Thoughts on the Fall of Adam

[Subduction Zone]

So maybe you think Adam could have or should have had sex with animals? After all, why not? If they evolved maybe they were still having sex with animals, hmm?

No, that is what the Bible implied. Once again read the myth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"18 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; nI will makehim a helper fit for5 him.” 19 oNow out of the ground the LORD God had formed6 everybeast of the field and every bird of the heavens and pbrought them to the man to see whathe would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beastof the field. But for AdamOr the man" style="color: rgb(114, 171, 191);">7 there was not found a helper fit for him. "

As you see none of the animals was a "fit helper" for him.

 

[YoursTrue]

"18 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; nI will makehim a helper fit for5 him.” 19 oNow out of the ground the LORD God had formed6 everybeast of the field and every bird of the heavens and pbrought them to the man to see whathe would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beastof the field. But for AdamOr the man" style="color: rgb(114, 171, 191);">7 there was not found a helper fit for him. "

As you see none of the animals was a "fit helper" for him.

No animal helper?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No animal helper?

The Bible was often euphemistic when it came to sex and the like. For example when Jacob wrestled with God, God won because he cheated by striking Jacob in the groin. Or the verses where priests can perform a chemical abortion at times.

 

[YoursTrue]

The Bible was often euphemistic when it came to sex and the like. For example when Jacob wrestled with God, God won because he cheated by striking Jacob in the groin. Or the verses where priests can perform a chemical abortion at times.

There is no rationality to the idea that two persons, one male and one female, evolved from another form at the same time to procreate, and stopped procreating with other forms of animal life.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no rationality to the idea that two persons, one male and one female, evolved from another form at the same time to procreate, and stopped procreating with other forms of animal life.

So you agree with me? It appears that you are saying that the Genesis story is nonsense.

 

[gnostic]

Another point of consideration is that before the flood people, like Adam, could live up to over 900 years.

Other than in story...myth...there was no Adam, no Noah, no Flood...which therefore mean, the notion of people living to be 900-plus years, is merely a story, and fictional and mythological one at that.

 

[nPeace]

So God lied. They did not die on that day. Sentenced to die is not the same as dying.

@Sharikind is not speaking Japanese SZ. Why can't you understand a simple reasonable, logical, and obviously sensible explanation?
I know you are not a child, so obviously you simply don't want to accept what throws your faulty reasoning off the cliff.
I hope @Sharikind realizes this and stop repeating himself when you repeat questions or assertions you got an answer to.
It should be obvious to you by now that you don't know the Bible anywhere as near as you think you do.
How could you? It's a product of holy spirit.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@Sharikind is not speaking Japanese SZ. Why can't you understand a simple reasonable, logical, and obviously sensible explanation?
I know you are not a child, so obviously you simply don't want to accept what throws your faulty reasoning off the cliff.
I hope @Sharikind realizes this and stop repeating himself when you repeat questions or assertions you got an answer to.
It should be obvious to you by now that you don't know the Bible anywhere as near as you think you do.
How could you? It's a product of holy spirit.

I know, and she keeps making the same error. Sentencing to die is not the same as saying "You are going to die today". She is making excuses not explanations. There is a difference.

 

[nPeace]

I know, and she keeps making the same error. Sentencing to die is not the same as saying "You are going to die today". She is making excuses not explanations. There is a difference.

Where did the Bible say, "You are going to die today"?
It doesn't, does it? You want it to say things that are not there, so you keep inserting your own thoughts. Please stop. It's not an honest thing to do. It's actually fraudulent.

 

[Earthling]

Other than in story...myth...there was no Adam, no Noah, no Flood...which therefore mean, the notion of people living to be 900-plus years, is merely a story, and fictional and mythological one at that.

As far as you know . . . which is almost like saying . . . nothing.

 

[nPeace]

Actually morally Adam had a conscience. This is because it was obviously planted in him. His conscience was perfect (made perfect moral choices) until he listened to his wife's voice. When a child who understands language is told not to do something, his conscience is disturbed if he goes ahead and makes the choice to do it anyway. If he gets hurt, it isn't because he does not know what he should have done.

Excellent! Are you a teacher? Perhaps the person you are addressing isn't paying attention. I can't imagine anyone not understanding the simple way you explain things, and my, are you patient.

 

[gnostic]

Colossians 3:12-14, is not about God’s ego. It’s about how we treat others.
In fact, that is a big part of worship....our actions toward others, giving people respect. You don’t think that’s spiritual?
Galatians 5:22-23.

Sorry, but what sort of respect did Jacob have for his father (Isaac) and his brother (Easu) when he deceive them both?

What sort of respect did David have for his friend by sleeping with and impregnating Uriah’s beautiful wife, and then set up Uriah to be killed, not only to hide the adultery, but to marry Bathsheba for himself.

Both Jacob and David were considered men of great characters, integrity and piety, and yet they have both resort to deception for their selfish needs. They were role models, but their respects for others, have been rather selective.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where did the Bible say, "You are going to die today"?
It doesn't, does it? You want it to say things that are not there, so you keep inserting your own thoughts. Please stop. It's not an honest thing to do. It's actually fraudulent.

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.

Do you understand the English? Now later interpretations try to avoid this by rewording the interpretation, but that is not totally honest. Just as anti-abortion people cause the interpretation on when a pregnant woman is struck and has a premature birth. The Bible has been reinterpreted when problems are found with interpretation. Of course it is all but impossible to reinterpret "The Test for an Unfaithful Wife." to the point where one can honestly say that is not a case of chemical abortion.

 

[nPeace]

God said on the day they eat from it they will die. They were not to die if they did not eat from that tree. The death sentence was passed that day. They were headed from that time onward towards death.

I realize you are a patient person, but please don't let @Subduction Zone take advantage of that. He will never admit that he is wrong, so he will keep repeating himself to keep you engaged in a pointless and endless circle. If you allow that, you won't get to share other points that I am sure will be strong and useful.
Just my suggestion... if you answer a question that's clear, and he repeats, ask him what he understands or doesn't understand, because likely he isn't paying much attention to your well put together argument.
I'm sure you don't want to waste time typing something, multiple times, and someone is just sitting on a computer rolling their eyes, and then repeating the same crushed argument.
In time you will become familiar with our skeptic friends here, and get to know their tactics.
IMO

 

[Subduction Zone]

Excellent! Are you a teacher? Perhaps the person you are addressing isn't paying attention. I can't imagine anyone not understanding the simple way you explain things, and my, are you patient.

That is only because she makes the same errors that you do. The problem with belief in the Bible is that one's beliefs get in the way of what it actually says.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I realize you are a patient person, but please don't let @Subduction Zone take advantage of that. He will never admit that he is wrong, so he will keep repeating himself to keep you engaged in a pointless and endless circle. If you allow that, you won't get to share other points that I am sure will be strong and useful.
Just my suggestion... if you answer a question that's clear, and he repeats, ask him what he understands or doesn't understand, because likely he isn't paying much attention to your well put together argument.
I'm sure you don't want to waste time typing something, multiple times, and someone is just sitting on a computer rolling their eyes, and then repeating the same crushed argument.
In time you will become familiar with our skeptic friends here, and get to know their tactics.
IMO

Why would you openly lie about me? Yesterday I did make an error in our discussion and I owned up to it immediately when you pointed it out. Meanwhile you make error after error and never admit it. It appears that you are projecting again.

By the way, when did you ever "crush" an argument?

 

[gnostic]

To me, Eve is a hero and what she did was the greatest gift to humanity. She vanished all the ''if''s and ''but''s. She vanished a fake reality that was hanging by a thread. She joined the real world and said ''bring it on''. Just for Eve, I am proud I am christian. In my opinion

Most christians I know hate Eve. And they see the world she gave us mundane. It's sad.

In the Gnostic version of creation (source: Apocryphron of John or the Secret Book of John) turned the entire story of Adam and Eve, upside down - where God is the villain and false god, the serpent was actually pre-existing Aeon Christ (the Christ before Jesus), the fruit was gnôsis, Eve was the heroine, and Adam was a clueless knuckle-head.

So some 2nd century Gnostic Christian sects did think and believe Eve to be a “hero” in the story.

In the Apocryphron, Jesus was the one narrating the story of creation, in which he passed his knowledge (gnôsis) to John.

We know that Apocryphron was written in the 2nd century CE, because the anti-Gnosticism Irenaeus havè known this story.

 

[nPeace]

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.

Do you understand the English? Now later interpretations try to avoid this by rewording the interpretation, but that is not totally honest. Just as anti-abortion people cause the interpretation on when a pregnant woman is struck and has a premature birth. The Bible has been reinterpreted when problems are found with interpretation. Of course it is all but impossible to reinterpret "The Test for an Unfaithful Wife." to the point where one can honestly say that is not a case of chemical abortion.

Be reasonable please.
You did not write the text.
You read it to mean what you think it means.
Another reads it as they understand it.
You don't know that it means what you think it does?
However, the Bible interprets itself, because only the author can confirm what it means.
So have you considered why Creationists understand it different to you? Do you care to know why they are right, and you are wrong?

Five reasons.
1. The text says, 'In the day you eat of it, you will surely die."
That doesn't automatically mean that the speaker is saying, "You will die on this particular day." Rather @Sharikind nicely explained, so there is no need for me to repeat. Just go back and read it.

2. The spokesperson, said to the man, after he ate, “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and ate from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account. In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life...."
So anyone reading the Bible with an honest humble heart, will see that the spokesperson made himself clear. So that anyone thinking he meant, that said day of Adam's life, would go, "Oh. I misunderstood."
Clear as day... In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life. So he couldn't have meant what you think he did.

3. Another person can understand that Adam died the same day, nonetheless, in two ways. Spiritually - from God's point of view, and physically, since the day mentioned could also have referred to the creative day of Adam and Eve, which is not the same as a day from man's point of view. That day has not ended.
However, this one will be above your head.

4. I'm sure there were five reasons, but I think the fourth just slipped my mind, so...
5. Only persons who read the Bible with a sincere heart, desiring to understand it, will grasp the things that are hidden by skeptics, and Bible bashers, because God will not allow them to see it. He will let them find fault, so that they never get the truth.

Does that make God immoral? No, but to those who view him as a monster, they will see him that way.
God is good, wise, and just, so he does what is right.
He knows that they are persons who hate him without just cause, only because they are selfish like the first selfish person Satan, who hates righteousness, and truth, and only want to do whatever they want, So God makes sure that no such person will get the reward of those that love him, and love right.

That seems fair to me.
Would you build a nice house, and decorate it with the finest things, and then put a whole bunch of animals - namely pigs and dogs in it? That's to me quite absurd.
God is more intelligent than we are.
That's why he even refuses to feed these animals (spiritually speaking). He knows their nature. - Matthew 7:6 . . .“Do not give what is holy to dogs nor throw your pearls before swine, so that they may never trample them under their feet and turn around and rip you open.

I think this should be clearer to you now SZ, on Genesis 2:17.
If it is not, then I would suggest you ask yourself the question you put to me... Do you understand English?

 

[nPeace]

how is it obvious? If your claim is that he had to have one of else God's actions would have been immoral then you are only making an excuse, not an explanation.

Once again read the story. They did not seem to know that they were doing wrong until after they are the magic fruit.

Again, you are inserting wrong ideas into the text. You seem to think you understand the Bible, but it's apparent you really don't.
The trees were not magical, Where did you read that? Scriptures please.

It is good that you said, "They did not seem to know...", but do you mean it?
It might seem that way to you, but that is not the case.

Genesis 3:2, 3, 6
2 At this the woman said to the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden.
3 But God has said about the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden:. . .
6 Consequently, the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was something desirable to the eyes, yes, the tree was pleasing to look at. So she began taking of its fruit and eating it. Afterward, she also gave some to her husband when he was with her, and he began eating it.

1 Timothy 2:14 . . .Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and became a transgressor.
What do you say to these.