The problem with your whole picture is you keep changing the focus. Not much gets by me and I will pick apart your ideas line by line if I feel there is reason too. The issue you're having is that you keep jumping from one idea to the next with no apparent logical connection. You want part of the bible to be true, claim that is it, in fact, but the other parts, I assume chosen at random by you or whomever wants it to be true, are merely metaphor. How is it that you or anyone can determine these things? Is there a primer that is given out in Germany that no one else has access to where it details exactly which parts are literally true and which parts are allegorical? Because I can assure you no such definitive text exists here in the states. Nothing reputable and verifiable, at any rate.

This is the problem I tried to allude to in my prior post. If you acknowledge that one part is allegorical but that this is supposed to either be the literal word of god or even the divinely inspired word of god, then that means the entire part is suspect. You can never be sure if a passage is true or if it is merely metaphor for some other abstract concept that was important to a nomadic desert people of 2000 years ago. As much as you want to ride the fence, this is not a subject that lends itself to ambiguity. Not if you want to maintain intellectual honesty. We're either dealing with the works of god or not.

And you completely skipped over the theological bind of believing in the Messiah Jesus but rejecting Adam & Eve. Which I don't blame you for, that's a sticky situation to try and get out of. You can't, really. Bend's the brain a little bit, don't it. :-E

Oh, and unless you're in a college-level religion class, the bible is not taught in public schools. It violates our constitution. Unless it's a high school course on comparative religion, which none of the schools I went to offered.

-S-

 

I personally wont worship some dude who lived over 2000 years ago.

 

I once saw that someone said that the prohibition of eating pork was because they had no refrigeration and it spoils to easily, so it was actually a health measure for the time. But when refrigeration became available, there was no authority to change it.

 

Oh come on kimi... Original sin is not about the sex....

It might have something to do with underage sex though.....and a resulting pregnancy at say 13.....

What loving parent wouldn't be disappointed were that to happen?

I also expect the kids themselves might have grown to wish they had waited until they understood what the result might be.

A baby normally changes the dynamics of any relationship doesn't it?

 

Then you might as well make "Aesop's Fables" one of your holy books. Now THOSE lessons are valuable.

 

Adam and Eve were underage? That must have gotten left out of my copy of Genesis.

 

Not literall silly...in terms of today's laws anyway.....but think about it....

A couple, growing up together with a garden of paradise to explore together....learning new things everyday.....

already warned not to 'eat' of the tree of knowledge....maybe because it was being fed to them....as and when God saw fit.....

but they got impatient....couldn't wait......

thereby ignoring God's wishes for them.....ie...the original sin.

They brought shame upon themselves....God did not place it on them.....

Then I guess it was a case of making the best of a bad job.

But tell me....would you like to have given birth under such circumstances.....No hospital....no midwife.....no epidural?

Not to mention not having a fucking clue what was happening to you?

And as I said previously.....doesn't a baby change the dynamic of any relationship?

Who was to blame?

She might have said....accusingly..."Wtf have you done to me?"

He might have replied...defensively..."You didn't tell me that was going to happen."

Hmmm...immediate discord.....and a baby to rear......

Sound familiar enough to you?

 

My guess is that Adam and Eve's descendants didn't make the connection between fucking and pregnancy for several thousand years. And up until the twentieth century, they muddled through without hospitals and epidurals and caesarians, too.

 

You can't be serious?

No birds and bees discussions?

 

God should have told them these things. Now THAT would have been useful information. Instead, he apparently just tried to scare the crap out of them, which soon became a time-honored tradition.

 

It would seem, or one would at least expect, that any parental advice is normally given with the child's best interests at heart, in the hope that children will do as they are told.

 

2009 and people still fall for the God Delusion?

*shakes head in pity and disgust*

"when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion."

 

Inky...I'm not forcing anything down yours or anyone else's throat.....nor am I insulting anyone.

I'm quite happy to let you and others believe what they want to......

When you can prove that a belief in God is a delusion....

I'll be quite happy to let you call me anything you want.

 

If we have a belief in God, then God exists!

If we have no belief in God, then God does not exist!

Reality! We choose it.

 

View attachment ​

 

"Thus I refute him!"

-- Samuel Johnson, kicking a table leg in his favorite tavern

 

And thus we should, Kimiko!

Interesting that you used a masculine pronoun!

 

Ummm....why shouldn't I, considering I was quoting a man, who was referring to a statement made by another man?

 

View attachment ​

 

YUP!