Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I want the opinion of someone who thinks this story is true, what was the point of this "god" creating a tree that if someone ate and apple it would release all sins or whatever. Obviously curiosity would take the better of someone...So why did he even create the tree?

first off, there is very little of the Old Testament that one can take for 100% truth, it's all kind of a general story about what happened, not to be picked apaprt and searched through for details.

now, why God made a tree in the middle of Eden, is sometihng I do not know, because abviously, I am not God. The best reason I can give you is that God made us with a free will so that we may or may not do what He asks of us, its our decision. The tree I guess was temptation, and temptation is just something thats just part of the world, and thus whould need to be planted.It was Adam and Eve's choice whether they ate the apple or not. God had told them no to, but they did anyway.

The Adam and Eve story never made much sense. Have you noticed who the honest one in that story is? It's the serpant. God tells them that they'll die the very day that they eat the fruit, which was false; the serpant says that they won't, and that they'll gain knowledge of good and evil, which was true.

See, I thought he may have meant "die" in a non-literal but perhaps more profound sense...and then be reborn. Or perhaps literally born- welcome to earth, kiddos. Enjoy. Start grooving on the good and the evil and getting the experience of both...

Maybe, but if he did, I doubt Adam and Eve realized it.

If Adam and Eve didn't already have knowledge if good and evil, they couldn't have been expected to realize that disobeying God was bad, could they? They're punished for it, though--not quite fair, I've often thought.

maybe they just didn't understand it but God just kinda went "Hey, if you disobery me, thats bad, and being bad...is not good...but if you want to disobey thats fine...but its bad."

Is it punishment? Not all consequences are punishment. Being born to Earth, in my mind, would not be a punishment, but an opportunity. A lesser being dies, a human is born and begins to know itself?

Birth is pain, life is pain and pleasure, both are informative and formative.

Contrary to what a lot of people think, being kicked out of Eden wasn't, to all appearances, intended as a punishment. You're right about that. God did that (well, I'm an atheist, so I don't believe this story, but you know what I mean) because he was afraid that Adam and Eve would also taste the fruit from the Tree of Immortality, not to get back at them.

But it's pretty clear that God is intending to punish them in 3:14--20, when he makes the snake crawl, increases labor pains, and declares that Adam shall suffer a life of toil.

I have a wierd perspective on the infliction of pain, and I probably shouldn't be projecting it on God- I'll shut my yap now.

ok here is what i have to say about this i did some research and found out there are diffrent versions to this story there is one with out the tree they said adam dies because eves sister killed him because of jealousy then eve's sis goes to hell for an eternity and eve stays alone heart broken and adams spirit apears and tell s her what has been done so thats one of the versions

i dunno the old testement confuses me

but, ya i can see where God would kick them out of Eden because he didn't want them eating the fruit of immortality..or whatevrr it was. but yes, i agree with the second part of your post about making the snake crawl, but i can also see God kicking them out of Eden as a punishment for diobeying Him, since in the Bible im pretty cure it says that outside of Eden the ground wasnt good for farming, and there werent many animals, unlike inside Eden, so life was going to be misrable for them and it'd be a lesson not to disobey God again.

Adam and eve was just another folk tale, part of jewish mythology when the book of genesis was written. When the jews were recording their history, they left out the full story of adam and eve because it was not considdered history. it was just a myth, therefore it only has a few paragraphs. The full story is in the books of adam and eve and the following books of jewish mythology. When the jews were writing the book of genesis, they intended it to be a record of their people's history, and since the books of adam and eve were considered to be fiction/mythology, they were shortenned to just a few paragraphs and mostly exluded from genesis itself.
http://www.earth-history.com/Pseudepigrapha/index.htm

I am not sure but I think it is to see if they would be tempted or not.That is my thought on it.I reallly don't know the whole story about Adam and Eve and did not brother to look it up in my dad's bible.
So who can say?JM

The old jewish mythology texts have a few books on the myths of adam and eve, but were not included in genesis (as that was meant to be a profile of their history).
The link to some of these myths (such as adam and eve) are in the above link (from my previous post)

link didnt work

Here's my thoughts on the story


15 The Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden of Eden to work it and watch over it.

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree of the garden, 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for on the day you eat from it, you will certainly die." (It's like saying "If you leave to attack the Romans You will certainly die". If they don't, they can live as long as God feels like it, i.e. forever)

18 Then the Lord God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is like him." 19 So the Lord God formed out of the ground each wild animal and each bird of the sky, and brought each to the man to see what he would call it. And whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all the livestock, to the birds of the sky, and to every wild animal; but for the man no helper was found who was like him. (Man got familiar with nature, and how to supervise it)

21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to come over the man, and he slept. God took one of his ribs and closed the flesh at that place. 22 Then the Lord God made the rib He had taken from the man into a woman and brought her to the man. 23 And the man said:
This one, at last, is bone of my bone,
and flesh of my flesh;
this one will be called woman,
for she was taken from man.

24 This is why a man leaves his father and mother and bonds with his wife, and they become one flesh. 25 Both the man and his wife were naked, yet felt no shame. (As they did not know of shame yet.)

1 Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the wild animals that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You can't eat from any tree in the garden '?"

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit from the trees in the garden. 3 But about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God said, 'You must not eat it or touch it, or you will die. ' "

4 "No! You will not die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "In fact, God knows that when you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

6 Then the woman saw that the tree was good for food and delightful to look at, and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom. So she took some of its fruit and ate ; she also gave to her husband, with her, and he ate . 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves. (They realised that one should not display one's sexual parts to the common world)

8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and they hid themselves from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. (Due to their shame at the disobedience)

9 So the Lord God called out to the man and said to him, "Where are you?" (If a parent sees that a child has broken a lamp, they'll ask the child to confess. The parent knows perfectly well the facts though)

10 And he said, "I heard You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid." (Showing shame, but not confessing his sin)


11 Then He asked, "Who told you that you were naked? Did you eat from the tree that I had commanded you not to eat from?" (Giving him an easy route to confession)

12 Then the man replied, "The woman You gave to be with me-she gave me from the tree, and I ate." (This is the key moment. For the first time in history, a serious sin is committed. He tries to shift the blame onto his wife)

13 So the Lord God asked the woman, "What is this you have done?" (Giving her a chance to prove that she is an able enough wit to admit at a direct accusation.)

And the woman said, "It was the serpent. He deceived me, and I ate." (Evidently not)


14 Then the Lord God said to the serpent:
Because you have done this,
you are cursed more than any livestock
and more than any wild animal.
You will move on your belly
and eat dust all the days of your life. 15 I will put hostility between you and the woman,
and between your seed and her seed.
He will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.


16 He said to the woman:
I will intensify your labour pains;
you will bear children in anguish.
Your desire will be for your husband,
yet he will dominate you. (Equality. Now they were in the real world they had to deal with cause and effect. If you try and force a large object through a hole that small, with the powerful sex nerves waiting for an event... ouch.


17 And He said to Adam, "Because you listened to your wife's voice and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'Do not eat from it':
The ground is cursed because of you.
You will eat from it by means of painful labor
all the days of your life. 18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field. 19 You will eat bread by the sweat of your brow
until you return to the ground,
since you were taken from it.
For you are dust,
and you will return to dust." (Thorns come with plants. It's a normal thing that happens)


20 Adam named his wife Eve because she was the mother of all the living.

21 The Lord God made clothing out of skins for Adam and his wife, and He clothed them.

your thoughts?, more like the biblical tale word for word.

http://www.earth-history.com/Pseudepigrapha/FB-Eden/fbe-intro1-2.htm

God only created Adam and Eve. After that every human walking the earth is the result of mommy and daddy having sex.

some inbreeding then

If that legend were true, we'd all be inbred.......

Truly disturbing.

And what was the point the point of having a tree that they weren't allowed to eat from? Why would such a thing be put there if it were so bad? Even better, why make it at all?

I quoted the story, but gave some commentary on the biblical story. My thoughts on it. It's easier than selecting individual verses and posting them one by one.

The first humans might well have no genetic defects. It might take centuries for the bad genes that cause inbreeding when incestful conduct is enacted to mutate into existence.

Free choice. Mankind choose sin. As I said in my commentaries, they choose to sin after eating the food (when they passed the blame).

Except for Jesus (virgin birth) and Samson (correct me if im wrong)

But: "Because you listened to your wife's voice and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'Do not eat from it' ..."

You claim that the sin was shifting the blame, but God himself seems to agree with Adam that his fault was in listening to his wife's bad idea.

Interesting how Eve was the one who ate it from first.I wonder why?JM

whats going on here

If God is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing) and omnipresent (all places at all times) than why did he create Sin?

I know what you are going to say: God didn't create Sin Satan did.

Well step back for a minute and think about this:

1. God created the universe and all that exists within. (The Christian claim, of course, not mine!)

2. Sin exists in the universe.

3. Therefore, God created sin.

The Book Of John: Chapter 1 Verse 1 - 3
1:1 In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word (Jesus) was with God, and the Word (Jesus) was God.

1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

1:3 All things were made by him (Jesus/God); and without him (Jesus/God) was not any thing made that was made.

Yes, Satan is claimed to have propagated sin, convincing humans to give in to their sinful natures. But God's the one who set the ground rules, not only defining what is sin but creating beings who have the capacity to sin.

In my view, this makes God responsible for sin and its consequences. After all, if someone designed a car in which the driver could maliciously press a button and eject a passenger, they are complicit in the resulting deaths even if they personally didn't eject those passengers.

In addition, because God supposedly created us, one could argue that God is as responsible to humans as we are to our children. If so, God was guilty of neglect and endangerment by leaving the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. After all, if you left a loaded gun in a room with your child, you'd be guilty of neglect and endangerment no matter how often you told them not to play with the gun.

Besides, unless God was exceedingly stupid, God had to know what Adam and Eve would do in Eden, and is therefore complicit in their sin.

---------------------
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (James 1:13)

-=VS=-

"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (Gen 22:1)

Hehe looks like God got caught in a lie again.

If you believe in the original jewish story of adam and eve, adam was the first man, but complained that he didnt have a mate (all of the other animals did).
So god made a woman 'lilith' out of muddy earth (whereas he made adam out of clean earth), so she went bad and left adam to sleep with loads of demons.
Then god tried other ways of making a mate for adam (apparently, one was made out of his tail, and one was made out of his 2nd face - he originallly had 2 faces) , and only on his 5th try did he create eve (out of his rib)

That is what I was taught ^when I was younger.And I still believe it!JM

And WHAT is wrong with incest eh? you judgemental sipher!

Wait a second Abam and eve are not related.What is with this inbreding stuff?I am so confuse.If any of you guys exclaim it to me I will be very happy.Thanks!
JM

There is nothing wrong with inbreeding naughty to say there is sets the standard of liaisons with dogs and sheep and things.

if you look as the supposed geneology of the first 10 generations of biblical characters, there is about 10 or more generations alive at the same time (just before the flood). That must have been hella confusing. It would be like, "are you my great great great grandad or my great great great great grandad?"

OK,
If adam and Eve had 5 children, there would be 7 people on the earth, Adam, Eve, and their 5 kids. Now in order for them to reproduce, they would have to have kids with their siblings or teir parents, thus inbreeding.

Now tell me after reading about the original Jewish story of Adam, Lilith, and Eve anyone could come to the conclusion that God/Bible is infallible is beyond me. The book is nothing more than oral tradition passed down for centuries until someone decided to write them down. Wow I guess we all know a little game called telephone by now.

If you line up a certain amount of people in a line (more that 25) and tell a story to the first person in line, by the time you get to the last person you will have a completely different story.That is what has happened to the Bible and all other Religious texts over the years.

Once a group of people decided to change any type of scripture to fit their own social, economical, and political views the text becomes corrupted and therefore void of its original propose.

Ok I kind of got it now I think.The bible has been written a long time ago I don't think they change anything in the cathloic bible only the Jews and Christens ones.JM

catholics are christians

And Jews had the bible first...
SO if the jews had the bible (Torah=old testament) and changed it.....
Your is changed in the same way!

sadwalkYour sin was in eating the apples and the proof is that you act sinfully. You also seem to concur that it is sinful, as you tried to shift the blame.

The first bad effect of a sin then. If you left a hundred bucks in a room, somebody took it, and when they returned it, they had an award winning massage parlor that they were also going to give you free use of, you'd probably go along as they are obviously getting more use out of it it than you If somebody stole it, and bought two grams of cocaine, then you would be less forgiving. They abused their freewill, and thus it was a bad thing they were abusing.

Eating an apple is a sin? Sorry, but that's weak. It was a story meant to teach people to do what they're told and probably intended for children. Cocaine? Massage parlors?! Ytaker, your comparisons are a little odd.....

Using a piece of equipment you shouldn't

Wasting the money

Using it for something good.

Adam and Eve is just an old jewish myth.....nothing more.... and it is kinda stupid to create a tree of sin....why would God create something like that would make those he loves go against him?? If he loved us so much why'd he make a tree like that... I think he knew what Eve was goin to do....if he was almighty he should have known the moment eve ate the apple and prevent adam from eating it...don't yall agree?...

Yes I agree.

what is good and why should we use it on it

It wasnt necesserally an apple. It's just called a forbidden fruit. Also, eve was not made from adams rib; the story just says that she was made from his side

the 'forbidden fruit' might have been a metaphor for something that adam/eve did that the original writers of the story didnt want to talk about in detail

Adam and Eve is ALL bullshit!

/\
I agree, but star wars is not real either, and there is a whole 4 forums on KMC devoted to that. It's a story, so it should be treated like a story. It shouldnt be totally ignored on the sole basis of it being untrue

Doesn't really matter. I think of it as an metaphorical apple.

Starting a supermarket that earns lots of money; I was pointing out the metaphors in my story. They abused their freewill. They didn't convert it into something worthwhile for God, but something bad.

Not really. There were three options. Not eat the apple (metaphorical), and live with God. They could also eat the apple, and use the freewill. The two choice were good (admitting their sin, and loving god) or bad (what they did). You have to give people free choice, if you want people.

The tree was to test them to see there royal to them.Which failed because eve was supposly the weak one and ate the apple after being told not too.
I think that it is not a tale it really happen.In anyway it is like questioning Eveloution.Which we have no facts that does exist.Inleast with Adam and Eve we know the whole story/jm

what a bunch of rambling nonsense.

Do they not have a right to know as well? In Henry V, Henry tests some traitors to see how they'd treat traitors. He knows that they're going to be executed (as they're lying butt kissers), but he wants them to choose their fate themselves.

Then they used their freewill to sin, by shifting the blame. They had knowledge then. Also, throughout the middle ages, and many other historical ages, Adam was blamed mainly, not Eve.

Not really. The knowledge is sufficient though. You can ignore many tales from more than four millennia ago if you choose.

Your view. Not mine. I see it as a template, not a model. Like the original printing press. Without that idea, I couldn't talk to you now. You can't find many better models than that. Besides, most of the scientific discoveries that were denied at first, were proposed by Christians. Like Newton.

Science however... it pollutes, it radiates, it proposes eugenics, biological warfare, the TV (I stick to the theory that we would be far more advanced without it.), acid (LSD), and other lovely little gizmo's. Of course it has proposed a lot of cures too. Depends on the person.

I recognise the name, but I don't know much about her. Do you have any sources? But anyway, yes, but now we know what it means thanks to http://bible.crosswalk.com/ and so do not need to ever worry about that again.

I'm not religious at all, but I think the tree is meant to be symbolic.

No, you haven't got the story straight. Read Henry V Act two. These are the important bits: The chorus, and scene two.

Will do.

The chorus tells the audience that, "the youth of England are on fire," (2.0.1) and that men throughout the land are preparing for a war with France. The French, afraid of the threat which Henry poses, have bribed three men to become traitors. The Earl of Cambridge, Lord Scrope, and Sir Thomas Gray of Northumberland have accepted French money and conspire to kill Henry before he can depart for France.


Act Two, Scene One



Corporal Nim and Lieutenant Bardolph are waiting for Pistol and his wife the Hostess to arrive. Nim was formerly betrothed to the Hostess, and is upset that Pistol has married her. Pistol arrives and soon he and Nim have drawn their swords and are ready to fight over the Hostess. She makes them put the swords away, but they again draw on each other only a few lines later.

Bardolph, upset by this, draws his own sword and threatens to kill the first man that dares to injure the other man. Before anything serious happens, the Boy who serves Falstaff appears and tells the men that his master is very sick. Nim tells Pistol that he will forget about the fight provided Pistol pays him the eight shillings he won gambling. Pistol agrees to give him a "noble", equivalent to six shillings and eight pence. Nim agrees to this arrangement and the men leave to go see how Falstaff is doing.


Act Two, Scene Two



Westmorland, Gloucester and Exeter arrive and discuss the fact that Henry knows that Scrope, Grey and Cambridge have become traitors. They remark that the traitors are able to pretend to be so loyal to Henry in spite of the fact that they accepted French money to kill him. They cannot believe that these men would sell their king's life for such a small amount of money.

Henry arrives accompanied by Scrope, Cambridge and Grey. He first asks them if they think he will be victorious against the French forces. They all tell him there is no doubt that he will win. Henry then decides to play a game with them. He orders Exeter to free a man accused of treason from the prison. Scrope objects, saying that it will set a bad example for the rest of the people. Henry replies, "O let us yet be merciful" (2.2.47). The other two traitors also object and tell him to put the man to death.

Henry nonetheless orders the man to be set free. He then changes topics and asks who the commissioners are (the commissioners are the men who will rule England in his absence). All three of the traitors inform him that he bade them come in order to receive a commission. Henry hands them letters of commission and tells Exeter and Westmorland to that the army will leave that night for France. He then turns back to the traitors and remarks that they appear quite pale.

The traitors have read the documents, which clearly implicate them in a plot to kill Henry. They beg for mercy, but he refuses to grant them any since they themselves would not pardon the accused man whom he wanted to free. He sends them away to be executed, and tells the assembled lords to prepare for war with France.


Act Two, Scene Three




Hostess Quickly, Nim, Pistol and Bardolph return from visiting Falstaff who has died. They discuss whether he went to heaven or hell, and Hostess Quickly argues that he cannot be in hell. Nim says that Falstaff swore off wine at the end, which was formerly one of his great indulgences. Falstaff's Boy also tells them that Falstaff swore off women, calling them "devils incarnate" (2.3.28). Nim then tells them it is time to leave. They all kiss the Hostess goodbye except for Nim and leave to join Henry's army.


Act Two, Scene Four



King Charles the Sixth of France tells his dukes Berri and Bourbon, as well as his son the Dauphin, to go to the garrisons and make sure France is well defended against Henry. The Dauphin says it is a good idea, but that it is also unnecessary because Henry is an idle king who acts more like a capricious youth. The Constable tells the Dauphin to be quiet because he is mistaken about Henry's real personality.

Charles decides that it is safer to prepare a strong defense rather than risk Henry being too strong. He is afraid of repeating the battle of Crecy, where Prince Edward of Wales defeated the French on their own territory. A messenger interrupts Charles' speech and informs him that Exeter has arrived as an ambassador from King Henry. King Charles orders Exeter to be brought before him.

Exeter informs Charles that Henry demands the throne of France, and wants Charles to willingly give up the crown or be responsible for the bloodshed that will occur. Charles tells Exeter that he will give him a response the next day. Exeter also has a message for the Dauphin, and tells the young prince that Henry scorns him for his joke and will make him pay for it. Exeter lastly informs the court that Henry has already landed on French soil and that Charles should give him a response immediately.

um.......

no species can survive with only two specimens remaining. Within a few generations the offspring would be so imbred as to virtually be unviable. This goes for humans aswell.

Now which human-prototype was Adam and Eve supposed to be again?

Ardipithecus ramidus?
Australopithecus anamensis?
Australopithecus afarensis?
Australopithecus africanus?
Australopithecus garhi?
Paranthropus aethiopicus?
Paranthropus boisei?
Paranthropus robustus?
Homo habilis?
Homo rudolfensis?
Homo ergaster?
Homo erectus?
Homo heidelbergensis?
Homo neanderthalensis?
Homo sapiens?

clarify for me........the bible does not mention.

Genesis 4v16 Then Cain went away from the Lord to live in the land of Nod, where he found himself a wife.

Adam and Eve had three sons, whose wives did not come from Eden. As I see it, Adam and Eve were the first 2 people, but not the only 2.

This, of course, begs the question--why did God create other people and select Adam and Eve to be the father and mother of His chosen people? If there were other people than Adam and Eve, were they already sinning? Or did they not sin until the fateful "Tree of Knowledge" bit?

Aah, it burns my mind with all these questions.

and the bible really doesnt have a clue.....................

I think the other peoples were created after Adam and Eve were kicked out.

I always thought that the story of adam and eve was so unfair.
First of all, is the fact that before they ate the fruit, they didnt know the difference between right and wrong. How are they meant to make the right choice if they dont even know the difference between right and wrong.

Also, it was the serpent that persuaded eve to eat the fruit. But what did god do? He punished eve by making her suffer painfully during birth. ANd what did he do to the serpent? He made it crawl on its belly for the rest of it's days. I would have thought that god would have been clever enough to know that the serpent DID ALREADY crwal on its bely. Talk about unfair punishment.

I have often thought of the metaphorical fruit as being civilization and the evolution into homo-sapiens. (eating the fruit is referred to as having the knowlegde between good and evil, and the ability to be like a god)

But did it? Find me proof, from a creationist point of veiw, that the serpent crawled on its belly before.

well it didsnt have arms or legs, so the serpent got off lightly

How do you know it didn't have any arms or legs?

and what did some serpents do that was so special that made god re-think his decision and allow them to evolve into lizards?


and nobody ever mentioned which species Adam and Eve were........

Ardipithecus ramidus?
Australopithecus anamensis?
Australopithecus afarensis?
Australopithecus africanus?
Australopithecus garhi?
Paranthropus aethiopicus?
Paranthropus boisei?
Paranthropus robustus?
Homo habilis?
Homo rudolfensis?
Homo ergaster?
Homo erectus?
Homo heidelbergensis?
Homo neanderthalensis?
Homo sapiens?

/\which of those species was the mini-humans found to have lived in indonesia thousands of years ago???

beats me........I'm no anthropologist.........

I personally believe more something along the lines of "God was. Then he made the big bang happen just right."

But what is a day relative to god? From I have read it says in the bible that 1 day to god is 1000 years and 1000 years to god is one day.....

/\ the serpent was wrong. Adam and eve DID die (eventually)

the serpent was the coolest person in this piece of Bullshit

God wrote not one book in the bible.............all were written by humans. To humans, 1 day is 24 hours.

he indeed got a point ther3e I think but I don't know

Humans wrote it but they are talking about God saying it.

Anyway, ive heard another explanation for God's saying you will die the day you eat the apple. Which I think was not literally an apple btw.

Yeah we called it Snow White

thats not it but like I think everybody should know, everything in the bible is not to be taken literally.

dont worry I dont take anything of the bible literaly nor do I find find it believable

Adam and Eve never were born, never died, never existed. Its just a story to teach ppl about the creation of human beings.

I was playing Unreal Tournamnet 2004 one day, and one person says that Christians are insane, I ask why, and he says (about the Adam and Eve story), "If you believe that shit, you're ****ed up."

I would have pwned him for that.

I'm 'Skater For Jesus' on UT2k4, btw

I would have pwned him for that.

I'm 'Skater For Jesus' on UT2k4, btw

Adam and Eve. The first white people on the planet. Not Asian,Black,Hispanic,other. White.

They also never experienced, childhood.

Why didn't god forgive them ? He is the most forgiving thing after all.

Think about it....a real intelligent being would of forgiven them, if this was true.....right....If not...It's conditional love....Is that what god is.,..conditional?.......Real love is UNCONDITIONAL LOVE....

he's sadistic: he punishes people that are now X generations away from Adam and Eve. What do I have to do with how the screwed up?

says who?

If Adam and Eve were really monkeys....I think I'd be sick......

Originally posted by JimMorrison227
I want the opinion of someone who thinks this story is true, what was the point of this "god" creating a tree that if someone ate and apple it would release all sins or whatever. Obviously curiosity would take the better of someone...So why did he even create the tree?

The tree was infact like a test, god wasl ikely to have wanted a check to see if mankind would obey him or not, and unlikily the Serpent(Dragon-like) got there first and put curiosity into there minds. And once they ate from the tree(which was a normal tree) they realised the knowledge of good and evil by disobeying god.

If Adam and Eve were really monkeys....I think I'd be sick......

too bad it bounced

Reality check bounced.....................

"Return to sender, address unknown"

It was probably a bill....anyway.

it was a bounced check