Hawksm278 - And wings!

both of you and NSC are correct, ten points for everybody

They forgot many things including Adam with hair or eve without hair

@@rasheed9705 Christianity is actually polytheistic. Satan wasn't a thing in a couple of early books. then satan. satan is not Satan, satan is a word, an adjective. Then few books later, Satan was invented as an alter ego of God. Then the New Testament loops the Satan to the snake. The Snake wasn't supposed to be Satan, but the New Testament bends the story.

@@rasheed9705 watch 43alley's video on The Evolution of Satan in the Bible ( link: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oJOXlbKfvNCafas.html ) [43alley and NSC did a collab] He did a great analysis on how Satan was introduced to the Bible and that a modern book (paradise lost) has greatly influenced idea of Today's Satan

That's a nice point right there. Being a "superior" being as we conceive it is pretty much... inferior.

Atleast with polytheism things were epic or atleast consistent . All gods had opposition worth or equal to the gods being opposed .The sex ; mostly rape scene are amazing and the gods weren't truly omnipotent but possess the right amount of power to either create something or claim authority among the pantheon . Each have their motivation to behave in a certain way and thus how the supernatural was consistent . Unfortunately monotheism came along and fused all these entity or traits into one single being ( causing D.I.D and other mental problems ) ...maybe that why they had to create Lucifer to hold that opposition spotlight but Lucifer can't be as great as his predecessors - if you ask , Lucifer is the weakest entity that ever hold the office of opposition .And of course there is this stupid idea of freewill that co exist with an omni god who caused everything from the neurological level to all the way up to grand scale to happen . Poor story writing ...so sad.

Dark Energy I agree, Norse and Greek mythology are awesome.

By murdering billions and making it their fault

@@darkenergy8318 The Bible wasn't monotheistic. It was henotheistic.

Fantastic comment.

Good thinking, but some religious groups would answer this with "humans were supposed to live on earth forever" like the jehovahs witnesses for instance...The thing about the bible, as you probably know, is that IT IS FUCKING CONTRADICTORY...There's even a video on this channel of two guys on a talk show saying completely contradictory thigs based on the bible, and this "living on earth/heaven" thing is one of them. But your line of thought would fit perfectly with most of the christian doctrines out there.

"How does a perfect garden where we live forever make sense in a cosmology where God''s ultimate plan is for us to end up in heaven?" ask any christian and the answer is usually "man was meant to live in Eden for a time and then go to heaven without dying."

Some denominations believe that the heaven (or rather, the paradise) will be on Earth. God will destroy everything on the Apocalipse and rebuild the Earth so the righteous can live here. I just don't know what he's waiting for.

NoTrueFace1 but what’s funny is that “meant to” implies a plan, so was it Gods plan that just...didn’t happen?

Yes and why create stupid people that u would eventually snuff out?

TO WORSHIP AND OBEY YOU. Duh.

@@CorePathway Why do I need to be worshiped and obeyed? Am I LONELY? Do I have a superiority complex? A perfect being doesn't have that, and shouldn't even have a Need or a Craving for being worshipped and obeyed.

​@@IvanSensei88yes thats what bugs me why would a perfect being create "imperfect" beings to worship him? And then knowing It would get bad created them anyway?

​@@gimmekromer1151 The only real way "out" of this conundrum, would be the to say that the creator is not perfect. Then I could 'somewhat' understand why such a being would want being worshiped, although this would raise a new set of problems for the theists. Also love how that other guy tucked his tail between his legs and skedaddled away the moment I engaged with him.

ChaosServant 12345 what kind of mother that allows her children to kill each other so that children have free will to love her.. People arent that free as most theist thinks..

I'll let my children play with the chainsaw because freewill.

Might as well leave poisoned candy out.

"god needed humanity to love him _freely"_ *Cue threat of eternal burning and torture*

My mom says this to me too (I'm 14). So, an innocent baby who hasn't the knowledge of good and evil, doesn't truly love their mom? Because they don't know of hate, that means they don't love? OK.

I never thought of that.

That's certainly one way of speculation. However, it is just that; it is not the teaching of Judea/Christian teaching. Being such a fundamental building block of these faith's version of the human condition, it seem obvious that there is a truth beyond this speculation. And there is indeed. Judea/Christian tradition asserts that up until the fall, humanity was absolutely certaint that their nature was rooted in God and God's desires/love alone. They had an intimate understand of this, even more so than the faithful do today. Now, based on our archaeological knowledge of today, the story of Adam and Eve isn't so cut and dry, but it's principles are. We know from the story that God gave human souls a defined list of what to do and what not to do. So choosing from the "what not to do" section was a deliberate action against the wishes of God, against their own nature rooted in God, a nature that they were, again, more intimately connected with than the humans that preceded them (aside from Mary, according to Roman Catholic doctrine). Thus, while the concept of "sin" had not been developed, it is fair to say that Adam and Eve's decision was an even greater offence than anything we could commit nowadays.

@@ducksquad1259 No, it isn't. When a child shoots himself with the gun his parent left cocked and loaded alone in his play pen, it's the parent's fault. Not the child. Especially when the parent also left a tv program running in the background telling the child how much fun guns are (the serpent's alleged enticement). I don't know what 'principles' you're talking about but I can't see any in this story. It sounds like the story an ancient adult would have made up to answer an innocent child's question about why people are so shitty to each other. They didn't have an explanation since they didn't understand evolution, so they said it was humanity's fault they transgressed against a god. But they weren't logical enough to see the holes in their own story. And people today still aren't logical enough, so they keep believing it.

Fair points, and that's a fitting analogy. Now, these religions claim that we have free will. Well, a will isn't truly free unless the options available span a broad spectrum, even to the point of contradicting eachother. The apple, representing temptation in general, was God's mechanism of promoting free will, just as the precence of the serphant (Satan's influence on the world) promoted it as well. The faiths also claim that God created us to love him. If you had a family doped up on happy love pills that you gave them, their love towards you would by nature be less intimate and less meaningful because it is impossible to distinguish if this love is of their own accord or merely one that you induced by giving them the pills (this later is actually more tangible, probable, and safer to assume). True love needs to be defined, among other things, by a fully conscious, fully aware, entirebly avoidable choice. I urge you to watch 51:00-51:00 of the video I link here to get a further grasp of where I'm coming from. The man in this video, Ben Sharpio, is an Orthodox Jew. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z9Wge7qkrdibaWw.html

@@ducksquad1259 Know the clip, and I know who Ben Shapiro is. He's pretty smart on a few topics, but he utterly falls apart on religion. His take on Genesis is nothing more than an opinion, and it's still wrong. He claims humanity was trying to 'superimpose its own view on reality' in opposition to what Yahweh wanted.' Remember: Yahweh is supposed to be omniscient. Every religious apologist ignores this whenever convenient. Meaning Yahweh knew when he put the fruit in the garden that the humans would notice it and personally allowed the serpent to tempt his creations knowing they'd fail. There is no way this story happens without every single action being fully under Yahweh's approval, meaning he intended humanity to fall, and intended to place all humanity in this terrible Jigsaw trap of needing to be saved from a sin none of us had any choice in making. The 'free will' argument is garbage. Yahweh has free will and he doesn't sin, so even according to monotheistic theology we know it's possible to both have free will and not sin. Why wouldn't Yahweh make us like that unless he WANTED to create suffering? You say "True love needs to be defined, among other things, by a fully conscious, fully aware, entirely avoidable choice." I'd agree. And what is the choice Yahweh gives us? Love him (even though he doesn't provide adequate evidence to convince humans he even exists), or be tortured forever. I'm curious as to how anyone could possibly see that as a loving choice. If you married a guy, and he came to you and said, 'baby, I love you forever and more than anything. And if you ever leave me, I'll kidnap you and torture you in my basement forever. That's how much I love you. But it's all your choice! I don't want to force you into anything.' What would your reaction be? It's honestly a hideous story of an eternal torturer dressed up to make it sound loving, and it's sickening to hear otherwise intelligent, compassionate people defending it.

Someones said we have free will

Free will is a myth

Thank You.

@@quinnard9750 free will isn’t a myth LMAO. You could do anything logically within bounds on your own will at any given moment. 😑

@@strxkereye Well, that's a) false and b) that's not what people mean when saying that there is no free will.

but no man shall see god and live everybody dies

+Thutil 6001!

Thutil The Ussher-Lightfoot-Calendar says that the Earth was created on Oct.23 4004 BC. I cannot see how one could believe that.

Yeah, you see, the puzzle pieces that fit perfectly with each other, and who obviously drifted apart over millions and millions of years, actually were just created apart from each other all along. Makes perfect sense to me.

C O R R E C T

Well of course not. Also you should note that genesis is the myth in which christian monotheism originates. Mythologicaly speaking it is the god El (which is the origin god of Yahwee) subjugating the last remaining god from his original pantheon which is his wife Ishtar (also called Inanna) thereby gaining her powers in addition to his own and becoming a single omnipotent god (as opposed to a pantheon of gods each with limited power). Let's recount the story. God (El) creates the man in his image making it a representation of himself. Afterwards he creates the women which is a representation of Ishtar, his wife. He creates the women from a rib of the man (himself) thereby demonstrarting that Ishtars powers are not hers but originate from him.

Well, you are not really telling me anything new. Also, the story about lillith is part of the original jewish mythology, it's no longer present in the current form of the (christian) bible. And no, "El" is not plural for elohim. It's just an older name for the god described. El was the babylonian god of water and wisdom. That's also why the bible states that in the beginning god's spirit "moved across the face of the waters" (genesis, 1:2). However, in the original myths Inanna, Els daughter (or in other myths regarding the two, his wife) bested El in a drinking game. In his drunkenness El gifted Inanna with the twelve "Me powers". The Me powers are basicaly the power to rule the world. Inanna took the Me powers and hastily made way for her own city of Ur where she was untouchable for El. El, after sobering up tried to get the Me powers back, but inannas servant (the queen of the west) managed to thwart els pursuers. Inanna arrived in Ur and El acknowledged his defeat. But when Inanna retrieved the twelve Me powers, which she had stored in her vulva (no joke, it's actualy what the myths tell you), there were many more powers than before. This was how Inanna in all essentiality became the queen of the gods. If you look at the myths predating the creation of the bible you can see that El took on more and more aspects over time with all of this culminating in (mytholocialy speaking) taking back the powers of inanna in genesis thereby becoming the supreme god. Of course it's not like there are no other gods in the bible. Yahwees struggles with Baal are taking up a good portion of the old testament. But the bible no longer describews them as god but as demons, a classical tactic to dissuade your own flock of doubting and judaism is by far not the first religion to do this.

Quite frankly, i didn't quite understood what your point was to begin with.

Good point!

No logic allowed in this comment section!

Thewifeswapped At the time the idea of omniscience was not around. That idea of god evolved later then they try to lie by saying it is the same guy. Try reading the Story of a God by Karen Armstrong she explains how Yaweh evolved

Thewifeswapped to be fair like, just because you know someone is going to do something that's wrong doesn't make it less wrong

Now God would indeed have known what happened which is why he told them that eating from the tree of selfrealisation would make them mortal, thus providing them with the tree of life to become one with God again in Jesus. It is a poetic description of puberty, the danger of rejecting the authority over the self by thinking to be in control of it yourself. Hanging on to your self is what makes you suffer death. If you live in God you can live in every heart. God did not want men to stay stupid as he told them what was right and wrong in eternal truth. He just did not want them to judge right and wrong according to their self interests. It is not the tree of wisdom or knowledge but the tree of realisation of good and evil. In eating from it they exercised free will as we all can, but we also can choose to accept Gods authority and follow him willingly

To be fair, it was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, so not eating of it wouldn't mean that humanity *had* to remain stupid and ignorant, only that they would remain eternally innocent and unable to sin (or feel shame, etc...)because they wouldn't be able to comprehend either good or evil on a conceptual level and therefore wouldn't have the ability to violate morals that they would be completely incapable of having.

Yeah as the punishment the snake had to crawl on it’s belly

Israel Institute of Biblical Studies, here.

Good and evil fruit is high in vitamin C and god didn’t want to get scurvy

And Adam, Eve, and God speak Australian English.

A little known fact - Adam and Eve were Polish :-)

@@LarsPallesen What? No they weren't!

2:36 haha

Mightve been the popular answer one. to test them, their faith

@@a.bagasm.7253 Faith in what? They know god exists cause they spoke to him. And why would an all knowing being, who knows all the hair on my head, everything i have done and will do, and knew me before i knew myself test Adam and Eve? Wouldn't God already know?

Why else would he start up this awful muck of a universe? The same reason we watch soap operas: it passes the time.

He's susceptible to regret despite being all knowing and perfect.

don't expect much from a book written by iron age men

Also, as they had no knowledge of the good/evil distinction, they could not have known there was a distinction between obedience and disobedience on a good/evil scale.

Absolutely...just proof it was written by men for the control over other men. Nothing holy about it.

And if they ate from the tree of good and evil, why were laws even written down?

Guess Eve wanted the D.

Why not? It wasn't childbirth per se that was her punishment, but that it would hurt so much. But she still had to have children regardless.

Thats a pretty bad statement, go work out and have some fresh air

Well they didn't eat from it, at least.

@@kendrajade6688 odd still.