satis5d wrote:

Goldenmane wrote:Just because I'm all kindhearted and shit, this is the post you ignored:

Thank you for the kindness indeed. I had no idea you expected a response to this. You are obviously infinitely wiser and more intelligent than I am. I grovel in your presence. Is that what you were looking for?

No, when I want disingenuous passive-aggressive fuckholery, you may be assured I'll request it outright.

This is a discussion board. You posited some nonsensical arsehattery about the existence of non-physical spirits, and when asked to demonstrate the existence of such replied with a pathetic string of non-sequiturs and idiocy. I responded, since this is a discussion board. It is a place dedicated to the evaluation of ideas. It is not a place designated for preaching and autofellatio.

The only question I see is "How is it that you apparently think that the following demonstrates anything regaring the existence of a non-physical spirit?" But then you seem to answer the question for me.

In your experience, does discussion only consist of someone asking questions and someone else blathering abject foolishness in pseudo-response? Doesn't work that way in my experience.

You demanded a response; I responded. You shot a dozen holes in my response. Put a notch on the gun and return it to the holster. I have no further response. I already added some material about NDEs and reincarnation. Consider that my response, I guess. I don't agree with all of your points, but at least you put your thoughts down and I have considered them. Forum win!

You made some vague hand-wavey gestures towards rampant idiocy as though it was supposed to address any of my points.

It didn't.

If you disagree with my points, please address them.

Or, you know, tuck tail and run. Your choice. The audience will know how to take it.

satis5d wrote:As to your final question, we could also ask, why didn't Mr Miagi in The Karate Kid, just give Daniel karate lessons instead of having him wash floors and paint fences? Sometimes you have to give the wise masters the latitude to do things a little differently than you expect. It not only allowed Daniel in the Karate Kid to also learn valuable life lessons about his attitude, it also makes for a much more interesting story.

Actually, it made an utterly shite story. It was passive-aggressive bullfuck that gave two generations of fucking idiots the entirely wrong idea about the martial arts, and encouraged the (highly religion-compatible) notions that:

a) It's perfectly fine to cheat if you're the good guy, and
b) You can get really good at shit accidentally

Both of these are very fun and comforting fantasies, but that's all they are. The lessons Daniel-san supposedly learned were useless and counterproductive.

I cannot pretend to be surprised that someone peddling fantasy thinks this other fantasy was good shit.

satis5d wrote:

Darwinsbulldog wrote:
Why take something on faith? I can understand you trusting a friend of long standing or something of that sort. Why not try some different hypotheses to explain your lapses in faith. You have in your possession one of the [known] most powerful thinking machines on the planet. Perhaps it is trying to tell you that all this biblical nonsense is just that. Why construct beings and things beyond necessity? An absence of evidence for the existence of demons and fairies is not PROOF of absence, but it is strong EVIDENCE of absence.
And morality. To be a moral agent, is surely more than fear of a god or trying to please a god-the moral act should be good in itself, without fear or favour. Why would a god want to test Abraham, by asking him to kill his son? We could question the ethics of such a god. Surely there are less nasty ways to test for loyalty? Why didn't god ask him to go and spend some hard years helping the poor and the sick?

Contrary to a definition given earlier, faith is not blind belief.

Except it is:

Definition of faith in English:
faith

noun
[mass noun]
2 Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof: bereaved people who have shown supreme faith

satis5d wrote:When one passes a check (cheque for you British/Canadians) to another it is generally accepted "in good faith."

Failed analogy.
This is a metaphorical expression and isn't like religious faith.

satis5d wrote:As to your morality paragraph, I agree that we should do good without fear or favor. You use the illustration of Abraham and Isaac which has caused many people concern. God did indeed command Abraham to kill his son, and Abraham obeyed BY FAITH. Remember that the back story is that this son was born to VERY old parents. The same God that did the impossible once for Abraham was counted capable of performing a second miracle.

So what?
He commanded a father to kill his own son ffs.

satis5d wrote: In Hebrews it explains that Abraham believed that what would happen is that God would raise Isaac from the dead after he killed him--which would have been an amazing story to tell the grandkids!

Citations?
And again, how does that justify the pain and terror father and son must have gone through?

satis5d wrote: However, God prevented the killing at the last possible moment and Abraham was credited as having the faith to obey, but Isaac only had a mild heart attack. Of course, God could have allowed Isaac to be killed on the altar that day, but then God would have had to come up with another plan to fulfill the promise he made to Abraham about birthing a nation.

Defending the indefensible.

satis5d wrote:As to your final question, we could also ask, why didn't Mr Miagi in The Karate Kid, just give Daniel karate lessons instead of having him wash floors and paint fences? Sometimes you have to give the wise masters the latitude to do things a little differently than you expect. It not only allowed Daniel in the Karate Kid to also learn valuable life lessons about his attitude, it also makes for a much more interesting story.

You really do believe this is an accurate analogy, don't you?

satis5d

Is the earth the centre of the universe?

NDE's, eh? Oh, I feel so fucking cheated! Cheated, I tell you!

Last year I had 5 'funny turns' in 24 hours when my sinus node all of a sudden decided it wasn't going to play the game properly any more, and my heart stopped. Or rather paused, the cardiac guy said, as he reckoned 'it would never have stopped completely' Very reassuring that. Whatever, with my blood pressure plummeting, it was enough for me to go away to la-la land, a land of loud rushing noises and confused fast-moving images like a nightmare on speed, but not once did I think I'd left my body, or see dead relatives, or a tunnel with white light at the end. The only vision I had was a ring of faces above me going 'Helen, Helen, come back to us', and they turned out to be real, the night nurses rushing to respond to the blaring alarms I had set off. They must have been angels, right?

And the devils were the other patients in that ward who complained bitterly the next day, within my hearing, of being woken up by the alarms which I set off. They obviously would have preferred for me to die so that they could get a good night's sleep.

satis5d wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

satis5d wrote:We generally call this part of us our mind. Science cannot prove that this "part" of the human existence exists through scientific methods.

Actually it can and it has:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100921151009.htm

I read the article. Thanks. However, how does finding the part of the brain that controls impulses equate to the discovery of the thinking, rationalizing part of us that says no to our bodies based on our belief that such further action would not be in our best interests? Are we not dealing with more than just impulses here?

We might be able to help you comprehend this with the aid of some basic thinking, feel up to it? You talk about our ability to stop satiating our base desire, like eating at a buffet. You seem to think that this demonstrates something mystical and magical and is therefore evidence of whatever fairy it is you like to favour. Let's look a little closer at this situation, shall we? Let's put you back at this heavenly buffet, let's have you full of fine treats, let's have you considering your next move. You seem to suggest that it is some sort of soul that stops us continuing to eat, our inherent humanity overcomes this and allows us to sit down. I don't know why you struggle to see it but this is clearly utter bollocks.

First of all, what do non-human animals do in the same situation? Do they eat until they burst, or do they stop when they are full? I have seen few animals so propelled by their base urges that they literally eat themselves to death. In my experience most stop when full. What about you, see many animals unable to exert control over their food intake? Can you post some pictures of some of the dead animals that were unable to control themselves? The point, if it were not clear enough, is that animals, humans included, enjoy the influence of self-preservation in the short term. No soul is required.

Let's move on from the short-term, a task many animals, including humans, are capable of. Perhaps when you are standing at the buffet, you turn your thoughts to the future and the possible long-term harm your overeating might do to you. We allow our long-term interests to override our short-term interests. This does not require any divinity, any soul, any magical fairy, all it requires is the ability to consider possible outcomes.

Your attempt to equate reasoning with something mystical is not successful. How do you respond?

satis5d wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:What separates your untestable bullshit from all the untestable bullshit that has gone before?

You claim that what I say is untestable, but I told you directly that I tested God myself and got a very satisfying response. It's not that what I say is untestable, it's that God is highly unlikely to answer your deepest questions when your attitude toward him is one of pride and disingenuous request. Let's just say that when I did my soul-searching and decided to put God to the test, I did so with the purest of motives (as pure as I can get, anyway ) So far, my experience of RatSkep is that humility is not the defining feature here. However, I would be surprised if there aren't some honest seekers of truth among the group here. I really have nothing to offer anyone here, but I have had experiences that convince me that God may be found if you honestly want to find him. That's all I'm saying.

The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector - Luke 18

9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

So we have to believe in your god first, then we will find reasons to believe in your god, is that right? Do you see what dishonest crap that looks like? You criticise our humility, another example of the dishonest manipulation that you asked me to point out. Does humility mean simply accepting what you say? Many of the people here value science, this makes them far better versed in humility than some proselytising god-botherer who thinks he has a direct line to his god. Humility is saying "I don't know but I'm going to try to find out." not "The answer is god, my god, accept it else." Perhaps you should look to the beam in your eye before casting judgement on us? You talk about "seekers of truth" but that is not you, is it? You have already found your truth and you want us to swallow it, hook, line and sinker, in the name of humility, on nothing more than your sayso.

You have shown us, as so many before you have done, that you are only interested in manipulation and self-aggrandisement. You have been exposed, the Emporer has no clothes on.

LucidFlight wrote:

satis5d wrote:

kennyc wrote:The mind is what the brain does. There is no soul. When your brain dies YOU die. End fini....

How then do you explain this? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2545668/Is-proof-near-death-experiences-ARE-real-Extraordinary-new-book-intensive-care-nurse-reveals-dramatic-evidence-says-banish-fear-dying.html

From the article:

In November 2009, Rajaa Benamour had an anaesthetic injection for minor surgery, after which she found herself mentally scrolling through her entire life, right back to her birth. This was followed by what she could only describe as a rapid review of the creation of the universe. After being discharged from hospital, she started trying to find books about what she’d learned during her vision.

Eventually, she realised that she had somehow acquired an in-depth understanding of quantum physics — despite never having previously known anything about the subject.

(My bold.)

Wow. That's amazing.

Steve wrote:Apparently she was writing a book, but I can't find it. Maybe it died?

Probably one of those 'unobservable' books.

satis5d wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:What separates your untestable bullshit from all the untestable bullshit that has gone before?

You claim that what I say is untestable, but I told you directly that I tested God myself and got a very satisfying response. It's not that what I say is untestable, it's that God is highly unlikely to answer your deepest questions when your attitude toward him is one of pride and disingenuous request. Let's just say that when I did my soul-searching and decided to put God to the test, I did so with the purest of motives (as pure as I can get, anyway ) So far, my experience of RatSkep is that humility is not the defining feature here. However, I would be surprised if there aren't some honest seekers of truth among the group here. I really have nothing to offer anyone here, but I have had experiences that convince me that God may be found if you honestly want to find him. That's all I'm saying.

The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector - Luke 18

9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

Oh Holy Shit!

satis5d wrote:....

The Bible speaks clearly about angels and demons,....

The Bible doesn't speak clearly about any fucking thing.

Doubtdispelled wrote:NDE's, eh? Oh, I feel so fucking cheated! Cheated, I tell you!

Last year I had 5 'funny turns' in 24 hours when my sinus node all of a sudden decided it wasn't going to play the game properly any more, and my heart stopped. Or rather paused, the cardiac guy said, as he reckoned 'it would never have stopped completely' Very reassuring that. Whatever, with my blood pressure plummeting, it was enough for me to go away to la-la land, a land of loud rushing noises and confused fast-moving images like a nightmare on speed, but not once did I think I'd left my body, or see dead relatives, or a tunnel with white light at the end. The only vision I had was a ring of faces above me going 'Helen, Helen, come back to us', and they turned out to be real, the night nurses rushing to respond to the blaring alarms I had set off. They must have been angels, right?

And the devils were the other patients in that ward who complained bitterly the next day, within my hearing, of being woken up by the alarms which I set off. They obviously would have preferred for me to die so that they could get a good night's sleep.

DUDE!!!!

(my suggestion is to write a book, you'll make a fortune! You've heard the one about 'Heaven is Real'TM right? What abouth one 'There is no Hell'TM ?)


"I see angels and aerials in leather and chrome,
swooping down from heaven to carry me home".
And he gave her one last kiss and died,
and gave her his Vincent
to ride. "

Vincent Black Lightening 1952

satis5d wrote:As to your final question, we could also ask, why didn't Mr Miagi in The Karate Kid, just give Daniel karate lessons instead of having him wash floors and paint fences? Sometimes you have to give the wise masters the latitude to do things a little differently than you expect. It not only allowed Daniel in the Karate Kid to also learn valuable life lessons about his attitude, it also makes for a much more interesting story.

I think you misunderstood the film there. Young Daniel didn't believe he could learn karate sufficiently to compete with his bullies in the tournament. Mr Miagi set about training him via muscle memory exercises and by giving him non martial tasks to mask his true intentions. Yes his attitude is challenged and even pushed to breaking, hence the temper tantrum scene with the big reveal that wax on wax off, sand the floor and paint the fence were imitations of basic karate blocks, now ingrained into Daniel's muscle memory. His ability to fend off Mr Miagi clears up his doubts over the weird training techniques.
I believe the remake and the kung fu is life explaination bit enhances this idea. Yes I get the latitude idea of teaching but........Mr Miagi joined up the dots with his mysterious ways, the karate/kung fu lessons were imparted in their genuine form once the negative attitude had been addressed.
Where is the join up re the bibles weird ways/claims and God?

There are many claims such as ask and ye shall receive. Why does God not heal amputees or give eyes to those unfortunate to be born with none or turn paedophile priests into pillars of salt?

See, I struggle with this sort of thing. In biblical times, the dead were raised, the blind were healed and a nosy woman was turned into a pillar of salt just for looking when she shouldn't. We're supposed to accept this on faith and yet during current times, where these sort of events could be very easily verified, we find no evidence of it at all.

The dead (or nearly dead) are raised by our understanding of anatomy and physiology coupled with advances in medical care, scientific work, application of ever advancing life saving techniques and equipment/drugs etc. Try ditching advanced CPR and resuscitation for prayer and see where it gets you. Try setting up a faith only paramedic service and see how many contracts you get. And yet, you should only have to ask for cures or at the least, lay your healing hands on the afflicted party. Your holy ambulances, crewed by the devout and holy should be saving the ER Dept's loads of work by healing the sick and injured, raising the dead all over the gaff and yet it isn't so. Why is that?

I refuse to accept that there have been no more than the 60 some people accredited with miraculous healings who were seriously convinced, honest believers who have visited Lourdes. Why the piss poor success rate?

Parachutists adopt a degree of faith that their chute will open (admittedly with some scepticism hence the reserve) but if the success rate of parachutes opening was as poor as Lourdes/God's, I seriously doubt the sport would have taken off, erm descended, you get it.

Why is there no reflection in reality of the claims in the bible? Why is everything hinged on mindlessly believing a poorly written, compiled, edited, translated compendium of ignorant bronze aged scribblings over reason, evidence as presented uniformly in the world around us and advances in learning and understanding?

Well we were 'cast out' -- oh wait that was well before biblical times....

trubble76 wrote:So we have to believe in your god first, then we will find reasons to believe in your god, is that right? Do you see what dishonest crap that looks like? You criticise our humility, another example of the dishonest manipulation that you asked me to point out. Does humility mean simply accepting what you say? Many of the people here value science, this makes them far better versed in humility than some proselytising god-botherer who thinks he has a direct line to his god. Humility is saying "I don't know but I'm going to try to find out." not "The answer is god, my god, accept it else." Perhaps you should look to the beam in your eye before casting judgement on us? You talk about "seekers of truth" but that is not you, is it? You have already found your truth and you want us to swallow it, hook, line and sinker, in the name of humility, on nothing more than your sayso.

You have shown us, as so many before you have done, that you are only interested in manipulation and self-aggrandisement. You have been exposed, the Emporer has no clothes on.

1. If you've paid attention to the key points I've made from the beginning of this thread, my point, and the point of my book is that you don't need to believe in my God or any god. Even if you go to your grave denying His existence, the God I know will rescue you from Hell and set you up for eternity in conditions far better than you can imagine on this earth after it has been refurbished. I say this based on years of study of the same Bible that many of you here criticize.

2. Have I criticized anyone's humility? Or did I point out that up to that point I hadn't noticed much of it.

3. I have been forced to change many parts of my worldview over the years in my search for truth. I value scientific study a great deal. What I believe now has been hard fought, for the most part, and I will not easily be moved from my position, as I expect neither will any of you. I continue to share my beliefs with you because I've not heard that anyone else here has the same peace about death and Hell that I have.

4. What do I stand to gain by manipulating anyone here? I'm not trying to convert you. At best I've kicked the anthill. The ants will scurry around wildly for a little bit, but soon they will go back to their daily business with their anthill fully rebuilt. I'm here to learn. I'm learning mostly about how you feel about God, the Bible and religion. I'm also open to tweaking my worldview if and when someone presents something worth adding.

It seems to me that this group is rife with fear and that you soothe each other with talk of how this evil God of the Bible doesn't exist, therefore Hell must not exist. And yet your fear of Hell is not satisfied. (That's my assessment based on two days of observation. I'm not judging anyone in particular or saying that there's anything wrong with what you're doing. In fact, it's great that you have each other for support.) The fact that I'm here and that despite all of your brilliant scientific arguments that God does not exist I am unmoved from my position of loving the God you deny makes some of you uncomfortable. Great! It's good to be uncomfortable sometimes. It exposes the shallowness of our beliefs. I've been there myself lots of times. I gave up a good-paying job at a church because I became so uncomfortable with the fact that I could see that corporate religion was part of the problem, not the solution. I already agree with a lot of things that you guys say, and some of you seem very intelligent.

So here is my big manipulation speech:
Live the way that you see fit and in the end the God that you deny will pleasantly surprise you.

However, if you're unhappy with the way your life is going because of your fear of death and Hell, I know what I've learned and experienced first-hand and I am certain that life can lived without fear of death and Hell because I'm living proof of it. Not because I'm anything special, that's just my experience. It seems to me that offering those who live in fear a solution would be a loving thing to do (provided that I do it for free and for no other personal benefit) since it seems that not many people around here have a solution other than to convince yourselves that God doesn't exist.

Just to be clear here: I have no fear of death, and I have no reason to think Hell is anything other than a juvenile fantasy. Same goes for Heaven.

I'm going to die. That will be the end of me, for a given value of 'me'. It may be today, tomorrow, or years from now. I don't relish the fact that I will cease to exist as a somewhat coherent illusion of mindfulness, but I have no reason to fear it. It is, if anything, oblivion. An utter lack of experience. What could there possibly be to fear in that?

At the same time, I do not seek it. For the nonce, I seem to exist and experience. That's enough to be going on with.

I do not fear Hell. I cannot fear that which I have no belief in.

satis5d,

If God exists, what is God?




N.B. references to God's job description will not/do not address that question.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

satis5d wrote:
The Old Testament (a legal term, by the way)

How do you figure?

satis5d wrote:But when Jesus came on the scene the age of law was put aside and we entered into a new covenant (commonly referred to in Bible terms as the New Testament).

And yet Jesus also said this:

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

"The scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

satis5d wrote:The point of the New Testament is to show the weakness and futility of the Old Testament and to point out a new and better way (the Gospel - which means good news).

So the almighty and perfect god made a silly and weak testament?
Doesn't quite compute.

Excellent points, Thomas. Notice that Jesus claims to have come to FULFILL the law and the prophets (prophesies).

ful·fill
verb (used with object)
1. to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise.
2. to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands.
3. to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.): a book that fulfills a long-felt need.
4. to bring to an end; finish or complete, as a period of time: He felt that life was over when one had fulfilled his threescore years and ten.
5. to develop the full potential of (usually used reflexively): She realized that she could never fulfill herself in such work.

When Jesus came the first time, he was prepared to usher in the Kingdom but the people chosen to receive it (the Jews) did not want it. This is why the new covenant based on the blood of Jesus was introduced. The law is still with us, but through Jesus one can be set free from the law, not to live as we want in our sinful condition, but to live as we want under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Ultimately, in the New Earth, the law will indeed be completely put aside.

So the almighty and perfect god made a silly and weak testament?

The answer to this question could get long, so I'll keep it short for now unless you want more detail later.
God, as creator, is responsible for his creation. The great plan of God is an elaborate story of pain, sorrow and sadness which we brought upon ourselves through deception followed by a great rescue and a blessed eternity. At some point there has to be a reckoning-- a time where all is put back into balance. If God is going to be the judge, then he must be fair, but as creator, he made this mess. So we have a conundrum.

One of the things that a just/fair God must do is to remove any valid claims that humanity could put forward at the great hearing. For instance, some could say, "God, if you had only given mankind the chance to love you without knowing sin and without having a sinful nature, we would have loved you and served you forever." But God can respond, "I tried that, and you chose to rebel by breaking the only rule I gave you." As it pertains to the law, an argument could be made..."God, if you would have only told us EXACTLY what we were supposed to do to live up to your standard of righteousness, we would have done it." To which God can reply, "I gave you the law for that reason and you repeatedly showed that you weren't interested in demonstrating your love for me that way."

So, in a sense, yes, God created a silly and weak testament, knowing full well that people would fail to love God through that method. Today he offers us the gift of live through Jesus Christ, also knowing that most people will reject that. God isn't concerned because his plan is not for us to save ourselves, He is looking forward to rescuing us and giving us far better than we deserve. (Consider the parable of the prodigal son.)

Goldenmane wrote:Just to be clear here: I have no fear of death, and I have no reason to think Hell is anything other than a juvenile fantasy. Same goes for Heaven.

I'm going to die. That will be the end of me, for a given value of 'me'. It may be today, tomorrow, or years from now. I don't relish the fact that I will cease to exist as a somewhat coherent illusion of mindfulness, but I have no reason to fear it. It is, if anything, oblivion. An utter lack of experience. What could there possibly be to fear in that?

At the same time, I do not seek it. For the nonce, I seem to exist and experience. That's enough to be going on with.

I do not fear Hell. I cannot fear that which I have no belief in.

That's fantastic. Part of the reason why I feel that Churches are part of the problem is that for many people their fear of Hell comes from the teaching of the Church in the first place. If the Church would stop proselytizing and focus on living quiet, godly, generous lives (as the Bible suggests) many more people would be spared the fear of Hell in their day-to-day existence. If what you are saying is true, then I believe that you are very blessed.

Oh for fucks sake. Have you thought this through? This supposed god created everything, including the evil he uses to condemn folks. He set up the fall and put the temptation to "sin" in place knowing the result. He set it up for man to fuck up. Why did he create us with a sinful nature? Apparently he wasn't all that great at logic, OR the folks that made up the whole thing weren't all that great at logic.

Law? Really? Are small children accountable for violating the law when they don't even know there is a law? No. How can humans that have no knowledge of good and evil be accountable for doing something when they had no means by which to determine was wrong? Remember, they had no ability to know right from wrong until they ate from the tree of knowledge. Fucking stupid made up mythology is stupid.

RS