Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So healthy families don't need police services, med services, schools, nursing homes, etc.???

---

You didn't read the link, did you and have no idea what that village consists of.

Quote:

---

Why won't it be the case most of the time?

---

Read Genesis 3.

Quote:

---

You didn't read the link, did you and have no idea what that village consists of.

---

I read your post and responded to it. You know, the one that said that healthy families don't need the village?

And this is from your link. Are you really saying that healthy families don't need these things? Did YOU read your own link?

"Here are some of the ways you can build your own village to raise a child.

• Teach kids to respect other adults.
• Build friendships.
• Encourage hobbies.
• Volunteer to carpool.
• Help out others.
• Organize a text chain.
• Deal with problems in person.
• Get to know your neighbors.
• Remember that everybody struggles."

Quote:

---

Read Genesis 3.

---

Why do you limit the effects of sin just to the family structure? Why not murder as well? "After all, we just have to get used to people getting murdered because, you know, there is that Genesis 3 thing." How about home invasions? Should we just get used to it? Rape? Lying? Child abuse? Wife beatings? Racism? Is "Genesis 3" your reply to all of the social pathologies of our time? Do you resist nothing? And for that matter, why doesn't Genesis 3 mean we should give up on hoping to strengthen the "village"?

YES, JL, we live in a fallen world and you just have to resign yourself to that fact, every sin imaginable will be committed , is being committed. You recall this is why Jesus came, to save us from ourselves because the law couldn't save us

Quote:

---

YES, JL, we live in a fallen world and you just have to resign yourself to that fact, every sin imaginable will be committed , is being committed. You recall this is why Jesus came, to save us from ourselves because the law couldn't save us

---

You raise your voice against social ills every week on this site. So does everyone else. Why haven't you decided to "resign yourself to that fact"?

It is one thing to know we live in a fallen world. It is entirely different to use that to accept and, even worse, justify the many evils that exist in the world. You guys can abandon the family if you want to. I had to deal with too many sad cases caused by, for the most part, absent or irresponsible dads, and sometimes moms as well. I am not about to abandon the field because of some feeble appeal to Genesis 3.

Obviously many stray from the good orderly path and fallen between the cracks and have to be dealt with in humane reasonable fashion. Sometimes it's through no fault of their own, but there are those that have no intention of following a good orderly path. maybe we deal with them more sternly but the challenge is knowing the difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You raise your voice against social ills every week on this site. So does everyone else. Why haven't you decided to "resign yourself to that fact"?

It is one thing to know we live in a fallen world. It is entirely different to use that to accept and, even worse, justify the many evils that exist in the world. You guys can abandon the family if you want to. I had to deal with too many sad cases caused by, for the most part, absent or irresponsible dads, and sometimes moms as well. I am not about to abandon the field because of some feeble appeal to Genesis 3.

---

I am resigned to the fact they exist, doesn't stop me seeking solutions, we don't deal with any absolute but one. I have never been guilty of abandoning my family despite many trials

Quote:

---

I am resigned to the fact they exist, doesn't stop me seeking solutions,

---

That I can agree with. WG treats Gen. 3 as a justification for any social oddity that she agrees with.

Quote:

---

we don't deal with any absolute but one.

---

There are a lot of absolutes.

Quote:

---

I have never been guilty of abandoning my family despite many trials

---

Thank God for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

That I can agree with. WG treats Gen. 3 as a justification for any social oddity that she agrees with.

---

Apparently, you've never read and fully understood Genesis 3. It's an allegory, btw.

Quote:

---

Apparently, you've never read and fully understood Genesis 3. It's an allegory, btw.

---

Jesus understood it to be literal. Perhaps you can correct Him about that.

Quote:

---

Jesus understood it to be literal. Perhaps you can correct Him about that.

---

No, but he understood the truth and the lesson in it.

Oh, and Cain and Abel were most likely twins.

Quote:

---

No, but he understood the truth and the lesson in it.

---

He spoke of Abel, Adam and Eve as literal people. You will need to correct Him on that.

Quote:

---

Oh, and Cain and Abel were most likely twins.

---

Cain and Abel were actually Remus and Romulus adapted to the OT. And they were some of the first liberal democrats.

Quote:

---

He spoke of Abel, Adam and Eve as literal people. You will need to correct Him on that.

---

He knew He had to; that was required when talking about "original sin". Same with Noah -- keep the allegory alive.

Quote:

---

He knew He had to; that was required when talking about "original sin". Same with Noah -- keep the allegory alive.

---

And you know this how? There certainly is no Bible reason to believe that, so how would you know such a thing?

Quote:

---

Cain and Abel were actually Remus and Romulus adapted to the OT. And they were some of the first liberal democrats.

---

No, no, no! Cain was the guy with the horned Viking helmet, storming the Capitol on January 6th. Abel was the one who helped AOC feed the beaten-down Texans after that devastating winter storm.

Quote:

---

And you know this how? There certainly is no Bible reason to believe that, so how would you know such a thing?

---

If Jesus, each time He told that story, had changed their names, e.g., to Fred and Ethel or Abelard and Heloise, His listeners wouldn't have understood what He was talking about, would have shaken their heads and walked away.

That just a rational excuse you use. It is nothing that even approaches evidence that you know what Jesus was talking about. If effect, you are saying he willingly lied.

Quote:

---

you are saying he willingly lied.

---

Lied about what? -- the lesson in Genesis 3?

No, but that those people actually existed. And that Abraham, Noah, and the many others in Genesis existed. And Paul and the other writers of the NT engaged in the same campaign of lying if what you say is true. It is simply an outrageous claim.

It would be so nice if you would learn the difference between mere conjecture versus actual supporting evidence. There is not so much as a whisper in the NT that Jesus was following the path you suggested. It is just guesswork on your part, and poor guesswork at that, which you engage in to try and validate you liberal orthodoxy.

Quote:

---

No, but that those people actually existed. And that Abraham, Noah, and the many others in Genesis existed. And Paul and the other writers of the NT engaged in the same campaign of lying if what you say is true. It is simply an outrageous claim.

---

Now you've added Abraham to your accusations. Why not go the whole nine yards and add Jesus too?

Did you ever tell traditional moralistic stories to your own kids or to your students? Did you change the names of the characters? If not, why not?

Quote:

---

to try and validate you liberal orthodoxy.

---

At least I'm not a literalist.

Quote:

---

Cain and Abel were actually Remus and Romulus adapted to the OT. And they were some of the first liberal democrats.

---

How about this explanation:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gkikBKW8vmQ

Quote:

---

At least I'm not a literalist.

---

You certainly are not. You really believe that your conjecture trumps the Bible. Jesus lied. Paul lied. The author of Hebrews lied. And how do we know that? Because WG said so!!