Plan B Forum

16) Fuck 'em, declare victory over evil and move on to concentrate on other planets and other life forms.

Gob--why does the piece conclude that evil was "created" only after Adam and Eve? FWIW, i d not accept the Adam and Eve account as factually accurate (and doubt many christians or jews do), but nothing I see in that account either says god created evil or waited until after Adam and Eve to create it. If anything, the point of the account is that man has the choice to accept or reject evil (all the tree of knowledge comments aside), not that it was created to deceive mankind.

The account of the great flood, which I similarly think is not meant to be taken as factual, is that evil cannot be destroyed by killing the evil people, others will proceed to that side of the spectrum, even if they began as devoted to god (look at Lot's daughters having incestuous sex with their dad while Sodom and Gomorrah were still burning and they were just saved from the same destruction by god.

As for whether god "created" the devil, I am unsure because I do not know the entire story of the origin of Satan (and don't even believe there is a devil); but even if the devil does exist and god did create the being that became Satan, his choice of embracing evil and rejecting god is what created the devil, not god saying "it's about time to create evil incarnate". Again, the point of the bible is that we live with the consequences of our actions and choices, not that we are simply robots to be commanded by the will of god.

Big RR wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 1:45 pm

why does the piece conclude that evil was "created" only after Adam and Eve? etc.

Puerile toy-tossing? I love it when atheists used their versions of Biblical teaching in order to demonstrate that Biblical teachings are unacceptable. Of course, it is their prejudiced and demonstrably juvenile "reading" of scripture that they insist is a true reading. And it doesn't matter, Big RR how often you show the falsehood of their statements, they just keep on saying them anyway. Dogmatic fundamentalists, all of 'em!

It would be helpful to have a Bible with the 'factually accurate' stuff in bold and the 'not meant to be taken literally' stuff maybe in italics or Comic Sans (didn't work) or whatever. I'd pay extra.

Big RR wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 1:45 pm

Gob--why does the piece conclude that evil was "created" only after Adam and Eve? FWIW, i d not accept the Adam and Eve account as factually accurate (and doubt many christians or jews do), but nothing I see in that account either says god created evil or waited until after Adam and Eve to create it.

You're taking it w-a-a-a-a-a-a--a-y-y-y too seriously...

ex-khobar Andy wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 2:10 pm

It would be helpful to have a Bible with the 'factually accurate' stuff in bold and the 'not meant to be taken literally' stuff maybe in italics or Comic Sans (didn't work) or whatever. I'd pay extra.

Nailed it. You can only surmise that god hates humankind.

ex-khobar Andy wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 2:10 pm

It would be helpful to have a Bible with the 'factually accurate' stuff in bold and the 'not meant to be taken literally' stuff maybe in italics or Comic Sans (didn't work) or whatever. I'd pay extra.

Why's that ex-k A? What in your view would be the difference if (say) Genesis was 100% to be taken literally or 100% to be seen as a mythical telling of truth? How would that change meaning?

(and Gob, you may surmise something hateful. Others may not)

You're taking it w-a-a-a-a-a-a--a-y-y-y too seriously...

Actually, that's what I think you (or the post) was doing.

MajGenl.Meade wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 2:00 pm

I love it when atheists used their versions of Biblical teaching in order to demonstrate that Biblical teachings are unacceptable. Of course, it is their prejudiced and demonstrably juvenile "reading" of scripture that they insist is a true reading. And it doesn't matter, Big RR how often you show the falsehood of their statements, they just keep on saying them anyway. Dogmatic fundamentalists, all of 'em!

As an atheist with a deep affection and respect for the Bible (well, at least the Tanakh), I take umbrage.

I don't know; I'd bet your oe of the very few atheists who knows what the Tanakh is.

Sue U wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 3:54 pm

MajGenl.Meade wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 2:00 pm

I love it when atheists used their versions of Biblical teaching in order to demonstrate that Biblical teachings are unacceptable. Of course, it is their prejudiced and demonstrably juvenile "reading" of scripture that they insist is a true reading. And it doesn't matter, Big RR how often you show the falsehood of their statements, they just keep on saying them anyway. Dogmatic fundamentalists, all of 'em!

As an atheist with a deep affection and respect for the Bible (well, at least the Tanakh), I take umbrage.

Well Sue, you ain't one of those atheists who use their versions of Biblical teaching in order to demonstrate that Biblical teachings are unacceptable. So . . . not you then . . .

Big RR wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 5:12 pm

I don't know; I'd bet your oe of the very few atheists who knows what the Tanakh is.

You might be surprised; I've met more than a few just going to synagogue.

MajGenl.Meade wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 6:26 pm

So . . . not you then . . .

Whew!

It's Satanic Appreciation Week in Boston, July 23 to July 29. SCOTUS has ordered that City Hall must fly the Satanic folks' flag. I wonder if local stores will take this chance to have holiday sales, like they do around Christmas. That will give me the opportunity to point out that the devil is in the retails.

Big RR wrote: ↑

Wed May 18, 2022 3:47 pm

You're taking it w-a-a-a-a-a-a--a-y-y-y too seriously...

Actually, that's what I think you (or the post) was doing.

Nah, it's a funny...

OK..