It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Thanks for the frankness wearewatchingyouman – now I know where you’re coming from and at ease in this converse. All I can say about your background is wow – you came from a very spiritually active family and I have no doubt that you have “the knowledge”. Me? -- just a reg-pub – that’s all (ave. 3-4).
But that’s neither here nor there for all the knowledge in this world will not matter much if it’s not founded in the infallible written word of God.
OF course you have your version of “truth” and I have mine – difference is I completely trust God’s Word the Bible. You on the other hand based your “truth” on “scholars”.
Don’t get me wrong – many scholars had gotten their works right, for that I’m grateful but sadly they are just imperfect men and women and will make mistakes. Noone is immune to this, that I’m fully aware – from Adam down to our time. In addition God’s enemy Satan and his minions are at this for a long, long time now - busily planting doubts since time immemorial. SO it’s up to the individual to “make sure of all things” – if a word, phrase, quote is true or not. If one is not selective as far as this world’s “wisdom” is concern then one will end up confused – especially if it’s NOT grounded on facts and most of all God’s infallible word.
And like I said – my standard is the Bible and I use extensively to detect whether “a truth” is indeed from the Word of God or not. If not then it will be fully revealed as such.
There’s also the need to be humble, the willingness to change if ones understanding or “wisdom” has been proven wrong (i.e. politics, war, cross, pagan celebrations, etc). Sadly many lack this attribute.
So back to the topic – since you’re not able to convincingly show and prove the discrepancy in Genesis 1 and 2 what discrepancy are you trying to prove now in Genesis 3?
(ps - no time count here, just a converse)
Adam and Eve would remain ethical and moral idiots without any frames of reference on how to conduct their lives
The account of Adam and Eve as a literal event is so full of logical contradictions.
There is something God did not want Adam and Eve to know. He didn’t want them to know the difference between good and evil. Why wouldn’t he want them to know that? Beats me. Furthermore, if God didn’t WANT them to know the difference between good and bad, then before they ate of that tree, they did NOT know the difference. It could be no other way.
Without knowing the difference between good and bad, Adam and Eve would remain ethical and moral idiots without any frames of reference on how to conduct their lives. By virtue of putting that tree in the garden and by virtue of God telling them it was the tree of “knowledge” of good and evil, then it is clear they could only get that knowledge if they did eat of that tree. It could be no other way.
They wouldn’t know that roasting their children live and eating them was evil, for example. They wouldn’t know that helping others was good, either. They simply wouldn’t know.
What if one argues that Adam and Eve were made in God’s image as the Bible clearly states? Since God knows what is good and what is evil, then God must have given them the ability to recognize good from evil. If that were the case, then there would be no NEED for that stupid ol’ tree in the first place! They would already have the godly qualities of knowledge of what is good and what is evil. But since there WAS a tree, then they didn’t have those qualities. Therefore, they were NOT made in God’s image as the Bible states. A major quality that separates humans from beasts, is that we have ethics and morals and we have choice about how to apply those ethics and morals. Beasts don’t. Without knowing right from wrong, i.e. “good” from “evil” we would not be truly made in God’s image. Therefore, “perfect” Adam and Eve were not made in God’s image at all and the Genesis account has already and directly contradicted itself.
So they ate the fruit, and God was really pissed. He states that they have now become one of US and now know the difference between good and evil. Once again, this shows that they did not know the difference before they ate. Herein lies another problem: what exactly happened that caused them to know this? The Bible said they became ashamed and fearful. But being ashamed is not good, nor is it evil. Neither is being fearful. Those are just feelings. SOMETHING caused them to gain this knowledge, though. It HAD to be something in the fruit! The fruit was rigged with some sort of DNA or chemicals or magical potion, or something. If you want to argue that it wasn’t the fruit, but that God himself instantly wired their brains the minute they ate of that fruit, then God is to blame for the whole thing. He didn’t have to wire their brains if he didn’t want to.
If they were perfect humans at the start as is the claim, and if they were “made in God’s image” as the Bible claims they would have HAD to know the difference between good and evil. Otherwise, they would have been worse than we who are imperfect yet do know the difference: they would have been morons without any moral compass for life whatsoever. But they DIDN’T know the difference or there would have been no need for that tree. In other words they couldn't have known that disobeying the good God was the bad thing to do, verses not listening to the evil serpent was the good thing to do, because they had no concept of this.Thus there was no "original sin", because in order to sin one must understand the good/bad, right/wrong paradox
The WTS claims that Adam and Eve were created to live forever, but Gen. 3:22 says God kicked them out of the Garden so they couldn’t eat of the “tree of life” and live to “time indefinite.” This implies that until Adam and Eve ate of that tree of life, they would not be able to live not only forever, but even to “time indefinite.” Adam and Eve’s bodies were not made to live a long, long time. If they were, there would have been no need for a “tree of life.” Either they were pre-rigged in such a way that they would die unless they ate of that tree of life and that tree contained some magic potion that would undo that rigging, or God would have had to tinker with their genes after they ate of that tree to make them live long, long lives or even forever.
This is important to remember. They were NOT initially set-up to live long, long lives. One cannot argue that they were, because of that “tree of life” verse. God COULD have been a little more optimistic and created them to live long, lives, and later messed them up when they disobeyed him, but it turns out that God was a pessimist from the get-go and assumed the worse by the was he set things up. He didn’t even trust his OWN creation. Strange God, that.
Therefore, the God of Genesis created the first pair pre-supposing they would be doomed. He made the tree of knowledge overwhelmingly resistible, they succumbed and he doomed them. And us.
Furthermore, the idea that the Serpent became the father of the lie in chapter 3 is absoloutly ludacis. Please point out where he lied. If anything God lied in 2:17 when he said "for in the day you eat it you will positively die." I'm pretty sure they didn't die the day they ate from it just as the serpent said in verse 3:4, and as already covered they weren't created to live forever. He certainly didn't lie when he said in verse 5 that they would become as God(s) knowing good from evil. This is made clear by verse 22 also when God says "he has become like one of US".
16 And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
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. -- ASV
Here was his deliberate 1st lie.
…Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden? “ Gen 3:1
… Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat:
3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened,
and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
.
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
And like I said – my standard is the Bible and I use extensively to detect whether “a truth” is indeed from the Word of God or not. If not then it will be fully revealed as such.
Originally posted by edmc^2
How would YOU know if your kids really love you with all their heart, mind and soul?
#6754 צֶלֶם tselem [tseh'-lem]
from an unused root meaning to shade; TWOT - 1923a; n m
—Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)
1) image
1a) images (of tumours, mice, heathen gods)
1b) image, likeness (of resemblance)
1c) mere, empty, image, semblance (fig.)
—Brown-Driver-Briggs (Old Testament Hebrew-English Lexicon)
From an unused root meaning to shade; a phantom, that is, (figuratively) illusion, resemblance; hence a representative figure, especially an idol:—image, vain shew.
—Strong's (Hebrew & Chaldee Dictionary of the Old Testament)
AV - image 16, vain shew 1; 17
Originally posted by Glass
reply to post by edmc^2
When the serpent tempted Eve it came down to one question:
Who does Eve trust? God or the Serpent?
God told Adam and Eve that they would surely die if they ate the apple. The Serpent told them that they would surely not die.
The problem though was that Eve had no knowlege of Good and Evil, so she could not comprehend that the Serpent was trying to decieve her. At no point did she ever consider that the Serpent could be lying.
Therefore it cannot be said that it was a just and fair course of action for God to immediately cast out his children for one simple act of disobedience when they didn't even realise that they were doing anything wrong.
Lets imagine that you've told your child not to do something, like talk to strangers for instance. Then one day a stranger walks up to her and starts talking to her, but she tells him she's not allowed to talk to strangers, to which he replies that he knows you, her father. Its a lie, but she doesn't know it, and she trusts him. You notice this happening and go over to them. What do you do? Do you take your child and discipline her appropriately? Or do you tell her she is no longer welcome in your house because she disobeyed you, and leave her at the mercy of the stranger?
Some loving father your god is..
At this the woman said to the serpent: “Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat. 3 But as for [eating] of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘YOU must not eat from it, no, YOU must not touch it that YOU do not die.’”
“Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and came to be in transgression.” (1 Timothy 2:14)
“. . .Later they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden about the breezy part of the day, and the man and his wife went into hiding from the face of Jehovah God in between the trees of the garden. 9 And Jehovah God kept calling to the man and saying to him: “Where are you?” 10 Finally he said: “Your voice I heard in the garden, but I was afraid because I was naked and so I hid myself.” 11 At that he said: “Who told you that you were naked? From the tree from which I commanded you not to eat have you eaten?” 12 And the man went on to say: “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me [fruit] from the tree and so I ate.” 13 With that Jehovah God said to the woman: “What is this you have done?” To this the woman replied: “The serpent—it deceived me and so I ate.”” (Genesis 3:8-13)
““5 And I shall put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed. He will bruise you in the head and you will bruise him in the heel.”” (Genesis 3:15)
“He who carries on sin originates with the Devil, because the Devil has been sinning from [the] beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest, namely, to break up the works of the Devil.” (1 John 3:8)
16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.
“. . .“From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. 17 But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die.”” (Genesis 2:16-17)
and as far as your explanation of the serpent telling lies... there is not a single lie there... did you even read what I wrote? and furthermore did you read the scriptures you quoted as lies and then verse 7 which you quoted as well?
“. . .And Jehovah God also laid this command upon the man: “From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. 17 But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die.”” (Genesis 2:16-17)
“. . .So it began to say to the woman: “Is it really so that God said YOU must not eat from every tree of the garden?. . .” (Genesis 3:1)
“. . .At this the serpent said to the woman: “YOU positively will not die. 5 For God knows that in the very day of YOUR eating from it YOUR eyes are bound to be opened and YOU are bound to be like God, KNOWING good and bad.”” (Genesis 3:4-5)
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by edmc^2
And like I said – my standard is the Bible and I use extensively to detect whether “a truth” is indeed from the Word of God or not. If not then it will be fully revealed as such.
How can you say that when you use all of the different versions of the bible in your posts?
Not every bible has the exact meaning the next does... for example...
Mt 19:17
KJV
Why callest thou me good?
NIV
"Why do you ask me about what is good?"
NAS
"Why are you asking me about what is good?"
NWT
"Why do you ask me about what is good?"
Luke 4:4
KJV
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
ASV
And Jesus answered unto him, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone.
NIV
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone
.....
...
..
.
I can confidently say this because I'm very familiar with the contents of the Bible. I know the truth that it contains so I'm able to use any version.
But as you can see - there's only one version that I quote from extensively because of it's accuracy.
The truth most likely is predetermined so everything is just made to fit that, no matter what it says.
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by edmc^2
I can confidently say this because I'm very familiar with the contents of the Bible. I know the truth that it contains so I'm able to use any version.
But as you can see - there's only one version that I quote from extensively because of it's accuracy.
It seems to me you use whatever version suits your own meaning.
Perhaps you might explain what "the truth" is that it contains... without a sermon?
Originally posted by jmdewey60
The truth most likely is predetermined so everything is just made to fit that, no matter what it says.
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by edmc^2
I can confidently say this because I'm very familiar with the contents of the Bible. I know the truth that it contains so I'm able to use any version.
But as you can see - there's only one version that I quote from extensively because of it's accuracy.
It seems to me you use whatever version suits your own meaning.
Perhaps you might explain what "the truth" is that it contains... without a sermon?
Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by edmc^2
You wrote:
["Of course if one will not consider carefully what the account is all about and lessons behind it and doesn’t consider the context then it will seem to have contradictions."]
And in our seemingly unending 'regression' of methods (how do you conclude, what you conclude), I have repeatedly asked you for YOUR way of structuring, patterning, organizing or interpretating the bible. I'm still waiting.
In my book a "I just know" really isn't an answer.
edit on 6-8-2011 by bogomil because: missing word
Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to post by Akragon
Obviously NWT
ASV
DBY
and the rest on occasions (for further clarification):
www.blueletterbible.org...
biblos.com...
I usually refer to the ones that used God's name - less confusion.