reply to post by Sparky63
Was it a lie? Perhaps Adam & Eve did not become gods, but what of their progeny? With sufficient levels of technology, would it not be possible for
mankind to become godlike? Even Richard Dawkins says that he can conceive of "god-like beings", but that they would not be gods only because they
would only be a product of this universe and not the creators of it who exist outside of it. Consider that, and then consider a simulation - a virtual
environment inhabited by conscious AI. In a sufficiently sophisticated virtual construct, would an AI that was created - or formed as a byproduct of
the rules of the simulation - be able to recognize that it was merely an AI and that the world it perceived around it merely a simulation? If we were
to create a simulation of that sophistication - would we not be the gods of those AI, who created them and their universe while also existing beyond
and outside of it?
If such is so... then it would only be the forbidden fruit of knowledge - the gift of Satan's Temptation that would have allowed us such an
accomplishment. In a limited fashion, we have already been utilizing this gift - as we can create worlds and people to inhabit them through art,
literature, and music. Through imagination. I've always, philosophically, considered the gift of imagination to be God's gift, and knowledge to be
Satan's gift. We are made in "God's" image - as world builders, as creators. Knowledge - however - allows us to make those worlds we imagine into
reality.
As said, however, I do not believe in the myths of the bible - nor in the Christian faith. Please don't confuse romanticism with faith. Adam & Eve
simply did not literally exist, and just about everything we know about anthropology, biology, sociology, etc confirms this.
they became disloyal rebels who rejected Gods Sovereign right to govern them.
Disloyal rebels sounds like such a negative connotation. At one time, it was a slave owner's sovereign (and scriptural endorsed) right to govern his
slaves. At one time, it was England's Sovereign right to govern over her colonies. At one time, it was France's aristocratic King's sovereign right
to govern over the people he kept in squalid poverty.
Rebelling against a tyrant's "Sovereign Right" to rule over you is not necessarily a bad thing. Such would be the case for humanity, I think. To
lay the blame of pain and misery on this ancient rebellion is to remove the mark of blame from the individual causing the misery, to say nothing of
the injustice of punishing the son for the sins of the father. It also betrays a very simplistic and completely inaccurate understanding of the
interdependent and natural systems which govern this universe - as if they could be subdued and bent solely to service the happiness of mankind. Sin
does not cause Hurricanes. Sin does not cause disease. Sin does not cause predation. Sin does not cause famine.
[edit on 3-12-2008 by Lasheic]