this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2026
77 points (91.4% liked)

Ask Lemmy

38847 readers
835 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BaraCoded@literature.cafe 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because he doesn't exist, so even questioning it is irrelevant

[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 6 points 1 day ago

When one person believes a delusion, it's schizophrenia. When millions do, it's religion.

[–] nylo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

it sounds like you're flirting with the Epicurean Paradox

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

I understand the epicurean paradox but I also understand for god to exist as some believe it would have to be paradoxical. I also understand that any true religion, anything not just societally and culturally forced, would not take hold as a probability based on geographical location of birth. I believe in a god that can give humans divine inspiration but I do not believe in a religion that is just a long tradition of group think. Any god that choses to create these structures of religion and call them right and just is of no interest to me.

I like that guy jesus, tho. He was a bro.

[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

The usual explanation is because God wanted humans to have free will, so interfering in their ability to self-determine would negate that.

The reality is because it makes no fucking sense, like much of the Bible.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

because he was a pussy

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

Ey Eve, bet you are too scared to try this apple.

[–] itisileclerk@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

It's a judeo-christian-muslim god.

[–] finallymadeanaccount@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Because he is a jealous god. He told people this.

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because he gifted humanity free-will? I thought that was like the main reason

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

He's also omniscient and created every atom of their being, meaning he knew exactly how it would play out. It was a setup.

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Would it really be free will if there was fate or destiny? Would he be a Laplace demon and by thinking about mankind eating the apple he was creating a simulation where mankind actually does eat an apple?

[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 1 points 1 day ago

you're trying to bring logic where logic goes to die. It won't work.

[–] Paragone@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

The story was adulterated, & that is visible in the text of that part of the bible, there was no apple.

"women ate of the fruit of the knowledge of Good & Evil ( MORAL UNDERSTANDING ), & shared that with men".

Yes, mothering enforces more moral-understanding than does male-ego-persuits, traditional or modern.

As women have noticed, & evidence absolutely does back it, women bring life into the world, & men persue killing, consistently more than women do.

( the insecurity displayed by the "god" of that story is idiotic, & the blunt fact that help has been provided to humankind, repeatedly, since then, falsifies the message in that part of their bible that "god" wants us kept down, as pets: it investes in our evolving, & there's even a book specifically on that, though from an Abrahamic-religion perspective, called "The Evolution of God", which .. isn't written by a believer, but comes to the conclusion that someone has been cultivating evolution, consistently, among the peoples of that "god". )


The "grace" left-behind by ones who experience moral-anxiety is the "grace" of being mere-animals, who don't have moral-anxieties.

This is an absolutely-factual metaphor/parable about the mere-animal ancestors of humankind vs the moral-anxiety/moral-difficulties condition of our "generation".

Also, there's another corroboration, but much more recent..

there's a yt vid on how Gobekli Tepe somehow was a metropolis without agriculture: Natural Abundance was sufficient for them to do that, & they didn't break their ecology, the way we do..

But you've still got the "grace"/"non-grace" difference between the people who just lived in natural-abundance & didn't break their ecology vs our-generation..


Oh, & as far as I can tell, the Abrahamic-religion authorities are looking totally at the wrong frame-of-reference, in trying to discern where the "Garden of Eden" was: it means Earth, not some limited-locale of it.

Earth was pristine, lush, drenchingly-alive ( I've read that the cod were sooo thick in off the Atlantic coast of Canada, that the fishermen said you could walk from ship to ship .. exageration, certainly, but .. the fish were, on average, 80y old, back then, & huge. Nowadays, they're .. a few years old, 8yo was what I'd read last century, & then we broke the coral-forests they breed in, & the cod-fishery collapsed, & never recovered. We're incompetent at preserving natural-wealth, & we do it in ALL contexts, all fisheries, all forests, .. where's all the BEST farmland on Earth? under concrete, because we converted it all to cities, since that was where the people were.

Idiocy ).

We're destroying the Garden of Eden, globally.

No matter: The Great Filter, our species-puberty, will force-exterminate our race, if we won't grow-up quick enough, completely enough.

Natural Selection, but at planet-scale.


& finally, free-will requires ability-to-choose-wrong.

Puppets aren't what we are.

( it is continuums/souls which are ChildrenOfG-D/CellsOfG-D, it isn't our-lives/incarnations: those are children-of-souls, so grandchildren-of-G-D )

_ /\ _

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 49 points 3 days ago (4 children)

It was a test, but if he was omniscient, he would have known the results without having to run it. 😉

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 3 days ago (2 children)

See how i didnt mention he is also "benevolent."

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 26 points 3 days ago (6 children)

There's quite a bit of evidence to argue he is actually malevolent.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Christians then start applying "ends justifies the means" logic.

Calvin ball. Its all just Calvin ball.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] basketugly@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Fanfiction/Please permit me to make wild allegations, I was also looking at this yesterday and wondered: is it the apple of knowledge of sexual reproduction? (I know the book says good and evil, I get it)

The other tree was the fruit of eternal life. They did not consume this fruit.

So, as for the story, humans could neither sexually reproduce nor live forever/a long time prior to eating the fruit of the knowledge of sexual reproduction. Life and death. Good and evil.

They ate it, wanted to have sex with each other and were ashamed and covered themselves to avoid sexual arousal.

The free will they received was the ability to sexually reproduce.

In the story, angels cannot sexually reproduce with each other?, but seemingly live forever/a long time, and angels supposedly did get very excited that they could now sexually reproduce with humans: nephelim. Hybrids. There are no female angels.

Two different technology trees: humans with sexual reproduction and limited lifespan and angels with longevity/eternal life/angel powers/no females.

This gave the world a third (unintended?) hybrid nephelim class and this upset the balance of power on earth/the creation.

The chaos that ensued inspired yahweh to flood his creation and try again?

Wild shit! For me these are the chaotic and confused retelling of a story of extraterrestrial influence on the development of the human species.

This particular chapter is focused on origins and bloodlines of humanity so it makes sense to me in that way 🙃

Thank you for your time.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I find the story better with "all-knowing" meaning know what is and had been and the future being unknown. A fact created by have multiple beings of free will.

That said eating the apple is very low stakes way to let someone choose to disobey you and thus learn what that means. The "punishment" seems like the plan all along.

at least how i prefer the story

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At some point, one of y'all is going to have to admit that the story doesn't actually make any sense, instead of reinterpreting it again to make yourselves feel comfy.

The "punishment" seems like the plan all along.

Then your god is a vengeful, evil monster, unworthy of worship

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Im describing it purely from "as a story" concept.

The punishment is being a creature with free will on earth and the ability to comptemplatr shame for moral decisions (because we can fail).

At least at this point of the story

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No, the punishment was increased pain, hardship, expulsion from the garden of Eden, and mortality.

Have you even read the book? From an "as a story" concept, whatever that means?

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

That is the same thing from a different perspective is what i am saying

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think it means a story instead of as a historically accurate document of fact.

Because as a story theres lots of lessons we can draw from it, and interpret in many ways like literature enthusiasts do.

As a historical document holy fuck help me satan

[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

Bad character and plot writing. The Bible was written by hacks and scabs.

[–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If I've learned something from listening History in the Bible podcast is that Yaweh is an asshole and that there are layers of bad translations.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Free will. The idea is that for free will to exist you must be able to choose the wrong action.

If a supreme being rules out all wrong actions or prevented you from taking wrong actions, how could there be free will? How could you even be responsible for your own thoughts and actions. How are you not just a puppet?

Alternately you can think of it as a leveling up. It seems like the Apple is always represented as “knowledge of good and evil”. So originally they’re just animals. They take actions but there is no morality, nothing is good or bad. But if they use their free will to take this one forbidden step, they receive the knowledge of good and evil, they can act good or act bad, they know it’s good or bad, and they have the free will to choose their path. And they are accountable for those choices. Now they’re human

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

But if god is omniscient, then he knows what they're going to do. And if he already knows that, then do they really have free will? Or do they just think they do?

[–] Lumisal@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's 3 philosophies I've seen on that question.

One is the planned domino effect, which another commentator already mentioned.

The next is the "paradoxical being" one, which is that something that is omniscient is paradoxical by default, therefore it can both know what will happen and simultaneously not know what will happen.

The last is the "unknown destiny" one, which is that even if we don't actually have free will, as long as we think we do and can't prove we don't, then does it matter? Because ultimately it would be no different to us than if we actually did have it.

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Interesting, thanks.

Addressed the first one on that other comment.

The second one just seems contradictory tbh, how can it be both?

The third one is interesting - but subjectively feeling like we have free will isn't the same as objectively having it.

And if there was a god and he was allowing (in fact, causing) us to believe we had free will, when we actually didn't, would just create the situation where god had misled us.

I think the best way out is that we do have free will, but god isn't omniscient (if he exists at all).

[–] Lumisal@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

The second one just seems contradictory tbh, how can it be both?

Well that's the nature of paradoxes, isn't it? But paradox philosophy is a whole 'nother can of worms and a very long discussion in of itself, though you've probably encountered some examples before, such as this one:

The next sentence is true. The prior sentence is false.

It results in an endless loop. Contradictory, yes, yet both sentences still exist, and are sentences.

The third one is interesting - but subjectively feeling like we have free will isn't the same as objectively having it.

Yes, true, but the point of that third one is that the result would be the same in the sense that in both cases, humans believe they have free will, and therefore their actions are determined by that, whether or not that path was outlined beforehand by a being we cannot fathom / fully comprehend or not. The actions will still become as they are.

I've also heard this third argument combined a bit with the second one as an attempt to better make sense of the paradox (although by doing so, it's really not a paradox anymore), and that is that God knows all possible paths humans would take, but not necessarily which one / God made infinite path he knows the outcome of but we are free to pick which one we take.

This issue I have with that one is that it's no longer a truly full omniscient being at that point.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This s is where you have the argument that a supreme being might have set the universe in motion but deliberately does not interfere with the way it evolves. The conditions are as close to even as possible so things can go either way …. For an infinite number of decisions for an infinite time

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] remon@ani.social 28 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Yeah, that story has a lot of plot holes.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 15 points 3 days ago

Don’t try to apply reason/common sense/logic to ANY religion. You’ll end up with more questions than answers.

Besides, I was told that the point of the story was resisting temptation. God wanted to see if Adam and Eve could do that. Spoiler: they couldn’t.

[–] mech@feddit.org 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Why are there two different creation stories in the Bible? If Cain and Abel were the first sons of Adam and Eve, how could Cain come upon a city while he was wandering the earth? Why are there two conflicting versions of the Ten Commandments? Etc. Etc.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FreddiesLantern@leminal.space 11 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Aha! The question that has many pastors digging deep to get a good answer too. And usually they end up with the age old “mysterious ways”.

The “best” one is usually along the lines of: god wanted a relationship which involves choice and free will, so he had to create a division that would allow humankind to have a choice in the matter.

So god feels lonely, causes all misery on earth that ever was and ever will be. Because free will… On top of that he also ~~indirectly~~ (oh screw it, it’s god) directly causes eternal torture in the afterlife for a vast majority of humankind. Because also, free will (I keep stressing that because that in itself is a huge problem for theologians).

And then all that leads to god killing itself in the form of its own son. Because some of you touch your own genitalia in glee.

Genius.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›