Biblical Translation—Eden, 3

AM writesOfcourse from my perspecive these laws (Rom 1:17-20)were already in men from an intrinsic standpoint from the begging. the written Law and its elaborations assisted the people in understanding the details that God wished for them and how these were to be carried out as his people. The Gentiles as you point out "got along just fine", by the intrinsic Law within them as well. (Rom 2:14-16).The written Law to the children of God however, were for specific clarification on how to live and be a light to the other nations, not because they were stupid and could not figure things out, but bcause it was through them that the nations would learn the nature and purpose of God.D Bertot

bertot: How to live and be a light to the other nations, so the nations would learn the nature and purpose of God? You actually think that makes sense?One man or culture telling another man or culture how to live according to the nature and purpose of his/their conception of God is historically a really bad idea. This is a recipe for conflict and devestation. If indeed your God is all-knowing He surely would have known that there is no good reason why one man should take another man's word especially when it comes to "the supernatural" that cannot be confirmed or verified. I personally do not know your "supernatural" God, and until your God makes Himself clear to me, and everyone else--with no blind-faith involved--only then will I learn His nature and purpose, as well as what He wishes of me.If your God cannot or will not do that, then why should I or anyone else listen to you?Do you see what I am driving at?All the best,
Ger

What I said, was not just my opinion, it is a commonheld one. I happen to agree with it when examining it. The inclusion of 'anything that is your neighbour's' - makes the notion of a thought only as a moot factor - it is open to no other directive than to not plan to get what is another's.The judiciary systems in all western nations is based on the OT laws, and one does not trangress any law by thinking. This is one's private space, and he has all the potential from refraining to convert his thoughts into action. You are mixing the OT and NT doctrines.

Autunman wriesIt appears we are back in buisness, let the arguing commence. sorry my respones was not sooner I had to work.Unless I am completly stupid it makes sense. Now I have not always been referred to as the sharpest crayon in the box but YEAH it makes sense.By Gods purposes I meant ultimate, the plan of redemption for mankind through Christ, which seems to have taken hold pretty well in nearly all countries to a great extent. Ofcourse not everyONE is going to accept it, but it is KNOWABLE and available by Gods ultimate purposes and plans since before thecreation of the world, according to the scriptures. Sounds like his SIMPLE little plan has been working. What do you say?What did you think of Romans 2:14-16. Is that intrinsic enough for you? So what you are saying is that there is no good reason for taking the words of individuals who wrote the Eden narrative, since it deals with the supernatural even from a metaphorical sense in your view. Certainly none of it can be verified or confirmed from a humanistic standpoint, correct. In other words according to your logic, it is also essentially useless.How do we know with any degree of accuracy thier use of metaphors that correspond to the natural world, were good for anthing. how can we say by simple inclination that it is probably from God. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, what do you say. Do you think your above philosophy would apply to your estimations as well? This has always been an interesting proposition to me. What exacally could or would God do to or for you to make you Know he was God. What act or acts would convince you? Would you believe him if he told you he was God and then performed a few miracles. What exacally would throw you over the top. How long and how many visits by him would you accept as evidence of his existence?What evidence do you use to establish the existence of your supernatural God, in your mind. Clearly you have indicated you believe in him. Do you mean to imply that you have absolute evidence without ANY aspect of faith on your part. Lets see how it works with your position on God. This should be interesting.D Bertot

Joseph writesAgain Joseph, A concept or idea (covet) would naturally correspond to a real world thing, otherwise the word would be geberish or nonsene. However, to refernece if to something is not the same as following through with the action itself. Thus Gods import in the command that we abstain from even thoinking about others thingsNotice also that it is a COMMAND, not a suggestion or a idea we can take or leave if we wish. It is not a recommendation attached to a physical action only valid if followed through on. Now, it would be alot easier if you were correct, but it seems by a simple reading and application of the text tha you appear to be wrong.Were you able to find the verse I requested that suggested that Coveting was only sinful or in direct disobedience ONLY if it were follwed through on? Since God knows our thoughts this conclusion above would not follow. Also, this continual habit you have of comparing Gods laws with mens, is to say the lest, questionable.Further, the NT is in exact harmony with Exodus 20:17. I am certain I can demonstrate this should I be asked to do so.D Bertot

bertot:

quote:

---

AM wrote: How to live and be a light to the other nations, so the nations would learn the nature and purpose of God? You actually think that makes sense?

---

“Redemption for mankind through Christ” is not KNOWABLE, since such a bizarre concept is a faith-based notion. An individual can read and learn the basic precepts of any superstition {an attitude of mind based on little or no objective evidence} but that does not make “Redemption through Christ” a KNOWABLE fact or reality. As far as we really know, no one has ever been “redeemed through Christ. Exactly “What Law” is Paul the Pharisee referring to? Furthermore, if we “Gentiles” do instinctively what the law requires”or not”then what do we need Paul and Jesus for. Christians have been living no different than any other human beings on this planet, as far as I can see. There are “good” Christians and then there are “bad” Christians, and then there are all those Christians in between. That’s the way humanity works”or not.

quote:

---

AM wrote: If indeed your God is all-knowing He surely would have known that there is no good reason why one man should take another man's word especially when it comes to "the supernatural" that cannot be confirmed or verified.

---

Everything written in the Hebrew Eden Narrative is based in “real, live, confirmable, verifiable nature”. If you had read a number of my posts carefully”or at all”you would have at least comprehended that there is no “supernatural” or “superstition” composed in or conveyed by the Hebrew Eden Narrative. We are going to run out our 300 post-limit again if you are unable to respond to what I write to you when I explain these concepts that are so alien to you. I will go back through this thread and pick out some of my post and give you their numbers so you can go back and read them”if you so desire. “Formed of dust” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “For dust you are” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “Tree of this life” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “Wood the knowledge of good and bad” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “The wet surface of the ground” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “To till the ground” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “To till the ground from which it was taken” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “Deep Sleep” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. “The serpent of the field which God made talking amidst the Deep Sleep” can be verified and confirmed from a humanistic standpoint. And so forth ... According to my logic nothing as ancient as the Hebrew Old Testament or the Greek New Testament, The Dead Sea Scrolls, The Gnostic Texts, or any literature that human beings have bestowed an equal force of authority and power upon should ever be regarded as useless. Let me say this one more time: None of the above mentioned Texts should ever be regarded as useless. That is how my logic works. Human beings share knowledge and wisdom and understanding through narratives and stories. These narratives and stories both employ human language and change human language at the same time. Societies and cultures form their worldviews according to what they perceive through their language and the narratives and stories they create. Language, narratives, proverbs, poems, myths, fables, and stories are “good for shaping the psyche and consciousness of the human beings who read them, whether they are “believed” or not. Narratives that are composed using natural-world-metaphors contain an intrinsic “degree of accuracy” simply because natural-world-metaphors can be verified, confirmed and studied in the real world, in real time, at any time. Reality and natural-world-metaphors are not only congruent, but are expressions of “real life.” For example: God creates “living” trees. Man cannot create living trees. Man can extract wood from trees. Man does extract wood from trees. Wood is not a living tree. Man did not create the real life that you and I are at present experiencing; that is a fact. Life is in the ground, the air, the water, the seas, the plants, trees, and animals that inhabit planet earth. Man did not create this life! The living Planet Earth is in the Cosmos, and Life on planet earth could not exist unless there was Life in the Cosmos. Life & God are synonymous. Man did not and does not create Life; therefore, Man did not and does not create God. I hope that is clear enough for you. No one should take my world for anything. I make mistakes, I misinterpret, I mistranslate, I don’t often know how to say what I want to convey, but I keep trying. So; don’t listen to me”Just Listen. If what I say appears to make some sense, then let’s discuss it. If what I say appears to make no sense, then let’s discuss it. Let’s be students of Scripture and Life. Does that make sense?

quote:

---

AM wrote: I personally do not know your "supernatural" God, and until your God makes Himself clear to me, and everyone else--with no blind-faith involved--only then will I learn His nature and purpose, as well as what He wishes of me.

---

Defining “God” as your conception of a “supernatural God” and/or “supernatural Jesus Christ”; just a simple physical visit would suffice. That would be “miracle” enough for me. We can sit and talk for a few minutes, and then he could go back to doing whatever it is he does. His actual, real-world existence would be enough evidence for me of his real-world or even real-Cosmos existence. That shouldn’t be too much to ask? Please read this entire post slowly and carefully, for I think I have answered your question in what I have written above.

Ill get to this in a while but it appears you are wrong again.D Bertot

AM writesIt is as knowable as any fact. You call that which is based on nearly more evidence, from the Old Testament, Old Testament phrophecy, archeological, historical and factual evidence of a persons existence, the early Church history, substantiated and verifiable written and accurate records with no fear of contradiction or falsification (the NT) and its contents, you call these things "bizzare".Yet you believe that people 6000 years or so ago are sending you secret metaphorical messages through unverifiable poetic documents that may or may not be influenced by some God you as yet fail to describe in any detail, These antient superstitious backwards people are giving you messages through the folliage and other things in nature and you call the concept of Redemption through Christ "bizzare"? Hey, it makes perfect sense to me but what do I know. I might remind you that the tv program "Ghosthunters" is on this evening as well, should you decide to take that in as well. OK fair enough, but that is not the point AM, to what point and to what purpose. Simply because people used metaphors from real life does not mean that this message was intented for you and me. However, even if it was of what value is iit. Can I not figure these things out on my own. If these messages are from God somehow through inspiration of the text, then all of you arguments about the supernatural would apply here as well. If not why not? Is a supernatural God trying to tell us something here or not? If he is how would we KNOW exacally what he wants or intends. If salvation through Christ is not knowable, then ofcourse no other message sent through the physical world would be of any value as well. You cant have it both ways.AM I understand completly what youare saying in your philosophy. its simply that you chastise people for thier belief in the supernaturaland the things related to it, but you song and dance around whether yours involves the supernatural. If it does then the messages conveyed in it by natural things or not would have to be classified as bizzare according to your own words as well. Certainly the evidence for Judeo-Christianity and its doctrine could not be considered anymore bizzare than this.D Bertot

AM first saysThen AM writesYou have strange logic AM. Would not the ancient Eden narrative text be one culture, namely thiers, telling you, how or what you need to believe or accept, or at the very least live by? Would you not say this is historically a bad idea. Here is how more of you logic works AM. Man can share knowledge through stories and narratives but God appearently cant do this small task. God apperently inspired somehow someway the eden narrative by using or giving them metaphors but he cant inspire the rest of the OT or NT the way he chooses and the way we know this is due to the fact according to you, that the stories and miracles are simply to bizzare and not natural enough, but the Eden narrative as a product of God is both believable and acceptable. More strange logic. These are very bold statements that in my opinion would warrent absolute knowledge and proof. Is this what you are saying, do actually konw for an absolute fact, that this is the case AM. Wouldnt you say that just allitle bit of Faith is required in these bold statements. Can you explain for example how he accomplished this task. certainly if you know that "that is a Fact" as you say, the you could demonstrate this clearly and absolutly.It is interesting that you at one moment chastise people for saying that they know this or that. Then turn right around and claim the very samething for things, interesting.Do a woman and a man create life AM? How do you know that God created the cosmos? Now I certainly agree with you, but you really must stop chastising people about faith and the supernatural, because as I have indicated you require it as much as we do.D BertotD Bertot

AM wrote:I think you missed my point here, your implication was that it was not possible to know this supernatural God of ours. I said how do you establish the existence of yours. Would not the resons be the same?You also missed the point of my second question about what God would need to do tomake known he is God. The situation you described in reponse did happen, it took place for 33 years and people said oh no this cant be God.In other words AM, if he sat down beside you, said he was God, how would you know that it was not "Q", playing a trick on you. In other words the information he has given in nature and direct revelation should be susbstantial enough for anyone to believe in his existence. If he sat down beside you and confirmed that all the miracles actually took place, then he left and never made contact with you again, could you really say that 20 years from that point you would not explain it away somehow. What is proof AM? Many people wittnessed much more than you are requesting AM and still walked away and said, "there is simply no way". Would this really throw you over the top AM. Is there really not enough evidence now?D Bertot

AM before we get to far out of hand and angry again, let me bring this into perspective. It is not that i dont understandwhat you are saying about the Eden narrative. I understand that you believe people used real world things to convey real world messages, I understand this. I alsounderstand that any literary work is of possible value, this is not my meaning when I say "useless", I ofcourse mean it from a spiritual context. However, there are very important and spcific questions that MUST naturally follow from this conclusion.1. If God had anything specific to do with this narrative, what messages is he trying to Convey to us today. Are they relevant, applicable and usable. You have answered his from your perspective to some degree.2. If he did have something to do with its composition why would his method of intervintion be limited to some mystical method of composition. Could he not directly involve himself at some other point not to far removed from the eden narative compilation in another manner. Why should one be believable an the other rejected because it does not fit into our way of thinking. In other words you will allow one but not the other. This does not seem to be an objective way to proceed.3. How does the Eden narrative fit into the rest of the OT scripture? Should it be considered an Island. This and the first one question seem to me to be of primary concern when it is under consideration. there has to be a reasonable connection. Certainly not all the stories in the OT can be dismissed as poetic or unbelievable if indeed God does exist and interacts with man.I simply wanted to bring things back into perspective, atleast frommy point of view. I will let you get to my other posts first.
I just wanted you to see this one initially, to see where I was comingfrom.D Bertot

bertot: I just got back from the VA. Sorry I had to run off this morning. One of the things I wrote before leaving was:

quote:

---

AM wrote: Man did not create the real life that you and I are at present experiencing; that is a fact. Life is in the ground, the air, the water, the seas, the plants, trees, and animals that inhabit planet earth. Man did not create this life! The living Planet Earth is in the Cosmos, and Life on planet earth could not exist unless there was Life in the Cosmos. Life & God are synonymous. Man did not and does not create Life; therefore, Man did not and does not create God. I hope that is clear enough for you.

---

In your opinion absolute knowledge and proof is needed for you to accept the fact that “Man did not create life.” Well find a human being that can “create life.” Planting a seed in the ground or in a female’s womb is “planting seed” not creating life. You do realize that, right?With your help I can indeed demonstrate this clearly and absolutely: Mankind does not create the air that we breathe in order to sustain our mortality. Mankind can pollute the air we breathe, but has not and cannot create the air we breathe in order to sustain our mortality. 1. Find a plastic bag, pull it over your head, and tape it around your neck so that no “air” can enter. 2. Open up your Holy Bible and begin reading {out loud or silently; it does not matter). 3. Make certain that you are accompanied by an adult that knows for certain that if they do not remove the plastic bag after you have passed out, if they wait more than three (3) minutes you will be brain-damaged, and if they wait more than seven (7) minutes you will die.I have defined above the Supreme Natural God=LIFE. We are all children of the Supreme Natural God=LIFE. There is absolutely nothing “supernatural” about Supreme Natural God=LIFE.Planet Earth is within and a part of the Cosmos. Do you agree?
There is LIFE on planet earth. Right?
How are you doing with that plastic bag trick? I certainly hope I have answered you in my brief statements above.
Do try that plastic bag trick if you do not believe that you need “air” {i.e. THE LIFE} more than you “need” the Holy Bible.I’ll get back with you in a bit.All the best,
Ger

AM writes Absoultly not, do I believe that anyone needs proof to know that man did not create life. You are still missing the point. Listen carefully. You said you did not KNOW my supernatural God and you indication was that until he reveals himself to you you could not be sure of his existence, or something to that affect. I then asked you how and by what criteria you would know him or that your God exists with such sharp and candid absolutness. It now appears that you are saying that because things exist, God must exist, correct? Ok, fair enough that is the same way I would establish the existence of God initally (If you are talking about an actual personality here and not simply organisms functioning or operating =Life). the question would then present itself as to whether this actual personality is or can be considered Supernatural or above and outside the Natural and yet having created the natural world. Why then would your God not be supernatural. This is the only point I was trying to make. If the God you are describing here is nature or things, then it is no God at all. If it is a personality, then it is completley ignorant to say that he is not supernatural, you would simply be mencing words. Please explain why a deity would not be supernatural. It is a form of procreation nontheless. Since I did not say that man was the ULTIMATE creator of life, the above silly illustration carries no weight or purpose. However, I might ask what direct evidence you have that would not require atleast a little bit of faith in knowing who actually pulled all of this off. Did the supreme God of nature tell you directly that he accomplished all of this, are you assuming all of this from the Eden narrative? You see AM even a person with a unique perspective about some deity as yours is still limited in knowledge and has to accept what he believes with some degree of Faith. Its just called being human AM.Lets follow you example a little further. Now I know I can not breath without air but could God alter the laws of nature as he did in the days of Joshua in causing the sun and laws of motion to stop to suit his purposes. You see AM, that is what it is all about. He either did influence the Eden narrative or he did not, there are no two ways about it. It appears that the only one here doing tricks is you. You now seem to have altered your posiion about what or who God is. Is he a real personality with freedom of choice or is IT just the cosmos and physical things. It is really hard to follow your speculative ramblings.By the way why cant I have both Air and the Word of God. Watch this AM ("the heavens and the EARTH will pass away, but the WORD of the Lord endures forever") Hmmmm I wonder which one is eternally more important?D BertotOuestio

bertot: Here's a long-winded reply:

quote:

---

AM wrote: In your opinion absolute knowledge and proof is needed for you to accept the fact that “Man did not create life.” Well find a human being that can “create life.” Planting a seed in the ground or in a female’s womb is “planting seed” not creating life. You do realize that, right?

---

Your blind faith does indeed seem to make you blind. I can explain to you all of this until I am blue in the face and you absolutely cannot embrace it, because what I am saying would undermine your “faith in your Lord Jesus Christ.” If you should open your mind and realize that your Pauline/Pharisee Judeo-Christian mind set is contrary to the real and true reality of human existence you would feel as though you have been inadvertently lied to from the beginning. That would be a terrible thing to endure. So do not do it.In the NT Gospel of Matthew, 16:6 Jesus supposedly says, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees...” Then Jesus explains that the term “leaven” is here being used as a metaphor. In Acts 23:6 Paul says, “I am a Pharisee the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.”According to the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Essenes {mentioned by Josephus {37-100AD), & Pliny the Elder {23-79AD), & Philo {20BC-50AD); Heb. chasziyd=kind, pious} regarded the Pharisees as “the builders of walls” and as such the teachers of haleqach=the teaching of seductive words, and the Essenes derisively called the Pharisees doreshe halaqot, best translated “those who expound false laws” (Understanding The Dead Sea Scrolls”Biblical Archaeology Review; Edited by Hershel Shanks, by Lawrence H. Schiffman, pg. 43). Yet, the doctrines of the Essenes disclosed in the Dead Sea Scrolls suggest that the Essenes were a kind of precursor to Christianity (pg. 39.). The Essenes were also no friends to the Sadducees. That is why the Essenes left Jerusalem and lived in the desert beside the Dead Sea. Yet is was the Pharisees who survived the Roman destruction of the Second Temple, and thus emerged Rabbinic Judaism as will as Pharisaic Christianity after 70 AD. A Deity who is perceived as working within and through reality”as opposed to altering reality”is not a supernatural being. Job 12:7-10 says this:

quote:

---

So ask the animals, and they will teach you; the birds of the air, and they will tell you; and the fish of the sea will declare to you. Who among all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this? In His hand is the life of every living animal, and the breath of every human being.

---

And Job 27:3 states, “As long as my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nose.”

quote:

---

AM wrote: I have defined above the Supreme Natural God=LIFE. We are all children of the Supreme Natural God=LIFE. There is absolutely nothing “supernatural” about Supreme Natural God=LIFE.

---

The Supreme Natural God is THE LIFE in nature and all things. The Supreme Natural God is the distinct and mysterious LIFE that enables all nature and all things to exist at all. If, as Job says above, “the spirit of God is in my nose” then the Spirit of God”of LIFE”must be in the air that human beings breathe. Can’t you see that? There is nothing “supernatural” about the air we breath, but there is an awesome mystery there that we can embrace and regard as Our Heavenly Father.

quote:

---

AM wrote: Planting a seed in the ground or in a female’s womb is “planting seed” not creating life. You do realize that, right?

---

Mankind does not create the seed, the ground, the sperm, the female ovary, or the eggs her ovary produces. There must be LIFE there or nothing will grow.

quote:

---

AM wrote: With your help I can indeed demonstrate this clearly and absolutely: Mankind does not create the air that we breathe in order to sustain our mortality. Mankind can pollute the air we breathe, but has not and cannot create the air we breathe in order to sustain our mortality. 1. Find a plastic bag, pull it over your head, and tape it around your neck so that no “air” can enter. 2. Open up your Holy Bible and begin reading {out loud or silently; it does not matter). 3. Make certain that you are accompanied by an adult that knows for certain that if they do not remove the plastic bag after you have passed out, if they wait more than three (3) minutes you will be brain-damaged, and if they wait more than seven (7) minutes you will die.

---

Your Pauline/Pharisee Christian interpretation of the Hebrew Eden Narrative states that Man created the mortal life we are experiencing today when “Adam & Eve” deliberately disobeyed God Command. That interpretation is conveyed by Paul in Romans 5:12:

quote:

---

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned

---

Paul declares that because one is mortal and dies that is proof of sin; and if “Adam” had not sinned in the garden mortal reality would not exist. That is just would I would expect of a Pharisee who is prone to preaching false laws. I live it every day. Life is. I really do not know what else to say. I am not waiting for a Jewish mashiycha, there is no Jewish or Christian mashiycha to wait for. But, for those who truly believe that Jesus Christ {Heb. mashiycha} is coming for a second time; two-thousand years have passed, and still the time is not right. I say to them: Just keep waiting. In the Biblical Hebrew of Old Testament the verb which has been commonly rendered “trust or believe” is >aman=to confirm, to support. It is from this verb that the adverb >amen=verily, truly is derived. Amen means “truly.” No belief or faith is mentioned or required. What can be confirmed and supported by fact is “truly” >emeth=truth. If you really need to believe that passage in Joshua, then knock yourself out. You do know that the sun and the moon rotate around the earth, right? Plus, the earth spins for a very good reason. If the kind of superstition described in Joshua does not give you pause, then you must be very pleased that the earth is in the state it is in at this time. It certainly looks like human life is going to become very difficult for the next generation; maybe that means Jesus is coming. I think you better hope so. I know for certain that LIFE influenced the Hebrew Eden Narrative. The author of the Hebrew Eden Text was profoundly inspired by LIFE, which is why he used only natural metaphors to convey his incredible insight. Since The Supreme Natural God is LIFE then it is clear to me that The Supreme Natural God influenced the Hebrew Eden Narrative.
I certainly hope I have answered you in my brief statements above. Do try that plastic bag trick if you do not believe that you need “air” {i.e. THE LIFE} more than you “need” the Holy Bible. Give me a break, my friend. I have not altered my position about God since we began discussing the Hebrew Eden Text. If you look in a mirror and peer deep into your eyes, and if you only see yourself looking back at you, you are missing out on something incredible. In Hebrew Grammar there is no neuter designation; there is only “masculine” and “feminine”. If a masculine noun is employed it is regarded as masculine”he, him”if a feminine noun is employed it is regarded as feminine”she, her. There is no neuter. the masculine noun >elohiym=God”male & female”is referred to as “He, Him.” The masculine noun >eth-ha>adam=the human species”male & female”is referred to as “he, him.”The Supreme Natural God is the singular/plural Deity of the singular and individual Mystery of LIFE. IT is neither male nor female; He is LIFE; and He/It is not to be anthropomorphized/humanized in any way. You do have them both as long as you keep breathing the air provided for you by God and do not just breathe what we humans produce. If you are really concerned about how you will be judged by God in that God’s eternal place”neither in the heavens nor on the earth”then you must be living in a subtle state of consternation. You are living in the twenty-first century reading a book that you believe is the word of God, and you must have faith that your efforts to live by that word are accurate enough to enable God to judge you favorably. Doesn’t Jesus say that many will proclaim “Lord, Lord,” but they will not all be judged as righteous enough?I’ll have to talk more in the morning. I am really tired.All the best,
Ger

AM writesIt appears from the this post that you have stopped debating and are now into deep sarcasm and resentment. With much rhetoric and display you have again avoided answering a very simple question I asked you. Is God a living personality likemyself or you or is IT just a simple force of nature as Einstien probably believed. Is God a living PERSONALITY, Yes or No? My faith is in no way blind as is indicated by my ability to stand and debate with you. None of the NT is contrary to nature in anyway. This is an assertion by yourself that needs to be demonstrated in your arguments. The nature of human existence is not in conflict with anything in the scriptures. Your unwillingness to embrace the supernatural as would be indicated by the word God and further coroberated by his word, repleat with miracles is the stumbling block you are experiencing. My friend if your God is an actual personality and he can work through or alter anything he is Supernatural. If Your God creates or works through anything, he would by the very nature of the csae be transendent. Making up new definitons to fit you God does not change anything It is interesting that you quote the SCRIPTURES all the time. Do you believe all they have to say or are you going to pick and choose out of them what supports your ideology. I believe what Job says too, but do you believe the part in Job where Satan and God decide to test Job and follow through in an INTERVENTION fashion, I doubt it. There are many things in the scriptures I would like to leave out because they interfer with my life AM, but it does not work that way. Could the Apostle Paul not have a change of heart from his past. Could he not see the errors of his ways, especially when an INTERVENTION from God took place. Whats your point here? Is this a real personality. If it created AIR would it not be supernatural. I agree that air is not supernatural but would not the God that created be thus? The Apostle Paul is only explaining what happened in the Eden narrative as supported by the Prophets, Law givers (Moses)and Christ.
It is up to you to demonstrate why the rest of the OT is not true and is not supported by the Eden narrative. All the evidence would suggest as I have indicated before that it was believed as literal by all that followed and as further indicated by the repleatness of the OT with the supernatural.Its not just Paul that dis agrees with you but all the rest of history and the scriptures. Example, I quote you below Your problems are much greater than anything to do with Pauls philosophy.More in a minuteD Bertot