• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was the fall of man necessary

zyzygy said:
Do you weep for YEC?
Click to expand...

I don’t quite get it. A self-professed atheist insulted that I read the Bible, instead of reading INTO the Bible. I’m detecting some form of ideological self-loathing going on somewhere; just not quite sure where to pinpoint it.


OM
 
ecofarm said:
It's okay if they're flawed. They're my perception and opinions. Things you don't have.
Click to expand...

True, I don't need to lean on perception. I have discernment and relevance in my corner.


OM
 
Omega Man said:
We agree. So what's the basis of your objection?


OM
Click to expand...

The supernatural is not a prerequisite to spirituality. Our spirit, our soul, our essence, is what we do in this world. Our influence, in ways we perceive and ways we don't. In ways like a drop in the ocean and the butterfly effect. If our essence, our soul, is good and we do good acts, that good will live on forever in others. It will inspire others and change things we cannot even imagine. If our essence is evil, our acts will be disparaged and discarded, incinerated by human conscience and the spirit will be gone. In this way, our spirit can live forever.

No supernatural. Yet spiritual.
 
Simpletruther said:
A mathematical theorem exists that says whatever can happen, Given enough time, will happen.

This not only can be shown mathematically, it seems intuitive logically.

The non calvinists say that Adam’s sin was not necessary. That he could have (done otherwise).
Click to expand...

From the Exsultet, sung every Easter Vigil:

O truly necessary sin of Adam,
destroyed completely by the Death of Christ!

O happy fault
that earned for us so great, so glorious a Redeemer!

Assuming this non calvinist view is true, logic tells us that the fall was still necessary and basically determined to happen any way(eventually) .
Adam was compelled to sin (eventually) by his nature of being able to. It was absolutely baked into the cake from the beginning, mathematically and logically.

So this idea fails to really resolve a big difficulty that some non calvinists have (that God determines evil) with Calvinism Because this still ends up being the case simply by the nature of how he created Adam, (capable of sin).

THoughts?
Click to expand...

This is faulty, at best. You cannot assume that all possible things that could happen would, given enough time, actually happen. A number that is infinitesimally larger than 0 is still 0, which is what the chances of monkeys writing Hamlet would be.
 
ecofarm said:
The supernatural is not a prerequisite to spirituality. Our spirit, our soul, our essence, is what we do in this world. Our influence, in ways we perceive and ways we don't. In ways like a drop in the ocean and the butterfly effect. If our essence, our soul, is good and we do good acts, that good will live on forever in others. It will inspire others and change things we cannot even imagine. If our essence is evil, our acts will be disparaged and discarded, incinerated by human conscience and the spirit will be gone. In this way, our spirit can live forever.

No supernatural. Yet spiritual.
Click to expand...

"Spirituality", as it relates to dogmatic betrayals of original biblical texts, is just another word for artistic license. That doesn't take "spirituality", that takes making s**t up, and then passing it on to others so that they can feel "spiritual" when consuming it.


OM
 
ecofarm said:
I don't do dogma. I do me, and I tend my spirit.
Click to expand...

...and yet your "spirit" adheres to dogma; given your objections to historical context which places that dogma in question.


OM
 
Omega Man said:
...and yet your "spirit" adheres to dogma; given your objections to historical context which places that dogma in question.


OM
Click to expand...

I adhere to no dogma. How dare you?

You have a spirit too. And you best start tending it. It's a terrible thing to lose.
 
ecofarm said:
I adhere to no dogma. How dare you?

You have a spirit too. And you best start tending it. It's a terrible thing to lose.
Click to expand...

You adhere to Lucifer being "the devil" (messianic biblical dogma), and you demonstrated your literal offense at my pointing out the historical significance of the biblical Lucifer by injecting my lack of "spirituality" into the discussion.


OM
 
Omega Man said:
You adhere to Lucifer being "the devil" (messianic biblical dogma), and you demonstrated your literal offense at my pointing out the historical significance of the biblical Lucifer by injecting my lack of "spirituality" into the discussion.


OM
Click to expand...

I'm capable of discussing the Bible on a greater level than merely cultural and historical reference. Don't be jelly.

I don't and have never believed anything supernatural. Nor have I ever conceptualized god as a deity. An yet, that does not render me spiritually crippled. Amazing.
 
ecofarm said:
I've always been atheist, even as a child. And I've never believed anything supernatural.

Nonetheless, your view of the Bible is pathetic. To see only the historical and cultural references and to interpret it only literally is a sad waste of the human spirit. It's a blindness so debilitating it could make me weep for you.
Click to expand...

If we look at the historical context, odds are much greater that they really do refer something more akin to the Greek and Roman than they would modern interpretations of the Judaeo Christian.

My money is on the battles between metaphorical star and planet gods rather than a literal fight between good and evil. :)
 
calamity said:
If we look at the historical context, odds are much greater that they really do refer something more akin to the Greek and Roman than they would modern interpretations of the Judaeo Christian.
Click to expand...

I got one translator: love. If love is not served, it ain't from God. God is love.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm capable of discussing the Bible on a greater level than merely cultural and historical reference.
Click to expand...

Define "greater level". Would that include the ability of later authors to make s**t up? You see, my ability to discuss these *unspoken aspects* of the Bible is what I consider a greater level.

ecofarm said:
Don't be jelly.
Click to expand...

Jealous? Of what?


OM
 
ecofarm said:
I got one translator: love. If love is not served, it ain't from God. God is love.
Click to expand...

Wait! What? Didn't you just claim to be an atheist a page or so back?


OM
 
Omega Man said:
Define "greater level".
Click to expand...

Something more than "Lucifer is Venus". Something along the lines of good and evil, right and wrong, aware and not, values... stuff like that. For me, Lucifer is a means of communication. It's not merely Venus.
 
ecofarm said:
Something more than "Lucifer is Venus". Something along the lines of good and evil, right and wrong, aware and not, values... stuff like that. For me, Lucifer is a means of communication. It's not merely Venus.
Click to expand...

It's the symbolism of Venus at dawn representing the downfall of evil (the Babylonian king) at the hands of good (Cyrus of Persia; Deutero-Isiaiah the author was a huge fan) that is "something more". I recognize that; however you apparently don't.


OM
 
Omega Man said:
It's the symbolism of Venus at dawn representing the downfall of evil (the Babylonian king) at the hands of good (Cyrus of Persia; Deutero-Isiaiah the author was a huge fan) that is "something more". I recognize that; however you apparently don't.


OM
Click to expand...

Cultural reference is cool. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate it.

But, for me, talking about Lucifer is talking about existential threats and how they're resolved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom