Why is that a 'god-like quality'? Gen 3:22 God saith, `Lo, the man was as one of Us, as to the knowledge of good and evil; and now, lest he send forth his hand, and have taken also of the tree of life, and eaten, and lived to the age,'
You answered your own question. Because if people were intended to live eternally then they would not have been ejected fromthe garden. There's other reasons, but this should be sufficient since you quoted the verse.
is that where you learned that from?
I learn from many, but this specific teaching comes from King Solomon.
Because knowledge is what enables a living being to survive and help others with the same.
It is the cause of many-many deaths and sufferings. This fact is absolutley true and consistent.
OK.... but i do not accept that a 'god saith'ith anything to anyone.
Then this should be applied towards your own theological position.
Now a serpent is talking to people? Which god saith'ith that. I even quote scripture with the saith'ith and dont use that as an authority.
But if mankind is still alive, and from first man/woman, than it is clear, they are still alive as us.
It's the very scope of 'raising the fathers to the flesh' they are us 'alive and in the flesh'
It's a story that teaches an important lesson. The lesson is true and consistent and easily observable in this thread and throught world history and in everyday life.
And a talking snake is just as implausible as Jesus descendind and rising, animating a corpse, speaking and permitting his disciples to inspect the wound. Yet you seem to have no problem asserting that as absolute inerrant truth.
You have a choicee tto make in order to be consistent. If you are choosing to weaken the Hebrew bible inorder to make it metaphor, then you have mispoken about the New Jerusalem, and your savior is not a true king, but a metaphorical king at best, not a true savior buut a metaphorical savior, and the promise of eternal life is a meetaphorical promise not a true promise, among other issues. Or you will be fforced into a contradiction and inconsistency and double-standards which are common in your position.
Funny, the quote that I had from gen 3, is 'god' saying it. Even if I know better but just the same as you are using the dialogue.
You are not paying attention to the details. It's ok, it's not your fault. I understand.
The serpent tempts with eternal life.
The serpent tempts with being god-like.
The serpent tempts wiith god-like knowledge.
After they eat the fruit, they realize what they did was wrong. They realize that what God did was right. They know both good and evil. They have become both good and evil. This is appparent in the confessional, but you need to understand the hebrew language to fully comprehend what is written there.
Then, what does God say:
ויאמר יהוה אלהים הן האדם היה כאחד ממנו לדעת טוב ורע ועתה פן־ישלח ידו ולקח גם מעץ החיים ואכל וחי לעלם׃
And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, what if he puts forth his hand, and takes also from the tree of life, and eats, and lives forever;
Who is "us". Who is there hiding in plain sight? You know who, don't you? And if you're reallt smart ( knowledgable, insightful, and wise, all three ) you'll know it's not just the serpent, but there's another lurking there too. In Revetion there's two enemies, if I recall? People are confused by this, but I can understand it. Can you?
Fact is, who you use to interpret the literature is not like me, capable!
I am
more than capable. I have resources and connections which are far beyond you at this time. I offered you friendship and I offered to share. It's an open ended offer.
OK........... both sides are written by human beings.
No apply that to the the narrative you accept as "gospel" truth, not only about Israel but also about Judaism. Can you do that? I'm looking for evidence that you can do it, not just empty words.
I did compare and represented the answer.
Then speak clearly and honestly. What is your opinion of the serpent in the story? Your words are a perfect match to it's words, correct?