• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Garden of Eden

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Obviously Jesus is much better. I meant just that it is possible people are "found guilty" and it doesn't necessary mean the person is bad.

I think it was a kangaroo court, and not civilized trial and that is why I don't think it is very bad.

Biden: "“I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus.”

And then he has signed countless number of executive orders. I think by his own words he is a dictator.

After watching the videos,I think it is ridiculous to call it an attack.

So, you think it is not true for example when Zuckerberg says the government pressured Facebook to censor speech the government didn't like?
A mob violently attacked the US Capital in order to prevent the lawful election of Joe Biden as President of the United States. Nine people died as a result! I don't know what videos you watched, but the above is a fact.

Are you really claiming that a person who is convicted by a jury and found guilty " doesn't necessary mean the person is bad". What else does it mean??? Felons are bad people!!! It was not "a kangaroo court" that convicted Trump of 34 felonies!

Your interpretation of Biden's quote is nonsense! He said that we are a democracy, and that you can't legislate by executive order (which is what a dictator does!).

Listen! It is the job of the President to sign executive orders! That does not make Biden (or any other President) a dictator!

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH YOU???
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I think they died, they lost their life in the garden. And also, I think the accurate words means, by death they shall die, which means that this life is the death by which they will die, not that the death is instant.
You keep ignoring the datum that in the story God has denied them knowledge of good and evil so it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to choose to do wrong. Until afterwards.

And I don't recall your responding to my question whether (although it's only a folktale) you think it's a good idea that humans should be able to tell good from evil, hence that Eve is actually a figurative heroine of mankind.
When they ignored God's words and didn't ask from God, but instead followed the serpent, they rejected God.
So God wasn't smart enough to work out that the whole situation was [his] fault, in deny them knowledge of good and evil in the first place? Out loud and proud, God was trying to protect [his] own position ─ Genesis 3:22-23 is the ONLY reason [he] gives for expelling them.
The text says: "Behold, the man has become like one of us" (Gen. 3:22) and you say "God was afraid A&E would eat from the Tree of Life and live forever and so become like [him]". If they had already become like God, why would he be afraid of that? And in any case, Bible doesn't say "God was afraid", it is your interpretation.
[He] was reacting to the situation [he]'d created, with words all about protecting [his] own position.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
A mob violently attacked the US Capital in order to prevent the lawful election of Joe Biden as President of the United States. Nine people died as a result! I don't know what videos you watched, but the above is a fact.
By what i know, only one killed that day was Ashli Babbitt, who was murdered by the police. If she should not have been white, there would probably have been similar "mostly peaceful" riots as when black, unarmed person, is killed by police.
It is the job of the President to sign executive orders!
It is dictating orders, which is the same as what dictators do.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
You keep ignoring the datum that in the story God has denied them knowledge of good and evil
Sorry, I don't think that is true. Bible doesn't say "God has denied them knowledge of good and evil".
And I don't recall your responding to my question whether (although it's only a folktale) you think it's a good idea that humans should be able to tell good from evil
I believe they could have done that even before the fruit event.
 
Why did God evict Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden? Christian dogma holds that God kicked them out because they violated his directive not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But that’s not the whole story. Here’s what the Bible actually says:
God didn’t want them to have both knowledge of good and evil and eternal life, so he threw them out to prevent them from eating the fruit of the tree of life. So the moral of this story is that Adam and Eve blew the one chance that humanity had for eternal life by getting themselves kicked out of the garden of Eden and thereby no longer being able to eat the fruit of the tree of life.

And that is the perspective from which the entire Old Testament was written-- except for the book of Daniel. That is the only book of the Old Testament that specifically describes the resurrection of the dead, the last judgment, eternal life, and paradise-- all four of those things.

Don’t take my word for it. Here’s what the world of biblical scholarship said about the matter more than 25 years ago:

There’s plenty of evidence from the biblical text itself that on the whole the Old Testament authors didn’t believe in the New Testament notion of the resurrection. Here’s an excerpt from the Psalms:
If God doesn’t remember those who are dead, then he can’t forgive their sins. If the dead are cut off from God’s hand, then he can’t resurrect them.

Chapter 2 of the book of Isaiah describes the author’s vision of the end of time:

What is most significant about the author’s words is what they do not say. There’s no mention of the resurrection of the dead, of the last judgment, of eternal life, or of paradise. But here’s what he says will happen:

That’s a description of farmers living in peace with the farmers of other nations. That’s not a description of angelic beings playing laudatory music in the vault of heaven.

In Zechariah Chapter 14 the author describes his vision of the end of time. Prior to that time the enemies of Jerusalem will surround the city:

But God will appear and will battle against the gathered nations:

God will bring about the destruction of Jerusalem’s enemies. And what then?

What is the Festival of Booths? It’s a Jewish religious observance. So in Zechariah’s vision everyone who survives the existential battle for Jerusalem will ultimately be converted to Judaism. And they will be required to go into the city of Jerusalem every year to observe the Festival of Booths. As far as I am aware there are no Christian sects that observe the Festival of Booths.

And as in Isaiah there is no mention anywhere in Zechariah of the resurrection of the dead, of a last judgment, of eternal life, or of paradise. The visions of these two very well known Old Testament authors have literally nothing in common with the New Testament vision of the end of time.

The book of Job has the longest discourse on man’s place in the universe of any book in the Bible. Job’s life was destroyed. He lost his oxen and asses to the Sabeans. His sheep and servants were consumed by fire. His camels were carried off by the Chaldeans. His sons and daughters were all killed when a great wind destroyed the house in which they were dining. And finally Satan afflicted Job with suppurating sores that covered his entire body.
Job debates the cause of his plight with several other men and claims that he was wrongly punished. But at no time throughout the discussion is there any mention of rewards or punishments in the afterlife. At the very end (Job 42:1-6) Job confesses to God that he was mistaken about God’s purposes. God accepts his apology and returns to Job everything that he had lost-- in this life, not in any version of an afterlife.

The Christian dogma of Original Sin holds that the terrible crime committed by Adam and Eve-- that of eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil-- has propagated throughout the entire human genome. As a result every human who has ever lived has been tainted with that indelible stain and is therefore utterly steeped in evil.
But as we’ve seen above, the story of the garden of Eden is less about the knowledge of good and evil than it is about eternal life. From what God actually said in Genesis 3:22, God would have been perfectly content to allow the humans to have knowledge of good and evil so long as they didn’t also have eternal life.

The doctrine of Original Sin is predicated on a complete misreading of the otherwise charming story of the garden of Eden. And it is one that has utterly warped the Christian understanding of human nature.

I am compelled to respond to this thought-provoking reflection on the nature of humanity and our relationship with God. The author raises some intriguing points about the biblical narrative and the concept of Original Sin.

But I must respectfully disagree with the notion that the story of Adam and Eve is solely about eternal life. While it is true that God's concern is not just about the knowledge of good and evil, but also about the potential for humanity to live forever, I believe that the narrative is more complex.

I see the story of Adam and Eve as a powerful exploration of human nature, with all its contradictions and paradoxes. It is a story about the human desire for autonomy and self-determination, as well as our deep-seated need for connection and relationship with others and with God.

The doctrine of Original Sin, while often misunderstood or misinterpreted, is not just about a "stain" or a "flaw" in human nature. Rather, it is a recognition that our choices and actions have consequences, and that we are all interconnected and interdependent. It is an acknowledgment that our individual and collective brokenness is a reality that we must confront and address.

I believe that the Christian understanding of human nature is not "warped" by the doctrine of Original Sin, but rather it is a nuanced and compassionate understanding that recognizes both our capacity for good and our tendency towards harm. It is a recognition that we are all in need of healing, forgiveness, and redemption, and that God's love and mercy are available to us all.

I appreciate the author's thought-provoking reflections, but I believe that the story of Adam and Eve and the doctrine of Original Sin are more complex than they suggest. I will continue to explore and reflect on the mysteries of human nature, and to seek a deeper understanding of God's love and mercy for all humanity.
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I am compelled to respond to this thought-provoking reflection on the nature of humanity and our relationship with God. The author raises some intriguing points about the biblical narrative and the concept of Original Sin.

But I must respectfully disagree with the notion that the story of Adam and Eve is solely about eternal life. While it is true that God's concern is not just about the knowledge of good and evil, but also about the potential for humanity to live forever, I believe that the narrative is more complex.

I see the story of Adam and Eve as a powerful exploration of human nature, with all its contradictions and paradoxes. It is a story about the human desire for autonomy and self-determination, as well as our deep-seated need for connection and relationship with others and with God.

The doctrine of Original Sin, while often misunderstood or misinterpreted, is not just about a "stain" or a "flaw" in human nature. Rather, it is a recognition that our choices and actions have consequences, and that we are all interconnected and interdependent. It is an acknowledgment that our individual and collective brokenness is a reality that we must confront and address.

I believe that the Christian understanding of human nature is not "warped" by the doctrine of Original Sin, but rather it is a nuanced and compassionate understanding that recognizes both our capacity for good and our tendency towards harm. It is a recognition that we are all in need of healing, forgiveness, and redemption, and that God's love and mercy are available to us all.

I appreciate the author's thought-provoking reflections, but I believe that the story of Adam and Eve and the doctrine of Original Sin are more complex than they suggest. I will continue to explore and reflect on the mysteries of human nature, and to seek a deeper understanding of God's love and mercy for all humanity.
I have read many, many posts on a number of forums. Yours is the best I have ever read! THANKS!!!
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Sorry, I don't think that is true. Bible doesn't say "God has denied them knowledge of good and evil".

I believe they could have done that even before the fruit event.
So tell me why, when they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil "then the eyes of both were opened" (Genesis 3:7).

It can't be because God had earlier endowed them with that knowledge, can it.

Why do you demand that the story mean something other than what it says? It's only a story, a folktale, after all. There never was a real Garden of Eden, a real "first couple" from whom the human race is descended. The closest we get to that is calculations from human genetics which suggest that "Y-chromosome Adam" >Y-chromosomal Adam - Wikipedia< and "Mitochondrial Eve" >Mitochondrial Eve - Wikipedia< existed tens of thousands of years apart.
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
By what i know, only one killed that day was Ashli Babbitt, who was murdered by the police. If she should not have been white, there would probably have been similar "mostly peaceful" riots as when black, unarmed person, is killed by police.

It is dictating orders, which is the same as what dictators do.
You have been brainwashed!

You have lost the ability to face facts! 5 people died on January 6.
It is part of the job of every President to sign executive orders. That doesn't make the President a dictator! (If it does, then Trump is also a dictator.)

Therefore, you know nothing!
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
You keep ignoring the datum that in the story God has denied them knowledge of good and evil so it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to choose to do wrong. Until afterwards.

And I don't recall your responding to my question whether (although it's only a folktale) you think it's a good idea that humans should be able to tell good from evil, hence that Eve is actually a figurative heroine of mankind.

So God wasn't smart enough to work out that the whole situation was [his] fault, in deny them knowledge of good and evil in the first place? Out loud and proud, God was trying to protect [his] own position ─ Genesis 3:22-23 is the ONLY reason [he] gives for expelling them.

[He] was reacting to the situation [he]'d created, with words all about protecting [his] own position.
Clearly, only some people can distinguish between good and evil!!!
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Clearly, only some people can distinguish between good and evil!!!
That's true, but fortunately they're not that common.

We know from studies and experiments that humans are born with evolved moral tendencies, which make living in tribes / communities possible. These are dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group and a sense of self-worth through self-denial. (I set out a summary of one such experiment here >Atheists acknowledging historical Jesus' goodness<.)

The rest is largely learnt behavior ─ how to encounter other people, in family, among relatives, at large, same or opposite sex, older or younger, relative place in the peck order, authority figures &c, and also observation of life markers ─ coming of age, pairing, birth, death, &c.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
So tell me why, when they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil "then the eyes of both were opened" (Genesis 3:7).
If we go only by what is said in the Bible, we can't really know what was the actual reason. Bible tells what happened after they ate the fruit. But, the reason why their eyes were opened could be that then they just realized what they had done and felt naked.
Why do you demand that the story mean something other than what it says?
I "demand" that people see the difference between interpretation and what is actually written.
...There never was a real Garden of Eden...
I believe the garden still exists.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
If we go only by what is said in the Bible, we can't really know what was the actual reason.
And what objective test will tell us whether any alternative version of the folktale gives the actual reason?

Or are you saying we're free to rewrite bible stories any way we please?
Bible tells what happened after they ate the fruit. But, the reason why their eyes were opened could be that then they just realized what they had done and felt naked.
Gimme a break! Have you read the text?

Gen 2:25 And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?"
2 And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden;
3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"
4 But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die.
5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
6 So 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 its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate.
7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons.
I believe the garden still exists.
A curious claim.

Gen 2:10 A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers.
11 The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one which flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
12 ...
13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one which flows around the whole land of Cush.
14 And the name of the third river is Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.​

So where is it, exactly, that these four rivers all rise?
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Please tell who died that day?

Why?

I disagree.
You know absolutely nothing!

1) Do you own research
2) Learn the ABCs of US government
3) It doesn't matter if you disagree. The truth is the truth.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Gimme a break! Have you read the text?

Gen 2:25 And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.​
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?"​
2 And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden;​
3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"​
4 But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die.​
5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."​
6 So 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 its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate.​
7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons​
Thank you. Now we can all see from that what happened after they ate the fruit. And we also can see that Bible doesn't say, their eyes were opened because of the fruit. It is only the common interpretation, that may be wrong.
So where is it, exactly, that these four rivers all rise?
It is a secret, and I think it should remain that.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Can't open that. Please give the names.
You can see from the headline on that link that five were killed, which is the only matter in contention.

If you want their names, and you can't read them there, simple google for them,

Thank you. Now we can all see from that what happened after they ate the fruit. And we also can see that Bible doesn't say, their eyes were opened because of the fruit. It is only the common interpretation, that may be wrong.
Why were their eyes opened, do you say, if not because of the fruit? Why is that stated at that point in the story if it's not a consequence?

It is a secret, and I think it should remain that.
So you don't know where it is. That's fair, since the Garden of Eden story is legend / folktale. Certainly it's not about anything that ever occurred in history.
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
That's true, but fortunately they're not that common.

We know from studies and experiments that humans are born with evolved moral tendencies, which make living in tribes / communities possible. These are dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group and a sense of self-worth through self-denial. (I set out a summary of one such experiment here >Atheists acknowledging historical Jesus' goodness<.)

The rest is largely learnt behavior ─ how to encounter other people, in family, among relatives, at large, same or opposite sex, older or younger, relative place in the peck order, authority figures &c, and also observation of life markers ─ coming of age, pairing, birth, death, &c.
It's too bad that the January 6 criminals didn't learn "evolved moral tendencies", such as respect for authority and learned moral behavior.
 

jimb

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
You can see from the headline on that link that five were killed, which is the only matter in contention.

If you want their names, and you can't read them there, simple google for them,


Why were their eyes opened, do you say, if not because of the fruit? Why is that stated at that point in the story if it's not a consequence?


So you don't know where it is. That's fair, since the Garden of Eden story is legend / folktale. Certainly it's not about anything that ever occurred in history.
a) You don't know everything that has ever occurred in history.
b) There is no evidence that the Garden of Eden story is legend / folktale.
 
Top