Thoughts on the Fall of Adam

[nPeace]

Not every translation says that, but in this case I don't think that is important. What is important, considering that God's knowledge is infinite does not mean He can choose not to know something in advance. In other words, He can choose not to foresee some things. Although He did say what would happen IF they disobeyed Him.

Actually, no translation says it. It's his insertion, as I pointed out to him.
Good point though.

 

[nPeace]

So God is willingly ignorant. That is a rather extreme claim that needs more than hand waving. And don't forget, God lied. He specifically said "On that day you will did". Did they die that day? No excuses, no silly claims that cannot be defended. Did they die or did they keep living?

That was answered already. You are not going to get an answer that your atheist buddies give. Just because you choose the position Adam took, and agree with him, and the one he chose to join, doesn't mean that everyone should agree with you.
You are preaching to the wrong choir.

 

[nPeace]

That is only because you too keep yourself blind from the fact that the God of the Old Testament is an immoral monster. It is called cognitive dissonance. When a person does such acts you would have no problem calling him out for what he did, but when a person's make believe friend does the same acts they are defended. People that believe in the God of the Old Testament cannot face this conundrum.

Tell me who would be fault here: I have a four year old son let's say. I put a riding lawn mower in the middle of the living room with an electric start with the keys in it. I tell my four year old not to sit on it. I also allow creepy Uncle Bob (who I know has trouble with kids) in my house when I am away. He urges little Timmy to get on the mower and to start it up. Timmy starts the mower and gets hurt. Who is ultimately at fault here? Is it rational to punish Timmy severely, and not only Timmy but any kids that he may have to boot?

Adam was not a child, and you were already told this.
Why are you repeating what you have already asked, and was given an answer to? I hope @Sharikind just points you to the post where he answered, instead of taking a ride on the merry-go-round, you guys like to create.
Merry-go-rounds go nowhere but around and around.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You keep saying the theory of evolution has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
False statement.
Prove me wrong. Don't just repeat it, or say I am wrong. Prove it.

I could but you would have to be willing to learn. I have my doubts that you can get over your fears.

A few preliminary questions first:

Is there reliable evidence for the theory of evolution?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That was answered already. You are not going to get an answer that your atheist buddies give. Just because you choose the position Adam took, and agree with him, and the one he chose to join, doesn't mean that everyone should agree with you.
You are preaching to the wrong choir.

You seem to be claiming that God is like a creationist and puts his fingers in his ears when he hears something that he does not want to hear.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Adam was not a child, and you were already told this.
Why are you repeating what you have already asked, and was given an answer to? I hope @Sharikind just points you to the post where he answered, instead of taking a ride on the merry-go-round, you guys like to create.
Merry-go-rounds go nowhere but around and around.

Morally he was. You are ignoring the myth again. Like a very very young child he did not have the "Knowledge of Good and Evil". Immediately after he ate the magical fruit that was when he knew what he did was wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Trust me when I say, you'll be wasting your time, but that's just my opinion.

Unlike creationists I can learn. I even own up to my errors.

 

[nPeace]

I could but you would have to be willing to learn. I have my doubts that you can get over your fears.

A few preliminary questions first:

Is there reliable evidence for the theory of evolution?

Figures. You can't back up your claims. You do this every time, like clockwork. I am fine with that.

You seem to be claiming that God is like a creationist and puts his fingers in his ears when he hears something that he does not want to hear.

No.

Morally he was. You are ignoring the myth again. Like a very very young child he did not have the "Knowledge of Good and Evil". Immediately after he ate the magical fruit that was when he knew what he did was wrong.

Wrong again.

Unlike creationists I can learn. I even own up to my errors.

Again, false. Your above posts demonstrate that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Figures. You can't back up your claims. You do this every time, like clockwork. I am fine with that.

Again you lie about me. I can back up my claims, I am trying to find out how much you know. Why is that unreasonable? Your fear to answer a simple question tells me that you are not willing to learn. I can't teach someone that refuses to learn.

No.

That is what it looks like. "No" is not an appropriate answer.

Wrong again.

Of course you are ignoring the myth. Or you misinterpret it. But one has to do that to defend an immoral God.

Again, false. Your above posts demonstrate that.

Wrong again, and now you are not being honest. When I made a mistake earlier today and you caught it, a first by the way. I immediately admitted that I was wrong. Do you need me to quote the post?

 

[nPeace]

Again you lie about me. I can back up my claims, I am trying to find out how much you know. Why is that unreasonable? Your fear to answer a simple question tells me that you are not willing to learn. I can't teach someone that refuses to learn.



That is what it looks like. "No" is not an appropriate answer.



Of course you are ignoring the myth. Or you misinterpret it. But one has to do that to defend an immoral God.



Wrong again, and now you are not being honest. When I made a mistake earlier today and you caught it, a first by the way. I immediately admitted that I was wrong. Do you need me to quote the post?

Irrelevant.
No proof.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Irrelevant.
No proof.

Not irrelevant. Unless I know how much you know I will have no idea what evidence to show you and how much education you need. For example the DNA evidence of Endogenous Retroviruses themselves are slam dunk evidence that we share a common ancestor with other apes:

Endogenous Retroviruses and Human Evolution

But if you have no clue as to what is and what is not evidence and wish to live in denial you will not be able to see that.

That is why I like to start with the concept of scientific evidence. If a creationist cannot be honest enough to even try to understand the concept of evidence then they have no chance of understanding the theory of evolution.

I can't prove it to you if you are not willing to learn. That does not change the fact that for people that are not afraid to think rationally that the theory of evolution has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[nPeace]

Not irrelevant. Unless I know how much you know I will have no idea what evidence to show you and how much education you need. For example the DNA evidence of Endogenous Retroviruses themselves are slam dunk evidence that we share a common ancestor with other apes:

Endogenous Retroviruses and Human Evolution

But if you have no clue as to what is and what is not evidence and wish to live in denial you will not be able to see that.

That is why I like to start with the concept of scientific evidence. If a creationist cannot be honest enough to even try to understand the concept of evidence then they have no chance of understanding the theory of evolution.

I can't prove it to you if you are not willing to learn. That does not change the fact that for people that are not afraid to think rationally that the theory of evolution has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

I just imagine you must not only have your fingers and toes crossed, but It almost seems as though you are praying... but I doubt you do, so...

Spoiler: Stay tuned.

Are you praying?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I just imagine you must not only have your fingers and toes crossed, but It almost seems as though you are praying... but I doubt you do, so...

Spoiler: Stay tuned.

Are you praying?

Oh no. I know that you cannot face up to your fears. I am only making it obvious to others that you are running away.

 

[nPeace]

Oh no. I know that you cannot face up to your fears. I am only making it obvious to others that you are running away.

Oops. I should have known you would miss that.
Stay tuned...

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oops. I should have known you would miss that.
Stay tuned...

No, I understood your irrational reaction.

Your ignorance of even the very easy concept of evidence and your fear of learning is what.motivates your posts.

Once again, let's start with the concept of evidence. Or are you too afraid?

 

[nPeace]

No, I understood your irrational reaction.

Your ignorance of even the very easy concept of evidence and your fear of learning is what.motivates your posts.

Once again, let's start with the concept of evidence. Or are you too afraid?

Are you so desperate to grasp for straws?
I am going to show you a number of things, but I will put together the information which I don't have to hand right now. So please stop panicking, and wait for you "slam dunk" to be blocked.
Gee. You are like a nervous wreck.
Get a hold of yourself.

You just hate to be shown up don't you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you so desperate to grasp for straws?
I am going to show you a number of things, but I will put together the information which I don't have to hand right now. So please stop panicking, and wait for you "slam dunk" to be blocked.
Gee. You are like a nervous wreck.
Get a hold of yourself.

You just hate to be shown up don't you?

Please why openly lie? I have not grasped at straws at all. Are you merely parroting phrases used against you?

And you lied about blocking the slam dunk. You are the incompetent player that just got dunked on. Denying facts is a form of lying, it is not blocking.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is only because you too keep yourself blind from the fact that the God of the Old Testament is an immoral monster. It is called cognitive dissonance. When a person does such acts you would have no problem calling him out for what he did, but when a person's make believe friend does the same acts they are defended. People that believe in the God of the Old Testament cannot face this conundrum.

Tell me who would be fault here: I have a four year old son let's say. I put a riding lawn mower in the middle of the living room with an electric start with the keys in it. I tell my four year old not to sit on it. I also allow creepy Uncle Bob (who I know has trouble with kids) in my house when I am away. He urges little Timmy to get on the mower and to start it up. Timmy starts the mower and gets hurt. Who is ultimately at fault here? Is it rational to punish Timmy severely, and not only Timmy but any kids that he may have to boot?

So God is willingly ignorant. That is a rather extreme claim that needs more than hand waving. And don't forget, God lied. He specifically said "On that day you will did". Did they die that day? No excuses, no silly claims that cannot be defended. Did they die or did they keep living?

Ignorant is not the right word. But if you want to use that word, ok. The death sentence was given, passed, on them the day they ate from the tree. They did not have a real pleasant life after that, but they were headed towards death from that day on. Just like when a judge says to a convicted murderer, on this day you are sentenced to die. Even if he said the criminal was to die that day, the execution could be in the future and that was his penalty. That has nothing to do with ignorance in this case.

 

[YoursTrue]

Trust me when I say, you'll be wasting your time, but that's just my opinion.

I am looking to see if he answered if maybe he likes the idea of dying anyway.

 

[YoursTrue]

Unlike creationists I can learn. I even own up to my errors.

Not sure what you mean by a creationist.