• Best of luck to the class of 2024 for their HSC exams. You got this!
    Let us know your thoughts on the HSC exams here
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
MedVision ad

Does God Exist? (3 Viewers)

bexta

New Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
20
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
It states that birth did not have pain in the Garden Of Eden.
Stating in the bible says that Adam and Eve did NOT
Have children until after they were out of the Garden.
When they were outside the Garden, birth was made with PAAAAAAIN!
Pain i tell you.

Adam lived until he was 130 years old. Presuming that Wemon live longer than Men, Eve would have been about 140-160 Years of age.
I don't exactly know about your parents, but my mum was
over her 3rd Child (me).
After 3 its Game-Over for most women aswell.
Now to bare 56 children has got to be insane.
How did these children not come out with Down-Syndrome?
If someone has a baby at 60 they have a greater chance of their kid comming out to be a mongrelyoid than if she was in her 20's. 56 Kids.
Bwhahaahaha kinda funny when you put in that way.

So.. almost all of her kids out of the way at 100 years old.

A-maz-ing.

Anyone wanting to beat 56 kids and try to live until 140 years old is welcome.
Though i doubt it'll happen i mean.. people only lived past their 100's back then - right? :rofl:



:EDIT:

heheh i know Not-That-Bright i was just messing with you :p
 
Last edited:

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Sophie777 said:
I think we all realise that it is impossible to prove God exists. We'll all just have to make our own guesses and hope for the best.

What is the point, if he does exist, of making us all try and guess and understand if he exists. He's an idiot if he thinks it is ok to make humans play stupid games. Why doesn't he just say he exists... as if it is our fault we see logic? Isn't it his fault?
Yes... its been what... 600+ posts now... still no reasons given for existence of God, and I don't think we're going to be given any. It was an attempt, but alas...

Anyway I think the most sensible conclusion is that no-one can know that God exists, just as no-one can know that God does not exist. If this is the case, agnosticism seems to be the answer. Certainly not theism (seeing as the onus is on them to show something hugely controversial and astoundingly unjustified). Additionally I think that athiesm is probably more justified than theism in this regard, because the onus is not on them to prove God does not exist.
 

Sophie777

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
415
It isn't humanly possible to have 56 children. Which means the bible is false in this section. Which means the entire book is void.
 

bexta

New Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
20
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Going to have to call it quits sometime...

But god, if you do exist.. POST ON THESE FORUMS!
 

bexta

New Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
20
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Sophie777 said:
It isn't humanly possible to have 56 children. Which means the bible is false in this section. Which means the entire book is void.
Exactly. Dunno where this debate goes from here
 

Sophie777

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
415
MmM... maybe it should end with

"Non-religious win"


as the bible is void, no-one can prove God exists therefore... he doesn't until someone comes up with an answer with evidence.
 

Kleaver

New Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
20
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
I won the argument about an hour ago. What the fuck are you on about?
 

MoonlightSonata

Retired
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
3,645
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
----------
Sophie777 said:
as the bible is void, no-one can prove God exists therefore... he doesn't until someone comes up with an answer with evidence.
Yes!
 

waterfowl

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
609
Location
Northern Beaches
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2004
It isn't humanly possible to have 56 children. Which means the bible is false in this section. Which means the entire book is void.
Yeh but you're looking at that from modern perspective. Think about it, Adam and Eve were the first humans, so they had pure blood and wouldn't have had any major genetic defects. And they lived for so long which kind of means that although there was disease and sickness, they were able to handle it better than us. Therfore back then it may have been very possible to have 56 children
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,176
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
On the topic of adam and eve...
atheism articles said:
Most people are probably familiar with the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Also, most people consider it to be just a story. An metaphor or parable about the rise of human civilisation; an early attempt by people to try to make sense of our origins.

There are, of course, people who take the story quite literally. As far as they are concerned, there was a garden called (or in) Eden. God did create Adam from dust, and later created Eve from one of Adam's ribs. And so on. This did happen and we are all their direct descendents, a few thousand years later. Exactly as described in Genesis.

Fair enough. If they want to believe that, fine. However, if they want me to believe it also, then I'll need a few things sorting out first...

Adam
Okay, so God created Adam in his own image. Physically or spiritually, whatever.

Did Adam have the standard male genitals? (most of you are probably familiar with them, one way or another). Now, I could understand God giving Adam a penis; after all, when you urinate it's handy to be able to aim somewhere convenient. But did he have testicles? Unless I've missed something, the sole purpose of testes is reproduction.

( What other use do they have? Maybe in the days before Eve, they served some other purpose. Perhaps they were some sort of alarm system, that lit up and made loud hooting noises if Adam strayed too close to a cliff edge or was about to eat something poisonous? )

My point? Well, God created Eve so that Adam would not be lonely. Why did he give Adam testes at the start unless he already knew that he would have to create Eve also? Why not just create the two of them (Adam and Eve, that is) at the same time? What use are male reproductive organs without the complimentary female ones?

Perhaps when God made Eve, he did a little extra surgery on Adam whilst he slept, and furnished him with the appropriate equipment. Imagine his surprise when he woke up!

Eve
Why did God create Eve from one of Adam's ribs? He created Adam from dust, what's the big deal about creating another one without having to do a bit of surgery on poor old Adam? You'd think an omnipotent being would be a bit more organised...
( And, of course, there's the story of Lillith - Eve was not the first woman, she came in second (or maybe even third...)).

Death
Was there any form of death before "the Fall"? If there was not, did God intervene to prevent all the flies, bacteria and rabbits from breeding like, well, flies, bacteria and rabbits? If not, the world would have been hundreds of feet deep in ooze. Some people say "Aha, but disease is a result of sin, so there were no bacteria then". Aha back, I say, without bacteria the whole ecosystem collapses. Not all bacteria are harmful, many organisms have symbiotic relationships with bacteria and could not survive without them.

The Apple
Well, fruit of some sort, but we'll call it an apple for now, as that is the traditional image.
So, God creates Adam and Eve, with no knowledge of good or evil, right or wrong - they are truly innocent. He sticks them in a Garden, and for some reason creates a tree whose fruit gives you the Knowledge of Good and Evil (it's not explained how this works, but we'll take their word for it).

"DO NOT EAT OF THIS TREE, OR YOU'LL DIE." says God.
Adam and Eve hear this and dutifully nod their heads. God goes off somewhere (he's a busy guy) leaving these two alone.

Now, as Adam and Eve don't have the faintest idea of right and wrong, they don't know it's a Bad Idea to disobey God ("Hey, God just told us not to eat that fruit!", "So? What's your point?", "Erm... I don't know. Save some for me!") The only way they can gain this knowledge is by.... Eating from the Tree!

It's like giving a bottle of bleach to a child who is too young to read the warning labels, and then being surprised when they poison themselves with it. To make matter worse, Adam and Eve were threatened with the punishment of death. How can this be any sort of threat? There was no death in The Garden (see above) - they had never witnessed it, and would probably have a hard time grasping the concept anyway. So, they were told not to do something (and had no way of knowing that disobedience was bad), otherwise something would happen to them (and they had no idea what that was, or whether it was a good or bad thing to happen anyway).. "We'll die? What does that mean? Maybe it's fun!"

It's the original Catch 22 situation.

Bare Naked Ladies (and Adam)
Another confusing aspect involves their nakedness. Apparently, when they ate the fruit they suddenly realised that they were naked, and this was shameful. This seems a little strange, as presumably all other creatures in the Garden were also naked, unless it was populated by Disney cartoon animals. ( "Oh no! We've got no clothes on! How embarassing!", says Adam. "Erm... What are clothes?", says Eve. )

If it was inherently wrong and immoral for these two to walk around naked, then why did God create them that way in the first place? Why would He want them to do something that He considered to be wrong? Did He just like watching naked people or something? Possibly, He wanted them to remain completely innocent and unsullied by such concepts as Right and Wrong. In that case, Adam could have done anything he felt like, being totally oblivious to the fact that some things were right and some were wrong. He could have tested the aerodynamic ability of small rodents, tortured bunnies, and killed and eaten Eve. God would have looked on happily as Adam innocently frolicked around enjoyed himself, unaware that he was committing all sorts of indecent, immoral and Wrong acts.

Giving them the Knowledge Of Good And Evil was the only way to prevent this sort of thing happening, so why is the act of eating the fruit considered to be Original Sin? After all, it stopped them from immorally walking around stark naked, didn't it? If Original Sin stems from Eve getting Adam to eat the fruit, in doing so she was preventing his wicked nakedness and any further immoral acts he might accidentally commit in his ignorance, wasn't she?

As for the clothing that they wore, Robert Green Ingersoll had this to say in his essay Some Mistakes Of Moses :
In this same chapter we are informed that "unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them." Where did the Lord God get those skins?
He must have taken them from the animals; he was a butcher.
Then he had to prepare them; He was a tanner.
Then he made them into coats; he was a tailor.
How did it happen that they needed coats of skins, when they had been perfectly comfortable in a nude condition? Did the "fall" produce a change in the climate?

Of course, God might have simply produced the coats using god-magic, and no animals needed to have been harmed. The Knowledge Of Good And Evil must contain some sort of information regarding animal rights - I wonder how Adam and Eve responded to being given skin ripped from dead animals to wear? Modern animal rights activists would have a thing or two to say about the matter - but then, God Himself seemed to think it was okay; and knowing Good from Evil, so then did Adam and Eve. After all, God seems to have been fairly keen on animal sacrifices throughout the Old Testament and, being immutable, I guess He still is...

Alternatively, he could have woven them perfectly decent clothes from cotton, silk or wool or some other natural fabric. He could have even given them expensive designer outfits or clown clothes to wear, and they would have been none the wiser.
Original Sin and Aliens
Apparently the Vatican has been thinking about this. Problem is, if alien civilisations exist, will they have the problem of Original Sin? As Adam and Eve were created on Earth, Original Sin has passed down from them to the rest of us (apparently). Unless they developed space travel and whizzed off to Betelgeuse for a couple of weeks, aliens should be free from their taint. Aliens will, it seems, be free from sin. They will not have needed Christ to appear to them to get killed by the state, as they have no sin to be saved from.

The kids
Adam and Eve had two children that we know of. Cain and Abel. When they grew up, Cain (or was it the other one?) went off and found a wife. Just where exactly did this woman come from?
And, for that matter, where did everyone else come from? Unless God had been creating loads of people on the sly, the only way for the population to develop from Adam, Eve and the two sons has to involve incestuous relationships.
Not a very good example for the rest of us, is it? (The same also applies when God trashed the world and left Noah and his small family to repopulate the world).
 

waterfowl

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
609
Location
Northern Beaches
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2004
Not-That-Bright said:
yea... but why did male have testicles if he was never going to reproduce... or did god just slip those on him once he sinned?
What? Man was meant to reproduce in the garden of Eden before Adam sinned. Thats why after God created Eve he said something along the lines of "for this reason a man will leave his parents and..." so obviously reproduction was in the plan!
 

Sophie777

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
415
waterfowl said:
Yeh but you're looking at that from modern perspective. Think about it, Adam and Eve were the first humans, so they had pure blood and wouldn't have had any major genetic defects. And they lived for so long which kind of means that although there was disease and sickness, they were able to handle it better than us. Therfore back then it may have been very possible to have 56 children
No. It would have never been possible to have that many children at any time. However, I don't accept they were human beings anyway.
 

Sophie777

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
415
Really? Well if someone was challenging the basis of my values and my life then I might do that too. Actually, I don't have an obsession with my own superiority.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)

Top