|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,817 Year: 4,074/9,624 Month: 945/974 Week: 272/286 Day: 33/46 Hour: 5/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Importance of Original Sin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1968 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
hooah writes: When was he with her? The text/context implies that he was with her when she initially ate it. But a literal reading doesn't say at what point he came to her side, now does it? It doesn't. Which is why I used the word 'could'. Perhaps he was with her when the serpent was talking to her. Perhaps not. Since we don't know we can't assume either way. You seemed to be assuming he was with her when the serpent was talking to her.
So he was right there with her, but he didn't hear the snake Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 828 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
You seemed to be assuming he was with her when the serpent was talking to her. Because it's the most obvious choice, mainly since it doesn't say anything like "then adam comes walking over and sees eve talking to a snake". Instead, the very next sentence says "who (adam) was with her", which implies he was with her when the event in the preceding sentence took place. This is the problem with the bible, and something that has reared it's head on EvC recently. It's far too open to interpretation, yet people take it as a literal truth. So open to interpretation is it that you cannot even tell people they are wrong. Every reading is just as valid as the next."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1968 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Because it's the most obvious choice, mainly since it doesn't say anything like "then adam comes walking over and sees eve talking to a snake". Instead, the very next sentence says "who (adam) was with her", which implies he was with her when the event in the preceding sentence took place. This is the problem with the bible, and something that has reared it's head on EvC recently. It's far too open to interpretation, yet people take it as a literal truth. So open to interpretation is it that you cannot even tell people they are wrong. Every reading is just as valid as the next. The text sees an encounter take place between the serpent and eve. As a result of that encounter Eve comes to a view and acts on it with Adam present. That there is some time difference between the encounter and the view formed is indicated by "when". That time difference could be a second or it could be a week. We cannot tell either way. If your view rests on assuming the one over the other then it stands on sandy ground and is subject to being washed away. There is no problem so long as you don't stand too much on sandy ground. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 828 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
If your view rests on assuming the one over the other then it stands on sandy ground and is subject to being washed away. There is no problem so long as you don't stand too much on sandy ground. I don't care one whit. I don't rest anything on any part of your holy book because it's all fairy tales. However, since we are in bible study, we are investigating the stories as written. So, if you want to assume that a whole bunch of time passed in one sentence, with no written indication that any time has passed, be my guest. Like I said: you are free to interpret your book however you see fit."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
J writes: What Adam and Eve knew about what was good to do and what was not good to do came directly from God. What is the point of the tree of knowledge if they already had all this knowledge about what was good and bad already? Edited by Straggler, : Fix quotes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
ICANt writes: God specifically told the man, "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die". Sentence was declared and would be carried out upon disobedience by eating the fruit. And how do A&E know that death is a "bad" thing? In fact if death is some sort of eternal ethereal existence why is death a bad thing? Where do you think you will be once you die ICANT?
Straggler writes: Then what did the serpent say? ICANT writes: The serpent did not say anything to the man. I am detecting some slipperiness here!! What did the serpent say (to either of them)?
ICANT writes: Just like I should have known when my grandmother told me if I touched the red sides of the wood heater it would burn me. Grandma told me if I touched it that it would burn me. God told the man if he ate the fruit from the forbidden tree he would die. I did not have to know right from wrong to know the heater would burn me and neither did the man have to know right from wrong to know he would die if he disobeyed. But why would Adam or Eve think that dying was a bad thing? My grandma told me that fire was dangerous and that I shouldn't go near it. When I was 4 I stuck my hand in the fire because I wanted to find out for myself. Put someone in a room with a big red button marked "danger", tell them that something terrible will happen if they press that big red button and you can bet your arse that they will dwell on it, ponder over it and then press the big red button of doom. Such is human nature......
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 828 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Put someone in a room with a big red button marked "danger", tell them that something terrible will happen if they press that big red button and you can bet your arse that they will dwell on it, ponder over it and then press the big red button of doom. But ICANT sells a genesis where there was no such thing as death before they ate the fruit. Hell, he even thinks animals could talk before that fateful event. So from that, we gather that they didn't even know what death was. You, me and all speakers of english know what "danger" means and that it's bad. It would be more like a big red button that said "hasa diga eebowai"."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 92 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Hoo writes: It would be more like a big red button that said "hasa diga eebowai". WTF!! - Did you just say "hasa diga eebowai"....? You CANNOT say "hasa diga eebowai"!!! Are you frikkin crazy? Do you have any idea what happens when you say "hasa diga eebowai"....?????!!!!!!! NNNNNNOOOooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!
Hoo writes: But ICANT sells a genesis where there was no such thing as death before they ate the fruit ICANT believes some strange shit. Even by the crazed standards of biblical literalists he is a shroom and mescaline merchant where others are mere dopeheads. According to ICANT there are literally two versions of Genesis and thus literally two versions of mankind, two Adams etc. etc. etc. It's wacky gone mad....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1968 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
hooah writes: I don't care one whit. I don't rest anything on any part of your holy book because it's all fairy tales. However, since we are in bible study, we are investigating the stories as written. Instructive. In suggesting one shouldn't build too much on sandy foundations I wasn't supposing a context anything than bible study building. Yet you read something into the my text. You've done the same here..
So, if you want to assume that a whole bunch of time passed in one sentence, with no written indication that any time has passed, be my guest. Like I said: you are free to interpret your book however you see fit. ..I'm not assuming anything. I'm pointing out that you are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 828 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
..I'm not assuming anything. I'm pointing out that you are. Not so much assuming but reading and comprehending."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1968 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Straggler writes: But why would Adam or Eve think that dying was a bad thing? Because he understood plain English (or whatever language was spoken then)? I don't mean that he understood death in the detailed sense we're able to appreciate it by. Rather (we must assume) he understood dying as being something negative/unpleasant/to be avoided. It wouldn't have been hard for God to go about educating him in this. If we don't assume he a working knowledge of this concept then we can't assume he had a working knowledge of any of the other concepts which are represented by words such as: On,this,day,you,will,surely, etc. - in which case debate is pretty much pointless. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi iano,
iano writes: Your 'he ate to join her in death' idea doesn't require him listening to her. The only thing that would be required of the man was to choose to wilfully disobey God. Just like a person that is given the opportunity to accept Christ and be saved who choses to reject that offer. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3484 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Some translations say when and some don't. If we read about the Fall of Man in the Legends of the Jews, we see Paul's presentation has more association with those stories than with what we have written in Genesis.
First she ate only the outside skin of the fruit, and then, seeing that death did not fell her, she ate the fruit itself.[64] Scarce had she finished, when she saw the Angel of Death before her. Expecting her end to come immediately, she resolved to make Adam eat of the forbidden fruit, too, lest he espouse another wife after her death.[65] It required tears and lamentations on her part to prevail upon Adam to take the baleful step. Not yet satisfied, she gave of the fruit to all other living beings, that they, too, might be subject to death.[66] All ate, and they all are mortal, with the exception of the bird malham, who refused the fruit, with the words: "Is it not enough that ye have sinned against God, and have brought death to others? This is where we see the idea of death being "brought in". From what I've read of some Jewish teachings today, they don't have a problem using Legends to teach. From looking at the NT, IMO, Jesus and Paul didn't have problems with using legends either. That mankind has the capacity to misbehave is a given. That we are not in control of our actions, is not a given. Jesus and Paul didn't present the idea that people were not able to behave. It is interesting when we look at other creation stories, which is what sparked this thread, the idea that there is good and bad seems to be in all the ones I've read; but the idea that mankind needs redemption from this condition does not show up in all of them. Not a universal thought. IMO, that's more of the story part and not the factual part. Marketing strategy: Create a need (real or imagined) and then fill it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1968 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
ICANT writes: The only thing that would be required of the man was to choose to wilfully disobey God. Indeed. But the question is whether he disobeyed in order obtain what were perceived by him to be positive consequences or whether he disobeyed in order to die with her. There is good, direct evidence to support the former notion, and absolutely no direct evidence to support the latter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Straggler,
Straggler writes: And how do A&E know that death is a "bad" thing? Why does death have to be a "bad" thing? It was just a consequence of disobeying God.
Straggler writes: I am detecting some slipperiness here!! What did the serpent say (to either of them)? quote: Those verses contain all the conversation of the serpent in the garden.
Straggler writes: But why would Adam or Eve think that dying was a bad thing? I could answer that question if I knew what the first man's definition of מוּת was.
Straggler writes: My grandma told me that fire was dangerous and that I shouldn't go near it. When I was 4 I stuck my hand in the fire because I wanted to find out for myself. So you exercised your freewill and chose to stick your hand in the fire.
Straggler writes: Put someone in a room with a big red button marked "danger", tell them that something terrible will happen if they press that big red button and you can bet your arse that they will dwell on it, ponder over it and then press the big red button of doom. Would that someone be forced to press that big red button? Or would they be exercising their freewill by choosing to press that big red button? No one made the man eat the fruit of the forbidden tree. He simply chose to eat the fruit for whatever reason he had.
Straggler writes: Such is human nature...... So humans have a nature to try things when they are told not to do them. Where do you think that nature came from? God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024