• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Thoughts on "Christian Cuber" or "Atheist Cuber" signatures

Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
567
Likes
3
Location
Australia, mate.
As the story goes, God told her not to eat the fruit.
Yeah, I got that. But "because I say so" is never a justification for a rule. Yes, if I had a child I might tell it to not touch a hot plate or to not put a plastic bag over its head or to not throw a knife at me and stuff like that. And there are good reasons for that which I'd most certainly explain along with the rule. Hence I still want to know what was wrong or bad with eating that fruit.

If I'm interpreting the story correctly, eating the fruit would have given Eve the knowledge of what was good and what was evil.
So... expanding knowledge is something bad now?
Pochmann, I'm using your post as an example, but I've seen this in quite a few posts. Here is my overstated controversial line: ASSUMPTIONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Who said that God just gave the reason "Because I say so"? I've never seen any evidence that he didn't have a lengthy chat to Adam and Eve about how he loved them and it would be best for them that they didn't eat this fruit, so that they could stay pure and holy and all that jazz. Just saying.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
357
Likes
0
Location
Cliché location here
YouTube
EnterPseudonym
As the story goes, God told her not to eat the fruit.
Yeah, I got that. But "because I say so" is never a justification for a rule. Yes, if I had a child I might tell it to not touch a hot plate or to not put a plastic bag over its head or to not throw a knife at me and stuff like that. And there are good reasons for that which I'd most certainly explain along with the rule. Hence I still want to know what was wrong or bad with eating that fruit.

If I'm interpreting the story correctly, eating the fruit would have given Eve the knowledge of what was good and what was evil.
So... expanding knowledge is something bad now?
Pochmann, I'm using your post as an example, but I've seen this in quite a few posts. Here is my overstated controversial line: ASSUMPTIONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Who said that God just gave the reason "Because I say so"? I've never seen any evidence that he didn't have a lengthy chat to Adam and Eve about how he loved them and it would be best for them that they didn't eat this fruit, so that they could stay pure and holy and all that jazz. Just saying.
And I've never seen any evidence "he" did.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2006
Messages
1,686
Likes
25
WCA
2004CHAN04
As the story goes, God told her not to eat the fruit.
Yeah, I got that. But "because I say so" is never a justification for a rule. Yes, if I had a child I might tell it to not touch a hot plate or to not put a plastic bag over its head or to not throw a knife at me and stuff like that. And there are good reasons for that which I'd most certainly explain along with the rule. Hence I still want to know what was wrong or bad with eating that fruit.

If I'm interpreting the story correctly, eating the fruit would have given Eve the knowledge of what was good and what was evil.
So... expanding knowledge is something bad now?
Pochmann, I'm using your post as an example, but I've seen this in quite a few posts. Here is my overstated controversial line: ASSUMPTIONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Who said that God just gave the reason "Because I say so"? I've never seen any evidence that he didn't have a lengthy chat to Adam and Eve about how he loved them and it would be best for them that they didn't eat this fruit, so that they could stay pure and holy and all that jazz. Just saying.
If there was a good reason for it, why was it never mentioned in the Bible? Without giving any kind of reason, the rationale behind God's decree is basically "Because I say so".

Inb4 "God works in mysterious ways". That's a lousy cop-out for anything you can't easily explain, and I'd rather not follow a system of beliefs that makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
23
Likes
0
Location
Missouri
YouTube
Gollum9993
As the story goes, God told her not to eat the fruit.
Yeah, I got that. But "because I say so" is never a justification for a rule. Yes, if I had a child I might tell it to not touch a hot plate or to not put a plastic bag over its head or to not throw a knife at me and stuff like that. And there are good reasons for that which I'd most certainly explain along with the rule. Hence I still want to know what was wrong or bad with eating that fruit.

If I'm interpreting the story correctly, eating the fruit would have given Eve the knowledge of what was good and what was evil.
So... expanding knowledge is something bad now?
Pochmann, I'm using your post as an example, but I've seen this in quite a few posts. Here is my overstated controversial line: ASSUMPTIONS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Who said that God just gave the reason "Because I say so"? I've never seen any evidence that he didn't have a lengthy chat to Adam and Eve about how he loved them and it would be best for them that they didn't eat this fruit, so that they could stay pure and holy and all that jazz. Just saying.
If there was a good reason for it, why was it never mentioned in the Bible? Without giving any kind of reason, the rationale behind God's decree is basically "Because I say so".

Inb4 "God works in mysterious ways". That's a lousy cop-out for anything you can't easily explain, and I'd rather not follow a system of beliefs that makes no sense.
Genesis 2: 15-17 said:
The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.
Sounds like a good reason to me.
 
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
2,010
Likes
4
Hey, maybe you're right. It was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and Knowledge is poisonous, right? :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
44
Likes
0
Eh everyone knows Christians are always bragging about their religion. (Not Catholics) Also Mormons. OH GOD. They can't seem to read "no soliciting" no matter HOW BIG THE SIGN IS.

=]
 
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
7,287
Likes
40
WCA
2003POCH01
YouTube
StefanPochmann
Who said that God just gave the reason "Because I say so"?
Nobody. Who said someone said that?

Although, if you punish someone "for disobedience" (I think this has been said), I'd say you *are* punishing for violating "Because I say so". Cause what else is "(dis)obedience"?

I've never seen any evidence that he didn't have a lengthy chat to Adam and Eve about ...
Oh right that must mean he probably did.

Genesis 2: 15-17 said:
but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.
Sounds like a good reason to me.
Wait... I thought they did eat of it and lived on. So is God a liar? Besides, if my kid does touch the hot plate despite me telling it not to, I think it's punished enough already... no need for me to be a dick and punish it further like God apparently did. I'd be more likely to console my kid than lock it in the basement.
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
567
Likes
3
Location
Australia, mate.
Who said that God just gave the reason "Because I say so"?
Nobody. Who said someone said that?

Although, if you punish someone "for disobedience" (I think this has been said), I'd say you *are* punishing for violating "Because I say so". Cause what else is "(dis)obedience"?

I've never seen any evidence that he didn't have a lengthy chat to Adam and Eve about ...
Oh right that must mean he probably did.

Genesis 2: 15-17 said:
but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.
Sounds like a good reason to me.
Wait... I thought they did eat of it and lived on. So is God a liar? Besides, if my kid does touch the hot plate despite me telling it not to, I think it's punished enough already... no need for me to be a dick and punish it further like God apparently did. I'd be more likely to console my kid than lock it in the basement.
You read me wrong. I was merely playing the devil's advocate, telling you where you were unfounded in your accusations.

Shelley, maybe it is because we DON'T KNOW as much as whatever sentinent being created us? It's possible that whoever wrote Genesis missed that point. As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything, just stating that people shouldn't jump to conclusions.
 
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
2,010
Likes
4
Shelley, maybe it is because we DON'T KNOW as much as whatever sentinent being created us? It's possible that whoever wrote Genesis missed that point. As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything, just stating that people shouldn't jump to conclusions.
Wait, are you saying that the Bible isn't the literal, unchanged Word of God? :eek:
 
Top