2 Tenets of Atheism

[LifeHiscost]

And this all started because the first two humans ate apples.

I don't find that particularly likely, do you?

And if the first two human beings on the earth couldn't even be found capable of following the simple instructions of taking or not taking a bite of fruit, what makes you think they would be found faithful in carrying out what was needed for the ongoing progress of the world they would be responsible for in the future.

Their lack of attention to detail, as exercised by the whole human race, results indisputable, should be evidence enough that following the god of this world isn't something we want for a permanent solution, of any kind.

"Jesus answered, “My Kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. If it were, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish leaders. But my Kingdom is not of this world.”"John 18:36 NLT

God blesses!

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

And this all started because the first two humans ate apples.

I don't find that particularly likely, do you?

And if the first two human beings on the earth couldn't even be found capable of following the simple instructions of taking or not taking a bite of fruit, what makes you think they would be found faithful in carrying out what was needed for the ongoing progress of the world they would be responsible for in the future.

Their lack of attention to detail, as exercised by the whole human race, results indisputable, should be evidence enough that following the god of this world isn't something we want for a permanent solution, of any kind.

Assuming that this story actually happened it wasn't really a fair test.

I know how easy it is to trick children. They are so trusting and gullible. Now pitting Satan, supposedly the smartest being created, against a rather innocent couple of beings was a given failure.

And this doesn't address condemning the whole human race based on the choice of two human beings. In fact god encouraged them to be fruitful and multiply. The "adult" in the story according to Christians is god, but the only one really telling the truth was the serpent.

That actually makes sense because in many ancient tales the trickster is the teacher of wisdom. I think Christianity in taking this story literally has really done the world a disservice.

[Bravus]

In response to the several thoughtful responses to the short quote I posted about the 'being', let me simply say that I know and understand what the Bible says on the topic

But if we simply look around at what actually happens in people's lives then as a general thing those who take personal responsibility for their lives seem to live better lives (both in terms of their own experience and in terms of the way they treat others - and I mean the big stuff like active support and help, not just courtesy) than those who ascribe everything to an external being.

Others will see the issue differently, particularly if they have the underlying assumption that all good comes from God, but that's what I've observed in a thoughtful life getting close to half a century long.

[Bravus]

The argument about the heartbeat, with all due respect, is simply another argument from personal ignorance[1]. The mechanisms within the nervous system by which the heart beats without conscious control are *very* well understood and have been for a long time. The fact that one does not know about this science is not evidence for anything except that one does not know about this science. It would be a sad state of affairs if a morning's reading could unravel the evidence for the existence of God.

[1] I probably shouldn't have to explain, but 'ignorance' is used purely as a descriptive term, not an insult. Ignorance is simply not knowing about something. There is an immense amount about which I am ignorant and freely acknowledge my ignorance.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

I wish there was a loving god that would reveal himself and express a plan to help humanity along the way.

If you do not believe the evidence He gave some two thousand years ago, why do you think there is a human being today who could give more substantial evidence? From my vantage point the human race has not increased at all in wisdom, although his use of technology to destroy the human race proves another is making sweeping progress.

Considering that the ancients made up a lot of stories, the happenings of 2000 years ago reported from ancient writings isn't what I would call evidence.

I actually disagree with you about the wisdom of the human race. The knowledge we have of human development is considerably greater now than 2000 years ago. One simply can compare what life was during OT times and now and the contrast is obvious. Living under laws that condemned you to death for the smallest offense would be untenable.

We have less violence over all as a human race and our quality of life is considerably greater. I don't buy the doom and gloom. We have problems, but if we just give up and wait for some fictitious second coming, I think that is irresponsible.

[John317]

...But if we simply look around at what actually happens in people's lives then as a general thing those who take personal responsibility for their lives seem to live better lives (both in terms of their own experience and in terms of the way they treat others - and I mean the big stuff like active support and help, not just courtesy) than those who ascribe everything to an external being.

The Christians I've known best do both: they give thanks to God for everything and they take personal responsibility for their lives and for how they treat people. It's not a question of either/or but of doing both things. Christ is a perfect example of this, as are all the prophets and apostles. If one studies the life of Ellen White, one will find she did the same. There are many Christians today who practice this in their personal lives.

[phkrause]

Considering that the ancients made up a lot of stories, the happenings of 2000 years ago reported from ancient writings isn't what I would call evidence.

I actually disagree with you about the wisdom of the human race. The knowledge we have of human development is considerably greater now than 2000 years ago. One simply can compare what life was during OT times and now and the contrast is obvious. Living under laws that condemned you to death for the smallest offense would be untenable.

We have less violence over all as a human race and our quality of life is considerably greater. I don't buy the doom and gloom. We have problems, but if we just give up and wait for some fictitious second coming, I think that is irresponsible.

I agree with you that many things were make up, but disagree that the Bible was one of these.

I would agree, but somewhere I recall reading (probably EGW) that just before the flood that the human race was much more advanced than we are even today. And also read somewhere that the ancient egyptians(sp) were also far more advanced (not sure where I read that).

Our quality of life today over ancient times I can agree with but the violence I'm not so sure about. You might be right but I don't see it that way. And I don't see anyone giving up, that would be very irresponsible indeed. And if that were the case we would be going against what Jesus said, To be watchful and not asleep so that that day doesn't come like a thief in the night.

[John317]

I know how easy it is to trick children. They are so trusting and gullible. Now pitting Satan, supposedly the smartest being created, against a rather innocent couple of beings was a given failure.

And this doesn't address condemning the whole human race based on the choice of two human beings. In fact god encouraged them to be fruitful and multiply. The "adult" in the story according to Christians is god, but the only one really telling the truth was the serpent.

The test God gave to Adam and Eve was actually a very easy one. All they had to do was obey God and not eat from a single tree. It wasn't as if they didn't have plenty of trees to eat from or as if they were hungry. They had all the food they wanted. The test was explained to them and they were told that Satan would try to get them to eat from the tree. In fact, Eve was told to stay close to Adam in order that she might not be tempted when alone. Satan could only tempt them at the tree, and if they had passed the test, Satan wouldn't have been able to tempt them any more.

Originally Posted By: cardw

In fact god encouraged them to be fruitful and multiply. The "adult" in the story according to Christians is god, but the only one really telling the truth was the serpent.

Yes, God did tell them to have babies. God wanted the human race to populate the earth.

Satan was telling a falsehood that the human race has generally accepted as true. But God was telling the truth and Satan was lying. He said things would get better if they disobeyed God's command. He essentially told Eve that God was being unfair and dishonest to require them not to eat of the fruit. But that was a lie.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

I know how easy it is to trick children. They are so trusting and gullible. Now pitting Satan, supposedly the smartest being created, against a rather innocent couple of beings was a given failure.

And this doesn't address condemning the whole human race based on the choice of two human beings. In fact god encouraged them to be fruitful and multiply. The "adult" in the story according to Christians is god, but the only one really telling the truth was the serpent.

The test God gave to Adam and Eve was actually a very easy one. All they had to do was obey God and not eat from a single tree. It wasn't as if they didn't have plenty of trees to eat from or as if they were hungry. They had all the food they wanted. The test was explained to them and they were told that Satan would try to get them to eat from the tree. In fact, Eve was told to stay close to Adam in order that she might not be tempted when alone. Satan could only tempt them at the tree, and if they had passed the test, Satan wouldn't have been able to tempt them any more.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: cardw

I recall the serpent said they would become like the gods knowing good and evil. They did.

They didn't become like gods. They began to die. They became separated from the life-giver. God didn't want them to know about evil. Things got much worse' date=' not better. Do you really think that if Satan had told Eve the truth, she would have eaten of the fruit. He led her believe that things would improve, not result in catastrophe and death.

Originally Posted By: cardw

God told them that they would die the day they ate of the fruit. They didn't.

Actually, the literal Hebrew is, "Dying you shall die," which means they would begin to die that day. The only reason they didn't die eternally at that time is God's plan of redemption. It is found in Genesis 3: 15.

Originally Posted By: cardw

In fact to make sure they would eventually die god threw them out of the garden because evidently if they ate from the tree of life they wouldn't die.

Yes, this is true. God would not allow rebels to eat of the Tree of Life and live forever, and He still won't. People who are in revolt against God won't ever be able to eat of that tree or be given the gift of immortality. It would be foolish to make sinners immortal.

Originally Posted By: cardw

So I'm not sure where you are getting all that additional detail.[/quote']

Studying these things for 40+ years has something to do with it, Richard. Attitude and openness to evidence also is important. Keep reading and studying.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

I recall the serpent said they would become like the gods knowing good and evil. They did.

They didn't become like gods. They began to die. They became separated from the life-giver. God didn't want them to know about evil. Things got much worse, not better. Do you really think that if Satan had told Eve the truth, she would have eaten of the fruit. He led her believe that things would improve, not result in catastrophe and death.

They way I read the serpent didn't tell Eve that she would have all the power of gods, but would know good and evil.

This story makes far more sense as an allegory of the emergence of consciousness and personal responsibility. With knowledge comes the possibility of shame and pain. This goes along with the idea that ignorance is bliss. The cost of knowing is to be thrown out of the garden.

Much of Eastern philosophy is trying to reframing consciousness in other terms than good and evil since duality has its limits.

I think Jesus was moving in this direction when he began to move away from laws to self control and empathy. Looking at results (fruits) rather than methods.

The literal view of this story has way too many problems and considering its plausibility it's even less useful.

[Twilight]

The literal view of this story has way too many problems and considering its plausibility it's even less useful.

This story makes perfect sense.

Adam was given the control of this planet.

Satan by deception gained control.

Adam was responsible for everything on the planet.

Everything on the planet then received of the curse.

Even Adam's children.

That is very basic and not difficult to understand, once we realise that God has created a Universe of Order and Consequence.

[Twilight]

Much of Eastern philosophy is trying to reframing consciousness in other terms than good and evil since duality has its limits.

I get the sense you are "into" eastern philosphy Rich, is that the case?

That you are an adherent of it possibly?

[Twilight]

And as to fearing God.

The one thing a man should fear more than anything, is his own sinful nature...

After all, that is the part that brings all the damage into the world.

Selfishness.

Fear "that" and you will find God Rich.

If we lift it up as something to be extolled (selfishness) then God is not available to us.

[LifeHiscost]

I recall the serpent said they would become like the gods knowing good and evil. They did. God told them that they would die the day they ate of the fruit. They didn't. In fact to make sure they would eventually die god threw them out of the garden because evidently if they ate from the tree of life they wouldn't die.

"But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."2 Peter 3:8 NKJV

" So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died."Gen 5:5 NKJV

"Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago..."Titus 1:1-3 NASB

God blesses!

[cardw]

I agree with you that many things were make up, but disagree that the Bible was one of these.

I would agree, but somewhere I recall reading (probably EGW) that just before the flood that the human race was much more advanced than we are even today. And also read somewhere that the ancient egyptians(sp) were also far more advanced (not sure where I read that).

Our quality of life today over ancient times I can agree with but the violence I'm not so sure about. You might be right but I don't see it that way. And I don't see anyone giving up, that would be very irresponsible indeed. And if that were the case we would be going against what Jesus said, To be watchful and not asleep so that that day doesn't come like a thief in the night.

In the Middle ages your chances of dying from violence was about 40%. Today we have more volume because we have more people, but your chances are 2% today. That is a considerable increase in the quality of life.

This is a great time to be alive. It is interesting. We have so many more options of how to live our lives. We have a lot more things to explore and this is expanding exponentially. We have much more freedom to express ourselves and many opportunities for self improvement.

The message that I see coming primarily from Christians is that we are going to hell in a hand basket. I see laments on how bad things are out there in the "world." I think it is just better reported, not more in volume. And this is all evidence that Jesus is going to come soon.

There are real solutions to the world's problems, but these require us all to mature and to co-operate with each other. When I go to gatherings where different religions are presented and shared, it is always the Christian evangelicals who go off by themselves and try to witness to everyone instead of having a dialog. They look like scared little children afraid of being contaminated by the worldly intellectuals who are going to trick them. Satan is around every corner looking to slip in some minor heresy to take down the church.

Look at Anne Rice. She got so fed up with the bigotry that she no longer wants to call herself a Christian. I believe the Bible promotes a lot of this immaturity when taken literally.

So, other than the philosophy of Jesus, I don't really find the rest of it all that attractive or believable.

[Mark Aurelius]

I recall the serpent said they would become like the gods knowing good and evil. They did. God told them that they would die the day they ate of the fruit. They didn't. In fact to make sure they would eventually die god threw them out of the garden because evidently if they ate from the tree of life they wouldn't die.

The form of the verb used in Gen 2:17 denotes a death decree. It's not a prediction. The sentence was in fact carried out substitutionally by the "lamb slain from the foundation of the world".

The serpent's trickery in saying that they would be as gods is to conjure up in the first couple the delusion of a "higher" experience, when all they ended up with in fact was an unholy mess.

[Mark Aurelius]

Actually, the literal Hebrew is, "Dying you shall die," which means they would begin to die that day. The only reason they didn't die eternally at that time is God's plan of redemption. It is found in Genesis 3: 15.

The idea that they would begin to die is a popular misconception, made so because of a margin comment in many Bibles, including my KJV. There is no present participle in the hebrew of that verse, i.e. no word denoting a process of death. And even if there were, the participle of the Hebrew word for to die mean dead, not dying.

Gen 2:17 is more accurately a death decree for anyone who eats the forbidden fruit. It was carried out symbolically.

[Mark Aurelius]

In the Middle ages your chances of dying from violence was about 40%. Today we have more volume because we have more people, but your chances are 2% today. That is a considerable increase in the quality of life.

That 40% figure is shocking. But the murder rate in Britain started to drop in the 16th century, i.e. with the Protestant reformation. And it has been going up more or less since the 1960s (US figures), when the West started a grass-roots rejection of Christianity.

Not saying that proves anything, but it is worth thinking about.

[doug yowell]

[so, other than the philosophy of Jesus, I don't really find the rest of it all that attractive or believable.

Why do you find the "philosophy"of Christ attractive? Or believable?

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

In the Middle ages your chances of dying from violence was about 40%. Today we have more volume because we have more people, but your chances are 2% today. That is a considerable increase in the quality of life.

That 40% figure is shocking. But the murder rate in Britain started to drop in the 16th century, i.e. with the Protestant reformation. And it has been going up more or less since the 1960s (US figures), when the West started a grass-roots rejection of Christianity.

Not saying that proves anything, but it is worth thinking about.

I wouldn't say the US, being the most overtly Christian country in the world, should be considered a country that rejects Christianity. Christians are still the majority of the population in the US. In this country there are far more Christians in jail than atheists both in terms of numbers and of percentages of their group. So evidently being a Christian doesn't prevent crime.

The crime rate and murder rate are lower in the most atheist countries in the world. They also happen to be the most generous countries.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

[so, other than the philosophy of Jesus, I don't really find the rest of it all that attractive or believable.

Why do you find the "philosophy"of Christ attractive? Or believable?

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

I recall the serpent said they would become like the gods knowing good and evil. They did. God told them that they would die the day they ate of the fruit. They didn't. In fact to make sure they would eventually die god threw them out of the garden because evidently if they ate from the tree of life they wouldn't die.

The form of the verb used in Gen 2:17 denotes a death decree. It's not a prediction. The sentence was in fact carried out substitutionally by the "lamb slain from the foundation of the world".

The serpent's trickery in saying that they would be as gods is to conjure up in the first couple the delusion of a "higher" experience, when all they ended up with in fact was an unholy mess.

If it was a decree then the serpent wouldn't have an argument. The serpent was basing its position on the statement as a warning of natural consequence.

Otherwise Eve would be under the impression that god would kill her if she ate of the tree.

[Mark Aurelius]

I wouldn't say the US, being the most overtly Christian country in the world, should be considered a country that rejects Christianity. Christians are still the majority of the population in the US. In this country there are far more Christians in jail than atheists both in terms of numbers and of percentages of their group. So evidently being a Christian doesn't prevent crime.

[Mark Aurelius]

If it was a decree then the serpent wouldn't have an argument. The serpent was basing its position on the statement as a warning of natural consequence.

Otherwise Eve would be under the impression that god would kill her if she ate of the tree.

I started looking at that verse because it is used to support a dualistic body-spirit view of the human being, which I didn't agree with. I went into it quite thoroughly, and then checked with NICOT*, the major Old Testament commentary at the local Brisbane Christian Bookshop. Against the interpretation I had heard from the evangelical group Creation Ministries, NICOT said that Gen 2:17 was a death decree. It is saying the same thing as "The wages of sin is death", or "The soul that sinneth, it shall die".

Thus the serpent appears to be saying that God was bluffing.

-----------

* New International Commentary on the Old Testament http://www.eerdmans.com/shop/product.asp?p_key=9780802825209