|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The first 3 chapters of Genesis | |||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
So you think God says, "Well, Eve, you would have delivered your baby without pain, but now...." Is that it? Yes, of course. And there used be no thorns and thistles and now there are. It used be easy, but now it is hard. That's the obvious meaning here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
But that's just silly. What kind of a "punishment" was it if Eve had nothing to compare it to? It's like telling a three-year-old, "I was going to let you drive the car, but now you'll have to wait for years and years and years." Where's the punishment? This is about the facts of the story. That's all it's about. The interpretations of the facts of the story by Jar and others are false. They are political in nature. This will not do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
It goes on to explain the main things about life. It explains why snakes have no legs, why we fear and kill snakes, why childbirth seems more painful for humans than other animals, why people must farm instead of foraging like the other animals. What a bunch of garbage this is. It's about man disobeying God and God punishing him for it. How more obvious can it get?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Your interaction of any substance (aside from a a quip or two here and there) in the Bible Study forum is limited to 4 occasions involving 4 people: Faith, Jaywill, Crevo and myself. A trinity of those happen to be Faith Aloners. The other...well he's has been shown to be just another lilly livered mark like you. The marks debating amongst themselves...sheesh! What in the hell are you talking about?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
In the case of Genesis the redactors place the newer tale first. It is a more sophisticated model than the older tale seen in Genesis 2. Why? Why not merge them together as they did in the other places? IMHO the different pictures of God are what is important. Each one shows a facet of God, an important thing we need to understand, that GOD is both Transcendant and Personal, Distant and Near. They presented the Transcendant GOD first, and then transition to the Personal GOD that walks with us, talks with us. Yeah, we have all this bullshit, but, Jar, why were they punished? You said you did not say they were not punished. Assuming you are not a sophist, that means they were punished. Why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
They handled things different in other areas, the Flood myth includes at least two stories merged together, same with Exodus, but here, at the beginning they deal with the essence of the issue, with the very Nature of GOD. Here, they felt it so important that they included the two mutually exclusive stories, even though they could see the inconsistencies and conflicting character Look at this nonsense. We are trying to come up with the facts of the literature, and we get this. We are trying to find out what happened in the story, but apparently this is troublesome. But it's obvious that Adam and Eve disobeyed God and were therefore punished. Stop this sophistry. I know it does not fit with modern ideas, but that's not the point of this thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I don't have a problem with this either. That's not the point. The point is that Adam and Eve disobeyed and were punished. Jar says this is non-sensical since A & E did not know right from wrong. But we are not talking about whether it is sensible or not, but only what the story relates. And that is what the story relates. Jar and others are trying to inject into the story what is not there---as they do with the New Testament. I can't think why. The only idea I have is that they want to hold on to the name of "Christian." Is that it, Jar?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
The puzzle for me is why you spend thread upon thread trying to take the name "Christian" away from them. Pleasure, pleasure--why does one do anything?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
You seem very strange and very silly. How am I silly? Do you do nothing for pleasure?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
You're the one who's injecting what isn't there: a fictitious world in which there is child-free childbirth and work-free gardening. No, you are applying realism. It's like saying there is no such thing as ghosts in regard to Hamlet. But we are inquiring about the facts of the story. Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I'm not saying there is no child-free childbirth or work-free gardening. I'm saying they're not in the story. If you think they are, cite chapter and verse instead of just repeating, "It's obvious." You must be the biggest damned fool I ever met in my life. So God said, everything is like it was before? No changes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
they vary quite a bit, if you reread the wiki, they do have "original sin" but its nothing like luther had Christianity makes no sense without the concept of the Fall and the Passion. That's why New Age Christianity is ridiculous. Jar's religion is a joke. I'm trying to help him out by pointing that out.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein. AdminPD See Message 121. Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Some would say that religion in general is a joke. I think that's is a point where reasonable people can disagree. Real religion is no joke. it's a very serious matter.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein. AdminPD See Message 121. Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning "Your friends, if they can, may bury you with some distinction, and set up a monument, to let posterity see that your dust lies under such a stone; and when that is done, all is done. Your place is filled up by another, the world is just in the same state it was, you are blotted out of its sight, and as much forgotten by the world as if you had never belonged to it."--William Law
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I think that's what I said I said real religion. Jar's religion is not real.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein. AdminPD See Message 121. Edited by AdminPD, : OFf Topic Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
The question was, why were Adam and EVe punished? Jar denied in another thread that they were punished due to the fact that they ate from the tree of KGE. I asked him why they were punished, and I get this:
Sorry robin but your reply is unrelated to the question I asked. This is the sophistry I'm trying to expose. Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024