Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Then also… maybe perfect is having the potential and choosing one way or another….. like Christ. Perfect denotes a choice.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted June 27 Super Moderator Share Posted June 27 7 hours ago, Edgarcito said: What the serpent offered was more appealing as a function of her youth vs. a mature perspective. To a previous point, why were some found righteous? Perhaps some were found righteous because instead of eating the fruit they ate word salad. Also, desiring knowledge as a function of youth, as opposed to a mature perspective? I'm not sure you understand how humans work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted June 27 Super Moderator Share Posted June 27 6 hours ago, Edgarcito said: Then also… maybe perfect is having the potential and choosing one way or another….. like Christ. Perfect denotes a choice.. Perfect denotes a choice... but a choice denotes free will, which we do not have. Walt has demonstrated that we do not have free will using scripture in this very thread; and I have demonstrated it using logic in the thread linked below. You're welcome to continue claiming that we do; but unless you can refute either of our arguments, or present a compelling argument of your own, then all you're really doing is trying to pretend the reality you really really really wish was true instead of accepting the reality that actually is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 13 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: This brings me back to my original question, which I will now answer. What is the significance of The Fall? Absolutely nothing. There is absolutely no significance to The Fall whatsoever. Humanity did not fall from innocence into sinfulness. They were created sinful from the beginning. Sin did not enter the world through disobedience. Sin entered the world when god created it and put it here. The Fall is simply god pulling the wool over our eyes to cover up his nefarious scheme to make us all guilty and justify his own need to be needed. Nothing more than that. The Fall is spiritually meaningless and insignificant. As you say, the buck don't go no further than this right here. I agree with this. But I would add that god seems obsessed with glossing over his tyranny with the pretence of legality. In this thread I've worked through the process, ramifications and consequences of how god used a law they couldn't keep to entrap Adam and Eve. Such a plan may have all the trappings of legality, but from the moral p.o.v. it is not just. In exactly the same way, when the book are opened on judgment day we see all the trappings of legality, but what happens is not even a show trial. It is a kangaroo court. The verdict has already been reached, or rather, was always known to god because he is both eternal and all-knowing. If the judge knows all then there is no need to present any evidence to him. He already knows it. So judgment day isn't about bringing god up to speed on the case details of every human being and then having him decide there and then who will be saved and who will be damned. Those details were always known to him. The only reason for the existence of the book of life is to give a pretence of legality to an unfair and unjust process. That book, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the Fall are therefore all equally meaningless. And so for that matter is the cross. Everything was decided beforehand by god and the creation of time, space and the universe was carried out to provide a stage where the pre-programmed drama could take place, with all the puppets playing out their parts without realizing who was pulling their strings. Thank you, Walter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: Perhaps some were found righteous because instead of eating the fruit they ate word salad. Also, desiring knowledge as a function of youth, as opposed to a mature perspective? I'm not sure you understand how humans work. Let me ask this. Is the potential for sin, sin? Does the potential for or ability to sin equal imperfection? You're saying yes I gather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted June 27 Super Moderator Share Posted June 27 1 hour ago, Edgarcito said: Let me ask this. Is the potential for sin, sin? Does the potential for or ability to sin equal imperfection? You're saying yes I gather. 21 You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell. ... 27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. 31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. ~Matthew 5 ... No, Ed. I do not personally equate having the ability to lie with actively telling a lie. But your buddy jesus seems to think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 18 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: 21 You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell. ... 27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. 31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. ~Matthew 5 ... No, Ed. I do not personally equate having the ability to lie with actively telling a lie. But your buddy jesus seems to think so. Wait, you're saying they were created with the potential and therefore free will was removed...i.e. imperfect.... but when asked directly, you're saying that's not the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 13 hours ago, Edgarcito said: What the serpent offered was more appealing as a function of her youth vs. a mature perspective. To a previous point, why were some found righteous? There's a logic problem with this assertion, Ed. You and I and everyone else can make a comparison between youth and maturity by looking around us at other people, youthful and mature. But for Eve there were no other people in the world besides Adam and he was (almost) as youthful as she was. So, how could Eve know what maturity was in order to compare that with her youth? And if she couldn't make that comparison then how could she know which one was more appealing? Sorry, but this just doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 7 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Wait, you're saying they were created with the potential and therefore free will was removed...i.e. imperfect.... but when asked directly, you're saying that's not the case? I know that this is addressed to the Prof, but you need to be careful, Ed. You are conflating the presence or absence of free will with the presence or absence of perfection. Is that valid? And if so, how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: I know that this is addressed to the Prof, but you need to be careful, Ed. You are conflating the presence or absence of free will with the presence or absence of perfection. Is that valid? And if so, how? I'm asking him as he seems to be the one mixing them... Personally, I don't know how we would know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 13 hours ago, Edgarcito said: Then also… maybe perfect is having the potential and choosing one way or another….. like Christ. Perfect denotes a choice.. Not so. Scripture clearly tells us that it is god who decides who will be perfected in Christ and who will not. Therefore, we do not get to choose to become perfect through the blood of Jesus. That choice was made for us, long ago. Ephesians 1 : 3 - 6 3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: I'm asking him as he seems to be the one mixing them... Personally, I don't know how we would know. I think you are misreading what the Prof has written and/or misunderstanding what he means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 7 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: There's a logic problem with this assertion, Ed. You and I and everyone else can make a comparison between youth and maturity by looking around us at other people, youthful and mature. But for Eve there were no other people in the world besides Adam and he was (almost) as youthful as she was. So, how could Eve know what maturity was in order to compare that with her youth? And if she couldn't make that comparison then how could she know which one was more appealing? Sorry, but this just doesn't work. I saying they were like hardware with no software. They had the potential and this is what the Prof is saying was the interference from God,.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted June 27 Super Moderator Share Posted June 27 18 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Wait, you're saying they were created with the potential and therefore free will was removed...i.e. imperfect.... but when asked directly, you're saying that's not the case? No. I am not saying that, Ed. Please read my posts again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted June 27 Super Moderator Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: I saying they were like hardware with no software. They had the potential and this is what the Prof is saying was the interference from God,.... No. The Prof is not saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted June 27 Super Moderator Share Posted June 27 @walterpthefirst, the passage from Matthew 5 may also be the key to your idea of latent or potential sinfulness. Bear with me here. We know that god is eternal and unchanging; and jesus is supposedly god. So, even if god had created Eve with only the potential of sin, then according to god's own standard (Matt. 5), she was already guilty before ever disobeying god's command concerning the fruit. Because she looked at the fruit as desirous in much the same way as a man might look upon a woman. Thus, if we apply Matthew 5 to Genesis 3, it might read something like this, "You have heard it said that you shall not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge; but I say unto you that if you even look upon it with desire, you shall be guilty of disobedience." Make sense, or clear as mud? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 5 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: I saying they were like hardware with no software. They had the potential and this is what the Prof is saying was the interference from God,.... No, that is not what you said, Edgarcito. What the serpent offered was more appealing as a function of her youth vs. a mature perspective. You wrote that Eve was able to understand what the serpent was offering her and this understanding required her to know what youth and maturity were, compare the two and find maturity more appealing. But that is a logical impossibility because Eve had no experience of maturity to compare to youth. Therefore, she could not have understood what you said the serpent was offering. Your claim and your argument does not work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 1 hour ago, Edgarcito said: Let me ask this. Is the potential for sin, sin? Does the potential for or ability to sin equal imperfection? You're saying yes I gather. I know this was also addressed to the Prof, but it does relate to things I've been writing about here. In Genesis 3 : 22 god says this... 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” He admits to knowing good and evil. So, god definitely has the potential for sin. If we say that the potential for sin equals sin, then by that logic god is a sinner. And if sin is imperfection then as a sinner god is imperfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 3 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: No, that is not what you said, Edgarcito. What the serpent offered was more appealing as a function of her youth vs. a mature perspective. You wrote that Eve was able to understand what the serpent was offering her and this understanding required her to know what youth and maturity were, compare the two and find maturity more appealing. But that is a logical impossibility because Eve had no experience of maturity to compare to youth. Therefore, she could not have understood what you said the serpent was offering. Your claim and your argument does not work. Right, her "youth" being just the capability to accept input and choose. Her "maturity", to understand the input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: I know this was also addressed to the Prof, but it does relate to things I've been writing about here. In Genesis 3 : 22 god says this... 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” He admits to knowing good and evil. So, god definitely has the potential for sin. If we say that the potential for sin equals sin, then by that logic god is a sinner. And if sin is imperfection then as a sinner god is imperfect. No, but Jesus is man and God and has the potential, but does not sin....perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 5 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: @walterpthefirst, the passage from Matthew 5 may also be the key to your idea of latent or potential sinfulness. Bear with me here. We know that god is eternal and unchanging; and jesus is supposedly god. So, even if god had created Eve with only the potential of sin, then according to god's own standard (Matt. 5), she was already guilty before ever disobeying god's command concerning the fruit. Because she looked at the fruit as desirous in much the same way as a man might look upon a woman. Thus, if we apply Matthew 5 to Genesis 3, it might read something like this, "You have heard it said that you shall not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge; but I say unto you that if you even look upon it with desire, you shall be guilty of disobedience." Make sense, or clear as mud? No, I can see your argument thanks, Prof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 4 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: Right, her "youth" being just the capability to accept input and choose. Her "maturity", to understand the input. No. Wrong. In order to find maturity appealing (your words) she would first have to know and understand what it is and be able to compare to youth. But she can't make that comparison because maturity did not exist in Eden. Therefore she could not find maturity appealing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted June 27 Author Share Posted June 27 5 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: No, but Jesus is man and God and has the potential, but does not sin....perfect. That's not what you asked. This is. Is the potential for sin, sin? Having knowledge of evil god (including Jesus) must have to potential to sin. Please note that I did not say that god ever did sin. But you asked if the potential for equalled sin. So, on that basis, because god does have the potential to sin, he is therefore a sinner. You see how this is predicated on the question you asked? Well, now you have the answer. If the potential for sin equals sin then god is a sinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: No. Wrong. In order to find maturity appealing (your words) she would first have to know and understand what it is and be able to compare to youth. But she can't make that comparison because maturity did not exist in Eden. Therefore she could not find maturity appealing. They are my thoughts Walter. You know I think differently than most. You can't declare my clarification of my thoughts wrong as they were mine to begin with....thx. And if you will re-read, that's not what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: That's not what you asked. This is. Is the potential for sin, sin? Having knowledge of evil god (including Jesus) must have to potential to sin. Please note that I did not say that god ever did sin. But you asked if the potential for equalled sin. So, on that basis, because god does have the potential to sin, he is therefore a sinner. You see how this is predicated on the question you asked? Well, now you have the answer. If the potential for sin equals sin then god is a sinner. So you're saying Eve was a sinner for her potential? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts