Why did God tempt Adam and Eve?

[Kenny]

LOL Altough your Luke 16[21] doesn't say the same thing as mine... I'm still staying with Leviticus. You have one STRANGE Bible!

But continuing on...

Luke16[21] and Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat,
Leviticus 16:21He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat

and confess over him all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins;
and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—

and he shall put them upon the head of the goat, and send him away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who is in readiness.
and put them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the wilderness in the care of someone appointed for the task.

[22] The goat shall bear all their iniquities upon him to a solitary land; and he shall let the goat go in the wilderness.
22 The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place; and the man shall release it in the wilderness.

Notice what missing that is found in yours? Also, the Jewish belief about what we do on Yom Kippur is to forgive sins that we may not be aware of and also for the forgiveness of communal sins-- iow, the sins of Israel. Personal sins are not viewed as being forgiven through that process but must be dealt with directly with whom we have sinned against while also asking God for forgiveness as well. If we don't at least try do the former, then the belief is that the latter will not avail to anything.

Actually, I know the Jewish position on this one. But I find the following:

Definition - transgression

1. transgression, rebellion
   1. 1. transgression (against individuals)
      2. transgression (nation against nation)
      3. transgression (against God) 1a
   2. in general 1a
   3. as recognised by sinner 1a
   4. as God deals with it 1a
   5. as God forgives
      1. guilt of transgression
      2. punishment for transgression
      3. offering for transgression

F24 Vid. Maimon. Hilchot Teshnbah, c. 1. sect. 2. - says that it includes both known sins as well as unknown, both big and small.

Could it be that modern interpretation is wrong? After all... "all" means "all" You did ask me to quote one verse.

BTW, I use the RSV most of the time because it's a more direct translation than most other Bibles. So, which translation were you using?

NASB, KJV and every other translation including RSV. KJV to find a verse because I cut my teeth on it or the Spanish Reina Valera -- cut my teeth on that one too.

I think in this case it was the NIV which I don't care for very much.

I never stated or implied otherwise

True...True! I love being contencious (we do this at home just for discussion sake... got my grandchildren trained too ) Truth be known.... we agree quite a bit on this one. The only difference is just on salvation but God is the judge and not I.

No, it's because I'm the "Gold Standard". And my wife also thinks I'm the "Gold Standard" as well. Here's her coming to collect her gold:

Shalom ,my dear friend!

 

[metis]

LOL Altough your Luke 16[21] doesn't say the same thing as mine... I'm still staying with Leviticus. You have one STRANGE Bible!

At first I couldn't figure out what the heck you were talking about, and then I finally caught it. OK, so I'm not the sharpest tack in the drawer.

BTW, I did go back and correct it, so thanks-- I think.

[22] The goat shall bear all their iniquities upon him to a solitary land; and he shall let the goat go in the wilderness.
22 The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place; and the man shall release it in the wilderness.

Yes, we pray for all our sins to be forgiven, but...

BTW, I think you know to beware of the use of absolutes within the scriptures-- it's not a law book that relies on the "fine print". If we took Paul literally, for example, we would have to obey Hitler and the NAZI's if we lived in Germany in the early '40's.

Could it be that modern interpretation is wrong? After all... "all" means "all" You did ask me to quote one verse.

I think in this case it was the NIV which I don't care for very much.

I have a copy of that, and I fully agree with you.

BTW, my favorite with the NT is the RSV as I mentioned, but with the Tanakh it's "The Jewish Study Bible" by the JPS because it is so brutally honest, pointing out "variations"-- "theologian" for differences.

Truth be known.... we agree quite a bit on this one.

Then I have to rethink this.

The only difference is just on salvation but God is the judge and not I.

But if you're leaving it up to God, then why did you say there's a "difference"?

Shalom ,my dear friend!

Ditto, my friend.

 

[Magus]

There is a cognate story in Greek mythology which involves Pandora opening a box , the Box itself was called 'Pithos cognate with Phoenician Pht ' Opening ' , the word used in the story of Moses when his chest was opened.

'Dora means Tree , cognate with Phoenician 'Yor and Doureios means wooden container, thus the Box was turned into a tree.

So Eve is then identified with the female that opened the chest containing Moses, whom
lifted up the snake Staff, or the head of medusa and turned the river into blood.

 

[Kenny]

My solution is to treat every single narrative as if it's a parable so I don't have to get into if X really happened as it's written. Instead, I focus on the teaching of the morals and values that are involved to see which might be useful.

However, here at RF I do often engage in discussions whereas I often deal with narratives as if they're accurate historical events. Just one of my many quirks.

I think you just like creating discussions

 

[metis]

I think you just like creating discussions

Yep, and like when I used to go fishing, I almost always find at least one sucker.

 

[Kenny]

At first I couldn't figure out what the heck you were talking about, and then I finally caught it. OK, so I'm not the sharpest tack in the drawer.

BTW, I did go back and correct it, so thanks-- I think.

LOL - I sure had a good time pointing that out

Yes, we pray for all our sins to be forgiven, but...

BTW, I think you know to beware of the use of absolutes within the scriptures-- it's not a law book that relies on the "fine print". If we took Paul literally, for example, we would have to obey Hitler and the NAZI's if we lived in Germany in the early '40's.

I knew that was coming... it is the proper rebuttal... just making sure you still have a sharp mind!

BTW, my favorite with the NT is the RSV as I mentioned, but with the Tanakh it's "The Jewish Study Bible" by the JPS because it is so brutally honest, pointing out "variations"-- "theologian" for differences.

I've used it before but I didn't know the relevance... I'll need to use it more often!

But if you're leaving it up to God, then why did you say there's a "difference"?

LOL I thought it was very Jewish to argue every point. After all, we are human and that is why there is a "difference".

But we KNOW that I am always right

 

[Kenny]

Yep, and like when I used to go fishing, I almost always find at least one sucker.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA rofl

That just happens to be the first fish I ever caught (at least that is what my dad called it)

Thanks for another great chuckle!

 

[Thief]

Then one could say the whole of the Gospels are just a parable and have no historical content. We can't switch when we want to... almost every time a parable is given it says "And there was a parable" and it NEVER contained living character names. Why should we all of a sudden switch?

start a thread.....

 

[Deeje]

Then one could say the whole of the Gospels are just a parable and have no historical content. We can't switch when we want to... almost every time a parable is given it says "And there was a parable" and it NEVER contained living character names. Why should we all of a sudden switch?

All three chapters of Luke 14-16 are parables. Read them...they are given one after another.

Just before the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus said...."Now the Pharisees, who were money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began to sneer at him. 15 So he said to them: “You are those who declare yourselves righteous before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is considered exalted by men is a disgusting thing in God’s sight."

He gave the parable for their benefit. He concludes it by saying "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’”

Was he speaking about himself? In his condemnation of those proud men Jesus said......
Matthew 23:37-39...
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. 39 For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s name!’”

It is clear that Jesus had nothing good to say about those men who led God's people astray.....killing his prophets who were sent to correct them. They neglected God's sheep who became lost....and Jesus was sent to rescue them.

 

[Kenny]

All three chapters of Luke 14-16 are parables. Read them...they are given one after another.

Just before the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus said...."Now the Pharisees, who were money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began to sneer at him. 15 So he said to them: “You are those who declare yourselves righteous before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is considered exalted by men is a disgusting thing in God’s sight."

He gave the parable for their benefit. He concludes it by saying "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’”

Was he speaking about himself? In his condemnation of those proud men Jesus said......
Matthew 23:37-39...
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. 39 For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s name!’”

It is clear that Jesus had nothing good to say about those men who led God's people astray.....killing his prophets who were sent to correct them. They neglected God's sheep who became lost....and Jesus was sent to rescue them.

Luke 14:1 One Sabbath... :7 Now He told a parable.... no names
15 - diiferent time.:1 THEN drew near unto him.
:3 and he spake this parable to them ...no names
16:1 Certain rich man... a parable... no names
16:21 THERE WAS A MAN NAMED LAZARUS (a historical statement)
17: parables
:12 he met ten lepers (a historical statement)
18:1 An he spake a parable

He spoke parables throughout his ministry but that does't mean that when "he met ten lepers", it is a parable.

 

[metis]

An he spake a parable

And my wife's church has a pairabells too.

OK, I'm leaving.

 

[BilliardsBall]

OK, but this is an after the fact reasoning, and not as you stated;

' . . . was to be crucified before the foundations of the world.'

Where was this predicted?



Remains an interpretation of a bad dream of good against evil.

It is convenient for you to label literal verses as metaphors.

It is less convenient for me to obey the teachings of the Bible.

One of us will be rewarded.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I believe you got it backwards, all who have their names Written in the Lambs book of Life are Christ Jesus.

Those who's names are not found in the book of Life are cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:15.

NKJV has a similar rendering: All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

But I agree. Everyone is written into the book and those whose names aren't blotted from the book are "in".

 

[Faithofchristian]

Why are you assuming that just because someone may be in heaven that everything is absolutely perfect with them? If I can pray to God for your benefit, why couldn't I pray for them for theirs? The early Christians felt that way.



Also, there's the issue of sheol, namely that can we as living persons pray for someone who has not yet been judged? Why not, especially if I can pray for you and you can pray for me now?

Prayer is not monolithic as there are different forms, including prayers of praise, meditative prayer, etc.

Secondly, why can't I ask God to intervene for someone who may have passed away. If I can do it while they're alive, why not if they're not physically here?

Finally, I'm not saying that praying for those whom have passed-over is the correct thing we all must do, just that there's an argument and a historical justification for it in Christian history and theology that says that at least it's a possibility. Therefore, I'm not saying the Catholic position must be correct, just that there is some justification for it traditionally and theologically. If you don't personally accept it, then the solution for you is obvious-- don't do it. But just because you don't do it necessitates telling others not to do it, especially since your position is actually the one that's more out of line with the early theology on this.

BTW, I don't believe in it either, but for a somewhat different reason (see my signature statement at the bottom of this post for why).

NKJV has a similar rendering: All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

But I agree. Everyone is written into the book and those whose names aren't blotted from the book are "in".

NKJV has a similar rendering: All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

But I agree. Everyone is written into the book and those whose names aren't blotted from the book are "in".

Ok, let's see if were getting this right, Your saying, All who dwell on earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the book of Life of the Lamb.

Can you explain how atheist or anyone else who does not believe in Jesus will be found in worshipping Jesus?

 

[metis]

Ok, let's see if were getting this right, Your saying, All who dwell on earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the book of Life of the Lamb.

Can you explain how atheist or anyone else who does not believe in Jesus will be found in worshipping Jesus?

What does this response have to do with anything I wrote?

 

[Faithofchristian]

What does this response have to do with anything I wrote?

Because according to you, those that do not have their names Written in the book of Life are found in Worshipping God.

So how does the Atheists fit into that, since they do have their names Written in the book of Life?
And do not believe in God?

 

[metis]

Because according to you, those that do not have their names Written in the book of Life are found in Worshipping God.

I didn't post that, so you must be confusing me with someone else.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I didn't post that, so you must be confusing me with someone else.

As to how this happened, I don't know, but excuse me, I was in conversation with someone else, but how you got it I don't know, Sorry

 

[Repox]

Did God already know they would eat the fruit and listen to the serpent? Why put the fruit there in the first place or let the serpent into the garden?

Genesis 3:16 ►
New International Version
To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

This curse was given to you ladies for a crime you didn't commit. Why? Do you have Adam and Eve to thank or God?

We all are suffering from original sin...just read the news and you can see evidence for it.

Why did God want us to be so disordered, confused, and have such a fallen nature?

Why give Adam and Eve a test he knows they will fail , and then punish everyone for it?

Who is to blame, God or “bad choices?”

I think the Adam and Eve story is a myth, but the principles about obeying God are important. Guilt or innocence depends on free will. The garden was the ultimate free will choice, a ripe juicy apple or the “keys” to heavenly existence. God gave them His rules to live by, but they chose to disobey and live according to their rules. One might ask, what happens if one declares independence from God? Is it Satan’s demonic world, an undisciplined existence with “free thinkers” and unrelenting “self-indulgence?” Our ancestors ate the apple and became independent of God. From so many apples, so many bad choices, mortal beings have planted and suffered ill-fated consequences of a bad harvest.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Ok, let's see if were getting this right, Your saying, All who dwell on earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the book of Life of the Lamb.

Can you explain how atheist or anyone else who does not believe in Jesus will be found in worshipping Jesus?

The worship in Revelation 13 is of Antichrist.

All those who worship the Antichrist, whose names will not be found written in the Book of Life (since all were written in initially but the wicked were blotted from the book).