Recall Notice

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem

Adam had no knowledge of good or evil - no moral compass. To blame him for an action that he took in that state seems foolish.

He had a moral compass in God's directly communicated command.
In essence - "Do NOT step over this line."

That he knew. Think on it a little bit.
He knew Authority. And there was one and only one command of God as a prohibition - not to step over a certain line. IE. Not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

It was against his own well being. He would DIE. He didn't need much moral compass to know, that if he disobeyed he would die.

Originally posted by sonship

Adam had no knowledge of good or evil - no moral compass. To blame him for an action that he took in that state seems foolish.

He had a moral compass in God's directly communicated command.
In essence - "Do NOT step over this line."

That he knew. Think on it a little bit.
He knew Authority. And there was one and only ...[text shortened]... ng. He would DIE. He didn't need much moral compass to know, that if he disobeyed he would die.

Except that he saw that Eve ate the fruit and she didn't die. So as far as he knew, God lied.

Originally posted by sonship

But Adam was a grown man and KNEW what he was doing. Just as the rest of us do.

He was not only a grown man. Adam was a pristinely intelligent man probably the likes of which has never existed since.

Directly from the creative hand of God, Adam was exceptional.
He just chose wrong, against God's warning.

But where Adam failed, the Son of God did not fail no matter what it cost Him.

He didn't even know he was naked. Couldn't have been very intelligent.

Originally posted by sonship
He had a moral compass in God's directly communicated command.
In essence - "Do NOT step over this line."

That he knew. Think on it a little bit.
He knew Authority. And there was one and only one command of God as a prohibition - not to step over a certain line. IE. Not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

One could hardly dream up a fable or allegory that sounded more man made, in my view. It sounds like the invention of superstitious writers in ancient times.

Originally posted by sonship

Adam had no knowledge of good or evil - no moral compass. To blame him for an action that he took in that state seems foolish.

He had a moral compass in God's directly communicated command.
In essence - "Do NOT step over this line."

That he knew. Think on it a little bit.
He knew Authority. And there was one and only ...[text shortened]... ng. He would DIE. He didn't need much moral compass to know, that if he disobeyed he would die.

Now that you mention it, he had never seen death either. So that would not be much of a motivator.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Now that you mention it, he had never seen death either. So that would not be much of a motivator.

Not believing God has never been an excuse for disobeying God's command.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Not believing God has never been an excuse for disobeying God's command.

Surely those who "don't believe in God" believe that there are no such things as "God's commands". This means that whether or not this lack of belief is expressed as "an excuse" is something purely in the imagination of believers and nothing more that a function of their self-righteousness.

Originally posted by FMF
Surely those who "don't believe in God" believe that there are no such things as "God's commands". This means that whether or not this lack of belief is expressed as "an excuse" is something purely in the imagination of believers and nothing more that a function of their self-righteousness.

One must be willing to accept the consequences of their actions.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by RJHinds
One must be willing to accept the consequences of their actions.

But if an atheist does not believe in God and does does not believe there are commands from God, then he or she will have no reason to believe there are the "consequences" that you, as a believer, claim there are. Your assertions are further undermined by the fact that you cannot present a single jot of actual evidence, from 2,000,000 years of homo sapien history, that there are such things "consequences" visited upon humans by a supernatural being.

Originally posted by FMF
But if an atheist does not believe in God and does does not believe there are commands from God, then he or she will have no reason to believe there are the "consequences" that you, as a believer, claim there are. Your assertions are further undermined by the fact that you cannot present a single jot of actual evidence, from 2,000,000 years of homo sapien history, that there are such things "consequences" visited upon humans by a supernatural being.

There is credible evidence for only about 6,000 years of human history. The death of man, the Holy Bible, the worldwide flood, Jesus, the Shroud of Turin, and the Christian religion should count for at least a jot of actual evidence.

Originally posted by RJHinds
There is credible evidence for only about 6,000 years of human history. The death of man, the Holy Bible, the worldwide flood, Jesus, the Shroud of Turin, and the Christian religion should count for at least a jot of actual evidence.

These are your religious beliefs and not evidence. Your certainty is not evidence. Your sincerity is not evidence. There's no actual evidence that there are "consequences" for humans imposed on them by supernatural beings ~ other than various religious beliefs and religious literature that make claims to that effect.

Originally posted by FMF
These are your religious beliefs and not evidence. Your certainty is not evidence. Your sincerity is not evidence. There's no actual evidence that there are "consequences" for humans imposed on them by supernatural beings ~ other than various religious beliefs and religious literature that make claims to that effect.

You mean none that you will accept.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You mean none that you will accept.

Well, unless you are content to simply listen to yourself blow your own trumpet or you're blowing it rather pointlessly for the choir of the converted to hear, the onus is on you to make non-Christians accept your claims about the reality in which we all live.

Originally posted by FMF
Well, unless you are content to simply listen to yourself blow your own trumpet or you're blowing it rather pointlessly for the choir of the converted to hear, the onus is on you to make non-Christians accept your claims about the reality in which we all live.

It is up to you to do your own homework and stop criticizing others for not doing it for you.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is up to you to do your own homework and stop criticizing others for not doing it for you.

I was a Christian for decades. That was my "homework" I suppose. If you reckon your conduct and the content of your posts here can turn non-believers into Christians, then you go for it.