YouTube...

[Danieltwotwenty]

Wrong, the Bible explains the why and has a little detail on the how, it's just that you don't accept that.

We don't say maybe this or maybe that, we say we know this we know that according to God's word.

No maybe's here.

Again, Dan, this was more like a factual statement. I know that the Bible says a lot of things about Creation, but actually saying that there are no maybes in the bible comes to using a certain degree of faith and personal beliefs.

Faith based on reason and logic is a solid foundation for belief, there are only maybes in our understanding of the Bible.

The Bible itself remains factual, truthfull, logical, internally consistent, standing the test of time under intense scruitiny for millennia.

There is little reason to doubt the truth claims made within and many reasons to accept it as factual.
Dan

[BryanH]

Faith based on reason and logic is a solid foundation for belief, there are only maybes in our understanding of the Bible.

The Bible itself remains factual, truthfull, logical, internally consistent, standing the test of time under intense scruitiny for millennia.

The Bible is not always factual and logical... The bible is full of metaphors metaphors aren't factual because they lead to interpretation.

On the logical part, well, some as above. Metaphors create a lot of problems, but besides that there are things that aren't quite logical in the bible.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Faith based on reason and logic is a solid foundation for belief, there are only maybes in our understanding of the Bible.

The Bible itself remains factual, truthfull, logical, internally consistent, standing the test of time under intense scruitiny for millennia.

The Bible is not always factual and logical... The bible is full of metaphors metaphors aren't factual because they lead to interpretation.

On the logical part, well, some as above. Metaphors create a lot of problems, but besides that there are things that aren't quite logical in the bible.

This is just your opinion, as is mine and I am not going to argue the point with you as it seems you have already made up your mind.

I see no point in discussing this further.

enjoy


Dan

[Pierson5]

Precisely. Just because the human race or science, etc.. doesn't have an answer (yet, if ever), doesn't make the other view correct by default.

What answer are we talking about, if you are talking about God, how exactly would science test for something outside of the scope of it ability?

With your limited time on this planet you may never have the answer before it is too late, maybe you should stop worrying about the whole human race finding an answer and concentrate on your own finite exitence before the candles burns out.

Dan

I believe we were talking about creation/origin of life? With the limited time I have on this planet, I would like to continue learning as much as I can about everything. These types of questions are interesting to think about. I concentrate plenty on my finite existence, this is just a form of entertainment/intellectual exercise and personal gratification (not to mention the scientific implications when we do find answers to such questions).

Faith based on reason and logic is a solid foundation for belief, there are only maybes in our understanding of the Bible.

The Bible itself remains factual, truthfull, logical, internally consistent, standing the test of time under intense scruitiny for millennia.

The Bible is not always factual and logical... The bible is full of metaphors metaphors aren't factual because they lead to interpretation.

On the logical part, well, some as above. Metaphors create a lot of problems, but besides that there are things that aren't quite logical in the bible.

Agreed. This is why we have such a long list of denominations in Christianity alone. If the bible was factual, logical, consistent, objective etc.. I find it hard to reconcile with:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch ... ominations

[Reactionary]

On the logical part, well, some as above. Metaphors create a lot of problems, but besides that there are things that aren't quite logical in the bible.

For instance?

Agreed. This is why we have such a long list of denominations in Christianity alone. If the bible was factual, logical, consistent, objective etc.. I find it hard to reconcile with:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch ... ominations

======> CIRCULAR ======>
˄ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ǁ
ǁ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ˅
BECAUSE . . . . . . . . . REASONING
˄ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ǁ
ǁ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ˅
<======= WORKS <=======

[BryanH]

For instance?

I will provide one example which is actually a problem of logic.

1) And the Lord God planted a fgarden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. gThe tree of life was in the midst of the garden, hand the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. (Gen 2:8-9)

2) The Lord God took the man kand put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil lyou shall not eat, for in the day that you eat4 of it you mshall surely die.” (Gen 2:15-17)

===> God forbids eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.


3) Now uthe serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made.
He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You1 shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, v‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’ ” 4 wBut the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise,2 she took of its fruit xand ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, yand he ate. 7 zThen the eyes of both were opened, aand they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths. (Gen 3:1-7)

4) He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” 12 The man said, d“The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, e“The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” (Gen 3:11-13)

===> God is all-knowing, but he asks anyways if they ate from the tree...

5) Then the Lord God said, q“Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand rand take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—” 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden sto work the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the tcherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-24)

Now let's make a summary about this story.

==> What is a deceiving talking serpent doing in the garden of Eden anyways?
==> Adam and Eve weren't allowed by God to know the difference between good and evil ( how could they avoid the trap of the serpent?)
==> God banishes Adam and Eve from the garden because now they have become like him knowing about good and evil.

So basically, Adam and Eve didn't know they made something evil until after they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They didn't have the notion of evil before eating from the tree.

So practically, GOD set Adam and Eve for a trap for which they didn't have any defense against. Nice...

[Reactionary]

===> God is all-knowing, but he asks anyways if they ate from the tree...

Genesis 3:11 looks more like a rhetorical question to me, you know. God knew how they would answer the question, but he wanted them to process it and reply. God's omniscience doesn't exclude human free will.

==> What is a deceiving talking serpent doing in the garden of Eden anyways?

God's creation was "very good" (Genesis 1:31), not "perfect".

By the way, YECs often suggest that the creation days couldn't have been symbolical because God's creation can't involve death. I disagree, because the creation wasn't meant to be perfect in the first place. Revelation 21:4 suggests that the new creation will not feature death (this includes spiritual death).

==> Adam and Eve weren't allowed by God to know the difference between good and evil ( how could they avoid the trap of the serpent?)
==> God banishes Adam and Eve from the garden because now they have become like him knowing about good and evil.

So basically, Adam and Eve didn't know they made something evil until after they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They didn't have the notion of evil before eating from the tree.

So practically, GOD set Adam and Eve for a trap for which they didn't have any defense against. Nice...

How could they avoid the trap of the serpent? Well, by following God's orders, don't you think? Genesis 2:16-17 He allowed them to do anything, except for eating from the tree. But they did it nevertheless, because they were greedy and wanted to be powerful like God, although they lacked nothing. That's the point of the story. Mankind is greedy, and never fully satisfied, always seeking for (more) power.

So practically, God didn't set a trap of any kind. God doesn't tempt people (James 1:13), it's against His nature. This is a typical excuse for the irresponsible. God didn't put an apple in their mouths, they decided for themselves to do that. And so consequences ensued. Where's the controversy here?

[BryanH]

How could they avoid the trap of the serpent? Well, by following God's orders, don't you think? Genesis 2:16-17 He allowed them to do anything, except for eating from the tree. But they did it nevertheless, because they were greedy and wanted to be powerful like God, although they lacked nothing. That's the point of the story. Mankind is greedy, and never fully satisfied, always seeking for (more) power.

So practically, God didn't set a trap of any kind. God doesn't tempt people (James 1:13), it's against His nature. This is a typical excuse for the irresponsible. God didn't put an apple in their mouths, they decided for themselves to do that. And so consequences ensued. Where's the controversy here?

Being greedy is evil. Adam and Eve did not have prior knowledge of evil until eating from the tree. So they couldn't have actually been greedy or anyways, they didn't know of it because God didn't give the power to understand that. Not listening to your parents (God in this case) is bad/evil. Hope you get the point.

But coming back to a more "earthy" example: children can't tell good from bad until a certain age. If a kid does something bad the parents "punish" or "explain" the kid the mistake, but the parents don't throw the kid out of the house in the street, right?

Anyways, you haven't answered me one question: What is a deceiving TALKING SNAKE doing in the garden of Eden? If the snake was there it means that God put it there. So the snake was there and was part of God's plan. So God did tempt Eve indirectly if we can say so.

Also, you are saying that this story is about man being greedy bla bla bla. Actually I disagree: God said that Adam and Eve now have the same knowledge about good and evil as him and that is why they need to be banished from the garden. It's not about being greedy, but being the same as God.

Also, God said that the moment they will eat from the tree they will die. He lied or he didn't tell the whole truth because again, God said that Adam and Eve now have the same knowledge about good and evil as him and that is why they need to be banished from the garden.

God also placed a guard near the tree of life so Adam and Eve couldn't eat it anymore and life for ever bla bla bla.

This is a very weird story and it inconsistent with many attributes that are assigned to God.

[RickD]

Anyways, you haven't answered me one question: What is a deceiving TALKING SNAKE doing in the garden of Eden? If the snake was there it means that God put it there. So the snake was there and was part of God's plan. So God did tempt Eve indirectly if we can say so.

Bryan, the snake was most likely a normal snake, that Satan possessed, to deceive Eve. But, yes, God allowed Satan to tempt Eve, as part of His overall plan of redemption for mankind.

Also, you are saying that this story is about man being greedy bla bla bla. Actually I disagree: God said that Adam and Eve now have the same knowledge about good and evil as him and that is why they need to be banished from the garden. It's not about being greedy, but being the same as God.

Bryan, Adam and Eve were banished from the garden, and access to the tree of life, because they died spiritually. Having access to the tree of life, would allow them to live physically, forever, while being spiritually dead. The problems man causes in his limited time on earth are bad enough within the 70-100 years we live. Just think, if man were able to physically live forever, being spiritually dead, we'd probably kill ourselves off.

Also, God said that the moment they will eat from the tree they will die. He lied or he didn't tell the whole truth because again, God said that Adam and Eve now have the same knowledge about good and evil as him and that is why they need to be banished from the garden.

The moment they ate of that tree, they died spiritually. They began the process of dying physically, when they no longer had access to the tree of life, which was the very thing that allowed them to live forever, physically.

This is a very weird story and it inconsistent with many attributes that are assigned to God.

I guess that would depend on which attributes you assign to God.

Man is spiritually dead, apart from God's grace through the work of Jesus Christ. God sent Jesus to die for the sins of mankind, so that we may live forever. Sounds like a pretty amazing God, to me.

[Reactionary]

Being greedy is evil. Adam and Eve did not have prior knowledge of evil until eating from the tree. So they couldn't have actually been greedy or anyways, they didn't know of it because God didn't give the power to understand that. Not listening to your parents (God in this case) is bad/evil. Hope you get the point.

Adam and Eve didn't understand... but the snake i.e. Satan did (who obviously possessed the snake, because we know that snakes don't normally talk). Since you mentioned an example of children - let's imagine a child that can't tell good from evil because it was never exposed to evil. So, it does not know that a certain evil deed is even possible. If someone evil came and talked the child into doing it, the child will therefore gain knowledge of that deed, and may even find it appealing. Maybe because it can't tell good from evil?

But coming back to a more "earthy" example: children can't tell good from bad until a certain age. If a kid does something bad the parents "punish" or "explain" the kid the mistake, but the parents don't throw the kid out of the house in the street, right?

I think this is where your analogy stops to apply. Adam and Eve were created as adults, and were given a strict order. Besides, circumstances were a lot different. God didn't forsake Adam and Eve as parents who throw their children in the street. We are all descendants of Adam and Eve, yet God cares for each and every of us. He sent his Son to reconcile us with Him.

Rick explained the rest. Thanks.

[Pierson5]

On the logical part, well, some as above. Metaphors create a lot of problems, but besides that there are things that aren't quite logical in the bible.

For instance?

Agreed. This is why we have such a long list of denominations in Christianity alone. If the bible was factual, logical, consistent, objective etc.. I find it hard to reconcile with:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch ... ominations

======> CIRCULAR ======>
˄ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ǁ
ǁ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ˅
BECAUSE . . . . . . . . . REASONING
˄ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ǁ
ǁ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ˅
<======= WORKS <=======

What? Just like disciplines studied in science, when mass amounts of scientists examine evidence, they generallu converge on a consensus. It appears the opposite is done with regards to Religion (diverges). If it was objectively true, shouldn't there be a convergence? How is that circular reasoning?

[Reactionary]

What? Just like disciplines studied in science, when mass amounts of scientists examine evidence, they generallu converge on a consensus. It appears the opposite is done with regards to Religion (diverges). If it was objectively true, shouldn't there be a convergence? How is that circular reasoning?

What about different views on evolution, namely gradualism vs. punctuated equilibrium?

Anyway, theology is obviously different than natural sciences. We can't empirically test salvation, because we don't witness afterlife until we die. Plus, there are plenty of other problems, like translation of 2,000+ year old languages, political ties of Church and states that lasted long (and contributed to divergence)... Finally, doctrinal differences don't affect the point of Christianity - you can see that there are Catholics, Protestants, non-denominationals and others among us. We can debate doctrines like YEC vs. OEC vs. TE, predestination vs. free will etc., and move along afterwards. Differences between Christian denominations aren't nearly as big as differences between scientific theories.

[BryanH]

Bryan, the snake was most likely a normal snake, that Satan possessed, to deceive Eve. But, yes, God allowed Satan to tempt Eve, as part of His overall plan of redemption for mankind.

This makes no sense: God let Satan tempt Eve so he can banish both out of the garden.
This means that Adam and Eve had no idea about what's coming their way.

Bryan, Adam and Eve were banished from the garden, and access to the tree of life, because they died spiritually. Having access to the tree of life, would allow them to live physically, forever, while being spiritually dead. The problems man causes in his limited time on earth are bad enough within the 70-100 years we live. Just think, if man were able to physically live forever, being spiritually dead, we'd probably kill ourselves off.

You are not making any sense with your interpretation.

God said:"Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand rand take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever"

Is god spiritually dead?

Adam and Eve didn't understand... but the snake i.e. Satan did (who obviously possessed the snake, because we know that snakes don't normally talk). Since you mentioned an example of children - let's imagine a child that can't tell good from evil because it was never exposed to evil. So, it does not know that a certain evil deed is even possible. If someone evil came and talked the child into doing it, the child will therefore gain knowledge of that deed, and may even find it appealing. Maybe because it can't tell good from evil?

You either made a mistake in your statement or you are saying what I just said: Adam and Eve were like some children compared to Satan. God allowed Satan to tempt and the moment they "screwed up" they were thrown out in the cold.

Again, that's not the way children are brought up.

I think this is where your analogy stops to apply. Adam and Eve were created as adults, and were given a strict order. Besides, circumstances were a lot different. God didn't forsake Adam and Eve as parents who throw their children in the street. We are all descendants of Adam and Eve, yet God cares for each and every of us. He sent his Son to reconcile us with Him.

Adam and Eve were indeed adults, but they had never been exposed to EVIL. So Adam and Eve were basically children. What Satan did was like stealing candy from a baby which he did.

If you don't like my analogy with children, then consider retarded people. They are adults, but their level of development and comprehension of what happens around them is the same as a child's, even worse.

It's hard to accept that God actually made a mistake in this case as the bible present the story, but the fact remains the same: Adam and Eve had always lived in a place filled with harmony, peace bla bla bla so they didn't have the skills to deal with the situation.

Needless to say that God never gave them a second chance... He just threw them out in the cold although he allowed all of it to happen.

You can't compare Adam and Eve as adults to you and me. They were pretty much naive.

[Dudeacus97]

Youtube comments, as I said in another thread, brought me to this website and the field of Christian apologetics. I remember there was also another video called "Atheism Easily Owned by SugaNutt", but it got removed by the poster.

I also see that we have a little flame war here. It's remarkably similar to the topic at hand, YouTube. I made up a video game about YouTube: http://videogameideabox.com/board/index ... pic=1037.0