/lit/ - Literature

So christian moralist fags wouldn't be christian moralist fags without satan because satan gave mankind morality

Yup.

Hail Satan.
Stupid creationist story isn't it. I much prefer Tolkien's.

Without the knowledge of good and evil, how were Adam and Eve expected to know that it was wrong to eat the apple against God's wishes?

>>2709346
Because God said so

that's like, the theme of the entire Bible

where were you during Sunday school?

>>2709348
They wouldn't know that it's a bad thing to disobey him without knowledge of good and evil, though.

Kind of a weird story huh OP.

That probably has something to do with why not all Christians and Jews believe that it actually happened.

Is /lit/ seriously this dumb?

>>2709349
No, see when the LORD SAYS, the LORD SAYS. You don't need knowledge of good and evil to obey the LORD.

The LORD says, man obeys.
Never a miscommunication.

>>2709352
>Christians and Jews
>2012

Why.jpg

Adam was aware that moral wrongs existed prior to eating the forbidden fruit, as a moral wrong within Christianity is something which God has forbidden us to commit; God forbids eating of the tree, ergo it is wrong. There is nothing particularly special about the tree, other than that God has forbidden man to eat of it. It represents man's dependency upon God for his morality. Eating from the tree did not confer knowledge upon Adam, but rather his disobedience (not the fruit) conferred upon him the curse of original sin. It's not some fucking magic tree.

>>2709363
They discovered freedom.

>>2709361
People turn to religion for answers to questions of death and morality. Questions that are every bit as relevant today as they were to the cavemen.

>>2709367
They shouldn't.

>>2709366
The freedom to go to Hell, yes.

>>2709370
But there is no hell.

Are you still playing devils advocate, or do you buy into this ancient BS?

>>2709363
How about this?

Adam was aware that moral wrongs existed prior to having gay sex with Seth, as a moral wrong within society is something which our peers have forbidden us to commit; our peers forbid gay sex, ergo it is wrong. There is nothing particularly special about gay sex, other than that God has forbidden man to partake of it. It represents man's dependency upon God for his morality. Tickling another dude's bum did not confer knowledge upon Adam, but rather his disobedience (not the ass) conferred upon him the curse of original sin. It's not some fucking magic butthole.

>>2709368
But Mr. Butterfly Namefag, haven't you ever been bothered by questions like "is their life after death, do my sufferings have meaning, and is there final justice?"

>>2709373
Are we discussing Christian theology or not? If that isn't what you are replying about, then let me know so I can ignore the rest of your irrelevant posts.

>>2709376

I've been bothered by those questions. The problem is there's no real way of knowing the answers. Not butterfly, btw

>>2709375
That's pretty edgy!

>>2709363
>it's not some fucking magic tree

Exactly! It's a magic Yahweh!

>>2709376
>entertaining objectivity
>entertaining permanence
>2012
>mfw

>>2709378
>Are we discussing Christian theology or not?
Ye, and then I called it shit. Did you miss that part?

>>2709376
I did indeed have an existential crisis some time back, (before I even knew the term) and I muddled through step by step. Now, no more panic attacks, very much aware of the huge problems in the world, but living simply and happily. Master of my own little "destiny" as they call it.

Mormon here. According to our beliefs (the genesis account is expanded in a book by Joseph Smith called The Pearl of Great Price)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_of_Great_Price_%28Mormonism%29

Basically Adam and Eve eating the fruit was ESSENTIAL to the plan of God. We needed the fall so that we could learn. If everything was nice and happy and cute all the time we'd basically fail to grow up.

However God needed to give us a choice so he set the whole thing up. In fact in the Book of Mormon is a passage of scripture that reads "Adam fell that men might be and men are that they may find joy".

We actually celebrate Eve as the one wise enough to realize the predicament. The plan of salvation could not have progressed if the two had stayed in the garden forever so Eve, realizing what had to be done, ate the fruit then gave it to Adam.

Smart girl.

Adam ... not so much.

>>2709394
Is that you, Orson?

>>2709394
>discussing Christian theology
>wild Mormon appears

>>2709394

Why didn't god create man as they were supposed to be in the first place, instead of making them live through thousands of torturous, ruinous years in order to "grow up", whatever that's supposed to mean?

>>2709394
>Lucy Harris
>Smart smart smart smart

>>2709403
No no no. There's no reasoning with any of it. Let it go.

>>2709403
I imagine the line of thought is something like: "Well, there's no point if you can't mature spiritually. Humans fell of their own free will and they must work to be closer to God." It's masochistic rubbish.

Yes, the ideal situation would be that Yahweh made all of Creation perfectly in the first place. But whence cometh evil then? This answer seemed reasonable millenia ago.

>>2709394
You shouldn't bother explaining things here. You're dealing with a bunch of teenage atheists who aren't actually interested in getting the answers to the questions they're asking; but rather coming up with an objection and then circle-jerking over it and insulting anyone who attempts to answer it. They shout, "LOL WHERE DID EVIL COME FROM THEN!" and then plug their ears and wonder why atheists aren't taken seriously.

>>2709394
DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB

>>2709419

Hey, man. Don't judge all us atheists the way most of us judge all people of faith. There are exceptions to the rule. I'm an atheist and I genuinely respect Christian philosophy, as well as that of many other religions. Just because you follow one path doesn't mean you have to disrespect those who've chosen another.

>>2709422
I am an atheist as well actually. But the majority of /lit/ posters who show up in threads like this appear to be the teenage dumbass variety, unfortunately. It's almost pointless trying to discuss these things here.

>>2709428

I agree, hopefully they'll grow out of their New Atheism phase at some point. It took me a while. Dawkins and Hitchens are damn convincing after a life of vague religious teaching. It takes time to realize there's a middle-ground

>>2709340
This has been touched upon: the general Biblical premise of morality is that it is dictated by the will and self-evident nature of Yahweh. It is fuzzy whether or not Adam and Eve can be said to have been responsible for the Fall because of ambiguity in the nature of the fruit. The fruit is of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, so before they have eaten of the fruit, do they know that disobedience is sin? If they are responsible for this choice, then what role does the Serpent play? Temptation to sin? This would reduce the fruit to a manifestation of a pre-existing morality (which diminishes its symbolic value, I think).

It does not seem a coherent idea to me, but I am aware that many interpretations have been and can be made. Remember that the Serpent doesn't get combined with Satan until later in the tradition, but works very well with the "accuser"/"opponent" motif.

The utility of the story seems apparent, though; Man (lit. "man" in Hebrew) is responsible for falling out of grace and must live by the sweat of his brow. Yahweh's revelations and appearances to his chosen people offer a way out.

Don't even get me started on what the New Testament brings to the table.

>>2709430
They don't even have to take the middle ground. I don't mind if someone if virulently opposed to religion (though I am not), but I mind if someone doesn't know what they're fucking talking about and is willfully ignorant. The shit you see in /lit/ threads is like some kind of weird fundamentalism, where knowing about the religions you oppose or being able to form a cogent argument is shunned.

>>2709433
Know thy enemy. I'm >>2709433.
and a super-duper-atheist

>>2709435
Whoops. Shot off that post without reading it. I'm >>2709431.

I apologize for any befuddlement on my account.

>>2709403
Very simply we've existed for all eternity. God merely gave us form. That means God cannot 'make us in perfect form' because that would take away from our individuality and freedom of choice. This is all in the Pearl of Great Price. Yup, your questions were answered before you asked them.

>>2709421
I've seen that episode thank you very much. Besides the fact it contains blatant lies, Joseph Smith showed the Gold Plates to 11 individuals all of whom kept their testimonies of what they saw till they died, it also got facts wrong about the relationship between Martin Harris and his wife.

Ask yourself this. If Mrs Harris really did nothing to the original manuscript as South Park claims where is it?

>>2709433

>4chan
>cogent argument

Yeah, nah. It'll never happen.

>>2709431

what does the New Testament brings to the table?

Catholic here.

I'm pro gay marriage, pro-choice, anti-death penalty, and believe that Creationism and Biblical Literalism are just as fucking retarded as any rational person. But yet, I'm still Catholic, and still believe in God, Jesus, the Saints, etc... but perhaps the issue is that people misunderstand belief. I don't know if the supernatural aspects of faith are literally true or not, but that does not matter, what does matter is that my Religion instills in me a moral and social imperative to do the most good that I can.

The inevitable response to that is "why?". And that is answered by Environment. I was raised in a Catholic Family, and so all my my upbringing and social teachings were done against this background, and it to this day serves as a very useful framework on which to discuss very abstract ideas about life and meaning... So, I am familiar with it through the environment I was raised it, and it serves me very well mentally and socially, and thus, I believe and am religious... If I were raised in a non-religious family, I'd be no less rational, but simply non-religious.

>>2709440

HEY I SAID NOT TO ASK ME ;__;

What the Christian interpretation of the concept and role of the Messiah, as enacted through Jesus, does is universalize the setorial aspect of the lapsarian legend which, in early Judaism, is only reserved for the tribes of Israel. This approach, coupled with the gospel missions, culminated in the breaking of the Jesus mission with mainstream Judaism, and they became separate religions (and then the Romans banished the Jews from Judea in the 2nd c.). Sorry for the digression into history, but it's interesting.

So Jesus allowed salvation to be brought to the Gentiles (i.e., "the nations").

>>2709445
>I'm pro gay marriage

Protestant here. What the fuck are you doing? Yes, love homosexuals, hate the sin. But bro, marriage has a purpose. You want to defile it's purpose to protect mere feelings?

>>2709478

Marriage in the Catholic Church is of course, between a man and a woman, and from a religious/spiritual sense, I support that... However, most people are not of my religion, therefore asking them to follow the rules of my religion is immoral. Marriage as a legal entity should be the same no matter the gender of the couple engaging in the contract.

The Spiritual/Religious implications of gay marriage on a government level are next to none, as far as most catholics are concerned.

>>2709445
So, then, are your moral views taken as a whole from the Bible, and do they adhere to the whole thing?

>>2709490

Of course not... my Moral viewpoint is of course based on both the society and family I grew up in, and is largely biblical (as is pretty much all western social morality at this point)... But the bible in it self is contradictory at times, and is in no way meant to be taken as a literal hard and fast standard by which to live.

Now, we can get on the whole "old testament vs. new testament" moral issues, the actual moral and social implication of christ dying for the sins of the world, and what is meant by "sin". etc... but suffice it to say, my morality is heavily influenced by the Bible, but the Bible is not the be all font of morality.

>>2709478
>marriage has a purpose
yo dogg marriage is tied to anachronistic production values, enforces the domination of surplus-producing capitalism over interpersonal relationships and functions as a shibboleth for systemic heteronormative discrimination, so its purpose is already pretty fucking defiled

>>2709496

damn nigga, what a post.

Your all missing the point.

The story of Adam and Eve eating the apple isn't really about morality, its about the fall of humankind out of the egoless flow of natural, harmonious existence into the pit of self-conscious ego-realisation. Basically they didn't give a fuck about anything and were just flowing along the river of divine grace and then all of a sudden they eat the apple and get embarrassed because they are naked.

As soon as the ego comes into play we get selfishness, language, civilization and everything just generally turns to shit.

The Abrahamic God is just a fucking idiot.


Gnosticism, why do you make so much sense?

It's just a nice parable about mankind falling from perfect-but-boring harmony to the evils and complexities of civilization.

First we exist as animals do, and the earth is plentiful. Then we learn of good and evil, and the first thing we do is feel shame for our nakedness and clothe ourselves. We learn that we have to till the earth, and childbirth sucks. Our sons and kin groups feud with eachother and even kill eachother (as do different groups of humans, farmers/shepherds), etc. And so on throughout Genesis. In the primeval history of the early Hebrews, and the wider Near Eastern traditions they ripped off, the gods are imperfect and not very transcendental, acting on and reacting to humanity's development, so creation myths can actually be pretty charming.

Christian interpretation of the Torah is interesting but it's only one interpretation, and because of the dominance of the Septuagint they made some initial errors that they ran with for a loooong time.

>>2709969

>Salvation through knowledge

Ha.

>>2709996
makes as much sense as salvation through any other means

>>2710015
Not really. Knowladge generally brings the awareness of having no knowladge and depression. I don't really see how that relates to salvation.

>>2709363
I think the decision of eating the apple against god's will represents the freewill that the humankind acquired. Furthermore, it means that everything that makes us free is bad for Christian's morality.

>>2710024
>no personal complexes in evidence here at all

>>2709969

The Lord said, "Blessed is he who is before he came into being. For he who is, has been and shall be."

>>2710047
More like general consensus.

Think about it this way:

God said not to eat from the tree, but what did that meant to Adam and Eve? How did they relate with that order if they were new, naked, unaware? To me, the paradox is essential here, and by disobeying God, they were able to know what it means to receive an order. That is, by the consequence of their acts they could retrospectively understand the difference between following or not following what God said. It was only when they broke the rule that they got what "rule" means.

God being, from my perspective, nothing but a way to say "how things really are". So that the actions of Adam and Eve, represent not to obey a person or an outside being, but how an active life instead of a passive one raise a paradoxical response which put things in perspective. They gained knowledge and shame, they experienced something they didn't know before: change. It comes off as a metaphor for civilization, family and growing up, including the evil present in all those things.

The serpent, which is phallic and chtonic, teases Eve into eating the fruit. It's not that it comes from below the ground, but it comes from below the surface of ourselves. It's "the voice in our head" or an unconscious feeling emerging. It is what makes us act, for good and for bad, moving forward.

Atheist with a thing for eastern religions here.

Genesis should be read primarily as an early (very early) Hebrew reaction against contemporary theologies and religious attitudes.

holy crap. i wrote way too much here.

http://pastebin.com/iLPUvLnC

>>2710067
>Atheist with a thing for eastern religions here.
>The serpent, which is phallic and chtonic, teases Eve
Sounds like you have a "thing" for the Viennese witch doctor as well...

This is just a thought but, what if it doesn't actually mean anything and it's just a story?

argument from morality (if god is not real everything is permitted, etc etc)

debunking the argument from morality (morality still derived from non-objective whims of a deity, Old Testament cruelties, etc etc)

To be completely honest, I'm so tired of listening to the atheist and the theist running in their circuitous tracks. I'm an atheist myself, but you can only have this debate so many times before it loses its flavor. I've literally got almost every point-counterpoint that could be made in the argument from morality memorized, right down to specific bible verses, comparison to other religions, where we derive morality from in absence of a supernatural lawgiver, blah blah blah.

In other news, here's a sculpture I'm doing based on Dore's etching of Lucifer that OP posted.

>>2712113

Damn, that sculpture's pretty good.

>>2712117
Thank you very much. The bit that's cropped out is Mayor McCheese's head. It's going on top, basically so I can title the piece "Cheeseburger In Paradise Lost". And yes I hate myself for going to such lengths to make a pun.