Eden / The concept of Original Sin
- Thread starter Dr. Dilznick
- Start date
madame_zora
Sexy Member
I'm pretty much in agreement with you Headbang8, I see the Bible as ONE of the sources for information on how we can live better and more productive lives, and the life of Jesus to be a great example, but not the only one. Persons of great humility and kindness are all inspirational to me, and though I could find minor flaw with any of them, what I know of their good deeds does light the way for me. If someone lacks the ability to recognise what is good separate from what is not, there is a bigger problem than lack of religion. Some people have emotional wiring that malfunctions and that is a problem I cannot solve, but I believe most of us are capable of knowing right from wrong in respect to how we treat others, and as for ourselves we are free to determine that to the best of our abilities.
I also agree with DMW in that it is of very little value to dissect the exact words of the Bible as if they were historical fact. Being that most of it is allegorical, you either get the concept or you don't. If you don't, there is no useful arguement that will make it make sense, they are not perfectly structured logical arguments. Stories to teach primitive people basic concepts will not hold up to close scrutiny, and that should be no surprise. Remember "Context Clues" when you were in elemantary school? They had us read stories and tell the three main ideas? You can only read the Bible like that, if you go digging deep for treasure that was never planted, you won't find any.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
The New Testament says that the wages of sin is death. The eating of the fruit was disobedience which is sin. Notice that in the story that Adam and Eve hid from God because they had disobeyed. That is central to the story. They feared God. Before the eating of the fruit, they weren't afraid of God and walked with him daily.
So sin, which is separation from God, entered the picture. And God did kick them out of the garden to keep them from living forever without any hope of redemption and there was implied punishment as well.
But as Jacinto said. this os am allegory passed down through the centures in oral traidoitnuntl until Moses had the Scribes write down all the stories which are called the Books for Moses by some people.
The other Creation story is about the creation of the world. The word day means a period of time and a week or 7 days is a number of completeness. And it is interesting that the order of evolution corresponds pretty much with the order of the crteation of the world in the Bible.
Now let us be realistic. Picture the scene some 1500 or so years before Christ was born. God tells Moses the complete story of how the world was created. I don't think we could handle the compete unabridged story now. There is too much we don't know now that would completely unnerve us. And I am sure that if we told the ancients what we know know they would have become totaly unnerved and wold not have come close to understanding it. But they could understand Creation as told in the "Garden Story" and the "Creation of the World in a Week" story.
I am quite sure the ancient story tellers knew that they were telling stories to explain things to the people who needed answers.
So there are these two stories. Timeless and wonderful. Wonderful as long as you know they are allegories. Wonderful to know that they try to tell the people of long ago how the world came about in a way they could understand amd believe.
Today we take those stories and decide what we think they meant to the people THEN. Then we take those same stories and decide what they can mean to us NOW.
The bottom line is about FAITH. Either you believe or you don't believe there is a God. It is not about proof. There is not enough evidence to prove the existence of
God to someone who does not wish to believe. On the other hand, there is not enough evidence to prove that there is no God for those who have faith that there is a God or Divine Creator.
I try to respect all beliefs. There is an eternal truth out there. We may not can figure it out completely, but there is eternal truth. We as humans can not change whatever the real truth about these matters are.
To emphatically declare that the other side is completely and totally wrong is to take the position of God. However, it doesn't mean that we are right. Someone is wrong. I suspect no one's theology is 100 % correct. There is some misunderstandng about supernatural and spiritua; things in all of us.
I kinow that I am not foolish enough to sit here at the keyboard and type out what I KNOW to be the complete universal truths and state without question that there is NO way I could be wrong.
That would be presumptive of me. That would also put in an a position of spouting some untruth as I am only human and not capable of being all knowing and always make the right decisins in what I do.
So sin, which is separation from God, entered the picture. And God did kick them out of the garden to keep them from living forever without any hope of redemption and there was implied punishment as well.
But as Jacinto said. this os am allegory passed down through the centures in oral traidoitnuntl until Moses had the Scribes write down all the stories which are called the Books for Moses by some people.
The other Creation story is about the creation of the world. The word day means a period of time and a week or 7 days is a number of completeness. And it is interesting that the order of evolution corresponds pretty much with the order of the crteation of the world in the Bible.
Now let us be realistic. Picture the scene some 1500 or so years before Christ was born. God tells Moses the complete story of how the world was created. I don't think we could handle the compete unabridged story now. There is too much we don't know now that would completely unnerve us. And I am sure that if we told the ancients what we know know they would have become totaly unnerved and wold not have come close to understanding it. But they could understand Creation as told in the "Garden Story" and the "Creation of the World in a Week" story.
I am quite sure the ancient story tellers knew that they were telling stories to explain things to the people who needed answers.
So there are these two stories. Timeless and wonderful. Wonderful as long as you know they are allegories. Wonderful to know that they try to tell the people of long ago how the world came about in a way they could understand amd believe.
Today we take those stories and decide what we think they meant to the people THEN. Then we take those same stories and decide what they can mean to us NOW.
The bottom line is about FAITH. Either you believe or you don't believe there is a God. It is not about proof. There is not enough evidence to prove the existence of
God to someone who does not wish to believe. On the other hand, there is not enough evidence to prove that there is no God for those who have faith that there is a God or Divine Creator.
I try to respect all beliefs. There is an eternal truth out there. We may not can figure it out completely, but there is eternal truth. We as humans can not change whatever the real truth about these matters are.
To emphatically declare that the other side is completely and totally wrong is to take the position of God. However, it doesn't mean that we are right. Someone is wrong. I suspect no one's theology is 100 % correct. There is some misunderstandng about supernatural and spiritua; things in all of us.
I kinow that I am not foolish enough to sit here at the keyboard and type out what I KNOW to be the complete universal truths and state without question that there is NO way I could be wrong.
That would be presumptive of me. That would also put in an a position of spouting some untruth as I am only human and not capable of being all knowing and always make the right decisins in what I do.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Freddie, it always comes back to the same thing. Even Socrates asserted that the only true knowledge comes from knowing we do not know. It never changes. We can make progress, and shame on us if we don't try- this is how the world evolves and grows, but to claim to have all the answers is the strongest form of stupidity available.
For that reason, I am a seeker. I believe the the quest for knowledge of Truth, knowing I will not reach attainment. This is the only position I could ever adopt without feeling like a complete fool. I try very hard to leave my mind open to the opinions and insights of others (if they are offered as such) but swiftly reject the preaching of canned memorised speeches of the unenlightened, delivered for the purpose of bringing shame. It is the intention I weigh before deciding how much weight to give an argument. If someone is interested in educating me further, I will listen eagerly! If they are only interested in telling me I'm wrong and they're right, I'm bored before it starts.
For that reason, I am a seeker. I believe the the quest for knowledge of Truth, knowing I will not reach attainment. This is the only position I could ever adopt without feeling like a complete fool. I try very hard to leave my mind open to the opinions and insights of others (if they are offered as such) but swiftly reject the preaching of canned memorised speeches of the unenlightened, delivered for the purpose of bringing shame. It is the intention I weigh before deciding how much weight to give an argument. If someone is interested in educating me further, I will listen eagerly! If they are only interested in telling me I'm wrong and they're right, I'm bored before it starts.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
Jana,
Thanks for your wonderful summation of what I was trying to say. I firmly believe there is eternal truth out there that is crystal clear and never changing. But the whole issue about humans is none of us is capable of completely understanding it or identifying it. We do the best we can.
And I agree very much with your last sentence. I gladly will enter dialogue with anyone who will be open minded. But as you say, "If they are only interested in telling me I'm wrong and they're right, I'm bored before it starts." And I'll add to that, I begin to shut down those valves that allow creative and openminded critical thinking as well. In reality there is no need to even have a conversation at all with someone who has all the answers and will not even listen to another idea or concept of what might be the truth. It is pointless.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Freddie, that is why I and so many of us here value the conversations we have here, it is the opportunity to learn that is of such great importance. Many times I have found someone else's way of looking at things to be advantageous to my own and that kind of growth is invaluable. I appreciate so much the input we get and give here. Sure we get into squabbles, but we tackle some pretty tough subjects too. Overall most of us come around to a place of mutual respect for each other's rights to hold our views, even if we can't respect the views themselves. This, I think, is the mark of maturity that makes possible greater learning and I treasure everyone who has contributed to mine.
GottaBigOne
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2004
- Posts
- 1,035
- Media
- 13
- Likes
- 255
- Points
- 303
- Age
- 42
- Location
- Dallas (Texas, United States)
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Ok, we so we are all in agreement that the creation story is just an allegory and shouldn't be taken literally. Then what is its value? It does put forth a few morals and makes some points that others in this post have alluded to i.e. that men are flawed and sin takes us further away from god, and these things must be taken as faith because they can not be proven. Again, what is the value of that? It all seems like bullshit to me, made up by primitive people who did not understand the world around them so why should we even have "faith" in what they say? Having such a limited amount of knowledge about the world (less so then we have now) I think they are much more likely to have gotten it wrong. For instance ancient peoples thought the world was flat and that the sun and stars revolved around it, we know now that to be false. We understand the nature of earthquakes, floods, drought, lightning and many other things which were once misunderstood by these ancient peoples as products of the actions of gods. If the creation myth makes any points at all, they all seem to be unsupportable, and dangerous. One poster stated that the creation myth explains that the flesh is evil, and pure spirit is what we should hope to attain one day. Man is flesh and therefore man is evil. The existence of spirits can not be shown to be true, the existence of the flesh is undeniable; the creation myth tells us to deny what we know for the sake of what we don't know; it asks us to abandon knowledge for ignorance, to hate urselves and revere what is not ourselves. Sure we have souls it says, but our flesh taints our souls and its near impossible for the flesh not to. Even Jesus who is said to lead a perfect life is guilty of sins in which he himself warns others of. I don't want to rifle through Matthew to find it, but there is a passage where he calls some people "fools" whereas he warned other not to do so, its also in psalms.
So we are asked to abhor our bodies and yearn for the attainment of becoming a ghost, and the only way to become one is to die sinless or forgiven. LIVING a happy life is not valued, DYING sinless is, if the two happen to coincide then fine, but LIFE is not what is valued, its death, the afterlife. We are asked to give up the only life we can be sure we have for the promise of an afterlife which we have no reason to believe is there except faith.
I personaly choose the life I know I have.
So we are asked to abhor our bodies and yearn for the attainment of becoming a ghost, and the only way to become one is to die sinless or forgiven. LIVING a happy life is not valued, DYING sinless is, if the two happen to coincide then fine, but LIFE is not what is valued, its death, the afterlife. We are asked to give up the only life we can be sure we have for the promise of an afterlife which we have no reason to believe is there except faith.
I personaly choose the life I know I have.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Well, this coming from me is kinda like "Confessions of an ex-fundie" because I was right there for almost ten years. Now, I can't unknow the things I learned in that world nor would I want to. Many of the lessons I learned were ones of moral fortitude, the joy of being "others focused", giving without expectation. I learned a good many lessons I have deleted from my living code, but to say that none of it was valuable would simply not be true.
While "God" to me may be the collection of spiritual capacity all humans share rather than a character with a face, I think I still believe in a power greater than myself. I am not ready to say I am the end all and be all in my own existance, but I do have the power to cast the deciding vote. Whether human beings are a delicate balance of electromagnetic waves whose spheres of influence overlap each other creating feelings of "like" and "dislike" similar to "attract" and "repel", or we are mystical beings created by a loving father for the purpose of family, well frankly I don't give a rat's ass. Yeah, I'll come out with it, I think God was created by Man in His own image to explain natural phenomena and for crowd control. That doesn't make me right, just my view. If I am wrong, and the Bible is literal and true, I will go to a place of separation from God and be burned. I can assure you that I am not quaking in fear, but if it happens, I'll suck it up like a big girl. I'll never be able to confirm or deny the existance of God, but the literal legitimacy of the Bible is easy enough to dispell. That being said, lessons of morality put there to teach the masses about how best to treat each other can be found. I can't dismiss the Bible as useless when I myself go there for clarity from time to time. I more often go to The Prophet, or various other sources, but the Bible has it's place in my reading list. Peanut's characters have some valuable insights on life if you are looking for them. If you are looking for nonsense, you will find that as well.
The only beliefs I dismiss as stupid are the ones by people claiming to be sure. Anyone seeking to understand their world and God I can live harmoniously beside, after all we'll never know who is closer to actual reality, or if we are both very far off the mark.
While "God" to me may be the collection of spiritual capacity all humans share rather than a character with a face, I think I still believe in a power greater than myself. I am not ready to say I am the end all and be all in my own existance, but I do have the power to cast the deciding vote. Whether human beings are a delicate balance of electromagnetic waves whose spheres of influence overlap each other creating feelings of "like" and "dislike" similar to "attract" and "repel", or we are mystical beings created by a loving father for the purpose of family, well frankly I don't give a rat's ass. Yeah, I'll come out with it, I think God was created by Man in His own image to explain natural phenomena and for crowd control. That doesn't make me right, just my view. If I am wrong, and the Bible is literal and true, I will go to a place of separation from God and be burned. I can assure you that I am not quaking in fear, but if it happens, I'll suck it up like a big girl. I'll never be able to confirm or deny the existance of God, but the literal legitimacy of the Bible is easy enough to dispell. That being said, lessons of morality put there to teach the masses about how best to treat each other can be found. I can't dismiss the Bible as useless when I myself go there for clarity from time to time. I more often go to The Prophet, or various other sources, but the Bible has it's place in my reading list. Peanut's characters have some valuable insights on life if you are looking for them. If you are looking for nonsense, you will find that as well.
The only beliefs I dismiss as stupid are the ones by people claiming to be sure. Anyone seeking to understand their world and God I can live harmoniously beside, after all we'll never know who is closer to actual reality, or if we are both very far off the mark.
GottaBigOne
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2004
- Posts
- 1,035
- Media
- 13
- Likes
- 255
- Points
- 303
- Age
- 42
- Location
- Dallas (Texas, United States)
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Are you SURE about that??
[post=318170]Quoted post[/post]
[/b][/quote]Yes! Very sure! Now bow down before me and worship me lest I beat you with my spike heels!
I am sure that I am unsure, despite my ava with exposed armpits.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
GotaBigOne,
All I ask is respect for my beliefs, not acceptance. That is a personal choice. I long time ago said that I respect your right to beieve what you choose to believe.
And I said that no one has the authoriy to tell someone else they are wrong. By the word authority I mean the power to state with uncertainty and have the clout and proof to back it up.
Believe in the Bible and God is a personal choice and is based on two things Faith whch is belief in something you can not prove to be true and grace. Grace is getting something you don't deserve as in humans are favored by God even though we don't deserve it.
To understand the Bible requires an understanding from start to finish and a knowledge of the basic concepts being taught there. You commented about the validity of the Bible. I believe the basic concepts are true.
It comes down to what you choose to believe. We don't always make the same choices.
All I ask is respect for my beliefs, not acceptance. That is a personal choice. I long time ago said that I respect your right to beieve what you choose to believe.
And I said that no one has the authoriy to tell someone else they are wrong. By the word authority I mean the power to state with uncertainty and have the clout and proof to back it up.
Believe in the Bible and God is a personal choice and is based on two things Faith whch is belief in something you can not prove to be true and grace. Grace is getting something you don't deserve as in humans are favored by God even though we don't deserve it.
To understand the Bible requires an understanding from start to finish and a knowledge of the basic concepts being taught there. You commented about the validity of the Bible. I believe the basic concepts are true.
It comes down to what you choose to believe. We don't always make the same choices.
One of the major morals of the Eden story is one not yet mentioned: culpability. Adam and Eve ate of the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, but as they gained this knowledge, with it came culpability. One cannot commit actual sin without knowing it. If realises that his intentions are wrong, yet follows through with them, sin has been committed. Yet man has gained some hope as well: with knowledge came conscience. Through proper use of conscience, one can avoid distancing himself from God to a certain extent. No man is free from sin, and that is part of the point of the story. Flesh is weak, and we are flesh, but we are not abandoned.
Oh, but no! That is the mistake the Gnostics made. Flesh is not evil, it is our natural state. Though it may be an imperfect state. . . a weakness . . . it is part of our journey. Man is not evil, but individual men can be corrupted. That's why we have consciences: they establish our moral codes. If we follow our convictions, we prove the good that we can be.
Krueger: Yay. My area of expertise.
Man was going to age by time, and he'd mature physically, but he would not approach death by doing so. Presently, aging leads to death because the body's cells have a limited number of divisions, so as you grow and your cells divide, or as you get injured and cells reproduce to repair the damage, you use up the number of divisions the cells have left. the inabilty to continue to divide causes a lot of things, like wrinkles in old skin, and death by natural causes. It is even stated in the Bible that once we are born we begin to die. Mildly depressing, eh?
Anyway, the generally accepted idea as to the purpose of the tree is free will. God gave man (and later woman) paradise on the grounds that they would follow his one command and basically live in a blissful stat ignorant of the faults of their actions. If there were no tree, man would practically be forced to forever remain in this ignorant state. By offering the tree, man had a choice: he could continue on in his present way of life, or he could live a life full of sacrifice and pain BUT he would no longer be ignorant (plus, he would momentarily have the pleasure of eating the fruit). God obviously wanted the best for his creatures and so commanded the avoidance of the fruit, but Satan had other plans. Just because something happens doesn't mean it is something God likes. Therefore not all catastrophe is his desire. I suppose he knew what would happen, but he had the plan to send His Son worked out already anyway, and I suppose he just didn't like the idea of a forced obedience more than he disliked the idea of a chosen disobedience. After all, if it's forced, is there really devotion? By having the ability to choose disobedience, it requires devotion now to be obedient.
The reason the God cast Adam and Eve from the Garden was not so that they would die. They were going to die once they touched the fruit. He kicked them out specifically so that they would not change their fate and live forever. Adam and Eve had just gained a very godlike quality with their newly acquired knowledge. Now if they lived forever, they might become even more likely to turn to corruption in their state of elevated power. Also, they were told they were going to die and death would be their punishment. To uphold both God's truth and authority, this had to remain true, and so the one thing that could prevent their death, eating of the tree of life, had to be prevented.
Also, Adam and Eve may not have known about good and evil before eating the fruit, but they were commanded against it AND warned of consequences beforehand. It would be these things that they would use to convince themselves (or not, sadly) to stay away from the tree.
Woo. long post. Hope it was helpful...if you read it all.
Man was going to age by time, and he'd mature physically, but he would not approach death by doing so. Presently, aging leads to death because the body's cells have a limited number of divisions, so as you grow and your cells divide, or as you get injured and cells reproduce to repair the damage, you use up the number of divisions the cells have left. the inabilty to continue to divide causes a lot of things, like wrinkles in old skin, and death by natural causes. It is even stated in the Bible that once we are born we begin to die. Mildly depressing, eh?
Anyway, the generally accepted idea as to the purpose of the tree is free will. God gave man (and later woman) paradise on the grounds that they would follow his one command and basically live in a blissful stat ignorant of the faults of their actions. If there were no tree, man would practically be forced to forever remain in this ignorant state. By offering the tree, man had a choice: he could continue on in his present way of life, or he could live a life full of sacrifice and pain BUT he would no longer be ignorant (plus, he would momentarily have the pleasure of eating the fruit). God obviously wanted the best for his creatures and so commanded the avoidance of the fruit, but Satan had other plans. Just because something happens doesn't mean it is something God likes. Therefore not all catastrophe is his desire. I suppose he knew what would happen, but he had the plan to send His Son worked out already anyway, and I suppose he just didn't like the idea of a forced obedience more than he disliked the idea of a chosen disobedience. After all, if it's forced, is there really devotion? By having the ability to choose disobedience, it requires devotion now to be obedient.
The reason the God cast Adam and Eve from the Garden was not so that they would die. They were going to die once they touched the fruit. He kicked them out specifically so that they would not change their fate and live forever. Adam and Eve had just gained a very godlike quality with their newly acquired knowledge. Now if they lived forever, they might become even more likely to turn to corruption in their state of elevated power. Also, they were told they were going to die and death would be their punishment. To uphold both God's truth and authority, this had to remain true, and so the one thing that could prevent their death, eating of the tree of life, had to be prevented.
Also, Adam and Eve may not have known about good and evil before eating the fruit, but they were commanded against it AND warned of consequences beforehand. It would be these things that they would use to convince themselves (or not, sadly) to stay away from the tree.
Woo. long post. Hope it was helpful...if you read it all.
GottaBigOne
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2004
- Posts
- 1,035
- Media
- 13
- Likes
- 255
- Points
- 303
- Age
- 42
- Location
- Dallas (Texas, United States)
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
The problem with holding adam and eve accountable for eating of the tree of knowledge even if they were commanded not to is that they didn't even know that they SHOULD obey God, disobeying God would have been just as "good" to them.
There is a staggering problem with the idea that without knowledge of good and evil men live in paradise. It is basically champoining ignorance which as DMW said is a bad thing, since conscience is a good thing. It is a big contradiction to say that free will is good, but gaining free will is punishable by death. If this was part of God's plan, and he is all powerful why not create men with this knowledge in the first place and not punish him?
Freddie: I do respect your right to believe whatever you want, but respect does not mean agreement or silence. I believe that a lot of aspects of some of the christian faith is wrong and dare I say "evil." I wouldn't expect you to remain silent if confronted by such a thing so don't expect me to. To me thats like saying "I have a belief that white people are the superior race and every other race should be eliminated from the face of the earth, you must respect that belief." I'm sorry but I won't respect that belief. I will respect that person's right to hold it, but I will not give any respect to the belief itself. Anything I say regarding christianity is not a personall attack on you, at least I don;t intend it to be. I understand that it may be insulting to you if I insult your religious beliefs, and I apologize for that, but I will not stop voicing my opinion about christianity. Just know that I mean nothing personal by it.
There is a staggering problem with the idea that without knowledge of good and evil men live in paradise. It is basically champoining ignorance which as DMW said is a bad thing, since conscience is a good thing. It is a big contradiction to say that free will is good, but gaining free will is punishable by death. If this was part of God's plan, and he is all powerful why not create men with this knowledge in the first place and not punish him?
Freddie: I do respect your right to believe whatever you want, but respect does not mean agreement or silence. I believe that a lot of aspects of some of the christian faith is wrong and dare I say "evil." I wouldn't expect you to remain silent if confronted by such a thing so don't expect me to. To me thats like saying "I have a belief that white people are the superior race and every other race should be eliminated from the face of the earth, you must respect that belief." I'm sorry but I won't respect that belief. I will respect that person's right to hold it, but I will not give any respect to the belief itself. Anything I say regarding christianity is not a personall attack on you, at least I don;t intend it to be. I understand that it may be insulting to you if I insult your religious beliefs, and I apologize for that, but I will not stop voicing my opinion about christianity. Just know that I mean nothing personal by it.
Krueger, please try and read Genesis without all the Christian presuppositions. Clear your mind of what you hear everyday at church and read the text. Unless you plan on showing that they were NOT going to die at some undisclosed point in time before they ate the fruit, this argument ends here. Scriptural evidence that they were immortal before the fall needs to be presented.
If you're going to take the tree to be the knowledge of good and evil, essentially of right and wrong, how are you going to tell someone it's wrong to eat from it and have them comprehend something they have no concept of? If you have no moral compass, then someone laying down a moral directive is a fucking lock to get you lost. There was no trepidation about partaking of the fruit on their part because of this and regret only came, not after the consequence of God's punishment, but after the eating, because they then knew what right/wrong, good/evil was.
If you're going to take the tree to be the knowledge of good and evil, essentially of right and wrong, how are you going to tell someone it's wrong to eat from it and have them comprehend something they have no concept of? If you have no moral compass, then someone laying down a moral directive is a fucking lock to get you lost. There was no trepidation about partaking of the fruit on their part because of this and regret only came, not after the consequence of God's punishment, but after the eating, because they then knew what right/wrong, good/evil was.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
To: GotaBigOne:
Of course I don't want to limit your power of free speech. But on the other hand when you say that parts of Christianity are evil, I would take that to mean that you would consider my believing them to be part of that evil. Keep in mind, that while you have that freedom to state your beliefs, there are consequences for everything you or I say or do. If you truly believe Christianity to be at least partly evil taints me as being evil as well. While you do respect my belief to believe in Chrisianiy, you limit the abiliy for us to be the best of friends when the basis of the friendship is that I am "evil" by my beliefs in a system which you consier "evil."
Now there are many Christians who believe that all non Christians are evil. I am not in that group.
Yes you have the right to voice your opinion. And thanks for apoligizing for any insutling that I might feel. And yes, when someone says that the core of my beliefs is evil, I take it to mean that it means I am evil as well. I am having problems with separateing the two situations.
I am aware that the literalist Christians believe that you are going to hell in a handbasket and will burn in intense pain for ever and ever. I find that a bit insulting. Don't worry some of them think I will be in hell with you. I am not a member of "their" church. If you are not a member of "their" church, get ready to burn.
There are some things that I would declare evil. Very much so. I just don't see any thing that is part of mainline Christian thought that is basically evo;/
To All:
of the Bible are factual. It is obvious to my from the style of the stories that the creation stories are indeed allegories. As such there is not need t nicpic themmatic material and detail to death. Now for those who believe in a literal translation, that changes things a lot, a whole lot. But for those who see it as a story, the need is to look at the overarching story. It is quite simple:
1. God created human beings with a choice
2. Humans make foolish choices
3. God punishes humans by removing them from the 'perfect" garden.
4. In both Jewish and Christian theologies God provides ways for humans to restore the relatoinship God once had with man.
Dr. D,
For those who believe the story is an allegory, the point as to who is the serpent does not require an answer. It is true that some literalists believe that the serpent and the devel are the same personality. I do not fall in that line of thinking. The serpent along with most of the characters in the Adam and Eve story is a fiction character in an allegory and should remain fictictoius as the whole story is not factual to begin with.
Dr. D
As a Christian, I do think you have a point. The Old Testament must be read from the eyes of the people then after a complete understanding of what it meant to them.
Then we can read it through the eyes of Christianity and Christian thought. I don't see a problem reading it thorugh the eys of Christianity provided we read it first throught the culture of the people in which the story originated.
To GotaBigOne,
It is true that all who have posted on this thread believe the Adam and Eve story is just an allegory. However, there are vast numbers of people who believe it to be a factual story. We don't have to agree with them, but we have to acknowledge they exist because they do.
Had my little discussoin with them here in this little southern town. But then some of them believe the earth is less than 5000 years old. Yes, you read correclty. They knwo the exact age of the earth and the day it was created. Yeah, try discusing this intelligently with them. You will be glad to get back to discussing this with Catholics and mainline Protestant Christians.
To Jacinoto:
Thanks for bringing up culpability. It is essential to the story.
I think I coverred all the points made since I last posted. I respect each of you posting because each of you and me is trying to understand the beliefs of the others. We don't have to come to agreement. I do think that it is better if we know why people believe what they believe. It makes it easier to understand each other and with true understanding comes thee possibility of peace here on earrth.
Of course I don't want to limit your power of free speech. But on the other hand when you say that parts of Christianity are evil, I would take that to mean that you would consider my believing them to be part of that evil. Keep in mind, that while you have that freedom to state your beliefs, there are consequences for everything you or I say or do. If you truly believe Christianity to be at least partly evil taints me as being evil as well. While you do respect my belief to believe in Chrisianiy, you limit the abiliy for us to be the best of friends when the basis of the friendship is that I am "evil" by my beliefs in a system which you consier "evil."
Now there are many Christians who believe that all non Christians are evil. I am not in that group.
Yes you have the right to voice your opinion. And thanks for apoligizing for any insutling that I might feel. And yes, when someone says that the core of my beliefs is evil, I take it to mean that it means I am evil as well. I am having problems with separateing the two situations.
I am aware that the literalist Christians believe that you are going to hell in a handbasket and will burn in intense pain for ever and ever. I find that a bit insulting. Don't worry some of them think I will be in hell with you. I am not a member of "their" church. If you are not a member of "their" church, get ready to burn.
There are some things that I would declare evil. Very much so. I just don't see any thing that is part of mainline Christian thought that is basically evo;/
To All:
of the Bible are factual. It is obvious to my from the style of the stories that the creation stories are indeed allegories. As such there is not need t nicpic themmatic material and detail to death. Now for those who believe in a literal translation, that changes things a lot, a whole lot. But for those who see it as a story, the need is to look at the overarching story. It is quite simple:
1. God created human beings with a choice
2. Humans make foolish choices
3. God punishes humans by removing them from the 'perfect" garden.
4. In both Jewish and Christian theologies God provides ways for humans to restore the relatoinship God once had with man.
Dr. D,
For those who believe the story is an allegory, the point as to who is the serpent does not require an answer. It is true that some literalists believe that the serpent and the devel are the same personality. I do not fall in that line of thinking. The serpent along with most of the characters in the Adam and Eve story is a fiction character in an allegory and should remain fictictoius as the whole story is not factual to begin with.
Dr. D
As a Christian, I do think you have a point. The Old Testament must be read from the eyes of the people then after a complete understanding of what it meant to them.
Then we can read it through the eyes of Christianity and Christian thought. I don't see a problem reading it thorugh the eys of Christianity provided we read it first throught the culture of the people in which the story originated.
To GotaBigOne,
It is true that all who have posted on this thread believe the Adam and Eve story is just an allegory. However, there are vast numbers of people who believe it to be a factual story. We don't have to agree with them, but we have to acknowledge they exist because they do.
Had my little discussoin with them here in this little southern town. But then some of them believe the earth is less than 5000 years old. Yes, you read correclty. They knwo the exact age of the earth and the day it was created. Yeah, try discusing this intelligently with them. You will be glad to get back to discussing this with Catholics and mainline Protestant Christians.
To Jacinoto:
Thanks for bringing up culpability. It is essential to the story.
I think I coverred all the points made since I last posted. I respect each of you posting because each of you and me is trying to understand the beliefs of the others. We don't have to come to agreement. I do think that it is better if we know why people believe what they believe. It makes it easier to understand each other and with true understanding comes thee possibility of peace here on earrth.
Krueger: To the idea that Adam and Eve would have no idea that disobeying God's one command would be wrong, all right, but they would still know it was bad by knowing that they did not want to die and eating the fruit would cause death.
That death is spiritual death: the separation of the souls of men from holiness and the need for salvation for redemption. Looking back, I can't find any evidence that Adam and Eve weren't going to physically die some time anyway, and I suppose it makes sense that they would. That doesn't really mean much of anything though because the "you will surely die" wasn't referring to physical death. If it referred to that, then Adam and Eve would not have lived as long as they did.
The serpent is never directly stated in the Bible to be Satan to the best of my memory, however, you can get from Scripture that it is. The discussion of the offspring of the woman crushing the serpent's head while the serpent strikes (or in some translations, bruises) his heel is in reference to God's promise to send his send for the forgiveness of all sins. Satan will strike Jesus's heal by the suffering he endures on the cross and temptation throughout life, but Jesus will crush the head of the serpent by living a holy life, dying on the cross to redeem all those who shall believe in him, and ascending from death and hell to life and later to heaven.
That death is spiritual death: the separation of the souls of men from holiness and the need for salvation for redemption. Looking back, I can't find any evidence that Adam and Eve weren't going to physically die some time anyway, and I suppose it makes sense that they would. That doesn't really mean much of anything though because the "you will surely die" wasn't referring to physical death. If it referred to that, then Adam and Eve would not have lived as long as they did.
The serpent is never directly stated in the Bible to be Satan to the best of my memory, however, you can get from Scripture that it is. The discussion of the offspring of the woman crushing the serpent's head while the serpent strikes (or in some translations, bruises) his heel is in reference to God's promise to send his send for the forgiveness of all sins. Satan will strike Jesus's heal by the suffering he endures on the cross and temptation throughout life, but Jesus will crush the head of the serpent by living a holy life, dying on the cross to redeem all those who shall believe in him, and ascending from death and hell to life and later to heaven.
All we know is that the serpent was evil. It says no such thing as "the Devil/Lucifer/Satan spoke through the serpent." It says something along the lines "of all the beast, the serpent was the most cunning," meaning that this was not an uncommon behavior. To make such an opinion on a creature means that there was a history of cunningness.
Also this is God. You think the omniscient, all knowing being would not know that this was "the fallen angel." If so, can God be fooled? Doesn't add up Krueger. And Satan's a complicated figure. See, he's banished from heaven, cast out; the morningstar falling from the heavens and all, and then, check Job...he's back up in the house to place bets with God over Job's fate.
I might as well address this here as well:
Would it be better to phrase it as "...for at that time you will certainly sign your own death warrant"? Dealing with the Scripture in translation is dodgy at best. Hebrew has many peculiarities that we don't have to deal with in English, and as a result, much of the character of Hebrew expression is lost. Yôm meant 'day', but it also meant an 'unspecified period of time.
[/b][/quote]
[translation: I'm going to blame translation]
This all ties into context and in this context there is little doubt what "yom" refers to ("yom," being the standard Hebrew word for "day," as you know) The serpent told Eve she wouldn't die for eating the fruit, and God said they would die the "day" they ate it. What you're saying is that by "day" God meant ~930 years, and that the serpent was lying because they didn't live forever. Both of those assumptions are contrary to context. See also the 7 Day Theory: the day-era idea is one method used by creation "scientists," and I suppose it's as good as any of their arguments.
Also this is God. You think the omniscient, all knowing being would not know that this was "the fallen angel." If so, can God be fooled? Doesn't add up Krueger. And Satan's a complicated figure. See, he's banished from heaven, cast out; the morningstar falling from the heavens and all, and then, check Job...he's back up in the house to place bets with God over Job's fate.
Please explain yourself.
I might as well address this here as well:
Would it be better to phrase it as "...for at that time you will certainly sign your own death warrant"? Dealing with the Scripture in translation is dodgy at best. Hebrew has many peculiarities that we don't have to deal with in English, and as a result, much of the character of Hebrew expression is lost. Yôm meant 'day', but it also meant an 'unspecified period of time.
[/b][/quote]
[translation: I'm going to blame translation]
This all ties into context and in this context there is little doubt what "yom" refers to ("yom," being the standard Hebrew word for "day," as you know) The serpent told Eve she wouldn't die for eating the fruit, and God said they would die the "day" they ate it. What you're saying is that by "day" God meant ~930 years, and that the serpent was lying because they didn't live forever. Both of those assumptions are contrary to context. See also the 7 Day Theory: the day-era idea is one method used by creation "scientists," and I suppose it's as good as any of their arguments.
Krueger: the "not referring to physical death" sentence is explained two sentences before, saying that the "you shall surely die" was spiritual death: they lost their holiness. if you look at the death God warned the two about as this spiritual death, then they "on that day" passage makes sense. Their holiness would have been lost instantly.
Also, i don't believe the Bible specifically does call that serpent the devil, but it is to be picked up from God's talk with Adam and Eve promising the coming of a savior.
God cannot be fooled. He knew what was going to happen. It was an inevitability of giving human kind the right to choose. He could have prevented it, but we would have to sacrifice human free will.
Satan is a weird cases. Y'know, I recently got me to thinking that I know of no Bible verse where it says that Satan rules over hell. The Revelations verses prophesying his imprisonment there would seem to suggest that he'd suffer the same torments as the rest of the damned. But seeing as how Revelations doesn't say he'll be locked up there until the judgemement time, i think maybe he's just an outcast "walking to and fro upon the earth" like he says in Job.
As a sidenote i always wondered about the length of days at creation. The yom thing is wonderful. I find stuff that has to do with the Hebrew fascinating.
Also, i don't believe the Bible specifically does call that serpent the devil, but it is to be picked up from God's talk with Adam and Eve promising the coming of a savior.
God cannot be fooled. He knew what was going to happen. It was an inevitability of giving human kind the right to choose. He could have prevented it, but we would have to sacrifice human free will.
Satan is a weird cases. Y'know, I recently got me to thinking that I know of no Bible verse where it says that Satan rules over hell. The Revelations verses prophesying his imprisonment there would seem to suggest that he'd suffer the same torments as the rest of the damned. But seeing as how Revelations doesn't say he'll be locked up there until the judgemement time, i think maybe he's just an outcast "walking to and fro upon the earth" like he says in Job.
As a sidenote i always wondered about the length of days at creation. The yom thing is wonderful. I find stuff that has to do with the Hebrew fascinating.
