Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Philosophical ramblings on the Adam & Eve Parable
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 16 of 80 (255790)
10-31-2005 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by nwr
10-31-2005 8:29 AM


Re: Free will not free will if you get slammed for making a choice.
I would maintain that most, if not all folk still know what is good. Some choose to practice evil. Nationalism and patriotic idolatry will turn many a soul blind in order to preserve self interests.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by nwr, posted 10-31-2005 8:29 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by nwr, posted 10-31-2005 6:15 PM Phat has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 17 of 80 (255858)
10-31-2005 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Phat
10-31-2005 11:23 AM


Re: Free will not free will if you get slammed for making a choice.
I would maintain that most, if not all folk still know what is good.
In my opinion, this is something we learn. Our idea of what is good comes from our families and from the culture. This is why what is considered good can vary between cultures.
Nationalism and patriotic idolatry will turn many a soul blind in order to preserve self interests.
That is surely an example of cultural influence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Phat, posted 10-31-2005 11:23 AM Phat has not replied

  
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2893 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 18 of 80 (255914)
10-31-2005 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by nwr
10-24-2005 4:44 PM


Re: Free will not free will if you get slammed for making a choice.
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 wordship 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. If an individual chooses not to love or worship God there is no punishment per se - there is only a loss to the individual of not receiving the benefits of loving God. Another way of looking at this is from the standpoint of good and evil. Certainly God would have no interest in man not knowing the difference between good and evil because one cannot really choose to do good if one does not know what it is and the same goes for choosing against evil. I agree with you that the forbidden fruit is simply a metaphor for the consciousness of man as compared to animals but I think we make too much of it - animals do have some consciousness and some may have nearly the same level as man does (I wouldn't even reject the possibility that some might have a higher level than man does). I don't think we really have any way of knowing for certain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by nwr, posted 10-24-2005 4:44 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by nwr, posted 10-31-2005 9:26 PM deerbreh has not replied

  
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2893 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 19 of 80 (255917)
10-31-2005 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Phat
10-31-2005 7:28 AM


Re: Free will not free will if you get slammed for making a choice.
My argument would suggest that we are incapable of internally creating a concept of a greater good than ourselves and that God Himself is the origin of good.
Or perhaps we ARE capable of internally creating a concept of a greater good and it is the origin of God. Maybe the moment when we are able to see the good in other people is the moment when we have created God.
edited quote codes
This message has been edited by deerbreh, 10-31-2005 09:25 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Phat, posted 10-31-2005 7:28 AM Phat has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 20 of 80 (255920)
10-31-2005 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by deerbreh
10-31-2005 9:16 PM


The metaphor
I agree with you that the forbidden fruit is simply a metaphor for the consciousness of man as compared to animals but I think we make too much of it - animals do have some consciousness and some may have nearly the same level as man does (I wouldn't even reject the possibility that some might have a higher level than man does). I don't think we really have any way of knowing for certain.
I agree with all of that.
edit: set a better subtitle
This message has been edited by nwr, 10-31-2005 08:28 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by deerbreh, posted 10-31-2005 9:16 PM deerbreh has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 80 (256103)
11-01-2005 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by robinrohan
10-24-2005 7:12 PM


Bad because God said so
To follow up on this idea that the state of innocence might have been a little more complicated than it seems--as least if we go by that 17th century text I cited--one might propose a little theory:
Adam and Eve had a moral system, a stripped down one consisting of one negative rule--do not eat that particular fruit. Nonetheless, this is spoken of by Winthrop as something still operable, which he associates with "Justice." He associates "Mercy" with the Covenant of Grace.
We understand that the Covenant of Works was and is as hard as nails. If you break it once, it's broken forever. The Covenant of Grace does not operate in that fashion. So we can see how Winthrop would associate the concept of Justice with the original covenant.
But the original Covenant said not to eat a particular fruit. It didn't mention any other rules. Nonetheless, Winthrop calls it the "Law of Nature." What could this mean?
Could it be that the Covenant of Works embodies a paradox about the relationship between God and morality--the question of whether or not an act is good or bad because God says it is, or is good or bad in and of itself, apart from what God thinks? Because with the injunction not to eat the fruit, we have apparently a rule that is correct only because God said so, not because eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is in itself evil.
And so, if we accept this, what is written in our hearts as the Law of Nature is the injunction that that which is good is good because God said it is, at least according to the original covenant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by robinrohan, posted 10-24-2005 7:12 PM robinrohan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 7:58 PM robinrohan has replied

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


Message 22 of 80 (268722)
12-13-2005 9:33 AM


Theology questions for Carico
Hello Carico,
I have studied theology for thirty years and I know a lot about it. So, what I don't understand is why creationists want us to believe that God made Adam from mud and Eve from a rib. This is obviously a lie, because mud and ribs are different things, so they cannot intermingle. No one has ever witnessed a mudman coming from the womb of a ribwoman since the beginning of recorded history. To even suggest that ribwomen cover themselves in mud is perverse and impossible. And if I am the descendent of Adam, then why am I not missing a rib?
Besides, when Eve had just been created by God, did she already know how to cook? It's impossible, because there were no cookbooks. And she couldn't even read either. So what did they eat? Corn flakes?
And if Satan and Jesus are brothers, and God loves them both, then why is one in Hell and the other in Heaven? This is not logical and a mistake creationists always make. Their stories are full of contradictions, and it is an oxymoron. And to make their stories fit one another, they have to make up more contradictions.
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?
You cannot answer any of these questions, because many creationists tell different stories, they cannot agree on many things. If they did, then why are there so many different beliefs?
Thank you.
P.S.: I won't be able to post for a while, probably the next 12 hours or so. Take your time answering this.

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-13-2005 1:31 PM Parasomnium has not replied
 Message 24 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 7:46 PM Parasomnium has replied
 Message 74 by Parasomnium, posted 12-22-2005 4:01 PM Parasomnium has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 23 of 80 (268814)
12-13-2005 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Parasomnium
12-13-2005 9:33 AM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
beautiful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Parasomnium, posted 12-13-2005 9:33 AM Parasomnium has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 24 of 80 (268976)
12-13-2005 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Parasomnium
12-13-2005 9:33 AM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Hello Parasomnium,
I have studied theology for thirty years and I know a lot about it. So, what I don't understand is why creationists want us to believe that God made Adam from mud and Eve from a rib. This is obviously a lie, because mud and ribs are different things, so they cannot intermingle. No one has ever witnessed a mudman coming from the womb of a ribwoman since the beginning of recorded history. To even suggest that ribwomen cover themselves in mud is perverse and impossible. And if I am the descendent of Adam, then why am I not missing a rib?
I don't answer for al Creationists. But it is ery significant that the woman was "built" from Adam's rib. This was a glimps into God's heart concerning Himself and His Bride the city New Jerusalem.
Only what came out of Adam could return to Adam. The one became two and then the two became one again. The wife matched Adam in life and in nature. All the other lives were dismissed as not of Adam's life and nature.
The putting of Adam to sleep was a type of Christ's death on the cross to accomplish salvation.
As the rib came out from Adam's side also blood and water flowed out of the side of Christ. When He died the soldier pierced His side and blood and water flowed out.
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.
Then entity of the church which was produced from Christ's death and resurrection must also be "built" up into a corporate dwelling place of God in man.
Through the transformation of growth in the divine life and the building up together in the divine love the church is one day presented to Christ without any such spot or wrinkle from the fall of man. She is to match Christ and be the counter part of Christ.
The New Jerusalem is the enlarged Wife and Bride constituted with both the Old Testament saints and the New Testament saints. And the Bible closes with this city of all of God's redeemed people comiong down from God out of heaven prepared as His Wife and Bride. The One became two. And then the two became one.
The building of a wife for Adam out of the rib of Adam is a window into the whole plan of God. In His salvation a collective and corporate entity is built up which matches Christ in life and in nature to be His eternal counterpart.
It is a very profound thing that you have touched on. Your other remarks seem to be somewhat in jest. I may be wrong. But the buioding of Eve from the rib of Adam has profound significance to the entire Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Parasomnium, posted 12-13-2005 9:33 AM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by robinrohan, posted 12-13-2005 8:01 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 28 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 8:19 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 38 by Parasomnium, posted 12-14-2005 5:40 AM jaywill has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 25 of 80 (268986)
12-13-2005 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by robinrohan
11-01-2005 8:44 PM


Re: Bad because God said so
Robinrohan,
Adam and Eve had a moral system, a stripped down one consisting of one negative rule--do not eat that particular fruit. Nonetheless, this is spoken of by Winthrop as something still operable, which he associates with "Justice." He associates "Mercy" with the Covenant of Grace.
It was an extremly simple system. "Be careful what you eat."
That is they were to be careful what they brought into them. Only one thing they were not to bring into them. That was the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
God did not have to instruct them how to worship or how to treat each other. He did not have to give them laws on relationships. They were not even told how to worship God.
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."
Instead of being infused with God's divine nature they were corrupted with the Satanic nature. Instead of them being Deified they became Devilified. They became the expression of Satan living in man a life of rejection to God's holiness, righteousness, and glory.
What seemed to be a promise of independence actually brought them into bondage to a terrible task master of death - the one who has the might of death, the Devil (Hebrews 2:14)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by robinrohan, posted 11-01-2005 8:44 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by robinrohan, posted 12-13-2005 8:14 PM jaywill has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 80 (268987)
12-13-2005 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by jaywill
12-13-2005 7:46 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Your other remarks seem to be somewhat in jest. I may be wrong.
That's the problem. You never can tell. But reading through Carico's posts might yield a clue.
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 12-13-2005 08:52 PM

"And from water we made all living things."-- The Quran

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 7:46 PM jaywill has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 80 (268990)
12-13-2005 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by jaywill
12-13-2005 7:58 PM


Re: Bad because God said so
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.
I know the story, jaywill. I was trying to make a further point.
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).
This message has been edited by robinrohan, 12-13-2005 08:53 PM

"And from water we made all living things."-- The Quran

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 7:58 PM jaywill has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 28 of 80 (268991)
12-13-2005 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by jaywill
12-13-2005 7:46 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
Two problems, jaywill:
1: You are making this stuff up as you go along;
2: If you had understood what Parasomnium's post was all about, you would have known better than to reply in the first place.
But never mind. I imagine that Parasomnium is having a good laugh because you took him seriously.

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 29 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 8:39 PM nwr has not replied
 Message 30 by jaywill, posted 12-13-2005 8:59 PM nwr has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 29 of 80 (268996)
12-13-2005 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by nwr
12-13-2005 8:19 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
NWR,
Two problems, jaywill:
1: You are making this stuff up as you go along;
I respectfully disagree strongly.
I am abbreviating what has had volumes about it writing. This is a discussion board. I can't write a book or a chapter. I have to cut some very developed and profound ideas down to a few significant abbreviated lines.
This may look to you like I am improvising things out of my head. Now you can disagree with what I wrote. But please don't infer that I am improvising things on the fly.
I am reducing to a few comments things of which theologians have extensively developed. You're dealing here with God's word. It is exceedingly profound often.
2: If you had understood what Parasomnium's post was all about, you would have known better than to reply in the first place.
I'll read it again to see why you say this. But as I remember the poster basically asked about Eve being made from Adam's rib and not from the mud as Adam was made.
Whatever else the poster said, I honed in on this aspect of the post. It is significant in the extreme that Eve came OUT of Adam. And on that point I can't back down one inch. Sorry.
If I missed the point of the poster's comments - my apologies to the poster.
I have studied theology for thirty years and I know a lot about it. So, what I don't understand is why creationists want us to believe that God made Adam from mud and Eve from a rib. This is obviously a lie, because mud and ribs are different things, so they cannot intermingle. No one has ever witnessed a mudman coming from the womb of a ribwoman since the beginning of recorded history. To even suggest that ribwomen cover themselves in mud is perverse and impossible. And if I am the descendent of Adam, then why am I not missing a rib?
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 08:40 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 08:40 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 08:45 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 8:19 PM nwr has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 30 of 80 (269006)
12-13-2005 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by nwr
12-13-2005 8:19 PM


Re: Theology questions for Carico
NWR,
Is the title of the post in question not "Theology Questions ...?"
Now, if I am making my response up on the fly could you please tell me what you think about the following New Testament passage:
" Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave HImself up for her.
That He might sanctify her, cleansing her by the washing of the water in the word.
That He might present the church to Himself glorious, not having spot or wrinkle or any such things, but that she would be holy and without blemish.
In the same way the husbands also ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his own wife loves himself.
For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ also the church,
Because we are members of His Body.
For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.
This mystery is great, but I speak with regard to Christ and the church." (Ephesians 5:25 - 32)
Could you comment on the church being Christ's Body and the references to Genesis? What theological significance do you see if any in Paul's parellel of marriage and Christ's having a wife whom He died for and nourishes as His own body?
Do you still think I concocted up some things on the fly about Eve being built from the rib of Adam and brought to him as his own bone and flesh to match him?
Lastly, I wonder if you have revelation from the Holy Spirit on any of these matters.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:00 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:01 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:01 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:02 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:03 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-13-2005 09:04 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 8:19 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by nwr, posted 12-13-2005 9:17 PM jaywill has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024