Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Philosophical ramblings on the Adam & Eve Parable
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 31 of 80 (269013)
12-13-2005 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by jaywill
12-13-2005 8:59 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Is the title of the post in question not "Theology Questions ...?"
It might be better described as "... for Carico."
... could you please tell me what you think about the following New Testament passage
I think it doesn't have to do with the Adam and Eve story.

What shall it profit a nation if it gain the whole world, yet lose its own soul.
(paraphrasing Mark 8:36)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 8:59 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 9:30 PM nwr has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1971 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 32 of 80 (269020)
12-13-2005 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by nwr
12-13-2005 9:17 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
NWR,
It might be better described as "... for Carico."
Then my reply was not a chat to the posting party but a reply for discussion to those participating in the general discussion.
Besides, the whole Discussion is on "Philsophical Ramblings," is it not? And I know you won't deny me that I am doing THAT!
I think it doesn't have to do with the Adam and Eve story.
You don't think that that Ephesian passage has anything to do with the Adam and Eve story ???
But he quotes the story. How could it not have anything to do with it?
Also the whole book of Ephesians is on God's eternal purpose (1:11; 1:9; 3:11).
And the first husband and wife were Adam and his wife.
And the references to the church being the Body of the bridegroom and Savior Christ are clear parellels to the story of Adam and Eve.
Granted, some of the things I originally wrote are not found developed in the Ephesian passage. But it is based on the theme of the first couple.
I also would encurage you to read the first two chapters of the Bible and compare them with the last two chapters of the Bible - Genesis 1,2 with Revelation 21,22. See how many parellel mentioning of symbols you can detect.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:32 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:33 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 9:17 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 9:43 PM jaywill has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 33 of 80 (269023)
12-13-2005 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by jaywill
12-13-2005 9:30 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Besides, the whole Discussion is on "Philsophical Ramblings," is it not?
Then you really should change the subtitle.
As a general comment, you are over-using boldface in your posts. Too much boldface is quite distracting. It should be used sparingly.
You don't think that that Ephesian passage has anything to do with the Adam and Eve story ???
But he quotes the story. How could it not have anything to do with it?
I saw no reference to the Adam and Eve story in the copy of Ephesians 5 that I examined.
I also would encurage you to read the first two chapters of the Bible and compare them ...
I would encourage you to stop preaching to me. This is a discussion forum, not a pulpit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 9:30 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 12:01 AM nwr has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1971 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 34 of 80 (269082)
12-14-2005 12:01 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by nwr
12-13-2005 9:43 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
NWR,
I'm here. I'm posting. I'm participating. And you can whine all you want that I shouldn't be here. But I'm here.
So stop hinting that I should go away.
And if you can't see the direct quotation of Paul to Genesis then you must have eyes to see but see not. I said he quoted the story.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-14-2005 12:02 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 9:43 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by nwr, posted 12-14-2005 12:08 AM jaywill has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 35 of 80 (269090)
12-14-2005 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by jaywill
12-14-2005 12:01 AM


off topic comment
So stop hinting that I should go away.
There was no such hint.
There was a suggestion that you change your writing style so that you don't come across as preaching.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 12:01 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 12:21 AM nwr has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1971 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 36 of 80 (269091)
12-14-2005 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by nwr
12-14-2005 12:08 AM


Re: off topic comment
There was a suggestion that you change your writing style so that you don't come across as preaching.
To much bold face? I'll think about it.
And sorry if you feel that you never had anything worth telling anybody.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by nwr, posted 12-14-2005 12:08 AM nwr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by ringo, posted 12-14-2005 12:53 AM jaywill has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 37 of 80 (269101)
12-14-2005 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by jaywill
12-14-2005 12:21 AM


jaywill writes:
... sorry if you feel that you never had anything worth telling anybody.
Whatever you have to say would have a lot more impact if you would tell it in much, much smaller doses.
And you could actually respond to other posters instead of just charging ahead. With your current style, I doubt that more than two or three people are actually reading you.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 12:21 AM jaywill has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 38 of 80 (269130)
12-14-2005 5:40 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by jaywill
12-13-2005 7:46 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Jaywill,
Thank you for your answer. And I apologize to you in advance for what I am about to do. But, being a Christian, you probably know all about sacrifice and therefore shouldn't mind. Think of it as for the greater good and all that. My ways are often mysterious and seldom agreeable. Actually, I am a bit like God in that respect, so if you don't understand my point, that's OK. God and I are used to that.
Now, please turn around and bend over.
jaywill writes:
I don't answer for al Creationists.
Exactly. That's one point proven: "many creationists tell different stories, they cannot agree on many things"
Only what came out of Adam could return to Adam.
Strike two. More perversity.
The one became two and then the two became one again.
OK, so the Bible and arithmetic are not compatible. That's strike three: "Their stories are full of contradictions, and it is an oxymoron."
The putting of Adam to sleep was a type of Christ's death on the cross to accomplish salvation.
God hadn't even completed his creation yet, and he was already thinking about salvation? Bit of a short term planner, was he?
The blood was for redemption from sin. The water signified that He released the divine life that He embodied. The redemption in His blood and this imparting of the life which He embodied produces the new testament church. The believers in Christ are redeemed by His blood and regenerated by His life - that is born of God.
Why all the hidden meanings, symbology and small print? Is he also a lawyer or something?
The New Jerusalem is the enlarged Wife and Bride constituted with both the Old Testament saints and the New Testament saints.
Well, small wonder God is such a moody character. I mean, imagine: you come home from a hard day's work creating, say, malaria, and what do you find, bulging all over the couch? An enlarged wife. Yeah, I'd be pretty pissed off too, in an I-am-going-to-flood-the-whole-fucking-world kind of way.
The One became two. And then the two became one.
Yes, yes, you've said that already. Anyway, you start with one, and you end up with one. So what's the point?
It is a very profound thing that you have touched on.
Like I said, I've been misunderstood before. It's no big deal.
Your other remarks seem to be somewhat in jest. I may be wrong.
You're not. I suggest that before you study God, you study Carico.
This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 14-Dec-2005 11:00 AM

"Also, all signatures should be done away with if lasting for more than one week. Ok, two weeks." - Robin Rohan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 7:46 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 9:25 AM Parasomnium has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1971 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 39 of 80 (269152)
12-14-2005 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Parasomnium
12-14-2005 5:40 AM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Sorry,
I was looking for a public discussion where I could participate in some Philosophical Ramblings on the Adam and Eve Parable.
Wrong Discussion apparently.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Parasomnium, posted 12-14-2005 5:40 AM Parasomnium has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by AdminNWR, posted 12-14-2005 9:47 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 42 by Phat, posted 12-16-2005 8:31 AM jaywill has replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 80 (269159)
12-14-2005 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by jaywill
12-14-2005 9:25 AM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
was looking for a public discussion where I could participate in some Philosophical Ramblings on the Adam and Eve Parable.
Wrong Discussion apparently.
The topic (thread) was fine for this.
The particular subthread started by Parasomnium's post was a poor choice.
This could have replied to the OP Message 1, or you could hit the "Gen Reply" button so that you are not responding to any specific post.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 9:25 AM jaywill has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 41 of 80 (269603)
12-15-2005 8:28 AM


parable of A&E
I received a POTM for my take on the A&E parable, and I guess I'd like to run it up the flagpole again in this thread. I'll make it shorter and to the point.
It is not a literal statement, and neither is it a discussion of how humans were tested and so became sinful.
To me it is a fable showing that the end of happiness in life is pretense to knowledge of good and evil. That is when humans play god, and judge the world based on their own criteria, rather than simply living and accepting the world as it is.
Everything in life is made worse and eternal life would be just a greater extension of hell. One truly loses paradise.
I think the elements for this interpretation are clear enough, but I can go through it again if people want.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18350
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 42 of 80 (269936)
12-16-2005 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by jaywill
12-14-2005 9:25 AM


An Invitation for Jaywill
jaywill writes:
I was looking for a public discussion where I could participate in some Philosophical Ramblings on the Adam and Eve Parable.
OK. I am the thread starter. Lets discuss what you have to say and what I have to respond and maybe we can arrive at a consensus, or at the very least an understanding.
Now....before you and I can discuss philosophy or theology, we have to get to know each other.
There are three basic levels involved in a relationship.
1) Knowing about someone.
2) Meeting someone.
3) Knowing someone.
You and I are at the first level right now. We know about each other through reading each others posts. If I may, allow me to attempt to remain on topic here and guide this thread along by going back, re-reading the thread, and attempting to summarize the topic the way that I see it.
summary 1 : covering the main points briefly : concise 2 : done without delay or formality <~ punishment> syn terse, succinct, laconic summarily \()se-mer-e-le, se-me-re-le\ adv
*****************************************************************
deerbreh,in message#7 writes:
How could a loving God say "Well here is what you can do but by the way, there is a tree over here that has wonderful fruit that you must not eat." Did'nt Jesus suggest in the Lord's prayer that God isn't in the business of tempting us? "Lead us not into temptation" doesn't seem to jive with "forbidden fruit."
robinrohan writes:
The story of the Fall was a way of explaining the discrepancy between the real and the ideal.
nwr,in post#10 writes:
To me, the idea behind the story is that man was created biologically as an animal (an ape, just as the theory of evolution would say). What differentiates man from ape is not biology, it is that man has knowledge of good and evil. The eating of forbidden fruit is simply a metaphor to account for this distinction.
IMO the conclusion is not that we are sinful due to Adam's mistake. Rather, it is that we know good from evil, and hence cannot use ignorance as a way to deny our sinfulness. Since an innocent baby does not know good from evil, that baby is indeed innocent.
Philosophers sometimes refer to "the principle of charity". The principle is that, when reading what somebody has written, one should attempt to understand it in a way that is charitable to the author. Here, "charitable" is intended to imply that the text as interpreted makes sense as rational argument or choice by the author.
In reading the Adam and Eve story, I think we should read it in a way that is appropriately charitable toward God.
robinrohan,in post#11 writes:
There are 2 laws: "The law of nature" and the "law of grace."
The law of nature is the original covenant between God and Man apparently ("given to man in the estate of innocence") and coresponds, I believe, to the Calvinist "Covenant of Works." The second law is the Covenant of Grace (Christ's sacrifice).
Adam and Eve, the Bible suggests, did not know good and evil. However(...) they had a set of rules called the "law of nature"--which sounds like something innate. They had a moral system and, not only that, this system is still in some sense operable. It's puzzling, as I say, but does suggest that this innocent state is more complicated than it might seem--at least according to the Calvinists.
OK so far!
deerbreh, in Post#18 writes:
I guess when I say "free will" I am thinking more of freedom to choose but not freedom to violate the rights of others. So a loving God is not going to punish someone simply for choosing not to worship said God, for example - because God has no interest in coerced worship. He wants an individual to worship him out of love - love which the individual freely chooses.
Scripture agrees with you, deerbreh.
Paul in NIV translation writes:
2 Cor 9:7-- Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
As a metaphor, the first action of choice must have been foreknown by God...surely He did not need to have a Plan B as He is all-knowing, right?
Parasomnium adds a bit of spice to the mix with some observations:
Parasomnium, in Post#22 writes:
The Bible cannot be God's law, because God's law was carved in two stone tablets and nobody knows where they are. Is it, or is it not true that the Bible is made of paper and if you carve into paper, you cut it up and it becomes useless and you can't read what it says? So the Bible cannot be God's law, because if you carve into the Bible, which is made of paper, you cut it up and it becomes useless and you can't read what it says. It's a lie that creationists have come up with in their imaginations. So, how do you know God's law?
Paul addressed this issue.
Paul in NIV writes:
2 Cor 3:2-3--You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everybody. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.
It is not the words on the paper. It is the word in the heart. But lets not drift too far away from our original topic!
jaywill,referring to A & E writes:
The only thing they were instructed on was what not to take into them as food. And in that one thing they disobeyed. And they were corrupted and polluted as a result. The were joined to Satan. They were Satanified.
The central food which they were suppose to take was of the tree that was in the middle of the garden. That was the tree of life. God desired to dispense into Adam and Eve His divine and uncreated eternal life.
Instead of the man being "Godified" he was "Satanified."
What did God think? Surely God foreknew that this would happen,did He not? (Discussing the parable as a metaphor yet as reality)
robinrohan writes:
I never saw or heard that word "Satanified" before. How is it pronounced? I suppose the accent is on the second "a"? If so, "Satanified" would rhyme with "Sudanified" (somebody who has lived and grown accustomed to the country of Sudan).
Robin is a quick wit and is clever with words! Back to our topic, though.
Holmes writes:
It (The A & E Parable) is not a literal statement, and neither is it a discussion of how humans were tested and so became sinful.
To me it is a fable showing that the end of happiness in life is pretense to knowledge of good and evil. That is when humans play god, and judge the world based on their own criteria, rather than simply living and accepting the world as it is.
Everything in life is made worse and eternal life would be just a greater extension of hell. One truly loses paradise.
Talk to me, Jaywill. I know about you by reading your posts. Tell me a bit about why you believe what you do. Where did you learn it from?
What do you feel that God is telling you to say to the audience at EvC?
I want to encourage you to get to know your audience.
Talk to us, not at us.
This message has been edited by Phat, 12-16-2005 06:44 AM

Nature is an infinite sphere of which the center is everywhere and the circumference nowhere.
Pensées (1670)
We arrive at truth, not by reason only, but also by the heart.
Pensées (1670)
Heb 4:12-13-- For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.
Holy Spirit--speaking through the Apostle Paul

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by jaywill, posted 12-14-2005 9:25 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by jaywill, posted 12-16-2005 5:49 PM Phat has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1971 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 43 of 80 (270134)
12-16-2005 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Phat
12-16-2005 8:31 AM


Re: An Invitation for Jaywill
erased
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-17-2005 06:40 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Phat, posted 12-16-2005 8:31 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Parasomnium, posted 12-16-2005 7:27 PM jaywill has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 44 of 80 (270167)
12-16-2005 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by jaywill
12-16-2005 5:49 PM


Re: An Invitation for Jaywill
jaywill writes:
Somebody asked me to bend over, but I prefer less discrete shows of affection! LOL !! Just kidding, just kidding.
That someone was me, Parasomnium.
I must apologize, my flippant reply to you was uncalled for. In my defence I would like to say that if you had not jumped in just like that, and instead had read some of what went before with Carico, you might have thought twice before you posted, as someone suggested.
But still, that does not justify my behaviour. Actually I am surprised that the admins didn’t come down on me a little harder. So please accept my apology, normally I do not go around insulting people.

Did you know that most of the time your computer is doing nothing? What if you could make it do something really useful? Like helping scientists understand diseases? Your computer could even be instrumental in finding a cure for HIV/AIDS. Wouldn't that be something? If you agree, then join World Community Grid now and download a simple, free tool that lets you and your computer do your share in helping humanity. After all, you are part of it, so why not take part in it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by jaywill, posted 12-16-2005 5:49 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by robinrohan, posted 12-16-2005 7:42 PM Parasomnium has replied
 Message 46 by jaywill, posted 12-17-2005 6:45 AM Parasomnium has replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 80 (270175)
12-16-2005 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Parasomnium
12-16-2005 7:27 PM


Hey, Parasomnium
That someone was me, Parasomnium
Hey, Parasomnium, my wife has heard me talking about my "Dutch friend," and she's here now and was looking at your avator, and said, "That's your Dutch friend?!"
Pretty funny. I had to explain that that's your pin-up girl or something.
She wants to know what you think of Andre Rieu (spelling probably wrong). He's a big hit on PBS (Public broadcasting in USA).
He's coming to our fair city in April.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Parasomnium, posted 12-16-2005 7:27 PM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Parasomnium, posted 12-17-2005 6:03 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024