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

Why was Adam exempt from the transgression when the transgression was disobedience?

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

I think that Adam, not being deceived, was more culpable than Eve.

Why then did God favor the guiltiest, Adam, with, --- he shall rule over you?

Men rule over women? Why when men were not deceived but disobeyed?

What was the transgression, --- if not a wise decision to choose knowledge and wisdom and shun immortality of the flesh, --- even if that were possible, --- and why was Adan not punished as hard as Eve when he was clearly more guilty?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Why was Adam exempt from the transgression when the transgression was disobedience?

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

I think that Adam, not being deceived, was more culpable than Eve.

Why then did God favor the guiltiest, Adam, with, --- he shall rule over you?

Men rule over women? Why when men were not deceived but disobeyed?

What was the transgression, --- if not a wise decision to choose knowledge and wisdom and shun immortality of the flesh, --- even if that were possible, --- and why was Adan not punished as hard as Eve when he was clearly more guilty?

Regards
DL

Because the people who constructed the religion and wrote the bible were men who wanted to control women. The story of Adam and Eve is just mythology, but how that mythology was interpreted makes all the difference.

Aside from the mythology part, the above is pretty accurate.
The Bible was written by men.
Who's to say if and how Adam was punished?

He wasn't exempt. Banishment from Eden and subsequently death were the most severe punishments that God handed out, and Adam suffered both of them as much as Eve did.

Good point, though Eve (and by extension, women) was the one getting all the bad press. And bleeding once a month out of her most intimate of places.
Adam/men seem to be suffering for sins that weren't his/our fault.

Here you go:

17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
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
By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”
(Genesis 3:17-19)

Yup, it was all the woman's fault. Not.

Originally posted by riv6672
Aside from the mythology part, the above is pretty accurate.
The Bible was written by men.
Who's to say if and how Adam was punished?

If Adam and Eve isn't mythology, what is it?

Originally posted by Robtard
Here you go:

17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
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
By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”
(Genesis 3:17-19)

So God made Women subservient and Men farmers?

Originally posted by MF DELPH
So God made Women subservient and Men farmers?
Pretty much.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If Adam and Eve isn't mythology, what is it?
A matter of faith.

Originally posted by riv6672
A matter of faith.

People can have faith is myths. Do you think the Greeks had no faith in their gods?

Originally posted by riv6672
Aside from the mythology part, the above is pretty accurate.
The Bible was written by men.
Who's to say if and how Adam was punished?


Mythology, my ass. Of course, it was written by men. The entire Bible was but God communicated to man (wether by talking, thru dreams, or some other means) what to write in it. The Bible is the word of God...and yes, He's quite real. Regardless of what know-it-all atheists think.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
People can have faith is myths. Do you think the Greeks had no faith in their gods?
Haha, YOU think their gods were myths. They didnt.

Originally posted by riv6672
Haha, YOU think their gods were myths. They didnt.

No they didn't. And they would have been pissed at me for calling their gods myths. Is your God a myth?

Originally posted by Star428
Mythology, my ass. Of course, it was written by men. The entire Bible was but God communicated to man (wether by talking, thru dreams, or some other means) what to write in it. The Bible is the word of God...and yes, He's quite real. Regardless of what know-it-all atheists think.

The Koran makes the same claim. Why should I believe you and the bible over the Koran?

Even though we've gone completely off topic, shaky, i have to first say, no, my god's not a myth (i'm Asatru), and i couldnt care less if you call him that or not, and second, i have to ask, why should anyone believe YOU?
Faith is faith.
I've never been a fan of religions that push themselves on others. Also never been a fan of people who claim a person's religion is false.
Live and let live, as long as no one's getting hurt.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Because the people who constructed the religion and wrote the bible were men who wanted to control women. The story of Adam and Eve is just mythology, but how that mythology was interpreted makes all the difference.

Exactly right.

You might like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ1PDxeUynA

Regards
DL

Originally posted by riv6672
Aside from the mythology part, the above is pretty accurate.
The Bible was written by men.
Who's to say if and how Adam was punished?

A literalist are you?

Do you believe in a talking serpent or a serpent that was controlled by Satan then.

Tell us why God put Satan right there beside Eve please?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Tzeentch
He wasn't exempt. Banishment from Eden and subsequently death were the most severe punishments that God handed out, and Adam suffered both of them as much as Eve did.

Is a life being ruled by another as good as a life where one rules over another?

I think it is better to rule than to be ruled and Eve was ruled and got the raw end of Adams sin.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by riv6672
Good point, though Eve (and by extension, women) was the one getting all the bad press. And bleeding once a month out of her most intimate of places.
Adam/men seem to be suffering for sins that weren't his/our fault.

That is a interesting /stupid statement when the bible says he sinned while Eve was deceived by a supernatural entity that she could not resist.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by riv6672
Yup, it was all the woman's fault. Not.

Now you have me confused as to what your position really is.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Star428
Mythology, my ass. Of course, it was written by men. The entire Bible was but God communicated to man (wether by talking, thru dreams, or some other means) what to write in it. The Bible is the word of God...and yes, He's quite real. Regardless of what know-it-all atheists think.

I am not an atheist. I am a Gnostic Christian.

Can you tell me why God put Satan right there with Eve?

Some say to test her but her mind was basically that of a baby who does not even know she is naked so there can be no testing of such an empty mind.

What is your view?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by riv6672
Even though we've gone completely off topic, shaky, i have to first say, no, my god's not a myth (i'm Asatru), and i couldnt care less if you call him that or not, and second, i have to ask, why should anyone believe YOU?
Faith is faith.
I've never been a fan of religions that push themselves on others. Also never been a fan of people who claim a person's religion is false.
Live and let live, as long as no one's getting hurt.

But faith is hurting many.

For the evils of religion to grow, read any scripture literally.

Any and all harmless beliefs are allowed by Gnostic Christians. We know that any myth can be internalized for good results and as esoteric ecumenists, we enjoy knowledge of all the myths that man has created about Gods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D

When there is a victim is when that view changes. Then you see why Christianity annihilated Gnostic Christianity. We do not let the evils of forced literalism go unopposed. To a tyrant like Constantine, we were poison. One of his first commands to his new Church was to kill off the free thinkers and of course, his new tool, his Church, did as bid. It was quite a ride for free thought for the next 1,000 years.

For the evils of religion to grow.

How can a Gnostic Christian, --- and any other free thinking moral person, --- not judge other's morals when seeing someone hurt other because of the same Church's teachings today?

Can you ignore such things if you have decent morals? Impossible. Especially with Islam pulling the same murderous, freedom stifling ****.

We must discriminate and judge constantly. Every law is a compulsion on all of us to judge.

It is my view that all right wing literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are moral religionists, --- as well as those who do not believe. Literalists hurt their parent religions --- and everyone else, be he a believer or not. Literalists and the right wing of religions make us all into laughing stocks. Their God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution has got to go. So must beliefs in fantasy, miracles and magic. These are all evil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKHa...x=0&playnext=1

They also do much harm to their own fellow adherents.

African witches and Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9...eature=related

Jesus Camp 1of 3
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=48b_1185215493

Death to Gays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMw2Z...eature=related

For evil to grow my friend, all good people need do is nothing. Fight literalism when you can. It is your duty to our fellow man.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by riv6672
Even though we've gone completely off topic, shaky, i have to first say, no, my god's not a myth (i'm Asatru), and i couldnt care less if you call him that or not, and second, i have to ask, why should anyone believe YOU?
Faith is faith.
I've never been a fan of religions that push themselves on others. Also never been a fan of people who claim a person's religion is false.
Live and let live, as long as no one's getting hurt.

This has nothing to do with me, and it sounds to me like you got offended. There is nothing wrong with mythology. There is wisdom from the people of the past in mythology. To say that a belief is mythology is not an insult.

I beg to differ on people not being insulted by saying their religions are essentially just stories, but, if you cant see that, its not ip to me to educate you on manners.

Also, the wall of text from the greatest i am...can be summed up in the first sentence.

Anything can be good or bad, (religion, science, eating, sex...) not sure what that has to do with anything.

Always interesting to see how people think on these topics...

Originally posted by riv6672
I beg to differ on people not being insulted by saying their religions are essentially just stories, but, if you cant see that, its not ip to me to educate you on manners...
Literalists are always insulted when people point out that the stories they take as real are not. This is because they confuse fact and truth. A story can have truth without being fact.

If you can't handle the fact that there was never an Adam and Eve, then perhaps you should post in a Christian forum.

I'm not christian, but thanks for the suggestion.

Not sure what the opposite of a literalist is, but you guys always get condescending when people point out that the things you take to be stories might be true.
Keep the faith, shaky.

Originally posted by riv6672
I'm not christian, but thanks for the suggestion.

Not sure what the opposite of a literalist is, but you guys always get condescending when people point out that the things you take to be stories might be true.
Keep the faith, shaky.

There is absolutely no way that the story of Adam and Eve could be literal. The human race would have died out long ago, and snakes would talk. The opposite of literalist is someone who can take the wisdom from a story without the story being fact.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There is absolutely no way that the story of Adam and Eve could be literal.
Why not?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The opposite of literalist is someone who can take the wisdom from a story without the story being fact.
Who says its a story?

Faith. Look it up.

Originally posted by riv6672
Why not?

Not enough of a gene pool, and snakes don't talk. When you see talking animals in a story, you know the story isn't real. Even if the story has great wisdom, you know the story didn't really happen.

Originally posted by riv6672
Who says its a story?

Faith. Look it up.

Personification says it's a story. Blind faith, look it up.

Gee you seem upset.
You literalists (as in you literally think you know everything) are easy to mess with.

Originally posted by riv6672
Gee you seem upset.
You literalists (as in you literally think you know everything) are easy to mess with.

Why would I be upset? You asked a question, and I have a bad habit of answering.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Why was Adam exempt from the transgression when the transgression was disobedience?

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

I think that Adam, not being deceived, was more culpable than Eve.

Why then did God favor the guiltiest, Adam, with, --- he shall rule over you?

Men rule over women? Why when men were not deceived but disobeyed?

What was the transgression, --- if not a wise decision to choose knowledge and wisdom and shun immortality of the flesh, --- even if that were possible, --- and why was Adan not punished as hard as Eve when he was clearly more guilty?

Regards
DL

"I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.
For Adam was formed first, then Eve;"
I Timothy 2:12-13

men should have authority over women because Adam was created first before Eve, that is the reason... not because Adam was not deceived... if this will make you feel alright --- Adam, as implied by the Bible, will not be saved... but Eve will be saved...

"Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty."
I Timothy 2:15

the mere fact that Eve was deceived, means that she committed a sin of lesser gravity than Adam, who sinned deliberately...

Originally posted by dyajeep
"I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.
For Adam was formed first, then Eve;"
I Timothy 2:12-13

men should have authority over women because Adam was created first before Eve, that is the reason... not because Adam was not deceived... if this will make you feel alright --- Adam, as implied by the Bible, will not be saved... but Eve will be saved...

"Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty."
I Timothy 2:15

the mere fact that Eve was deceived, means that she committed a sin of lesser gravity than Adam, who sinned deliberately...

I agree yet God punished her more than Adam.

If God cannot judge well then he is not a worthy God.

Right?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
"I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.
For Adam was formed first, then Eve;"
I Timothy 2:12-13

men should have authority over women because Adam was created first before Eve, that is the reason... not because Adam was not deceived... if this will make you feel alright --- Adam, as implied by the Bible, will not be saved... but Eve will be saved...

"Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty."
I Timothy 2:15

the mere fact that Eve was deceived, means that she committed a sin of lesser gravity than Adam, who sinned deliberately...

As sick as that sounds, that is correct according to the bible. I'm sure glad I'm not a Christian anymore.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
Personification is not exclusive to fiction.
There is a whole genre popular today called creative nonfiction:


So, lets say I tell a creative nonfiction where I use a family of mice to tell a tragic story. Is this story meant to be taken literally? Are there mice that like in a house together like humans? No. Anyone who took the story literally would miss the point all together. That is exactly what is happening with the story of Adam and Eve. If you take the elements literally, you will miss the point of the story.

Humans once lived in the garden. We were just like the other animals, but then we did something, and we were thrown out of the garden. That's the story. Snakes didn't really talk, and Adam and Eve were not the first people. I personally believe that "first sin" was agriculture. If you read on, you will see that the story of Cane and Adel is another story about the struggle between those embraced agriculture and those who were hunter gatherers.

I never said the story was not important, I just said it was not literal. In other words fiction. Fiction is not devoid of meaning and wisdom.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I agree yet God punished her more than Adam.

If God cannot judge well then he is not a worthy God.

Right?

Regards
DL

can you tell me what punishment?

here is Eve's punishment:

"To the woman he said, I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."
Genesis 3:16

and here is Adam's punishment:

"And to Adam he said, Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, You shall not eat of it, cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
Thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field.
In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return."
Genesis 3:17-19

the way i see it, Adam's punishment has more gravity...






Originally posted by Shakyamunison
As sick as that sounds, that is correct according to the bible. I'm sure glad I'm not a Christian anymore.

i'll gladly take that as a compliment, Shakya...

Originally posted by riv6672
Yup, it was all the woman's fault. Not.

yes, it was never the woman's fault, that is correct... the Bible is clearly saying that Eve was deceived, so the fault is not hers...

"Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned--"
Romans 5:12

it's clearly Adam's fault...

Originally posted by dyajeep
yes, it was never the woman's fault, that is correct... the Bible is clearly saying that Eve was deceived, so the fault is not hers...

"Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned--"
Romans 5:12

it's clearly Adam's fault...

Yes and God still gave Eve the short end of the stick.

Total injustice that seems to escape that unique twisted Christian way of looking at things through their faith blinders.

Regards
DL

Not really, women got it easy, Pain in childbirth versus working the fields all you're life.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Not really, women got it easy, Pain in childbirth versus working the fields all you're life.

Eve got more than that. He shall rule over you.

Adam, although more culpable, Gets a nice slave that he can boss around the field.

Who is better off? The master or the slave?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Eve got more than that. He shall rule over you.

Adam, although more culpable, Gets a nice slave that he can boss around the field.

Who is better off? The master or the slave?

Regards
DL

Then the first words of the U.S. Declaration of Independence must also be wrong as it says "all men are created equal" and does not mention women.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Then the first words of the U.S. Declaration of Independence must also be wrong as it says "all men are created equal" and does not mention women.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

It does not showing just how misogynistic the U.S was back then.

No wonder women did not get the vote till what, 1920.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
It does not showing just how misogynistic the U.S was back then.

No wonder women did not get the vote till what, 1920.

Regards
DL

I don't see your point as its changed.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
I don't see your point as its changed.

My point is 2,000 years of Christian misogyny against women. Shame on Christians.

You may not want to believe those here but what if a Christian Bishop said about the same thing.

Would it matter or is your opinion stronger than his?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIyVWACkii0

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Yes and God still gave Eve the short end of the stick.

Total injustice that seems to escape that unique twisted Christian way of looking at things through their faith blinders.

Regards
DL

it was Adam's fault, but both Adam and Eve committed sin, and both of them was punished... i don't think about what punishment is heavier... but what the Bible implies is that Adam will not be saved and Eve has a chance... feel any better?

Originally posted by dyajeep
it was Adam's fault, but both Adam and Eve committed sin, and both of them was punished... i don't think about what punishment is heavier... but what the Bible implies is that Adam will not be saved and Eve has a chance... feel any better?

No. It is unsupported speculation.

So you think both punishments to be about equal even though Adam get to be lord over Eve.

Ask your wife if she agrees.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
No. It is unsupported speculation.

So you think both punishments to be about equal even though Adam get to be lord over Eve.

Ask your wife if she agrees.

Regards
DL

Eve disobeyed Adam and Adam disobeyed God. By every telling of the Fall that has a religious devotion Adam was the worst sinner.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
No. It is unsupported speculation.

no it's not.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
So you think both punishments to be about equal even though Adam get to be lord over Eve.

Ask your wife if she agrees.

Regards
DL

so you want Eve to be the lord then?

Originally posted by Bentley
Eve disobeyed Adam and Adam disobeyed God. By every telling of the Fall that has a religious devotion Adam was the worst sinner.

Agreed yet he gets out of Eden with a slave wife who gets to suffer a hell of a lot more than Adam showing what a misogynistic religion Christianity is.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
no it's not.



so you want Eve to be the lord then?

Not surprising that equality is not part of your options showing yet again what damage your religion has done to your thinking.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by riv6672
I beg to differ on people not being insulted by saying their religions are essentially just stories,

I refer to my own religious stories and characters as "Mythologies." That is the technically accurate term for it. The Greek Pantheon? Mythologies. Christian Godhead? Mythologies. A Pagan views Christian religious beliefs as mythologies.

But they are all mythologies.

Mythology:
"a body of myths, as that of a particular people or that relating to a particular person..."




To answer the thread topic with some Mormonism (because I honestly believe Mormons have just a tad bit extra on the Gospel to make much of this weird stuff make sense), Adam and Eve were naive, not dumb. Adam and Eve had intelligence and wisdom but lacked a great deal of knowledge since they were isolated from human culture. Also, God didn't send Satan. God banished him from heaven after his rebellion. He was banned to this plane of existence. Also, Adam and Eve existed at the same time as the rest of humanity and the story of their creation is 100% allegory and 100% not factual. You don't find this out in Mormonism until you go to the temple and do the crazy Mormon temple stuff. It is subtle but if you pay attention in the temple ceremonies, you'll see that Satan had been around doing his thing in the universe, on other worlds, for billions of years prior to earth. And humanity exited outside of Adam and Eve's little marriage in the Garden, as well.

Adam was not exempt from jack diddly or squat, as the OP implies. Adam made an informed decision to partake of the fruit.

Adam had 2 choices and both choices would result in him breaking God's commandments:

1. Obey the commandment to love Eve and "cleave unto her" and also have children.
2. Obey the commandment to not eat the forbidden fruit.


If he did 1, that means he would have to violate 2 (he would have to violate 2 in order to change his body to have children). If he did 2, that means he would violate 1 because he would lose Eve and wouldn't be able to stick to her.


And why was this obvious "doomed to fail" scenario setup? Because of the whole Free-Will thing God had going on. God wanted humanity to choose Him of its own free-will; not be forced to have to obey him. So He setup a scenario that he knew Satan would play into and that He knew Adam and Eve would fail. The kicker is, Adam and Eve both knew this scenario would be setup because, in Mormonism, we were all given callings to hold in the mortal plane and theirs was one of setting up humanity to experience mortality.

Eve was tempted because she wanted to do better for Adam and humanity. As we like to describe it in Mormonism, Eve knew that she had to eat the fruit in order to bare children. So she had a decision: remain in heavenly limbo indefinitely or get the Plan of Salvation started. Based on the very true temptations that Satan used to trick Eve (that she would gain the Knowledge of God), Eve made the choice to transgress God's commandment and partake of the fruit.


What we do not know is how long Satan tempted Eve. It could have been for centuries before she finally gave in. We also know Adam and Eve did not have the same bodies we did (allegorical, maybe) so their cognition may not be the same as ours. What we do know is both Adam and Eve chose to transgress God's commandments.


To put it more succinctly, here was Eve's conundrum:

1. Love Adam and multiply (have children).
2. Do not eat the forbidden fruit.


As we can see, Eve took the plunge. Some disparage Eve for this and make sexist statements that this is the bane of having women in our lives. In Mormonism, she is seen as, perhaps, the more righteous of the couple because she recognized the need to get the ball rolling.




So while Satan did what he was supposed to, as God predicted, so did Adam and Eve. Transgressing the Law was always the point of their stay in the Garden of Eden. They were never intended to stay there, indefinitely.


Some Mormons, including myself, speculate that God's spiritual reign on earth did not fully begin until Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden which was around 4000 B.C.E.

Some Mormons, but not myself, think the Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden since the Earth was formed over 4.5 billion years ago and that it took that long for Satan to tempt them to get the fruit. This interpretation means evolution still took place until modern humans evolved (because our mythology hints that humans existed outside of the Garden of Eden), this implies to these supporters that Eve made the choice when she thought the outside world was ready for them to face the consequences of their fruit eating actions.



As far as I believe, I don't know how much of the story is allegory and how much is real. Not even in Mormonism is it seen as important. But there was some Man, perhaps Hebrew, that was Adam and his wife Eve. Different names, most likely, but the story is about them. Adam, in Mormon mythology, is Michael the Archangel. He is a higher ranking angel than Lucifer before he fell. He was directly outside the Godhead (meaning, he was as close as possible to being Godlike without actually getting that title, officially) and, in Mormonism, he helped create the universe with Jehovah (Jesus Christ). So, this implies the Adam created the universe with Jehovah, knowing full well that he would have to go through the Garden of Eden trial and disobey God. I can speculate that he could not be part of the Godhead because he had to have imperfections enough to make the whole plan work (meaning, he would have to be able to break the Law).

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Not surprising that equality is not part of your options showing yet again what damage your religion has done to your thinking.

Regards
DL

i don't know how you define "equality" but what you're saying is definitely wrong... the sin committed by Adam has nothing to do of him being superior to Eve... women are subjected to men when they are in a relationship as husbands and wives, if that's your point... but being single, i don't see any reason for men to rule over women... happy?

Originally posted by dyajeep
i don't know how you define "equality" but what you're saying is definitely wrong... the sin committed by Adam has nothing to do of him being superior to Eve... women are subjected to men when they are in a relationship as husbands and wives, if that's your point... but being single, i don't see any reason for men to rule over women... happy?

You are either not married or have not been married for long.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Agreed yet he gets out of Eden with a slave wife who gets to suffer a hell of a lot more than Adam showing what a misogynistic religion Christianity is.

Regards
DL

So the worst sinner proved to be less moral than the less sinner? Color me surprised.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are either not married or have not been married for long.

problem is, GIA thinks women are being "downed" in the Bible, esp. Eve, but i don't see it... Adam ruling over Eve is because they are husband and wife... the man should lead the way, should drive the steering wheel... the Bible doesn't talk about a man and a woman who does not have a relationship...

Women are not supposed to be subservient to men. They are to be a "help-meet" to men.

http://godswordtowomen.org/help.htm



"HELP
Strong's # 5828 (Hebrew = ezer) aid: -- help
Strong's Root = # 5826 (Hebrew = azar) azar = prime root: to surround, ie, protect or aid: help, succour

Gesenius adds that the primary idea lies in girding, surrounding, hence defending




MEET
(Hebrew = kenegdo) corresponding to, counterpart to, equal to matching


The traditional teaching for the woman as help (meet) is that of assistant or helper subservient to the one being helped. This definition would appear to line up with Strong's definition of the word. However, if you look at the context of every other use of the word ezer in the scripture, you will see that ezer refers to either God or military allies. In all other cases the one giving the help is superior to the one receiving the help. Adding kenegdo (meet) modifies the meaning to that of equal rather than superior status. Scripture is so awesome. God says just what He means.

Dr. Susan Hyatt gives the following definition from her book In the Spirit We're Equal "Re: Hebrew ezer kenegdo. In Genesis 2:18, the word "helpmeet" does not occur. The Hebrew expression ezer kenegdo appears, meaning "one who is the same as the other and who surrounds, protects, aids, helps, supports." There is no indication of inferiority or of a secondary position in an hierarchical separation of the male and female "spheres" of responsibility, authority, or social position."





And this is probably the nail in the sexist coffin:

"The word ezer is used twice in the Old Testament to refer to the female and 14 times to refer to God. For example, in the Psalms when David says, "The Lord is my Helper, 'he uses the word ezer.'"




Let us be clear that the Apostle Paul was sexist and possibly homosexual (some say he was asexual but his hate for women and praise or elevation for men seems to indicate something other than asexual).

Originally posted by dyajeep
i don't know how you define "equality" but what you're saying is definitely wrong... the sin committed by Adam has nothing to do of him being superior to Eve... women are subjected to men when they are in a relationship as husbands and wives, if that's your point... but being single, i don't see any reason for men to rule over women... happy?

Adam could not sin as he did not know good and evil and had no evil intent.

If you or your God would condemn a person for something evil when they do not know evil then you both show that you know little about justice.

Look up mens rea and thank secular that it is not as barbaric and as backward as your view is.

Come back and tell us what you found. It will not be a hard search.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Bentley
So the worst sinner proved to be less moral than the less sinner? Color me surprised.

Sin is attributed to Adam and not Eve. She was deceive says God. Adam was not and flat out disobeyed.

Read your bible or even the quote in the O.P. sometime, for the first time.

Now explain why Christianity denies women equality regardless of what your myths say?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
problem is, GIA thinks women are being "downed" in the Bible, esp. Eve, but i don't see it... Adam ruling over Eve is because they are husband and wife... the man should lead the way, should drive the steering wheel... the Bible doesn't talk about a man and a woman who does not have a relationship...

So women should become slaves to men when they decide to marry one. How stupid can you get.

Equality is even written up in the U.N. Charter. You would not qualify to join the rest of the world.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dadudemon
Women are not supposed to be subservient to men. They are to be a "help-meet" to men.

http://godswordtowomen.org/help.htm



"HELP
Strong's # 5828 (Hebrew = ezer) aid: -- help
Strong's Root = # 5826 (Hebrew = azar) azar = prime root: to surround, ie, protect or aid: help, succour

Gesenius adds that the primary idea lies in girding, surrounding, hence defending




MEET
(Hebrew = kenegdo) corresponding to, counterpart to, equal to matching


The traditional teaching for the woman as help (meet) is that of assistant or helper subservient to the one being helped. This definition would appear to line up with Strong's definition of the word. However, if you look at the context of every other use of the word ezer in the scripture, you will see that ezer refers to either God or military allies. In all other cases the one giving the help is superior to the one receiving the help. Adding kenegdo (meet) modifies the meaning to that of equal rather than superior status. Scripture is so awesome. God says just what He means.

Dr. Susan Hyatt gives the following definition from her book In the Spirit We're Equal "Re: Hebrew ezer kenegdo. In Genesis 2:18, the word "helpmeet" does not occur. The Hebrew expression ezer kenegdo appears, meaning "one who is the same as the other and who surrounds, protects, aids, helps, supports." There is no indication of inferiority or of a secondary position in an hierarchical separation of the male and female "spheres" of responsibility, authority, or social position."





And this is probably the nail in the sexist coffin:

"The word ezer is used twice in the Old Testament to refer to the female and 14 times to refer to God. For example, in the Psalms when David says, "The Lord is my Helper, 'he uses the word ezer.'"




Let us be clear that the Apostle Paul was sexist and possibly homosexual (some say he was asexual but his hate for women and praise or elevation for men seems to indicate something other than asexual).

Thanks for this good research.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dadudemon
I refer to my own religious stories and characters as "Mythologies." That is the technically accurate term for it. The Greek Pantheon? Mythologies. Christian Godhead? Mythologies. A Pagan views Christian religious beliefs as mythologies.

But they are all mythologies.

Mythology:
"a body of myths, as that of a particular people or that relating to a particular person..."




To answer the thread topic with some Mormonism (because I honestly believe Mormons have just a tad bit extra on the Gospel to make much of this weird stuff make sense), Adam and Eve were naive, not dumb. Adam and Eve had intelligence and wisdom but lacked a great deal of knowledge since they were isolated from human culture. Also, God didn't send Satan. God banished him from heaven after his rebellion. He was banned to this plane of existence. Also, Adam and Eve existed at the same time as the rest of humanity and the story of their creation is 100% allegory and 100% not factual. You don't find this out in Mormonism until you go to the temple and do the crazy Mormon temple stuff. It is subtle but if you pay attention in the temple ceremonies, you'll see that Satan had been around doing his thing in the universe, on other worlds, for billions of years prior to earth. And humanity exited outside of Adam and Eve's little marriage in the Garden, as well.

Adam was not exempt from jack diddly or squat, as the OP implies. Adam made an informed decision to partake of the fruit.

Adam had 2 choices and both choices would result in him breaking God's commandments:

1. Obey the commandment to love Eve and "cleave unto her" and also have children.
2. Obey the commandment to not eat the forbidden fruit.


If he did 1, that means he would have to violate 2 (he would have to violate 2 in order to change his body to have children). If he did 2, that means he would violate 1 because he would lose Eve and wouldn't be able to stick to her.


And why was this obvious "doomed to fail" scenario setup? Because of the whole Free-Will thing God had going on. God wanted humanity to choose Him of its own free-will; not be forced to have to obey him. So He setup a scenario that he knew Satan would play into and that He knew Adam and Eve would fail. The kicker is, Adam and Eve both knew this scenario would be setup because, in Mormonism, we were all given callings to hold in the mortal plane and theirs was one of setting up humanity to experience mortality.

Eve was tempted because she wanted to do better for Adam and humanity. As we like to describe it in Mormonism, Eve knew that she had to eat the fruit in order to bare children. So she had a decision: remain in heavenly limbo indefinitely or get the Plan of Salvation started. Based on the very true temptations that Satan used to trick Eve (that she would gain the Knowledge of God), Eve made the choice to transgress God's commandment and partake of the fruit.


What we do not know is how long Satan tempted Eve. It could have been for centuries before she finally gave in. We also know Adam and Eve did not have the same bodies we did (allegorical, maybe) so their cognition may not be the same as ours. What we do know is both Adam and Eve chose to transgress God's commandments.


To put it more succinctly, here was Eve's conundrum:

1. Love Adam and multiply (have children).
2. Do not eat the forbidden fruit.


As we can see, Eve took the plunge. Some disparage Eve for this and make sexist statements that this is the bane of having women in our lives. In Mormonism, she is seen as, perhaps, the more righteous of the couple because she recognized the need to get the ball rolling.




So while Satan did what he was supposed to, as God predicted, so did Adam and Eve. Transgressing the Law was always the point of their stay in the Garden of Eden. They were never intended to stay there, indefinitely.


Some Mormons, including myself, speculate that God's spiritual reign on earth did not fully begin until Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden which was around 4000 B.C.E.

Some Mormons, but not myself, think the Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden since the Earth was formed over 4.5 billion years ago and that it took that long for Satan to tempt them to get the fruit. This interpretation means evolution still took place until modern humans evolved (because our mythology hints that humans existed outside of the Garden of Eden), this implies to these supporters that Eve made the choice when she thought the outside world was ready for them to face the consequences of their fruit eating actions.



As far as I believe, I don't know how much of the story is allegory and how much is real. Not even in Mormonism is it seen as important. But there was some Man, perhaps Hebrew, that was Adam and his wife Eve. Different names, most likely, but the story is about them. Adam, in Mormon mythology, is Michael the Archangel. He is a higher ranking angel than Lucifer before he fell. He was directly outside the Godhead (meaning, he was as close as possible to being Godlike without actually getting that title, officially) and, in Mormonism, he helped create the universe with Jehovah (Jesus Christ). So, this implies the Adam created the universe with Jehovah, knowing full well that he would have to go through the Garden of Eden trial and disobey God. I can speculate that he could not be part of the Godhead because he had to have imperfections enough to make the whole plan work (meaning, he would have to be able to break the Law).

Good work again.

Eve took the plunge and Adam had the good sense to follow her lead.

That is likely why Jews and Gnostic Christians like me see Eden as our place of enlightenment and elevation while Christians see a fall.

http://www.mrrena.com/misc/judaism2.php

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Now explain why Christianity denies women equality regardless of what your myths say?

Because Adam was the biggest sinner according to the myth, of course he would mistreat Eve more. It's only logical.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Adam could not sin as he did not know good and evil and had no evil intent.

If you or your God would condemn a person for something evil when they do not know evil then you both show that you know little about justice.

your ignorance and arrogance will be your demise... now i'm positive that you don't know the Bible the way i do...

you mean to say that God created a "baby" Adam who does not know what's right and wrong? nope... God created a mature Adam! after creating Adam, God took him and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it (Genesis 2:15)... and even brought the animals to him for him to name them (Genesis 2:19)...

Adam was perfectly knowledgeable about what's right and wrong... and there was this one single solitary commandment that he should obey:

"And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, You may freely eat of every tree of the garden;
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."
Genesis 2:16-17

God threw a commandment right there... a covenant with Adam, never to eat the forbidden fruit but he blew it... sin is trangression of the law (I John 3:4) and Adam did that:

"But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me."
Hosea 6:7

Originally posted by Greatest I am
So women should become slaves to men when they decide to marry one. How stupid can you get.

Equality is even written up in the U.N. Charter. You would not qualify to join the rest of the world.

Regards
DL

why do you have that habit of twisting my words? who told you that women are to be "slaves" to men when they get married? people like you does not recognize the goodness the Bible teaches!

"Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord."
Ephesians 5:22

to be slaves? to beat the wives to a pulp? read further!

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself."
Ephesians 5:25, 28

now, i don't know what your schools and churches taught you but the Bible is not sexist nor degrade women in any way... of course, Paul taught that women should be silent, but then again, even if you're a man, if you are speaking nonsense, then you should be silent too!

"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God."
I Corinthians 14:28

but even if you're a woman, and you speak no nonsense, you can even be a minister!

"But I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea;"
Romans 16:1

equality? women get that in the Church of the Bible... it's just people like GIA are ignorant enough not to recognize these verses in the Bible!

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Exactly right.

You might like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ1PDxeUynA

Regards
DL

Very good video.

"Nevertheless, even though you chant and believe in Myoho-renge-kyo, if you think the Law is outside yourself, you are embracing not the Mystic Law but an inferior teaching."
Nichiren

Originally posted by Bentley
Because Adam was the biggest sinner according to the myth, of course he would mistreat Eve more. It's only logical.

So Christians knowingly follow a poor immoral misogynistic example and do not care if they make their own wives, daughters and mothers second class citizens.

Gotta love the morality of Christianity. Not.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
your ignorance and arrogance will be your demise... now i'm positive that you don't know the Bible the way i do...

you mean to say that God created a "baby" Adam who does not know what's right and wrong? nope... God created a mature Adam! after creating Adam, God took him and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it (Genesis 2:15)... and even brought the animals to him for him to name them (Genesis 2:19)...

Adam was perfectly knowledgeable about what's right and wrong... and there was this one single solitary commandment that he should obey:

"And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, You may freely eat of every tree of the garden;
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."
Genesis 2:16-17

God threw a commandment right there... a covenant with Adam, never to eat the forbidden fruit but he blew it... sin is trangression of the law (I John 3:4) and Adam did that:

"But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me."
Hosea 6:7



why do you have that habit of twisting my words? who told you that women are to be "slaves" to men when they get married? people like you does not recognize the goodness the Bible teaches!

"Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord."
Ephesians 5:22

to be slaves? to beat the wives to a pulp? read further!

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself."
Ephesians 5:25, 28

now, i don't know what your schools and churches taught you but the Bible is not sexist nor degrade women in any way... of course, Paul taught that women should be silent, but then again, even if you're a man, if you are speaking nonsense, then you should be silent too!

"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God."
I Corinthians 14:28

but even if you're a woman, and you speak no nonsense, you can even be a minister!

"But I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea;"
Romans 16:1

equality? women get that in the Church of the Bible... it's just people like GIA are ignorant enough not to recognize these verses in the Bible!

You are correct in that I do not know the bible as you do.

But you do not know justice nor your bible.

You have a mature Adam who is to stupid to know he is naked.

You are too stupid yourself if you think a mature male does not know when he is naked.

Begone. I have no time for such as you.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Very good video.

"Nevertheless, even though you chant and believe in Myoho-renge-kyo, if you think the Law is outside yourself, you are embracing not the Mystic Law but an inferior teaching."
Nichiren

+ 1

I only trust men who have written their moral code and laws in their hearts.

In an emergency, if a man has to run to a book before knowing the moral way to act then he is not worthy of being called a man.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
You are correct in that I do not know the bible as you do.

But you do not know justice nor your bible.

You have a mature Adam who is to stupid to know he is naked.

You are too stupid yourself if you think a mature male does not know when he is naked.

Begone. I have no time for such as you.

Regards
DL

that's your argument?

if you want to refute that Adam is not created to be a baby like you imply, then you should've made a better one.

and if you admit that you don't know the Bible that much, then "asking" about it is better than "criticizing" the book you don't really understand... sounds like someone i used to talk to...

if you don't time for me, then so be it.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
So Christians knowingly follow a poor immoral misogynistic example and do not care if they make their own wives, daughters and mothers second class citizens.

Gotta love the morality of Christianity. Not.

Regards
DL

My point was that your affirmation only enforces that the Bible is right in a twisted way, it doesn't detract from the teachings of the Church.

Christian don't have the exclusivity of mysoginy.

Originally posted by Bentley
My point was that your affirmation only enforces that the Bible is right in a twisted way, it doesn't detract from the teachings of the Church.

Christian don't have the exclusivity of mysoginy.

Well, Gnosticism is a form of Christianity, although it maybe older. So, what do you expect?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, what do you expect?

To be honest I expected exactly what I got

Originally posted by Bentley
To be honest I expected exactly what I got

Well, at least you are not disappointed.

One aspect of Gnostic Christianity that I like is that, as Universalists, we cannot be misogynistic as we see a spark of God within us all regardless of the gender our souls show.

The view most have of God is of an androgynous creature so to see our souls that way follows the logic of that belief.

That is why we do not and cannot discriminate against women and gays the way many religions do.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
The view most have of God is of an androgynous creature so to see our souls that way follows the logic of that belief.

That is why we do not and cannot discriminate against women and gays the way many religions do.

Regards
DL

that's one of the reasons, i somehow agree on the underlined... although i'm more of using "asexual" to describe God... and God is not a "creature" since He is the Creator...

"But those who are accounted worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage,"
Luke 20:35

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Galatians 3:28

God the Father is a "He", making Him a male but He gave birth to His Son (Hebrews 1:5), having female aspects... but then again, "giving birth" is not limited to females only because of the "seahorse logic"... and Jesus saying that the Father is a spirit (John 4:24), and a spirit doesn't have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39) makes God an androgynous or asexual entity...

Does anyone actually believe limitations such as gender would apply to a pandimensional entity such as the one we call god?

Originally posted by Bentley
Does anyone actually believe limitations such as gender would apply to a pandimensional entity such as the one we call god?

A literalist would.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A literalist would.

I'd argue that if you're that much of a literalist you're actually incapable of believing in a pandimensional entity at all mmm

Originally posted by Bentley
I'd argue that if you're that much of a literalist you're actually incapable of believing in a pandimensional entity at all mmm

If it was written in the bible that way they would. But no, sense the word pandimensional is not in the King James Version of the bible, then they wouldn't.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If it was written in the bible that way they would. But no, sense the word pandimensional is not in the King James Version of the bible, then they wouldn't.

So when the Bible portrays the same events in two different ways then they would believe both happened, right?

Then they would have no problem admitting the Bible is both the word of God and the word of Man.

Originally posted by Bentley
Does anyone actually believe limitations such as gender would apply to a pandimensional entity such as the one we call god?

Originally posted by Bentley
So when the Bible portrays the same events in two different ways then they would believe both happened, right?

Then they would have no problem admitting the Bible is both the word of God and the word of Man.

The literalists I have known jump through many hoops to explain such things.

Originally posted by Bentley
Does anyone actually believe limitations such as gender would apply to a pandimensional entity such as the one we call god?

Only idol worshipers will give any attributes to their imaginary Gods.

Christians are idol worshipers.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Bentley
So when the Bible portrays the same events in two different ways then they would believe both happened, right?

Then they would have no problem admitting the Bible is both the word of God and the word of Man.

Also, there are no pure literalists.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Only idol worshipers will give any attributes to their imaginary Gods.

Possibly?

Keep in mind that giving attributes is just how language works, this doesn't mean people actually believe a god that speaks has to have vocal chords. If we could escape from language limitations when talking about philosophy we certainly would.


Originally posted by Greatest I am
Christians are idol worshipers.

Depends on your definition, but I can see how that is true.

The problem would be if any kind of worship is idol worshiping, if that's the case, you're making a very redundant argument.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I have to laugh at those who think a God would create a son just to kill him.

God didn't create His Son... They are together in the past eternity...

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Only idol worshipers will give any attributes to their imaginary Gods.

Christians are idol worshipers.

Regards
DL

if you don't believe in any God, how can you categorize something as an idol? God and the idols are two opposite figures... idols are idols because they are false gods... they are false because there is a true one... and if you believe that God does not exist, then you cannot categorize the idols as false one...

in the Bible, the true God is not worshipped through graven images:

"God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."
John 4:24

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Only idol worshipers will give any attributes to their imaginary Gods.

Christians are idol worshipers.

Regards
DL

Since you don't believe in God or the Bible, then you cannot therefore believe in Satan, so everything you believe in such as Satan does not exist.

Dumbass

Originally posted by dyajeep
that's one of the reasons, i somehow agree on the underlined... although i'm more of using "asexual" to describe God... and God is not a "creature" since He is the Creator...

"But those who are accounted worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage,"
Luke 20:35

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Galatians 3:28

God the Father is a "He", making Him a male but He gave birth to His Son (Hebrews 1:5), having female aspects... but then again, "giving birth" is not limited to females only because of the "seahorse logic"... and Jesus saying that the Father is a spirit (John 4:24), and a spirit doesn't have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39) makes God an androgynous or asexual entity...

You understand the Jewish God poorly if the information here is true and I think it is.

I enjoyed this whole link but the part I want you to see is at about the 10 min. mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TndLzFZI9A

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Bentley
Does anyone actually believe limitations such as gender would apply to a pandimensional entity such as the one we call god?

As we create all of our Gods, all we can do is see what the ancients were thinking in terms of ideals and see if they are still the epitome of what a God should be.

It is all symbology and myth but most sages seem to think that our ideal mind set should be androgynous and that is why they showed their Gods as such. If we view God as just our leader then we would want our leadership to be cognisant of both the male and female view of any policy that God would make.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Bentley
Possibly?

Keep in mind that giving attributes is just how language works, this doesn't mean people actually believe a god that speaks has to have vocal chords. If we could escape from language limitations when talking about philosophy we certainly would.




Depends on your definition, but I can see how that is true.

The problem would be if any kind of worship is idol worshiping, if that's the case, you're making a very redundant argument.

Not to a Christian that does not recognize that he is idol worshiping and that his bible forbids such.

But I was not making an argument. I was stating a fact. Your statement was more like an argument or explanation for my fact.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep


"God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."
John 4:24

I agree. And where do you go to find the one you should worship?

I will assume that you viewed what I gave you and that would mean you know where to look.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Since you don't believe in God or the Bible, then you cannot therefore believe in Satan, so everything you believe in such as Satan does not exist.

Dumbass

Since I never indicated such a belief, I don't know why you posted this.

Just to be ignorant seems like.

See ya. Woun't want to be ya.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
You understand the Jewish God poorly if the information here is true and I think it is.

i'm not a Jew, and neither is my belief... i am a Christian, and i follow a Christian God...

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Tell that lie to those who fly the cross.

what lie? that God is a spirit? that the worshippers should worship Him in spirit and truth? what's the lie about that? or are you just upset that the Scriptures does not conform with your belief?

Originally posted by Greatest I am
As to my beliefs in a God, as a Gnostic Christian, of course I believe in a God. Just not the foolish way Christians do.

I have no need to swallow all the poor morals, miracles, fantasy and magic that Christians have to force feed themselves nor do I have to kowtow to a God who has stupidly condemned me for being exactly what he created like Christian fools have to.

well, if you read the Bible, you don't need to swallow the "miracles" that you think is all fantasy...

"Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
And of instruction about washings, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment."
Hebrews 6:1-2

Christianity is not about "miracles", dude... it's about living your life according to the doctrines of Christ:

"Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you stand firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel,"
Philippians 1:27

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I agree. And where do you go to find the one you should worship?

ironically, if you read the context, you don't need to go to any particular place:

"Our fathers worshiped on this mountain; and you say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.
Jesus said to her, Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father."
John 4:20-21

true worshippers should worship God in spirit and truth... in a simpler way, the Bible says this:

"But worship the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:"
I Peter 3:15

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
...Satan does not exist...

So, we agree.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Not to a Christian that does not recognize that he is idol worshiping and that his bible forbids such.

But I was not making an argument. I was stating a fact. Your statement was more like an argument or explanation for my fact.

Regards
DL

I was trying to understand your statement properly, it's part of my learning process.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Because the people who constructed the religion and wrote the bible were men who wanted to control women. The story of Adam and Eve is just mythology, but how that mythology was interpreted makes all the difference.

Pretty much bang on.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Pretty much bang on.

Indeed.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Because the people who constructed the religion and wrote the bible were men who wanted to control women. The story of Adam and Eve is just mythology, but how that mythology was interpreted makes all the difference.

this is a stupid conclusion...

any individual - whether it be male or female - can do anything he/she wants... to say that men needed to create, write and construct a "mythical" book just to control women is just plain stupid and far-fetched...

accusing the Bible of misogyny means you do not understand the book itself... you just take a verse out-of-context and make it appear to hate or degrade women...