almeyda responds to me:
quote:
quote:
Um, without the second law of thermodynamics, life is not possible. So if you're going to trigger the invention of physics with the fall, how on earth was there any existence of anything before? There couldn't be an Adam or an Eve to fall if there were no second law.
I was hoping to sneak that remark by because it wasnt really part of my argument. The reason i put it there is because Genesis marks the beginning of the temporal and material world.
Again, without a temporal and material world, there can be no existence. If you're going to trigger the invention of reality with the fall, how on earth was there any existence of anything before? There couldn't be an Adam or an Eve to fall if there were no temporal and material world.
quote:
Therefore since God took away his power in upholding the earth. Ever since the curse then it would mean energy and our resources have been running down hill since then. Thats my understanding of the 2nd Law. However if im wrong please tell me the true meaning.
delta-S = delta-Q/T
That's the second law.
Where do you find anything about "running down hill" in there? You seem to think that the second law has something to do with order. It does not. It has to do with energy transfer. In any reaction, energy is transferred, but not all of it. Some energy is always lost. The three laws of thermo really do correspond to the common concept of "You can't win, you can't break even, you can't even quit the game." You cannot get more energy out than you put in (first law), you can't get out all of the energy you put in (second law), nor can you ever reach purely zero energy (third law).
These laws are interdependent, too. Part of the reason the second law exists is because of the first law. Suppose you had a high temperature boiler and low temperature condenser. Suppose you have an engine that is perfectly efficient, capable of converting all energy input into work. You could then use this engine to run a refrigerator. But this would violate the other laws: You'd end up getting more energy out than you put in as you pulled energy from the low temperature reservoir as well as getting the energy from the engine (violation of the first law) and you'd eventually pull all the energy from the low temperature reservoir, sending it to absolute zero (violation of the third law).
quote:
quote:
What on earth does a Christian text have to do with a Jewish story? Genesis was written by Jews for Jews. Who are Christians to tell Jews what their stories mean?
Genesis was not written for Jews.
(*blink!*)
You did not just say that, did you?
It's their holy scripture. How on earth could it not be written for them?
quote:
It was written by Jews.
And who do you think they were writing for? Christians who wouldn't exist for another thousand years?
quote:
Genesis is the beginning of the humanrace, and it was not written just for Jews.
You misunderstand. Genesis cannot be understood except from a Jewish perspective. The metaphors it uses, the way it presents things, the phrasing and imagery, they are all part of the Jewish experience. That doesn't mean that non-Jews can't get anything out of it, but it means that the point of the story is dependent upon that Jewish conceptualization of the world.
Thus, for example, the serpent in Eden was not the devil. It cannot be because in Jewish theology of the time that Genesis was written, there was no such thing as the devil. Even in current Jewish theology, the concept of the devil isn't like the Christian vision of a fallen angel. For someone to then claim that the "old serpent" mentioned in Revelation is the same serpent from Eden is simply ludicrous. Since the serpent in Eden wasn't the devil, how could the devil in Revelation be the serpent in Eden?
quote:
If that was the case then the OT would not be in the christian Bible.
You ignore the history of Christianity. The Christian Bible wasn't completed until the fifth century CE with many of the books written long after the supposed time of Jesus. Judaism had split into many sects at the supposed time of Jesus already, so it is not surprising that as Judaism morphed into Christianity, that it would pull some of the texts from its past into the new paradigm, abandoning the old interpretations in favor of the new. After all, what is the point of being a new religion if you're just like the old one?
Christianity is not simply Judaism + Jesus.
quote:
And the Bible would not have been translated into more languages then any other book.
Euclid's
Elements.
And people don't have ulterior motives for putting
Elements into other languages. The proselytising of theology is the height of arrogance, claiming that the poor victims are morons who need to be saved when they never asked for assistance in the first place.
In other words, was the Bible translated into, say, Maori because the Maori asked for it or because the English imposed it upon them?
quote:
The OT & NT cross reference each other hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times.
Impossible. The OT cannot reference the NT because the NT hadn't been written at the time. Remember, the OT was written by Jews for Jews.
And as for the NT referencing the OT, do not forget that the NT often gets the OT wrong.
quote:
The same God inspired the writings of both.
Christian arrogance. The god of the Jews is not the same god as the god of the Christians. If it were, then Jews would accept Jesus as the Messiah.
quote:
quote:
If god didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge (or even touch it, if we are to believe Eve), then he shouldn't have put them in the same spot.
What you have to understand is the reason behind God making man.
Non sequitur.
Let's try again. If god didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge (or even touch it, if we are to believe Eve), then he shouldn't have put them in the same spot.
quote:
He gave man a soul. He had to test mans obediance. God wanted man to live in harmony with him. And also wanted man to do it because of his own freewill. Not because God has not let him choose otherwise. Thats what freewill is all about.
Says who? You? Where on earth do we find anywhere in the Bible the claim that god must tempt humans to sin?
Chapter and verse, please.
quote:
quote:
Why? Where on earth do we find anywhere in the Bible the claim that god must tempt humans to sin?
How else could man have been tempted to disobey God?
So the tempter of Adam and Eve was actually god? It certainly wasn't the serpent since he didn't tell them to eat from the tree. The actual temptation was the tree, itself? Then why blame the serpent?
But you still haven't answered the question. Where on earth do we find anywhere in the Bible the claim that god must tempt humans to sin?
Chapter and verse, please.
quote:
In Genesis 3:1 it says 'Now the serpent was more subtile than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made'.
This doesn't make the serpent evil. As I pointed out in
Message 51:
The root is "'aruwm" which means "prudent," "shrewd," "sensible."
Where on earth does this imply the serpent was evil? Remember, the serpent never tells Eve to eat from the tree. She came to that decision on her own.
quote:
The serpent was a creature made by God, but used by Satan.
Says who? You? The Bible never says that. Remember, Genesis was written by Jews who had no concept of the devil. How on earth could they write a story about an animal "used by" the devil when in their minds, there is no such thing?
quote:
But God said that if they did eat from the true, then they would surely die.
But god was lying. The serpent, being prudent and sensible, told Eve the truth.
quote:
quote:
Only because he wasn't given the requisite tools not to. Adam and Eve were doomed to disobey precisely because they were innocent. Obedience requires knowledge of good and evil. Since they didn't have that knowledge, they had no reason to follow god and would eventually eat from the tree.
When God made Adam, he was born as a mature and intelligent adult.
Where did I say that Adam was stupid? I have repeated this statement over and over and over again. How many times must I say it before you remember it?
Adam was not stupid. He was
INNOCENT.
Beetaratagang or clerendipity? Which one do you choose? One will send you to heaven and one will send you to hell. Which one do you choose? Come on, now. Why do you hesitate? You are a mature, intelligent adult. Surely you are capable of deciding whether you wish to follow the path of beetaratagang or the way of clerendipity.
Do you not understand the point? It isn't that you are stupid...it's that you don't know what those things are. You are innocent. How do you describe color to a blind person? Sound to a deaf person? It isn't a question of mental capacity. It's that they simply don't experience the world that way.
quote:
They had a reason to follow God because he was there and he made them,
That's not a reason. Why should they care that god made them? That's a question of "honor" and "respect" which is part of "good" and "evil," which they don't understand because they hadn't eaten from the tree yet.
quote:
and he warned them about the tree.
By lying about it. The serpent, being prudent and sensible, told them the truth. He didn't tell them to eat from the tree, however. Eve came to that decision all on her own.
quote:
He had authority over them and they chose to disobey his orders.
Authority is part of "good" and "evil" which Adam and Eve didn't undestand because they hadn't eaten from the tree yet.
And again, they obviously did act contrary to god's will, but that doesn't make what they did
sin. Sin requires deliberate intent to do evil. Since they did not know what evil was, they were incapable of having deliberate intent to do it.
quote:
quote:
Um, I'll stand up for myself, thank you very much. Didn't you just say that "we shouldn't suffer from our parents for their sins"? If Adam and Eve screwed up, they can suffer the consequences. I haven't eaten from the tree of knowledge, so why should I be punished for it?
Well it doesnt look like your living with God.
Since when was it decided that I was an atheist? I've been very careful to leave my opinions about the existence of supernatural beings out of it. Just because I don't believe in
your god doesn't mean I don't believe in
any god.
And you haven't answered my question. If the biblical system of justice is that the sins of the parents should not be visited upon the children, why on earth are we being punished? God could easily have let the sin die with them.
quote:
Judging by your posts you seem like an athiest (tell me otherwise).
No.
I refuse to have you judge my posts based upon your perception of how a person of religious persuasion X should behave. Learn to live with disappointment.
quote:
So even today you are doing the exact thing Adam and Eve did.
Says who? You? Doesn't your saviour tell you not to judge?
quote:
The reason we must live by his way at all costs is because he is the one that will judge every man who ever lived and also has the power to cast sinners into hell.
BZZZZT!
Pascal's Wager. I'm so sorry, almeyda. Johnny, tell him what parting gifts he has!
Well, Bob, almeyda has won himself a lifetime of anguish in someone else's hell! Yes, that's right. After spending all of his life fighting against Satan and worshipping the Christian god, almeyda gets a reward of going straight to Hades for his hubris. He'll be sentenced to solve a series of puzzles for which the instructions can be read in many ways. Every attempt to glean more information will be met with "Since it would just be a waste of my time to tell you, I won't." Of course, every proposed solution will conflict with something in the contradictory instructions. This being for his continued insistence that those around him are unworthy of explanations.
But, he won't get hungry because he'll have an afterlife-time supply of Rice-a-Roni, the San Francisco Treat.
You didn't really think that the god that truly exists was the Christian one, did you?
quote:
quote:
Didn't you just say "we shouldn't suffer from our parents for their sins"?
What i mean is that all the generations and people have descended from Adam and Eve.
Non sequitur.
If we shouldn't suffer from our parents for their sins, why does the rest of humanity have to suffer from the sins of Adam and Eve? Why does it matter that humanity is descended from them?
quote:
And all these generations have been born with sin in their lives and in the world.
Why? if we shouldn't suffer from our parents for their sins, why are we suffering from the sins of Adam and Eve?
quote:
Nothing is going to change that the earth is cursed.
God could do it if he wanted. He put the curse down. He could take it away. After all, isn't that the promise from your saviour?
And if we aren't supposed to suffer the sins of our parents, why did god curse the entire world for the sins of Adam and Eve?
quote:
Its not about Adam murdering and us going to hell for it. Its about allowing the choice of disobedience to Gods will.
They always had that choice and it was set up by god. By putting the tree where Adam and Eve could get to it, god allowed the choice of disobedience to god's will into the world. Original sin, therefore, was deliberately thrust upon the world by god. Adam and Eve were simply patsies set up to take the rap for god.
quote:
This choice is now available in a cursed world.
It doesn't have to be.
quote:
quote:
What on earth does this have to do with a Jewish story? We're talking about Genesis: A story written by Jews for Jews. What on earth makes you think a Christian has any authority here?
You seem to think that the OT and NT are not compatible or something like that.
They're not.
If they were, Jews would be Christians. Since they're obviously not, then it must necessarily be the case that the Old Testament doesn't really connect with the New Testament. Instead, Christians have taken the Old Testament, mangled its intent and stories to mean things it was never supposed to. A Christian reading of the Old Testament is quite different from a Jewish reading.
As a f'rinstance, what was the sin of Sodom? Christians seem to think it was homosexuality. Jews, on the other hand, seem to think it was inhospitality.
quote:
If they werent then the OT wouldnt contain prophecys of Jesus and the New Covenent.
But that's just it:
It doesn't.
Jesus does not fulfill the prophecies of the Messiah as put forward by the Old Testament. That's why Jews don't accept him as the Messiah.
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!
™ Version 4.2