Summations Only

BumpEdited by Blue, : Edit

Ok so Adam knew. What about eve? What about the other questions?Edited by Blue, : Edit

Either way, from a Jewish perspective it still doesn't have anything to do with the snake in the garden.That's why if that is what God really meant, then he had deceived all those Jews. Uh, he studied to be a Rabbi and you're just making stuff up off the cuff. Its far more likely that he is right and you are wrong. You're getting very basic stuff wrong that we can easily see by looking at the scripture. Its obvious that you're just making stuff up as you go along.

I'm not making anything up. If you are referring to my conversation with ringo it is a simple mistake. It doesn't support the serpent being an internal adversary. The arguments I have I have had for 20 years.The fact that he is a rabbi means nothing. Plenty of them disagree with each other. Including those converted jews that are rabbi and pastor like johnathan cahn.Edited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : Edit

This is getting silly. You flat-out contradict the Bible and you stil cop an attitude. Try to get your act together.If you want some questions answered, get them together in one post.

You are hating on the Bible. It is clear. You can't even address my post. Yes if we re going to talk about the text we need to address every verse of the story. Read verse 1-2. Address my questions earlier. Stop distracting with claims as you just posted. Stop being silly.Edited by Blue, : Edit

Quoting the Bible to show how you are wrong is not hating.

You are hating on the Bible if you pick a few verses to make claims which are false in accepted biblical theology. You need to quote the verses in the proper context of the WHOLE story. Address my questions. Explain v 1-2. Explain the usage of the serpent being SUBTIL.Edited by Blue, : Edit

I can't be chasing you in a dozen directions at once.Take a breath. Take the time to get all of your questions together in one post. Maybe if you stop and think for a minute you'll find some of the answers yourself.When you're ready, I'll be glad to answer any questions you have.

Here are my questions:If the Serpent in the story was not deceiving Eve in vs 4, why does vs 4 follow from the context of a SUBTIL character in vs 1?Why does the question in vs 1 follow from a SUBTIL character? Here is the definition of SUBTIL according to the Hebrew Lexicon: SUBTIL or `aruwm meaning sly, crafty, prudent, shrew, etc.How does Eve know in chapter 3 the tree was the tree of good and evil? She wasn't even created until a few verses after God instructed "the man" not to eat from the tree of good and evil in chapter 2. Why does the author describe the serpent choosing to deceive Eve vs Adam? Does this have anything to do with the fact that Adam knew it was the tree of good and evil?I really don't see how Eve knew it was the tree of good and evil, if the serpent is an internal adversary how did she know it was the tree of good and evil?Why are we presenting that the serpent is a metaphor of an internal adversary when it is being painted as an external adversary? It is considered a beast of the field that GOD made. If I'm going to accept this NEW interpretation you or somebody claiming it will need to answer these questions, and possibly more..Edited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : ErEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : FormattingEdited by Blue, : vs 16Edited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : edit

If this is the case how can she and Adam be held culpable for their 'crime'?

Oh so now we are accepting inferences, which is what you are implying.My answer is, Adam knew it was the tree of good and evil.Edited by Blue, : err

How could he have known the difference between good and evil until he had eaten from the tree?

Eve fed him the fruit. Which is an interesting point. So I suppose we can reasonably conclude she knew because of Adam... However we are concluding it, it is not written. Remember we don't want to rely on unwritten material.Please don't pretend like I am not willing to accept new points but the below 3 questions are a bit more hard to solve.1 If the Serpent in the story was not deceiving Eve in vs 4, why does vs 4 follow from the context of a SUBTIL character in vs 1? This is the context of the entire chapter. It is how it begins.2 Why does the question in vs 1 follow from a SUBTIL character? SUBTIL -Hebrew Lexicon3.) Why are we presenting that the serpent is a metaphor of an internal adversary when it is being painted as an external adversary? It is considered a beast of the field that GOD made. Edited by Blue, : editEdited by Blue, : AddEdited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : err

Neither Adam or Eve was able to make an informed decision about fruit eating. For Yahweh to apportion culpability to them is like blaming a child for eating the plutonium dad left in the Wendy house.