Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Poor Satan, so misunderstood.
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 46 of 301 (439199)
12-07-2007 6:06 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by jaywill
12-07-2007 4:03 PM


Re: Result of Eating the Tree of Knowledge of g/e
OT = The 5 Mosaic books. Job is post Bible, prophetic writings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 4:03 PM jaywill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Rrhain, posted 12-08-2007 4:17 AM IamJoseph has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 47 of 301 (439201)
12-07-2007 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by jaywill
12-07-2007 4:03 PM


Re: Result of Eating the Tree of Knowledge of g/e
quote:
You need to stop for a minute and contemplate the personality and power of a being who could dare to revolt against God to overthrow God. Appearing or using a serpent would be nothing to him.
No need to think about it. This is hellenist head bashing diety stuff. Its not monotheism, but skirting paganism. To each their own - not that one's belief transcends one's actions..
quote:
I sometimes wonder how the Egyptian magicians were able to imitate God's miracle and turn their staffs into serpents. This they did by their dark magic arts.
This is a top question, and not much understood. The ancient world did have magic, same as we have science today - the latter replaced the former. The Egyptian priests were able to forecast the coming of Moses via the sea [thus they killed the first born male hebrews].
quote:
Anyway, the little snake is going to the lake of fire to be punished forever. And we of the children of God are going to take a part in putting him there.
There is no punishment described as 'forever'; this would contradict the act of forgiveness and mercy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 4:03 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 10:11 PM IamJoseph has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 48 of 301 (439246)
12-07-2007 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by IamJoseph
12-07-2007 2:12 AM


IamJoseph writes:
quote:
That the serpent has his legs confiscated, means he onced had legs and did not crawl - which says this garden was not in this physical realm.
Except the Bible says it was. The garden was placed among the four rivers, two of which most people actually have heard of: The Tigris and Euphrates.
If it were not in the physical realm, what on earth were Adam, Eve, all the other animals, and all the plants doing there since all of them were physical beings?
quote:
It also alludes to why we have no knowledge of anything of a pre-physical realm or of the origins of anything whatsoever.
Except the Bible specifically says that everything started on the first day, five days before the creation of humans.
quote:
This is given as a reason to await a Messiah or further revelation.
There's that Christian imposition upon a Jewish text again.
The Messiah is not a philosopher. The Messiah is a warlord. Prophecy specifically says so.
Oh, and the Messiah does not die.
Ergo, Jesus cannot be the Messiah which is one of the myriad reasons why Jews don't accept him.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by IamJoseph, posted 12-07-2007 2:12 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by IamJoseph, posted 12-08-2007 2:25 AM Rrhain has replied

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


Message 49 of 301 (439253)
12-07-2007 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by IamJoseph
12-07-2007 6:19 PM


Re: Result of Eating the Tree of Knowledge of g/e
No need to think about it. This is hellenist head bashing diety stuff. Its not monotheism, but skirting paganism. To each their own - not that one's belief transcends one's actions..
I still don't see how monotheism is threatened by the existence of the Devil. It sounds like another discussion.
This is a top question, and not much understood. The ancient world did have magic, same as we have science today - the latter replaced the former. The Egyptian priests were able to forecast the coming of Moses via the sea [thus they killed the first born male hebrews].
Science is prevalent today, true. But peoples have not dropped magic, voodoo, curses, sacrifices, and the dark Satanic, and contact with the demonic. So magic has not been replaced universally by science. Some of the practitioners consider it "science" anyway.
There is no punishment described as 'forever'; this would contradict the act of forgiveness and mercy.
It is suppose to contradict the act of forgiveness and mercy. It is suppose to be an act without forgiveness and without mercy.
If you're looking for forgiveness and mercy then you need to look in the proper place. Look to Calvary where Christ has died for our sins that we may be forgiven. You don't go to the lake of fire to search for forgiveness and mercy.
"And he laid hold of the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan ... And the Devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimestone, where the beast and the false prophet were; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever." (See Rev. 20:2; 10)
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by IamJoseph, posted 12-07-2007 6:19 PM IamJoseph has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 50 of 301 (439254)
12-07-2007 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by IamJoseph
12-07-2007 2:38 AM


Re: Satan is good.
IamJoseph responds to me:
quote:
Absolutely, though we don't blame those following their belief sincerely.
Oh, yes, you do. Otherwise, you wouldn't try to push a Christian concept onto a Jewish text.
quote:
specifically atheist science
No such thing. Science says nothing about the existence of god, just as it says nothing about the existence of YOU.
Nobody thinks you don't exist. Science is the study of things that happen on their own.
Oh! Looks like we're back to the question that never gets answered:
Is there anything that happens on its own or is god required for everything?
quote:
The answer to all these issues are also vested in the OT
And yet, you reject the OT. You continue to try and push Christian concepts onto Jewish texts.
quote:
faith is meritless with revealed, open knowledge.
Why?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by IamJoseph, posted 12-07-2007 2:38 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 51 of 301 (439256)
12-07-2007 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by jaywill
12-07-2007 7:16 AM


jaywill responds to me:
quote:
Was Adam a Jew ?
Adam was created by the Jewish god, wasn't he?
quote:
I thought he was the first created man not just the first created Jew.
The fact that you have strayed and have started worshipping other gods doesn't change the fact that the creation story in Genesis is a Jewish story.
quote:
What happened to God's promise that through Abraham's seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed?
Nothing. All you have to do is follow the god of the Jews. It's the first commandment, after all: I am the lord, your god. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
quote:
Did God say only the Jews would be blessed through Abraham?
Of course not. But if you decide to worship other gods, what do you expect?
quote:
This book is to the Jews yet also to all mankind.
Indeed. But that means you don't get to claim it says things it clearly doesn't simply because you wish it applied to this other god you're worshipping.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 7:16 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 10:35 PM Rrhain has replied
 Message 54 by IamJoseph, posted 12-08-2007 2:45 AM Rrhain has not replied

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


Message 52 of 301 (439258)
12-07-2007 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Rrhain
12-07-2007 10:18 PM


Adam was created by the Jewish god, wasn't he?
Do you mean the Jewish God who said:
"Turn to Me and be saved, All the ends of the earth, For I am God and there is no one else." (Isaiah 45:22)
Do you mean that God who tells "all the ends of the earth" to turn to Him to be saved?
I think I will turn to Him and to His book to receive salvation.
The fact that you have strayed and have started worshipping other gods doesn't change the fact that the creation story in Genesis is a Jewish story.
The fact that you have revolted against the Messiah doesn't mean that I should not turn to the one true God and be saved.
Have you not read?
"In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrians will come to Egypt, and the Egyptians to Assyria; and the Egyptians will worship with the Assyrians.
In that day Israel will be the third party with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the land.
With which Jehovah of hosts will bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt My people and Assyria the work of My hands and Israel My inheritance." (Isaiah 19:23-25)
Are you going to talk loud about mercy from one side of your mouth and cut off the Gentiles from it on the other side?
Have you read the book of Jonah? One entire book from the Hebrew canon is dedicated to God's reluctance to judge a Gentile nation and their response to a Jewish prophet in repentance.
So I have repented at the Jewish Messiah Whom you reject.
Nothing. All you have to do is follow the god of the Jews. It's the first commandment, after all: I am the lord, your god. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
We learn not only what God has said. We also learn what else God has said. And this God has come in Christ the Son. And no wonder for He promised in Isaiah 9:6 that the child born would be called the Mighty God and the Son given would be called the Eternal Father.
This book, from Genesis to Revelation, is my book.
The Old Testament is also my book. Sorry.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Rrhain, posted 12-07-2007 10:18 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Rrhain, posted 12-08-2007 4:23 AM jaywill has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 53 of 301 (439280)
12-08-2007 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Rrhain
12-07-2007 9:38 PM


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That the serpent has his legs confiscated, means he onced had legs and did not crawl - which says this garden was not in this physical realm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except the Bible says it was. The garden was placed among the four rivers, two of which most people actually have heard of: The Tigris and Euphrates.
Consider the text:
quote:
Gen. 2/10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became four heads.
Consider the words, 'THENCE' and 'PARTED' here. The garden was parted [seperated from] the river; one was not on the physical earth realm. Then:
quote:
15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
'Took man' [from where? - from the physical earth he was created in], and placed him in the [separated] garden, aka pardez, aka paradise. Next, the expulsion to earth, with re-entry barred :
quote:
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. 23 Therefore the LORD God *sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken*. 24 So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubim, and the flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way to the tree of life. {S}
quote:
If it were not in the physical realm, what on earth were Adam, Eve, all the other animals, and all the plants doing there since all of them were physical beings?
Examine the text impacting on your pivotal question. We saw that adam was taken from the place he was created, and put into a garden, which was parted from where Adam came from. We know also from ch 2, the text, the animals emerged prior to Eve's emergence/seperation: this signifies a time prior to the garden placement of Adam [The OT is contextual, not chronological]. We know that after adam's encounter with the animals, this verse appears:
quote:
21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the place with flesh instead thereof.
The encounter of adam and eve as seperate entities occured in the paradisical garden, signified by 'deep' sleep [instead of normal sleep only]; this 'deep sleep' term is again mentioned with Abraham, whereby he is suddenly swirling the universe galaxies [enumerable stars] and given a prophesy his seed will surely be in bondage - even before any seed was yet born or commited any sin/crime. In both cases, Adam and Abraham were transported, so to speak [astralised?], into a different realm.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It also alludes to why we have no knowledge of anything of a pre-physical realm or of the origins of anything whatsoever.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except the Bible specifically says that everything started on the first day, five days before the creation of humans.
Yes, but w/o any contradictions with the conclusion. Everything was created in one instant [opening verse 1/1]; their chronological emergence in the six cosmic days [not earth-calendar 24 hour days]. This was the generic creation of life forms per se, and then explained in more subjective, historical context in the subsequent chapter. The text imposes this critical reading, else it does not make any orderly connections.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is given as a reason to await a Messiah or further revelation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's that Christian imposition upon a Jewish text again.
The Messiah is not a philosopher. The Messiah is a warlord. Prophecy specifically says so.
Oh, and the Messiah does not die.
Ergo, Jesus cannot be the Messiah which is one of the myriad reasons why Jews don't accept him.
Yes, nor does the messiah need resurrecting - the people need this, as well as a reconcialation with the animal kingdom, and peace between the nations of the earth [Isaiah]. The term warrior is multi-levelled.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Rrhain, posted 12-07-2007 9:38 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Rrhain, posted 12-08-2007 4:38 AM IamJoseph has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 54 of 301 (439283)
12-08-2007 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Rrhain
12-07-2007 10:18 PM


quote:
Was Adam a Jew ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adam was created by the Jewish god, wasn't he?
Abraham was the first Jew, and Jacob [Israel] became a nation after the cencus under Moses. All the OT laws upto Noah are directed upon all humanity, prior to any religions being formed. There are seven Noahic laws, which includes the belief of Monotheism - encumbent upon all humanity.
quote:
The fact that you have strayed and have started worshipping other gods doesn't change the fact that the creation story in Genesis is a Jewish story.
But the OT is also a universal and global treatise, effecting all sectors of life, including animals, women, parents and interactions between religious groups and nations. The jewish position may be just a background setting, as per its texts: be an example/light unto the nations, and the application of its laws which declares equal rights and justice applicable to all humanity equally.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happened to God's promise that through Abraham's seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing. All you have to do is follow the god of the Jews. It's the first commandment, after all: I am the lord, your god. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
That statute is well vindicated. Abraham's seed refers to jews, christians and muslims, and by subsequence all the world which follows the laws and advocations. A time factor is not given here.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did God say only the Jews would be blessed through Abraham?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course not. But if you decide to worship other gods, what do you expect?
The blessings were to all of Abraham's 'seed'; Jews constitute one thread, and the smallest, the variance being jews must follow 'all' the OT laws w/o variance. The law not to add or subtract is not mandated in other scriptures.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Rrhain, posted 12-07-2007 10:18 PM Rrhain has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 55 of 301 (439288)
12-08-2007 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by jaywill
12-07-2007 8:21 AM


Why are you quoting the New Testament when analysing the Torah?
jaywill responds to me:
quote:
quote:
No, he didn't. The serpent in the garden was precisely that: A serpent. Nothing more, nothing less.
Okay. It amounts to the same thing. The serpent was somehow utilized by the spiritual advasary of God, the devil.
No, it doesn't. For precisely the reason that the serpent was nothing more than an animal, no connection to god, not supernatural, not the devil.
There is no such thing as the devil in Judaism.
quote:
The old serpent was the devil - " ... The ancient serpent; he who is called the Devil and Satan, he who deceives the whole inhabited earth" (Rev. 12:9)
See, there you go trying to force a Christian interpretation on a Jewish text. The serpent mentioned in Revelation is not the same character as the one mentioned in Genesis.
quote:
quote:
The Bible directly calls the serpent a beast. The punishment of the serpent is to have its legs removed and to have his offspring forever crushed under the heel of humans.
On one level that may be true. I am not sure.
What do you mean you aren't sure? You mean you haven't read the Bible?
Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
See? A beast of the field. Not an angel. Not a devil. Not an instrument of god. Just a plain serpent.
Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
See? A beast of the field. Treated like an animal. Not a fallen angel. Not a devil. Not an instrument of god. Just a plain serpent.
3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
See? Treated like an animal. Not a fallen angel. Not a devil. Not an instrument of god. Just a plain serpent.
quote:
But the Bible is a deeply profound and spiritual revelation.
Indeed. And the Bible clearly and directly calls the serpent a serpent. Not a fallen angel. Not a devil. Not an instrument of god. Just a plain serpent.
quote:
And the fuller significance is that God incarnate, as the seed of the woman born of a virgin, would crush the Devil in His death and resurrection.
There you go again trying to force a Christian interpretation on a Jewish text. There is no such interpretation to be found in the Torah.
quote:
The Bible calls the Devil the ancient serpent in Revelation 12:9.
Yes, but it isn't referring to Genesis. The "Satan" of the Torah is the agent of god, doing god's bidding and in perfect harmony with god.
The idea that Revelation is referring to Genesis is a modern Christian interpretation forced upon a Jewish text.
Genesis was written by Jews for Jews and can only be understood in a Jewish context...which means there is no such thing as the devil and the tale told in Revelation is made out of whole cloth with no connection to the Torah of any kind as it refers to entities that do not exist.
quote:
quote:
No, he didn't. The serpent never tells Eve to eat from the tree. He simply points out that god is not being truthful regarding it.
For what purpose?
We don't know. The Bible doesn't say. That doesn't change the fact that the serpent was right. Adam and Eve did not die as god said they would. Instead, they became as gods, knowing good and evil as the serpent said.
The serpent never told Eve to eat of the tree. He simply told her the truth.
quote:
Of course that she would take of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Why? Why does knowing the truth mean she has to eat of the tree? The serpent does not tell Eve to eat. He merely tells her the truth.
[quotations from the New Testament deleted for space]
There you go again trying to force Christian interpretations upon a Jewish text.
quote:
quote:
And the serpent was right: Adam and Eve, of their own volition, eat from the tree and become as gods, knowing good and evil.
The most effective lie is always mixed with a little truth.
Where was the lie? The serpent didn't tell Eve to eat from the tree. He simply told her the pure truth.
[quotations from the New Testament deleted for space]
There you go again trying to force Christian interpretations upon a Jewish text.
Geneis was written by Jews for Jews and cannot be understood outside of a Jewish context. Any reference to the New Testament is necessarily flawed. You have to explain Genesis using the Torah and Judaism, not Christianity.
Or are you saying that Jews don't understand their own religion?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 8:21 AM jaywill has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 56 of 301 (439289)
12-08-2007 3:46 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Greatest I am
12-07-2007 9:57 AM


Re: Satan is good.
Greatest I am responds to me:
quote:
I believe that the name Satan is only a catch all name for evil thoughts and notions and deeds.
Again, that's a Christian claim. The Torah directly contradicts that idea. "Satan" first appears in Job as an agent of god, under orders from god, carrying out god's will.
quote:
Like God is a title, so is Satan.
Indeed. It means "Adversary," but not as one to god. Rather, it is god's adversary to man.
You are forcing a Christian interpretation onto Judaism.
Are you saying Jews don't understand their own religion?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Greatest I am, posted 12-07-2007 9:57 AM Greatest I am has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Greatest I am, posted 12-08-2007 11:02 AM Rrhain has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 57 of 301 (439294)
12-08-2007 4:08 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by jaywill
12-07-2007 4:03 PM


Re: Result of Eating the Tree of Knowledge of g/e
jaywill writes:
quote:
Please don't tell me that that is not the devil but God's friendly neighberhood prosecutor. Who started that foolishness on the Internet anyway?
That's an overly simplistic way of putting it, but it gets to the point: Satan in Job is an agent of god. The name translates as "Adversary," but not as an adversary to god but rather god's adversary to man.
Where does this idea come from? Well, that would be the Torah. You have actually read it, have you not? Here:
Job 1:12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand.
See? Satan is being driven by god, working under god's direction and orders. And again in Job 2, Satan does nothing but what god tells him to.
And who does Job finally raise his wrath to? Not to Satan but to god. And eventually, god comes unto Job and lifts him from his travails.
quote:
The behavior of the slanderer who is of some kind of angelic nature is the same throughout all references to the serpent, or Satan (in Job or Zechariah).
There's no reference to a serpent in Job. And the reference to Satan in Zechariah is to a person: The King of Tyre.
We've been through this before.
quote:
I believe Revelation 12 that says that the old serpent was the Devil and Satan, the one who deceives the whole inhabited earth.
But that's a Christian interpretation imposed upon a Jewish text. There is no devil in Genesis, therefore the "serpent" of Revelation cannot be the same serpent from Genesis.
quote:
I am not sure how the existence of the Devil was denial of monotheism.
Because it means that there is an "other" to god. But in monotheism, there is no "other." There is only god. All things, good and evil, come from god.
quote:
I think I'll limit myself to something like a topic at a time. Right now I am in the process of exposing Satan and discussing what he did and how he is being dealt with.
But you're confusing Christianity with Judaism as if Jewish texts could ever justify a Christian claim.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 4:03 PM jaywill has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 58 of 301 (439296)
12-08-2007 4:17 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by IamJoseph
12-07-2007 6:06 PM


Re: Result of Eating the Tree of Knowledge of g/e
IamJoseph writes:
quote:
OT = The 5 Mosaic books.
Incorrect. The first five books of the Bible are the Torah.
The "Old Testament" is everything you find in the "Old Testament" in the Bible. That's why it's called the "Old Testament."
The "Old Testament" contains the Torah, the Nevi'im (the Prophets), and the Ketuvim (the writings).
Judaism refers to this collection as the "Tanakh," but they order the books differently than Christians do.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by IamJoseph, posted 12-07-2007 6:06 PM IamJoseph has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 59 of 301 (439297)
12-08-2007 4:23 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by jaywill
12-07-2007 10:35 PM


jaywill responds to me:
quote:
Do you mean the Jewish God who said
Why did you ignore my very next sentence? The fact that you have started worshipping other gods doesn't change the fact that the creation story in Genesis is a Jewish story.
quote:
The fact that you have revolted against the Messiah doesn't mean that I should not turn to the one true God and be saved.
Have you not read?
Yes. That's how I know that Jesus isn't the Messiah. He fulfills none of the prophecies of the Messiah clearly delineated in the Jewish texts.
For one thing, the Messiah doesn't die. Jesus died. Ergo, Jesus cannot be the Messiah.
Or are you saying Jews don't know their own religion?
quote:
Are you going to talk loud about mercy from one side of your mouth and cut off the Gentiles from it on the other side?
Non sequitur. Please rephrase. We're discussing whether or not Christian concepts can be imposed upon Jewish texts.
quote:
So I have repented at the Jewish Messiah Whom you reject.
But Jesus wasn't the Messiah. He fulfilled none of the prophecies of the Messiah as laid out in the Jewish texts. Ergo, you have done no such thing.
quote:
The Old Testament is also my book. Sorry.
If it were, why do you have it out of order? Why do you split it into 39 books when there are only 24? Why do you impose line breaks on it that do not exist?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2007 10:35 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2007 3:54 PM Rrhain has replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 60 of 301 (439298)
12-08-2007 4:38 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by IamJoseph
12-08-2007 2:25 AM


IamJoseph responds to me:
quote:
Consider the words, 'THENCE' and 'PARTED' here. The garden was parted [seperated from] the river; one was not on the physical earth realm.
Incorrect. You ignored your own text. The river parted into four. Those four rivers are here on earth. Therefore, the thing happens here on earth.
quote:
'Took man' [from where? - from the physical earth he was created in], and placed him in the [separated] garden
But the earth he was created in WAS THE GARDEN. Therefore, the garden was on earth.
Genesis 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
The garden is "east." Not in another dimension. Not in a spiritual realm. It's simply "east." It's here on earth.
quote:
We know also from ch 2, the text, the animals emerged prior to Eve's emergence/seperation: this signifies a time prior to the garden placement of Adam
Incorrect. The text says the exact opposite. The animals are specifically created FOR THE USE OF ADAM TO FIND HIM A WIFE.
Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
quote:
[The OT is contextual, not chronological].
Incorrect. The story of Genesis 2 is chronological. Adam is created. God notices that Adam is alone. God creates animals in an attempt to find a wife for him. None of the animals are suitable, therefore god creates Eve.
quote:
Yes, but w/o any contradictions with the conclusion.
Incorrect. Genesis 1 directly contradicts Genesis 2. This is not surprising since Genesis 1 and 2 are distinct and separate creation myths from earlier times that were cobbled together into a single text.
quote:
their chronological emergence in the six cosmic days [not earth-calendar 24 hour days].
Incorrect. The days in Genesis 1 are literal, 24-hour days. That's what "evening and morning" means: A literal, 24-hour day.
quote:
This was the generic creation of life forms per se, and then explained in more subjective, historical context in the subsequent chapter. The text imposes this critical reading, else it does not make any orderly connections.
You're right that Genesis 1 and 2 don't make any sense when placed next to each other. That's because they're separate, distinct creation stories from earlier times that were cobbled together into a single text. For an even clearer and more startling example of this hatchet job of an editing, see the story of Noah. Two stories of a flood are told in parallel. That is why Noah does things like enter the ark twice, the fact that the animals come in both "twos" and "sevens," that the ark comes to rest twice, etc.
quote:
Yes, nor does the messiah need resurrecting
That's because the Messiah does not die. Jesus died. Therefore, Jesus cannot be the Messiah.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by IamJoseph, posted 12-08-2007 2:25 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by IamJoseph, posted 12-08-2007 5:34 AM Rrhain has replied
 Message 62 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2007 8:41 AM Rrhain 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