| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"ShawnMilo" |
| Date: |
18 Aug 2007 06:35:36 PM |
| Object: |
Original sin couldn't have happened. |
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
ShawnMilo
.
|
|
| User: "Pt. Lurk Pt." |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
18 Aug 2007 07:01:01 PM |
|
|
"ShawnMilo" <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187480136.201801.141590@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
Translation: 'the first three chapters of Genesis read like idiotic garbage;
therefore they can't be meant to be taken literally'.
Whereas *in reality* the first three chapters of Genesis ARE meant to be
taken literally AND ARE ALSO idiotic garbage...
L.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
18 Aug 2007 08:18:55 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 00:01:01 GMT, "Pt. Lurk" <Pt. Lurk@renvcom.net>
wrote:
"ShawnMilo" <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187480136.201801.141590@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
Translation: 'the first three chapters of Genesis read like idiotic garbage;
therefore they can't be meant to be taken literally'.
Whereas *in reality* the first three chapters of Genesis ARE meant to be
taken literally AND ARE ALSO idiotic garbage...
No. I think they were meant to be just-so stories. Heck, they're a
re-hash of earlier stories. Babylonian coins have been found with a
man, a woman and a snake. And the flood story appears in the Gilgamesh
epic (but not for the same reason).
L.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
19 Aug 2007 02:44:02 PM |
|
|
Christopher A.Lee wrote:
Translation: 'the first three chapters of Genesis read like idiotic
garbage; therefore they can't be meant to be taken literally'.
Whereas *in reality* the first three chapters of Genesis ARE meant
to be taken literally AND ARE ALSO idiotic garbage...
No. I think they were meant to be just-so stories. Heck, they're a
re-hash of earlier stories. Babylonian coins have been found with a
man, a woman and a snake. And the flood story appears in the Gilgamesh
epic (but not for the same reason).
I'm gonna go with Pt. Lurk here. The Talmud was writted as a political tool
to justify the claims of the ruling class. IMHO myths hold no sway in that
regard.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
18 Aug 2007 11:49:47 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 21:18:55 -0400, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 00:01:01 GMT, "Pt. Lurk" <Pt. Lurk@renvcom.net>
wrote:
"ShawnMilo" <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187480136.201801.141590@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
Translation: 'the first three chapters of Genesis read like idiotic garbage;
therefore they can't be meant to be taken literally'.
Whereas *in reality* the first three chapters of Genesis ARE meant to be
taken literally AND ARE ALSO idiotic garbage...
No. I think they were meant to be just-so stories. Heck, they're a
re-hash of earlier stories. Babylonian coins have been found with a
man, a woman and a snake. And the flood story appears in the Gilgamesh
epic (but not for the same reason).
Yes, I agree.
They were comforting myths.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
18 Aug 2007 08:31:49 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:35:36 -0000, ShawnMilo <shawn.milo@gmail.com>
wrote:
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
If you search Google, you'll find that I said exactly the same thing
years ago, here in alt.atheism. They couldn't have known, before they
ate of the fruit blah, blah, so it couldn't have been sin (WILLFUL
WRONGdoing).
BTW, it's not "eating the fruit", it's "eating of the fruit", which
defines "fruit" in the same way that "by their fruits ..." does. The
"fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil" is the knowledge of
good and evil. Even literally it doesn't refer to the reproductive
organ of a plant, which MOST Christians get wrong. (How many
arguments, among otherwise educated Christians, have their been about
whether the "fruit" was a fig, an apple, etc.)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
20 Aug 2007 02:30:26 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:35:36 -0000, ShawnMilo <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
1. The King James version states that God said Adam would die the day he ate
it.
It took more than six 24-hr earth days to create the universe. He died.
2. Adam and Eve could not have known right from wrong before they ate that
fruit, so they were not committing a sin. End of story.
Gen 3:2 specifically acknowledges their understanding of the penalty for eating
the fruit.
3. The serpent, in both cases, told Eve that the fruit didn’t cause death, but
brought knowledge.
Eve rejected God's words and accepted satan's. Bad, bad move.
4. Then, God punishes the serpent for being honest,
For denying and standing against the truth of God's word.
5. And why create the tree in the first place?
To test Eve. She failed.
6. However, he thought the serpent worthy of knowing the truth about the tree
of knowledge. So we rated below the serpent in godly honesty. Very interesting.
Satan got started rejecting God well before A&E appeared on the earth.
Well, enough of the silly games. I suggest you give up blogging or at least go
find out the truth before you make an ***** of yourself again.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
20 Aug 2007 02:52:38 PM |
|
|
In article <cdqjc31d0tob0lhs1bcreogdfp96nrq4n6@4ax.com> duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> writes:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:35:36 -0000, ShawnMilo <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
1. The King James version states that God said Adam would die the day he ate
it.
It took more than six 24-hr earth days to create the universe. He died.
2. Adam and Eve could not have known right from wrong before they ate that
fruit, so they were not committing a sin. End of story.
Gen 3:2 specifically acknowledges their understanding of the penalty for eating
the fruit.
3. The serpent, in both cases, told Eve that the fruit didn’t cause death, but
brought knowledge.
Eve rejected God's words and accepted satan's. Bad, bad move.
4. Then, God punishes the serpent for being honest,
For denying and standing against the truth of God's word.
5. And why create the tree in the first place?
To test Eve. She failed.
God couldn't tell in advance what was going to happen?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
20 Aug 2007 02:49:29 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:30:26 -0500, in alt.atheism
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in
<cdqjc31d0tob0lhs1bcreogdfp96nrq4n6@4ax.com>:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:35:36 -0000, ShawnMilo <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
1. The King James version states that God said Adam would die the day he ate
it.
It took more than six 24-hr earth days to create the universe. He died.
Not on the day he ate it.
2. Adam and Eve could not have known right from wrong before they ate that
fruit, so they were not committing a sin. End of story.
Gen 3:2 specifically acknowledges their understanding of the penalty for eating
the fruit.
So the storyteller claims.
3. The serpent, in both cases, told Eve that the fruit didn’t cause death, but
brought knowledge.
Eve rejected God's words and accepted satan's. Bad, bad move.
Satan told the truth. God had lied to Eve.
4. Then, God punishes the serpent for being honest,
For denying and standing against the truth of God's word.
What truth?
5. And why create the tree in the first place?
To test Eve. She failed.
But God gave the command to Adam before Eve was created.
6. However, he thought the serpent worthy of knowing the truth about the tree
of knowledge. So we rated below the serpent in godly honesty. Very interesting.
Satan got started rejecting God well before A&E appeared on the earth.
So you say.
Well, enough of the silly games. I suggest you give up blogging or at least go
find out the truth before you make an ***** of yourself again.
Since nothing in Genesis is accurate history anyway, it doesn't really
matter, does it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harry F. Leopold" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
21 Aug 2007 03:02:14 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:49:29 -0500, Free Lunch wrote
(in article <csrjc3htth6h28ld27gaim2v88g87od1b1@4ax.com>):
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:30:26 -0500, in alt.atheism
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in
<cdqjc31d0tob0lhs1bcreogdfp96nrq4n6@4ax.com>:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:35:36 -0000, ShawnMilo <shawn.milo@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
1. The King James version states that God said Adam would die the day he
ate it.
I see that once again Duke is using that Protestant bible, how strange that
not once has he used any Catholic bible.
Remember Duke, you are the one who calls them "protest-ants" as an insult, so
why do you use their bible to prove your claims?
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness
(remove gene to email)
Evolution doesn't take prisoners.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Original sin couldn't have happened. |
18 Aug 2007 09:58:00 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, ShawnMilo <shawn.milo@gmail.com> bloodied us
up with this:
Here's an article I wrote recently for my site. I'd be interested in
seeing the responses it gets here.
http://milocast.com/2007/08/06/original-sin-couldnt-have-happened/
Basically, the first three chapters of the bible alone are enough to
convince any thinking person that it is not and was never meant to be
literal.
Known science debunks the A&E creation myth, which means you're right,
original sin never happened, not literally anyway. But science *was* meant
to be taken literally. Literal and real are in the same set.
Can you think this through?
Since original sin never happened, mankind is not inherently sinful, as the
godbots claim. There is literally no reason for any earthly saviors.
Religion is just a feel-good warmy-blanky for the insecure, who only
believe there is a magic kingdom awaiting us because they are afraid to
face the fact that at the end of life we die.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
