Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8943 total)
31 online now:
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,852 Year: 18,888/19,786 Month: 1,308/1,705 Week: 114/446 Day: 10/104 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Has anyone seen god?
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 267 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 31 of 60 (159954)
11-15-2004 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by dpardo
11-15-2004 2:53 PM


Re: But God does lie.
We see here that the whole incident is a vision of Micaiah in which he sees a spirit come forth and declare to God that he will go forth and be a lying spirit in the mouth of Ahab's (unGodly) prophets. Micaiah tells Ahab that his false prophets are lying to him.

according to the story, or rather the words of jehoshaphat, god is holding a meeting to try to decided how to get ahab to enter a battle that he will lose. various spirits (angels?) suggest ways to get ahab to do it, but the one that god chooses is the one that says he will lie to ahab.

the story is trying to explain reasons that not all prophesies come true, and still keep a perfect god in ultimate command of everything.

so, the question is, did god send a messenger with the knowledge that the messenger would lie?

Adam did not finish dying in that day, but he began to die.

but the text is very clear.

quote:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

one more time. in the day he eats of it, he will die. not just die, SURELY die. that day. that's what it says. i don't see how you can evade that.

930 years and one day are not the same. but don't look at me, i'm just reading the text literally.

By virtue of the fact that Adam and Eve were no longer allowed to eat of the tree of life, they started the process of dying and eventually did die. The "fruit" of the tree of life apparently staved off the death process

let's look at the text again.

quote:
and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

this is talking about a single action. god has to prevent this from ever happening. it's not saying that it's constantly eating of the tree that will keep him alive. he's saying eat of it once, and adam will live for ever.

how many times did adam need to eat of the tree of knowledge to become like god?

this means that adam was created mortal. if he had eaten of the tree of life before, he'd be a god when he ate of the tree of knowledge. (poor planning on god's part? there's nothing to indicate that adam was previously immortal at all, quite the contrary. notice the text doesn't talk of "starting to die" or "spiritual death" it says only that adam could become immortal.

the sin did not bring death into the world. this doctrine is not biblical in the slightlest, no matter what paul says.

[editted for typo]

This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 11-15-2004 11:36 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by dpardo, posted 11-15-2004 2:53 PM dpardo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by dpardo, posted 11-15-2004 11:06 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 267 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 32 of 60 (159957)
11-15-2004 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by happy_atheist
11-15-2004 6:03 PM


If i'm understand sidelined (and the quotes offered) correctly, the argument is that if any part of god is seen then the bible contradicts itself, as several of those quotes clearly say that it is impossible for anyone to see any part of god.

it's quite obvious to anyone who's read a large segment of old testament that one of two things happened:

1. god changed somehow, towards the abstract spiritual entity and away from the physical being god. looking at him became deadly, first just his face, and then any part.

2. peoples' opinions of god changed.

i think that considering the bible was written over more than a thousand years, the second one is the safe bet, even if you don't believe a word of the bible. the evolution of the way religious people have thought of the creator has changed rather drastically.

i'd like to say that it's clear progression, but it's not. if you arrange the books chronologically in order they're supposed to take place in, god changes somewhat linearly from a physical being into a spiritual one, and then all but disappears. but i suspect that was not the order they were written in. (points for neither side)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by happy_atheist, posted 11-15-2004 6:03 PM happy_atheist has not yet responded

  
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 60 (159958)
11-15-2004 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by dpardo
11-15-2004 2:53 PM


Re: But God does lie.
dpardo

Adam did not finish dying in that day, but he began to die.

By virtue of the fact that Adam and Eve were no longer allowed to eat of the tree of life, they started the process of dying and eventually did die. The "fruit" of the tree of life apparently staved off the death process.

I may be reading this wrong but it appears that you are under the asssumption that Adam was going to live forever yet this cannot be since
in this verse

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

We find that he is not immortal which is also a funny thing considering that I would personaly think that to be the first fruit one would think to eat,and it also was not denied him.


"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by dpardo, posted 11-15-2004 2:53 PM dpardo has not yet responded

  
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 60 (159974)
11-15-2004 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Angel
11-15-2004 5:30 PM


Angel

but seeing as how it is weak, maybe you should clarify for us, exactly how you would prove and/or disprove it? Do not just state scripture, anyone can read the Bible, please, let us know your interpretations for the passages.

Well on a personal level face to face means exactly that since it desribes eye contact as a means of determining the unconscious cues that interplay between people.To communicate as we do over the internet is no where near as revealing of a personal interaction as to be face to face."

Well, I think that it is clear by any account that God has appeared, though Moses didn't see His face, he did see Him, for example

I still find that debatable and we must also bring the responsibilty to you and have you defend your position as evidenced here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen.12:7
"And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him."
Gen.17:1
"And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him...."
Gen.18:1
"And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre."
Gen.26:2
"And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of.

Gen.26:24
"And the LORD appeared unto him the same night, and said, I am the God of Abraham thy father: fear not."

Gen.35:1
"And God said unto Jacob, Arise, go up to Bethel, and dwell there: and make there an altar unto God, that appeared unto thee when thou fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother."

Gen.35:7
"And he built there an altar, and called the place Elbethel: because there God appeared unto him, when he fled from the face of his brother."

Gen.35:9
"And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came out of Padanaram, and blessed him."

Gen.48:3
"And Jacob said unto Joseph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Canaan."

Ex.3:16
"The LORD God ... appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you."

Ex.4:5
"That they may believe that the LORD God ... hath appeared unto thee."

Ex.6:3
"And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob...."

Ex.24:9-11
"Then went up Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel. And they saw the God of Israel ... They saw God, and did eat and drink."

1 Kg.22:19
"I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left."

Job 42:5
"I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee."

Ps.63.2
"To see thy power and they glory, so as I have seen thee in the sanctuary."

Is.6:1
"In the year that King Ussiah died, I saw, also, the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up."

Is.6:5
"For mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts."

Am.7:7
"The LORD stood upon a wall made by a plumbline, with a plumbline in his hand."

Am.9:1
"I saw the Lord standing upon the altar: and he said, smite the lintel of the door, that the posts may shake."

Hab.3:3-5
"God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran .... He had horns coming out of his hand."

These above all refer to an appearance, so I will omit these, because they do not even come close to mentioning seeing His face.

Since they do not mention his face does this mean that such did not occur? How would we explain the following passage here

Is.6:1
"In the year that King Ussiah died, I saw, also, the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up."

Can you see a person sitting in a throne and be unable to view his face?
But wait it would be possible if we were to view from the side and he had turned his head.However,we have yet another one here;

1 Kg.22:19 "I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left."

In this passage we must be viewing from the front in order to view the host to right and left of the throne and therefore in full view.
And unlike with moses the scripture does not make point to state that god hid his face from view.


"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Angel, posted 11-15-2004 5:30 PM Angel has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Angel, posted 11-15-2004 11:12 PM sidelined has responded

  
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 60 (159977)
11-15-2004 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Angel
11-15-2004 6:08 PM


Angel

That may be this topic, but sidelined was confused by what I had said in an earlier topic, so I was explaining to her

LOL Just a note to clear up my obviously misunderstood sex. I am male as far as I can remember though if you have evidence to the contrary please present it.Being married with children I no longer have a great deal of opportunity or energy to continue refreshing my memory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Angel, posted 11-15-2004 6:08 PM Angel has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Angel, posted 11-15-2004 11:07 PM sidelined has not yet responded

  
dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 60 (159981)
11-15-2004 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by arachnophilia
11-15-2004 9:34 PM


Re: But God does lie.
I think it is reasonable to assume that Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of Life. The text does not say they did not and, since they were allowed to, it's likely they did.

Revelation 22:1-2 seems to indicate that the Tree of Life in Heaven will yield fruit on a regular basis indicating continuous consumption by the saved.

1 ¶ And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by arachnophilia, posted 11-15-2004 9:34 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by arachnophilia, posted 11-15-2004 11:26 PM dpardo has responded

  
Angel
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 60 (159982)
11-15-2004 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by sidelined
11-15-2004 10:54 PM


Sidelined,

LOL Just a note to clear up my obviously misunderstood sex. I am male as far as I can remember though....

Lol, sorry.


Angel

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by sidelined, posted 11-15-2004 10:54 PM sidelined has not yet responded

  
Angel
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 60 (159984)
11-15-2004 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by sidelined
11-15-2004 10:44 PM


I omitted the long list of verses because in no way do I think that God hasn't appeared to mankind. I never said anything to the contrary. I just wanted to clear that up. As far as the proof lying with me, I have explained my position. It is up to you, one would think to defend your position. As far as the verses you quoted, aren't they referring to a dream, or a vision? I can invision what you may look like (obviously it wasn't accurate...lol), that doesn't mean that it is what you look like.


Angel

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by sidelined, posted 11-15-2004 10:44 PM sidelined has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by sidelined, posted 11-17-2004 7:50 AM Angel has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 267 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 39 of 60 (159989)
11-15-2004 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by dpardo
11-15-2004 11:06 PM


Re: But God does lie.
I think it is reasonable to assume that Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of Life. The text does not say they did not and, since they were allowed to, it's likely they did.

i see no idication of that. and as well, if they already ate of the tree of life, why would god worry about them doing it again? you're arguing that effects of one tree wore off, but the sin of another didn't for 4000 years?

genesis 3 indicates god preventing a single action, to prevent them from becoming gods.

Revelation 22:1-2 seems to indicate that the Tree of Life in Heaven will yield fruit on a regular basis indicating continuous consumption by the saved.

the tree of life was in eden, which is described as having a very real location on earth. it was in mesopotamia. the tree of life in heaven that john is referring to is christ.

see, it's symbolism. communion, eating from the tree, leading twelve disciples, having twelve fruits? healing the world?

the tree of life is three different things:

1. a literal or symbolic tree in eden, whose fruit made you live forever.
2. the design upon which god made adam (see the qabala for that one)
3. a metaphor for jesus, who also gives eternal life.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by dpardo, posted 11-15-2004 11:06 PM dpardo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by dpardo, posted 11-15-2004 11:37 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 60 (159994)
11-15-2004 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by arachnophilia
11-15-2004 11:26 PM


Re: But God does lie.
Hi Arachnophilia!

Arachnophilia writes:

i see no idication of that. and as well, if they already ate of the tree of life, why would god worry about them doing it again? you're arguing that effects of one tree wore off, but the sin of another didn't for 4000 years?

You are comparing apples and oranges here.

One was sin, the other was not.

I am going to bed now so I may not get to your responses till morning. As always, it has been great talking to you guys!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by arachnophilia, posted 11-15-2004 11:26 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by arachnophilia, posted 11-16-2004 12:21 AM dpardo has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 267 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 41 of 60 (159999)
11-16-2004 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by dpardo
11-15-2004 11:37 PM


Re: But God does lie.
You are comparing apples and oranges here.

well, not exactly. we're comparing the fruit of the tree or knowledge of good and evil and the fruit of the tree of life. but the joke doesn't sound as funny that way.

One was sin, the other was not.

why was god so worried about the one that wasn't sin?

why does god tell the animals, and man, to "be fruitful and multiply" before eating of tree of knowledge?

why would eating of the tree of life make them immortal is they were not mortal to begin with? god didn't say that eating of the tree of knowledge would make them susceptable to death, he said it would make them dead. this didn't happen, did it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by dpardo, posted 11-15-2004 11:37 PM dpardo has not yet responded

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 3248 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 42 of 60 (160041)
11-16-2004 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Angel
11-15-2004 5:20 PM


Re: Peniel
Hi Angel,

This presents a problem, if God was on land, as a man, because you would have to have a body to wrestle, I would assume.

Anything is possible with God, if he wanted to manifest himself in physical form then that would not be a problem.

So if you take this literally, it would present a problem with Jesus being the Only Begotten, wouldn't it?

I dont see why it would. God taking human form is different from Jesus' case. Jesus is said to have an earthly mother. This requires a 'begat', but the earlier incident doesn't.

If God was in the flesh then, thousands of years earlier, where does Jesus fit in?

Jesus doesn't fit in anywhere in the Old Testament, and as I said the situation is totally different.

The chapter repeats the fact that it happens at night, or in a dream, and obviously when we dream we are not physically wresting with someone, at least not in mine.

Do you also hurt your hip so bad in dreams that you cannot walk

It appears that Jacob did.

Cheers.

Brian.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Angel, posted 11-15-2004 5:20 PM Angel has not yet responded

    
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 60 (160404)
11-17-2004 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Angel
11-15-2004 11:12 PM


Angel
I omitted the long list of verses because in no way do I think that God hasn't appeared to mankind.

But this is my point Angel. The bible disagrees with this and whether you believe that the face of god or some body part was seen the fact that god was seen at all is directly in contrevention of this verse.

"No man hath seen God at any time."

This is a contradiction of one statement of the bible to another.It is also in direct contravention with your own statement.


"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Angel, posted 11-15-2004 11:12 PM Angel has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Angel, posted 11-18-2004 3:40 PM sidelined has not yet responded

  
Zachariah
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 60 (160801)
11-17-2004 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by arachnophilia
11-15-2004 3:47 AM


I have heard some scholars say they believe there were instances where Jesus may have been appearing before man in the Old Testament. One such referrence would be in Gen 18 the three visitors. One is the Lord and since we don't get to see the Fathers face and Abraham saw the three men (one being God) the one he spoke to (face to face) would have to be Jesus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 11-15-2004 3:47 AM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by arachnophilia, posted 11-18-2004 1:19 AM Zachariah has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 267 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 45 of 60 (160836)
11-18-2004 1:19 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Zachariah
11-17-2004 11:15 PM


the text of that passage says, literally, that abraham saw the lord.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Zachariah, posted 11-17-2004 11:15 PM Zachariah has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Zachariah, posted 11-22-2004 11:41 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019