Post by quantumcat on May 16, 2006 17:17:45 GMT -5
Speaking of highs,I'd like to know what Eve and her mister were smoking when
the listened to Satan in the first place.
True,they had no reason to doubt his sincerity in the beginning.
(They had no precedence re deceit and there was that whole 'born yesterday' bit.)
But,once he introduced the concept of somebody having a dterimental,hidden agenda,
why assume the guilty party was God?
He'd been pretty nice to them so far.
Why give the serpent the benefit of the doubt and not even look into the facts?
Y'all make some very good points here but my favourite aspect of the Fall has
been the nature of the lie itself.
I figure it this way:
Satan says God doesn't want us to be at all like him.
Satan says God is afraid of our acquiring power and wisdom.
Satan says God wants to keep us from things that could make us happy.
Satan is a liar,liar,pants-on-fire.
Ergo,nothing would tickle God more than to have us be wise,powerful,happy
and bearing so much of a 'family resemblance' to him that people would see Him
whenever we went into action and that we might even do more here than He accomplished.
Maybe we're (to some degree) a lab experiment.
See how this organism degrades once it chooses sin and how it recovers once redemption
is introduced.
Since our lifespans are a few eons shorter than the average angel's,Satan and his ilk could
watch our story unfold rather as the scientists observed the microscopic vermin of George R.R.
Martin's 'Sandkings'.
Maybe we're supposed to get them to think better of using our free will against God just as a white mouse
might be supposed to warn us of the potential dangers involved in misusing thalidomide.
When our minds get a bit more adept,we might comprehend how and why the angels rebelled in the first place.
But,it's interesting that the Bible records the notion of doubting and thwarting God.
It looks as if He had no qualms about admitting that he was found wanting by someone close to him.
Even if an 'origin of evil' story was required,why bring up that the foes had once been part of the inner
workings of heaven and that they seemed amiable and convinced that God was in the wrong?
That seems to portray God as scrupulously honest even as we are warned of the corrupt and duplicitous nature
of our enemy.
It's as if even the Victor-writes-the-history-books account of sin's entry into the world has to show the devil as
shrewd and beguiling and mention at least one being's opinion that God was a petulant and selfish spoilsport.
Any implications that Eve might have misunderstood a kind and generous God's wishes concerning the tree slide
right into a far less attractive take on the Creator's character.
The subtlety Brutus used against Caesar wouldn't come around for a bit.
My cynical side seldom believes how good and loving God is but it can grasp the idea that Satan says God is a jerk and Satan lies.
Until I get a bit smarter,that much knowledge of good and evil will suffice.
the listened to Satan in the first place.
True,they had no reason to doubt his sincerity in the beginning.
(They had no precedence re deceit and there was that whole 'born yesterday' bit.)
But,once he introduced the concept of somebody having a dterimental,hidden agenda,
why assume the guilty party was God?
He'd been pretty nice to them so far.
Why give the serpent the benefit of the doubt and not even look into the facts?
Y'all make some very good points here but my favourite aspect of the Fall has
been the nature of the lie itself.
I figure it this way:
Satan says God doesn't want us to be at all like him.
Satan says God is afraid of our acquiring power and wisdom.
Satan says God wants to keep us from things that could make us happy.
Satan is a liar,liar,pants-on-fire.
Ergo,nothing would tickle God more than to have us be wise,powerful,happy
and bearing so much of a 'family resemblance' to him that people would see Him
whenever we went into action and that we might even do more here than He accomplished.
Maybe we're (to some degree) a lab experiment.
See how this organism degrades once it chooses sin and how it recovers once redemption
is introduced.
Since our lifespans are a few eons shorter than the average angel's,Satan and his ilk could
watch our story unfold rather as the scientists observed the microscopic vermin of George R.R.
Martin's 'Sandkings'.
Maybe we're supposed to get them to think better of using our free will against God just as a white mouse
might be supposed to warn us of the potential dangers involved in misusing thalidomide.
When our minds get a bit more adept,we might comprehend how and why the angels rebelled in the first place.
But,it's interesting that the Bible records the notion of doubting and thwarting God.
It looks as if He had no qualms about admitting that he was found wanting by someone close to him.
Even if an 'origin of evil' story was required,why bring up that the foes had once been part of the inner
workings of heaven and that they seemed amiable and convinced that God was in the wrong?
That seems to portray God as scrupulously honest even as we are warned of the corrupt and duplicitous nature
of our enemy.
It's as if even the Victor-writes-the-history-books account of sin's entry into the world has to show the devil as
shrewd and beguiling and mention at least one being's opinion that God was a petulant and selfish spoilsport.
Any implications that Eve might have misunderstood a kind and generous God's wishes concerning the tree slide
right into a far less attractive take on the Creator's character.
The subtlety Brutus used against Caesar wouldn't come around for a bit.
My cynical side seldom believes how good and loving God is but it can grasp the idea that Satan says God is a jerk and Satan lies.
Until I get a bit smarter,that much knowledge of good and evil will suffice.