Which of the ten commandments did Adam and Eve break?

1. 61

   OpinionDuckposted 13 years ago

   None, they didn't exist for them, and technically I think breaking the tablets into pieces is like repealing them.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Doesn't matter, as nothing can occur that wasn't scripted by the Xian daemon deity.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         OpinionDuckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         no comprende

         replyreport
         1. 57

            stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Why not?  There wasn't anything complex about my response.
            
            Xian, shorthand for Christian, was coined by believers based on the Greek character 'rho.'  Now you know.

            replyreport
   2. 84

      oceansnsunsetsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      They broke the only rule given to them, and there were not ten commandments yet given, to break.  They were only given one easy rule, and there were lots of other great trees to eat from.  They broke the one "commandment" you could say.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Nope, nothing was 'broken.'  The two mythical figures had no inkling of right or wrong.  You might as well fault a infant for not being able to design a nuclear reactor.
         
         Secondly, their innocent action was scripted by the Xian daemon deity.
         
         Divine Plan and the omni characteristics.  Something is omni [all] or it isn't.  There is no in between.

         replyreport
   3. 61

      OpinionDuckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Any answers

      replyreport
   4. 51

      paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Then why ask this question, please.

      replyreport
2. 93

   habeeposted 13 years ago

   They didn't honor their mother and father.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Hey Habee, I don't mean to bust you on this or sound off beat...
      
      But who exactly would be Adam's mother, if Adam was created by God. I can understand "father"? If god were real of substance.
      
      But, Adam wasn't done by birth from a mother. God said let their be a human and I will call him Adam. No birth.
      
      It's interesting that Adam? If constructed as religion claims, never experienced childhood, so when God gave him free will, only then did Adam disobey. There was no parenting process.
      
      It was *poof* Adam exists. I'm not trying to mock or make fun of you. I just want your understanding.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         habeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         It was tongue-in-cheek, Ray!

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Okay.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               God is not male or female so he would be both mother and father, figuratively speaking.

               replyreport
         2. 57

            C.J. Wrightposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Habee,
            as in God is assexual?
            
            
            Casgil,
            
            .....you seem to imply, if there is a God, it's definitely a HE.

            replyreport
      2. 80

         pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Perhaps God is both feminine and masculine. You know like the yin and yang? In and of one another.

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Okay then, God was a poor, neglectful, egotistical, psychotic parent. Robbing his own child of a childhood.
            
            What does that say about what people aspire to be like? WOW!

            replyreport
            1. 80

               pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Yep if thats how you see it!

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  It isn't 'how a individual' sees it.  Its the objective facts based on 'holy writ.'

                  replyreport
                  1. 80

                     pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Ok if you say so! So what is objective fact to you?

                     replyreport
                     1. 57

                        stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        That should have been 'objective facts'. 
                        However, I would have figured it all would have been apparent.
                        
                        Believers, generally, consider their 'Holy Writ' to be objective facts.
                        
                        I'm fully aware its all B.S., and poorly written psychotic drivel at that.

                        replyreport
                        1. 80

                           pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           That is your opinion ooook.....Your opinion is not an objective fact. It is an opinion.
                           
                           You still didn't answer what is objective facts to you? In relation to my comments to Casgil post. What is apparent to you is not apparent to me.

                           replyreport
            2. 57

               stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               cue following the [cough] divine; loving and humble example.  [rolls eyes]

               replyreport
         2. 61

            Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Pennyofheaven: "And God said let us create man in 'our' image after 'our' likeness," Genesis 1 26 KJV. But God is neither male or female the likeness referred to is Spiritual as God is Spiritual, ipso facto man is spiritual but with a flesh-like appearance.
            
            
            In answer to the original question. God gave Adam and Eve dominion over everything, he permitted them to use everything they so chose. He told them to leave the one tree, the tree of knowledge of good and evil alone because he did not want them discovering evil. They failed to obey the one and only rule God gave them.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Yes agree Dave!

               replyreport
      3. 57

         stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         There's no such thing as 'Free Will'.  'Adam' could do no other than follow the 'script' [Divine Plan]. 
         
         Disobedience doesn't come into play as it would have been a foreign concept.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            What script? If there was a script to follow he would not have chosen to eat the fruit. If there was no free will Adam would not have chosen what he did. So are you saying it was in the script for him to disobey?

            replyreport
            1. 58

               Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Assuming the story as written is true, 
               
               That in ONE  DAY ,God created Adam to have a mind of his own.  Doesn't it make sense that had Adam not done something based upon his own decision to do so;  there would have been no evidence that the free will experiment was a success?
               
                 So. YES, I think that it was in the script for Adam to disobey.
               
                 And in like manner, Satan had little choice either.
               
                 I think that we have it all wrong about Satan in the same manner as we misunderstand the betrail by Judas.
               
                 Judas had no choice to do anything other than what he did.
                 In fact!  just hours before Judas betrayed Jesus, Jesus COMMANDED  Judas to ... "do that which you  MUST  do."

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Ok so according to your logic, that would mean we do not have choices and we do not have to take responsibility for them?

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     That is not what I was saying. 
                       In the case of Adam,  he  had no choice but make a choice.
                     
                       And the only choice that was available   AT  THAT  time was to disobey one simple rule. And the story teaches us that we pay for our choices. We are responsible for them.
                     
                        In the case of Judas  ?  This would have been a direct command to follow the directions of Jesus.
                       I don't think that he had a choice in this instance.
                     Therefore it would not have been his responsibility to pay the price. Jesus paid it the next day.

                     replyreport
                     1. 80

                        pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        He also had the choice not to make a choice and dwell as he was. He was told... eat from the tree of knowledge and you will surely die. Which he did in a spiritual sense. The state of being beyond what is good and evil no longer existed for him because he partook of that fruit.
                        
                        Judas betrayal was foretold by Jesus yet he still chose to do what Jesus had foreseen even after Jesus warned him. And the other disciple that Jesus foretold would deny him 3 times and still he chose to, even after knowing that he would be given the choice not to. The choices were made out of fear granted, but it didn't say much for what they had learned hanging around Jesus.

                        replyreport
                        1. 58

                           Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           I have not ever seen the story of Adam and Eve eating the forbiden fruit as a literal fact.
                              I wonder how the story could have played out had they not eaten the forbiden fruit. Someone would have eventually eaten it don't ya think?
                              
                             In one sense every baby boy after being born kinda falls into a catagory of being just like Adam. And every little girl just like Eve.
                             Our first disobediant act is an awakening of sorts deminstrating our free will.
                             So I guess when we accepted our free will, that was OUR own origional sin?
                              
                             Concerning Judas ...  I am curious what Hebrew word was translated as Betrayed and what other words might have been used in its place?
                           
                              "It just echos in my ears" that Jesus TOLD Judas . "to go Now and do that which he MUST do."
                             As if the two had had a prior discussion as to this thing that Judas  MUST  do.
                           
                              I could be wrong!  That is the what I have always understood this to be saying.

                           replyreport
3. 0

   luabuposted 13 years ago

   can i add my cyber mumblings to this line of dribble
   
   whats with opinion duck and adam and eve
   
   what about it mighty duck

   replyreport
4. 61

   spookyfoxposted 13 years ago

   I think it was:
   
   "Thou shalt not covert thy neighbours ox."
   
   Who can resist the temptations of that next-door ox?
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBbroXKc … re=related

   replyreport
   1. 58

      fits3x100posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It's interesting that the exercise of mans will is indeed natural. The exercise of free will. It would appear as though the Creator did not desire Automatons. So much so, that he was willing to risk their loss, at the expense of choice.
      To answer directly, none of the Mosaic commandments were broken,  since they had not been given. But the interesting side bar is the insistence of opportunity and choice. No wooden boys for the Creator, he wanted real boys.... Would you prefer your  children Love you because they chose to? Or because they had to? If they had to...could that really be Love? I would suggest that without choice, there is no Love. Love requires choice. hmmm

      replyreport
      1. 61

         spookyfoxposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         If they did't love me out of their own free choice, I wouldn't punish them for it... doesn't that defeat the purpose of choice? In fact it seems like the choice given is just for an ego boost if they happen to choose to love you. 'Hey, it was their choice to love me!'. Why would someone in a position of absolute power care, be bothered and be angry about someone not loving them?
         
         If you take god out of his pedestal in your mind, and see his actions as if they were made by an ordinary man, you'd find countless things you'd judge as absolutely horrendous if only you weren't clouded by worshipping.
         
         Love me or burn for all eternity. Hell of a choice.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            stoneyyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You forgot 'Love me and burn for all eternity.' 
            
            There is no 'choice' with the Christian God.

            replyreport
            1. 58

               fits3x100posted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Not sure I agree with the statement Love me or burn forever. I see it as commune with me or be without me. Kind of an oil and water thing. Not the greatest description, but gravity is a law. If I feel compelled to disregard it, I do so at my own risk. I really do struggle with the idea that so many folks use here,(self included) I'll do damaging things until I'm in over my head...then take my hands off the wheel and beg God to fix it. Everything is acceptable...not everything is beneficial...
               Can't buy into the disconnected bully thing. Grace is necessary...nobody's perfect. But, sooner or later...personal responsibility has to be considered. I  can buy into the idea that justification can be instantaneous, but sanctification? Not so much...
               "Sin" isn't so black and white... what is the condition of the heart?
               Love me, or be eternally separated from me.  If, and I use if respectfully, all of  the Christian Bibles primary tenants and claims were true... and someday we found ourselves understanding? Being separated from that would indeed be Hell enough ...fire ...anguish...sorrow take the word fire out and substitute any word that speaks loudly enough to your mind the concept of un-ending anguish and sorrow....
               Hey...could be crazy...but sort of migrated to that after significant study.

               replyreport
5. 82

   manlypoetrymanposted 13 years ago

   They were out in public without their leaves on!

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Though they disobeyed, God knew they would. That is what happens when you tell your kids "Don't touch that". They won't rest until they do. Part O' the plan. Quicker to kick the little birds from the nest (which happened next)

      replyreport