"Antares 531" <gordonlrDELETE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:io742497nru50he0iu7fia9eevbo563hc3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 7 May 2008 16:31:31 +0100, "Bill M" <wmech@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"The_Sage" <The_Sage@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:34t124p0uv6vid6cqumh12sluodj7af79a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> In the Garden of Eden, where God placed Adam on the sixth day, God had
>>> also
>>> planted a very special tree there which he called "The tree of
knowledge
>>> of good
>>> and EVIL". Where did God get His knowledge of evil when he created the
>>> tree of
>>> knowledge of good and evil -- from His heart or from His head? Why
>>> didn't
>>> God
>>> have Satan create the tree of knowledge of evil instead? Maybe because
>>> Satan
>>> couldn't create a tree evil enough for God to look down on and declare
>>> "and it
>>> was good"? Which is more evil: the person who does an evil deed or the
>>> accomplice who teaches that person how to do evil deeds? Where is the
>>> justice in
>>> that?
>>>
>>> One day Adam broke one of God's commandments by eating of the Tree of
>>> Evil
>>> Knowledge. If Adam was born without knowledge of good and evil (and
>>> therefore
>>> had no knowledge of what sin was), then how could Adam be blamed for
>>> doing
>>> evil
>>> when he ate of the forbidden tree? Where is the justice in that?
>>>
>>> Adam eventually died as a result that action, but did Adam gain
anything
>>> by
>>> dying? If Adam died and then continued to live afterwards in heaven,
>>> then
>>> sin
>>> and the resultant death was not a curse, but a blessing because dying
is
>>> a
>>> way
>>> to go to Heaven. If Adam continued to live afterwards in Hell, then it
>>> was
>>> dishonest and unjust for God to not give Adam a fair warning ahead of
>>> time, a
>>> warning that if he sinned he would not just only die, but he would
>>> continue to
>>> live in a terrible place where he would be tortured forever and ever.
>>> Where is
>>> the justice in that?
>>>
>>> Adam supposedly was created with a body, soul, and spirit. When Adam
>>> first
>>> sinned, which of these parts of Adam was responsible for the sin? If
it
>>> was the
>>> body then why must our souls be saved and not our bodies? If it was
soul
>>> or
>>> spirit then why must the body suffer? When God spoke to Adam in Gen.
>>> 3:17-19,
>>> was he speaking to "Adam the body" or "Adam the soul" or "Adam the
>>> spirit"? If
>>> you say spirit or soul then why would God mislead Adam by saying from
>>> dust
>>> YOU
>>> were made and to dust YOU will return? Why didn't he truthfully say
from
>>> dust
>>> only your body was made and to dust only your body will return?
>>> Eventually
>>> there
>>> would come Jesus and he was to buy back what Adam lost. This brings us
>>> to
>>> the
>>> question of what exactly did Adam lose? If Adam was already in Heaven,
>>> then he
>>> didn't need Jesus to die for him because he would already be where he
>>> would want
>>> to be. If Adam was in Hell then it was too late! He was already where
he
>>> deserved to be. Wouldn't God have originally wanted Adam to have not
>>> sinned? If
>>> you believe in foreordaination, you would have to say no, because God
>>> had
>>> preplanned for Adam's failure, therefore God wanted Adam to sin. Where
>>> is
>>> the
>>> justice in that?
>>>
>>> The Sage
>>
>>The Adam and Eve and "The tree of knowledge of good and EVIL". are all
>>myths
>>and
>>fable just like Alice in Wonderland, The Wizard of Oz, Aesop's Fables
etc.
>>
>>Gods are all the creations of man's imagination. They were created to
>>overcome man's panic
>>fear of the finalty of death and the end of their lives.
>>
>>There si NO objective verifiable evidence that they exist in reality!
>>
> Bill, there is no objective, verifiable evidence that any other
> planets have some life forms on them, but, hey, if it could happen
> here on this planet, can we have enough faith to "believe" that it
> might have happened on a number of other planets...even in the absence
> of any objective, verifiable evidence? Or, are we compelled to shut
> the door on this and conclude that it just ain't possible, since we
> can not prove it?
Baseing your life on possibilities rather then realities is your
privalege,
not
not good logic. I don't dive off bridges because the water might be deep
enough!
> Your posture on the Adam and Eve story may seem quite sound if one
> reads and interprets it only in its literal form. However, if one
> examines this and other allegorical stories for their embedded
> meaning, they begin to make a lot more sense.
You mean 'meaning' embedded by you too suite your hopes and wishes!
> Adam and Eve represent the very earliest homo sapiens sapiens. Recall
> that in this story, Adam used nouns to name all the animals, and God
> was VERY PLEASED, but there was not a woman found suitable as a mate
> for Adam.
>
> The Adam class males had apparently experienced a genetic mutation
> that gave the males a much improved speech center of their brains. The
> DNA for this trait was carried on the Y chromosome, and therefore not
> transmitted to the females.
>
> God then induced a deep sleep (comatose state from some viral
> infection) upon Adam. This was probably done with some retrovirus such
> as mumps that infected the platelets in Adam's flat bones (ribs). The
> retrovirus then did a horizontal transfer of DNA for this speech
> center mutation from Adam's platelets in his ribs to either the
> women's ovaries, or perhaps to Adam's sperm cells, placing this
> horizontally transferred DNA on the X chromosome so that it was then a
> part of the females' genotype.
>
> Then, as soon as some females were born with this genetic mutation,
> and matured to the speech development age, they also could use
> nouns...and they haven't shut up since!
>
> Prior to this mutation, the pre-Adam class humans (Cro-Magnons) were
> limited to using only a form of verbs, adverbs, adjectives, etc. Once
> they could use nouns their speech/language abilities surged ahead and
> they were very soon able to pass along meaningful history to their
> descendants, and were well on the way to a modern form of humans.
>
> Gordon
|
