And yet Hitchens cannot understand why there is suffering when even you “get it!”
New evidence suggests burial cloth ‘showing imprint of Jesus’ is REAL
- Thread starter NoleATL
- Start date
Adam and Eve, as the first humans, were placed in the Garden of Eden, a perfect environment created by God. Within this garden, they were given free will—a central aspect of their humanity. The two trees, the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, represented choices with profound consequences. The command not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was not just a simple rule but a test of trust and obedience.
The serpent, often interpreted as a symbol of temptation or evil, engaged Eve in a conversation that sowed doubt about God's command. This wasn't merely about a "talking snake" but about the introduction of deception and the challenge of discernment. Eve's decision to eat the fruit, and then Adam's subsequent choice to do the same, were acts of disobedience that symbolized humanity's first exercise of free will in opposition to God's will.
The "Fall," therefore, is not a simplistic tale but a profound narrative about the human condition—our capacity for choice, the consequences of our actions, and the introduction of sin into the world. While it might seem like a story a 12-year-old could grasp, its layers of meaning offer deep insights into human nature, morality, and the relationship between God and humanity.
Nope. In your theology Jesus and your god and some Holy Spirit are all one. Jesus was there all along, from the very beginning, and actively participated in genocide. You just compartmentalize it so you can ignore the difficulty it poses for you.
And it’s the term atheist that’s meaningless. With apologies to Gervais, I say Thor is real. You say prove it. I say I can’t. You say you don’t believe my claim about Thor. You’re an aThorist. Does that keep you up at night?
That’s it. At that point, your threats about what happens after death under YOUR premise aren’t material to my life.
Seriously…what??? There’s suffering because people don’t get what they need. There’s suffering because people lose others they love. The idea that all human suffering traces back to the actions of a very naive girl in thrall to a talking f’n snake is ludicrous. Quite frankly, the idea that a god created us specifically to suffer so we would worship it is reprehensible to me.
Well, we know Thor is a myth. Jesus isn't. I don't believe in Thor.
I don't mean to threaten you.
In my judgement, compared to eternal life, nothing else matters in the final calculation.
What do you think is most important?
I can stop you right there. God is omniscient by definition. God KNEW Adam and Eve would fail. Knew it. They could not have done any different than what they did. That’s not free will. All part of God’s plan. Created to fail. Created to suffer. Created to prevail over that suffering by worshipping the being responsible. I pass, thanks.
Now, if you’re presenting this story as myth - great. Sure it has teaching value just as many myths do. Joseph Campbell thought myths were essential to civilization. Trying to present a story that ludicrous as actual history? Yeah…no.
Last edited:
And you still fail to address the complicity of Jesus in genocide. I get it. Touchy subject. I’ll drop it.
Thor is a myth. Jesus the man probably isn’t. Jesus the miracle working literal embodiment of the Jewish god on Earth is a myth. You think differently? Prove it.
I don't think Jesus was complicit in genocide but I'll ask Him if we meet. I can't know everything this side of the veil.
That being said, what's most important to you?
I've already stated what's most important to me...eternal life.
You have the written, inerrant account of genocide ORDERED by your god. Jesus is part of that god. Do you think the father and the son disagreed? Did the Holy Ghost come down on dad’s side to break the tie? You lose people with that kind of weasely parsing of your book and your faith.
What’s important to me? My family is important to me. My friends are important to me. I try to treat others as I wish to be treated. I try to confront bigotry when I encounter it. I strive to leave the world better than I found it. Being the best person I can be and knowing I will fall short is important to me. If that’s not good enough for your god, that god isn’t worthy of the office.
I’ve read the Bible cover to cover though that was over 40 years ago. Some good stuff there. Some really silly stuff - the Tower of Babel as the source for all the different languages…seriously? And some truly abhorrent stuff that no rational person would accept. You want to tackle the question Brian refuses to address?
I’ve heard you get a beej from the holy trinity, it’s like a three for one. Are we reading from the same scripture?
I think the exact same thing you do…absolutely no idea. I suspect I will be as aware of whatever it will be as I am of what it was like before I was born. You’ll claim differently but you have no way of knowing empirically. You hope. You have faith. You have no more actual evidence than I do. The difference is I have no problem saying I don’t know. Que sera, sera.
Right. It's about belief.
You believe it will be oblivion. I believe it will be Heaven or Hell.
I appreciate your perspective.
You fail to comprehend. I believe nothing. I have no idea. Nor do you. You WANT a certain outcome so you try to convince yourself that it’s so but you do not know. I’m perfectly ok not knowing but if I have to speculate, the only evidence I can call on is what it was like before I was born. You know what that was like too.
I’m curious if there is any God you can accept? Unconditionally?
Sure.
We don't know but will find out.
Before I was born, I didn't exist. Now that I exist, it's different than before I was born.
The argument that God’s omniscience means Adam and Eve didn’t have free will is incorrect. Just because God knows what will happen doesn’t mean He’s forcing it to happen. Think of it like knowing a friend so well that you can predict their choices—your knowledge doesn’t take away their freedom to choose. In Genesis, Adam and Eve were completely free to make their own decisions, and their failure wasn’t because they were "created to fail," but because they had the ability to choose right from wrong.
The idea that God created humanity just to suffer is also way off base. Suffering came into the picture as a result of human choices, not because God wanted it that way. The Christian message isn’t about worshipping a God who enjoys our pain but about finding hope and redemption even in the midst of suffering. God’s plan is about bringing good out of bad, offering a path to reconciliation and eternal life despite the hardships we face.
DIsmissing the story as "ludicrous" if taken as literal history misses the point. Whether you see it as historical or symbolic, the story of Adam and Eve deals with deep questions about human nature, morality, and our relationship with the divine. It’s not just a tale—it’s a narrative that has shaped how billions of people understand themselves and the world around them.
Great post.
Also, suffering is how we grow. Suffering sucks but there's no growth without it.
Even atheists like Frederick Nietszche believed this.
None conceived in the mind of man. Some universal intelligence whose existence is orders of magnitude more alien to me than my existence is to a bacterium? Sure. Maybe. The point of course is that we can never know on this side and I’m perfectly ok with that. I don’t need some manufactured-by-man god to try and be a good person.
Not trying to understand or not understand Paul.
I am not anti-Paul…..tons of good stuff he preached.
Just as noted in subsequent posts of mine in this thread is the fact i just find it strange in the history of christianity how much Paul has influenced modern day Christianity….again just saying personally i just find it odd that the 2 years of jesus’s teaching with the apostles was literally the biggest event(s) in history of the world up to that point from a christian perspective but then God had to then wait a couple years and get Paul involved to correctly roll out christianity to the world? Would make more sense to me if Pauls story happened 100 years after the appostles, but for it to happen where Paul actually met with the apostles while they were still on the earth is just strange to me.
I’m not dogging on Paul or his teaching, just saying the logistics of the roll out just seems strange to me is all.
Religion is gambling and insurance. All wrapped in one perfect package that feeds on the human condition.
It is absolutely brilliant. And I mean that. Brilliant.
Nope. Sorry. Not the same thing remotely. My friend is perfectly capable of choosing differently. Friends can surprise us. You can’t script their entire existence no matter how well you know them.
This god cannot be surprised. This god literally wrote the script. No ad libs allowed. There is absolutely no free will in that scenario. Eve had to fail. Adam had to fail. That’s the plan. You can’t rationalize your way out of that other than to say this god isn’t omniscient. You can’t have it both ways.
There is no resemblance to modern day preachers. He was flogged, left for dead, imprisoned and beheaded. He wentbto prison when he didnt have to do that. He was ship wrecked. Like today....no
Honestly…truly honestly…I do not care. No creator of the universe god would be remotely comprehensible to me. Do you want there to be a personal god who ordered the utter destruction of the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites? Leaving nothing alive that breathes? Genocide on a scale that would make Idi Amin blush?
I get where you're coming from, but IMO the comparison still holds in an important way. Even though God knows what will happen, that doesn't mean He is controlling every move like a script. Think of it like a parent (I already used "a friend"
) who knows their child so well, they can predict when they’ll make a bad decision—but that doesn’t mean they made the decision for them. The child is still acting freely, and the parent’s knowledge doesn’t override that freedom. God’s omniscience is about knowing the outcome, not dictating every choice along the way.When it comes to free will, it's not about whether God can be surprised but whether He gives us the ability to make meaningful choices. Eve and Adam had the freedom to act. God knew what they'd choose, but that foreknowledge doesn’t remove their responsibility or their ability to choose differently. They weren’t “scripted” to fail—foreseeing something doesn’t mean forcing it to happen. The plan, if anything, includes the freedom to choose and the opportunity for redemption afterward, not some predestined failure.
You can still believe in God's omniscience and human free will without a contradiction. It’s more nuanced than a rigid "God wrote the script" view. So, you can have both: a God who is omniscient and humans who have free will. God’s foreknowledge doesn’t strip away our freedom; it respects it while working within it. Again, IMO THis perspective preserves both God’s omniscience and the meaningfulness of our choices.
Last edited:
Religion certainly has its complexities, and I get what you're saying about how it can seem like a mix of gambling and insurance—feeding on our fears, hopes, and the human condition. From that perspective, it might look like a brilliant, if somewhat cynical, system. But for me, it's less about religious dogma or societal expectations and more about the personal relationship that Christ offers.
I'm not a big fan of the "behavior modification" approach that has taken root in Americanized Christianity. It often turns faith into a set of rules to follow rather than a transformative connection with Christ. What I find compelling is the genuine relationship with Christ—one that's personal and not just about ticking boxes or adhering to dogma. That relationship goes beyond the transactional nature you might associate with religion and speaks to something deeper and more meaningful.
I've posted this before, but I'll do it again:
All you’re trying to claim here is that this god knows everything I’m going to do from the moment I take my first breath but I have free will to choose differently that I can never use. It’s a logical black hole. An omniscient god created a couple of naked kids and put them in paradise KNOWING they would fail. KNOWING they would be cursed. KNOWING he would kick them out, and KNOWING he would eventually murder all of their descendants outside of a single family because they pissed him off…again. (Which begs the question - why get pissed when what you know is going to happen actually happens. Especially when you could have prevented it all with nothing more than a thought?)I get where you're coming from, but IMO the comparison still holds in an important way. Even though God knows what will happen, that doesn't mean He is controlling every move like a script. Think of it like a parent (I already used "a friend"
When it comes to free will, it's not about whether God can be surprised but whether He gives us the ability to make meaningful choices. Eve and Adam had the freedom to act. God knew what they'd choose, but that foreknowledge doesn’t remove their responsibility or their ability to choose differently in theory. They weren’t “scripted” to fail—foreseeing something doesn’t mean forcing it to happen. The plan, if anything, includes the freedom to choose and the opportunity for redemption afterward, not some predestined failure.
You can still believe in God's omniscience and human free will without a contradiction. It’s more nuanced than a rigid "God wrote the script" view. So, you can have both: a God who is omniscient and humans who have free will. God’s foreknowledge doesn’t strip away our freedom; it respects it while working within it. This perspective preserves both God’s omniscience and the meaningfulness of our choices.
We were in the kitchen cooking Thanksgiving dinner many years ago. Maybe six adults in there with me. My niece was in there - maybe three years old. I opened the oven door to check on some pies and she came streaking across the room and slapped her hands flat on the open oven door. Now I knew she was in the room and I know little kids can do things without understanding the consequences but if I had KNOWN what she was going to do, it would never have happened. That’s the difference.
Christians definitely need a Church, though.
Jesus said when we have disagreements, we should "take it to the Church."
Without the Church, there would be no Bible, Sacraments, etc., etc.
If God revealed Himself, would you bow down before Him?
If it were undeniable, I certainly would. To answer an earlier question, I do hope there's a god. That means those that have faith are going to live out eternity in "heaven." That would be great and I would be happy for them.
Having said the above, I do not believe in a god and I can't delude myself into doing so for "insurance." when we die, nothing happens. We are animals. The same thing happens to us as the bugs that splat on your windshield.
lol, well, of course. A verifiable, undeniable god revelation is all that has been requested.
Unless it’s that maniac who ordered multiple genocides and is claiming to be a god of love and forgiveness. I’m not bowing down to that psychopath.
I understand your frustration with the concept of an all-knowing God who allows events to unfold as they do, especially when it seems to defy logic. But there's a key distinction that often gets overlooked: knowledge of an event doesn't equate to causation. In the example of your niece, you knew there was a possibility of her getting hurt, but knowing isn’t the same as willing it to happen. The difference here is that God’s foreknowledge doesn’t strip away our free will.
Yes, God knew Adam and Eve would fail, just as He knows every choice we’ll make, but that doesn’t mean those choices are forced upon us. It’s like reading a book where you already know the ending—knowing the outcome doesn’t mean you dictated every action along the way. Free will allows for genuine love, genuine relationship, and genuine choice, even within God’s omniscience.
As for the idea of God being angry or disappointed, it’s not about God being caught off guard or frustrated by human choices. Instead, it’s about the relational aspect—He’s not a distant scriptwriter but a Father who desires a meaningful relationship with us, even when we fail. And for what it's worth, I’m not a big fan of religious dogma either (as I said to Hawki97 above). What resonates with me is what Christ really offers: a personal relationship.
We're not going to change each other's minds on this, but I do appreciate the respectful dialog. It's rare on here; especially in these types of threads (and the political ones). BTW, you were up LATE last night...wasn't it a school night or did you finally retire?
Last edited:
Similar threads
