Uh-oh!
By J. Lords aka boomslang ~
Recently I attempted to find common ground with a Christian apologist (female) in a discussion over an article she had written titled, "Securing a More Stable Future". Towards the end of the article, she added...
The reason that this caught my attention and prompted me to chime in, is because, as a former believer myself, I know what she had in mind, and that is that children need to be taught (indoctrinated with) Christianity and that morals come from "God", namely, the Christian god. We know that this is false for many reasons, one of which, is that in order to know that "God" is things like moral and good in the first place, you'd obviously have to have a preexisting standard of morality with which to compare to this "God". If you don't have a preexisting standard and simply allow "God" to be the moral standard, himself/herself, then anyone with a half a brain can see the problem.
What would have happened had Adam & Co. obeyed "God" and NOT eaten the forbidden fruit?In any case, the discussion got to a point where "Original Sin" came up and how, according to her beliefs, everything is so messed up today because Adam and his lover/accomplice ate the magical forbidden fruit. Well, I thought to ask her a hypothetical question on that very topic. That question was this: What would have happened had Adam & Co. obeyed "God" and NOT eaten the forbidden fruit?
Well, lo and behold, at that point she all of the sudden could not (would not) speculate, affirming that the duo ate the fruit and we subsequently live in a sinful, fallen world, so the "what if" doesn't matter [paraphrased]. In other words, her back was up against a wall and she resorted to the fallacy of begging the question.
So, why is it that this question is so difficult for believers to answer? Anyone? Christian lurkers? It seems to me that if going against biblegod's wishes and eating the fruit made Adam, his lover, and the rest of the human race flawed with "sin" and in need of "God", that the opposite would be true had they honored biblegod's wishes and not eaten the fruit. That is, that Adam, Eve, and the rest of the human race, would have been flawless(aka, perfect), and not in need of "God". But of course, Christianity cannot have this, can it? No, and isn't this a giant, red flag? I think so, because the conclusion is glaring: Christianity is dependent upon the very things that it warns us against..i.e.."sin" and "evil". Uh-oh!!!
"This is why the Founders lamented that children must receive a good moral education in order to secure this Republic."
The reason that this caught my attention and prompted me to chime in, is because, as a former believer myself, I know what she had in mind, and that is that children need to be taught (indoctrinated with) Christianity and that morals come from "God", namely, the Christian god. We know that this is false for many reasons, one of which, is that in order to know that "God" is things like moral and good in the first place, you'd obviously have to have a preexisting standard of morality with which to compare to this "God". If you don't have a preexisting standard and simply allow "God" to be the moral standard, himself/herself, then anyone with a half a brain can see the problem.
What would have happened had Adam & Co. obeyed "God" and NOT eaten the forbidden fruit?In any case, the discussion got to a point where "Original Sin" came up and how, according to her beliefs, everything is so messed up today because Adam and his lover/accomplice ate the magical forbidden fruit. Well, I thought to ask her a hypothetical question on that very topic. That question was this: What would have happened had Adam & Co. obeyed "God" and NOT eaten the forbidden fruit?
Well, lo and behold, at that point she all of the sudden could not (would not) speculate, affirming that the duo ate the fruit and we subsequently live in a sinful, fallen world, so the "what if" doesn't matter [paraphrased]. In other words, her back was up against a wall and she resorted to the fallacy of begging the question.
So, why is it that this question is so difficult for believers to answer? Anyone? Christian lurkers? It seems to me that if going against biblegod's wishes and eating the fruit made Adam, his lover, and the rest of the human race flawed with "sin" and in need of "God", that the opposite would be true had they honored biblegod's wishes and not eaten the fruit. That is, that Adam, Eve, and the rest of the human race, would have been flawless(aka, perfect), and not in need of "God". But of course, Christianity cannot have this, can it? No, and isn't this a giant, red flag? I think so, because the conclusion is glaring: Christianity is dependent upon the very things that it warns us against..i.e.."sin" and "evil". Uh-oh!!!
Comments
Post a Comment