aChristian; You argue that your interpretation of the Adam and Eve myth in the Bible does not reduce it to a practical joke or game because;
No, it was a demonstration of the fact that the human race is less righteous than God, and thus undeserving of eternal life.
BUT, we, according to you are sinful (i.e. less rightous than god) because "Human beings have a sinful nature. A nature which God gave us". So, by your own definition, god was demonstrating that humans were less rightous than us, which is hardly surprising as he made us that way. That seems daft to me, sorry.
In responce to me saying that the A&E myth describes a test, you say;
Where in the Bible does it describe the events which took place in Eden as "a test"?
Ah, so it's a demonstration, not a test. To use your phrasing; Where in the Bible does it describe the events which took place in Eden as "a demonstration"? This is what bugs me; you apply the Magic Christian decoder ring, and say this is thus and so, and yet, when ever anyone else does it, they are wrong, like this;
Really? Where does it say that in the Bible? It doesn't. That is Watchtower theology, which you have thoroughly confused with biblical theology.
... and
Again all Watchtower/Fundy theology, not biblical theology.
Be careful man; elitist thinking and absolute rightness are the perogatives of the cultist.
Now, you then try to do doublethink; you state previously "Human beings have a sinful nature. A nature which God gave us", and then when I say having this sinful nature means we do not have free will, you claim;
Nope. Our "sinful" nature is simply that we, unlike God, have the ability to act unrighteously if we choose. That is also our "free" nature.
So god is a robot without freewill? He is not omnipotent? He must be pissed off with his creator too... oh, but yeah, that's what humans have in common with god... they weren't created. Except if a human says that you think he's wrong, and if a Bronze-Age goatherd says that about god, then he must be right, even if you can't prove it. Hmmmm...
I also think that if it is in one's nature to do something, then one has an inclination towards it. Semantics? Maybe, but you agree that god KNEW humans would act this way due to the nature it gave them, which seems like a strong inclination unless you are so devoted to apologising for the logical errors in an account you don't actually stop to THINK. As it is, you try to have things both ways, which you would not like if a non-theist tried it.
When I point out that freewill attract penalties, you do the double think again;
Evil attracts no real penalties. Death is not a penalty for doing evil. It is a part of our nature. We were not created to live forever.
So, what was the deal, when it says, "When you eat from the tree, in thatb day you will die"? I suppose the Magic Christian decoder ring helps here, because a/ they didn't die in that day, so 'yohm' must be 'period of time' in this case, BUT, why didn't they say "But we will die anyway, oh great stater of the bleedin' obvious", did they? Where is your backing for this assertion? A 'careful reading', yes, but WHY is YOUR'S right?
And then you ignore that giving a gift ("Eternal life, however, is a gift God gives to all whom He declares to be righteous") to people who do a/ and not to people who do b/ is as big a debar to freewill as a firey hell. So Yale graduates have more or less freewill in choosing jobs as crack whores? Hmmmm...
Oh, back to your assertion that A&E were not meant to live forever; how come they lived so long then when they stopped taking the drugs, sorry, fruit, that their dealer, god, er, fruitmonger, was bribing them with. Yes, there is a lot of sarcasm in that sentence. Justly so; now god says he give freewill, yet the minute you use it, you don't get the bribe. It's like giving kindergarden kids dime bags to build up a customer base; immoral.
aC, you're view of the Bible is rather cultic; it's elitist, it's defined as the right understanding,. yet you share one thing in common with less exclusivistic Christians.
You can't prove any of it.
And nobody has explained why god has seen fit to make his existence a matter of belief. They try, but it falls short and drowns in ineffability.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
