I heard Wierwille teach on this subject. I have always thought that this particular version I'm about to share was in CF&S, but no one seems to remember it being there. So, I'm at a loss as to where and when he taught it. Anyway, I think his explanation was all a bunch of *%*&$#@*, so, I am simply repeating this for informational purposes.
Wierwille taught that Eve either masturbated Adam or performed oral sex on him. (I don't recall which.) Then, claimed Wierwille, Eve consumed the "byproduct" (and the following was supposed to be the "sin" part.) and convinced Adam to do the same. (Consume it, that is)
Yeah, I know. That's some really bizarre stuff to be coming from a guy who was supposed to be a minister.
Like I said, I think it's a bunch of nonsense "and then some", but, I wanted to put it out there as a matter of reference so people could see what kind of twisted mind drove someone we all thought was some kind of great Man of God.
I have logical reason to believe the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" was exactly what God said it was! People everywhere seem to have misunderstood this tree. (Whether it was symbolic or real, the lesson is still valid - so for the sake of argument, let us suppose for now it was a real tree of some kind.) Even the "serpent" (the devil in disguise) knew what would result from eating fruit of that tree: He said, "You will be as gods, knowing good and evil." (hence, the tree of knowledge of good and evil)
But God had commanded Adam not to eat of it, preferring he ate from the “tree of life” instead...
I always wondered why God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right smack in the middle of the garden Eden (directly next to the tree of life) where either Adam or Eve was bound to find it.
Anyway, I think the fall of A & E was bound to happen: you had two innocent humans (what did they know?), the tree was there beckoning, the serpent was there goading Eve on. God specifically told them not to eat the fruit, but did He really expect them to forever resist the temptation? Could God have foreknown the outcome?
I always wondered why God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right smack in the middle of the garden Eden (directly next to the tree of life) where either Adam or Eve was bound to find it.
Anyway, I think the fall of A & E was bound to happen: you had two innocent humans (what did they know?), the tree was there beckoning, the serpent was there goading Eve on. God specifically told them not to eat the fruit, but did He really expect them to forever resist the temptation? Could God have foreknown the outcome?
Forgive me soul searcher, but you almost sound like you believe God intentionally set man up "for a fall". Do you suppose the same thing is true when wise and mature parents instruct their children?
Do they know ahead of time that the children will sometimes disobey? Are they instructing their kids to "set them up" or to keep them on "the right track", so they may grow up safe and healthy?
Forgive me soul searcher, but you almost sound like you believe God intentionally set man up "for a fall".
What do I know about God's ways? Innocent people suffer and die everyday.
The story in Genesis is a stretch to begin with. It conflicts with my knowledge of the laws of the physical universe. Dinosaurs walked on this earth millions of years ago. We have bones and fossils to prove it. And just because Moses didn't write about the Ice Age it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Finally, it seems to me that God did many mean things in the OT. I've posted some examples.
The story in Genesis is a stretch to begin with. It conflicts with my knowledge of the laws of the physical universe. Dinosaurs walked on this earth millions of years ago. We have bones and fossils to prove it. And just because Moses didn't write about the Ice Age it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
You'd be surprised what you can see about science, evolution and "the ice age" from the Bible. I have a book coming out soon. (My first!) It will be called, "Genesis One: God's Table of Contents".
Although you probably won't agree with it totally, many things you have brought up are addressed and explained logically.
It should be ready for release around November.
SPEC
:)
PS: And why did you SIDESTEP the issue at hand? I asked you to comment on:
"Do they (parents) know ahead of time that the children will sometimes disobey? Are they instructing their kids to "set them up" or to keep them on "the right track", so they may grow up safe and healthy?"
Did you avoid this because it makes "too damn much sense"? Maybe perhaps because you don't have a proper and logical response?
In an "honest debate", you STICK TO THE ITEM AT HAND - not just go "somewhere else" and start a new "argument" while the other is still there!
Wierwille taught that Eve either masturbated Adam or performed oral sex on him. (I don't recall which.) Then, claimed Wierwille, Eve consumed the "byproduct" (and the following was supposed to be the "sin" part.) and convinced Adam to do the same. (Consume it, that is)
Yeah, I know. That's some really bizarre stuff to be coming from a guy who was supposed to be a minister.
Like I said, I think it's a bunch of nonsense "and then some", but, I wanted to put it out there as a matter of reference so people could see what kind of twisted mind drove someone we all thought was some kind of great Man of God.
I remember that well, Waysider. And didn't LCM take it to a WHOLE OTHER LEVEL when he expounded (in the "new class", "The Way of Abundance and Power" - 1995) about the sin really being Eve in a lesbian relationship with the serpent, who had taken on the "form of a woman"!
He even found some related artwork ("Temptation and Fall", by Miche) to "prove his point": [Click to enlarge]
Perhaps LCM had "carnal knowledge" (LOL) of what may have been going on between his wife Donna and the current "president" (RFR), and was making some attempt at reproof. (?)
PS: And why did you SIDESTEP the issue at hand? I asked you to comment on:
"Do they (parents) know ahead of time that the children will sometimes disobey? Are they instructing their kids to "set them up" or to keep them on "the right track", so they may grow up safe and healthy?"
Did you avoid this because it makes "too damn much sense"? Maybe perhaps because you don't have a proper and logical response?
I "sidestepped" your questions (actually I ignored them) because I honestly thought they were rhetorical. Either way, I thought they were irrelevant and, truth be told, somewhat patronizing.
Sounds to me like you may be a "mocker".
Well, God knows I've done my share of mocking over the years. But even so, I wasn't mocking...
No matter what language you translate it from, or what language you read it in, God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right next to the tree of life. He didn't put it in another land (in Nod, east of Eden, for instance) or five miles way, or down the road, or up the river, or on top of a mountain. He put it right there in the middle of the Garden of Eden where A & E were bound to see it. And the tree had some very interesting things growing on it. And then there was a serpent (where did he come from, anyway?).
So, if I wanted to appreciate the story of creation as an allegory -- which I might be persuaded to do -- I might be persuaded to believe that God actually gave early man a choice: "eternal paradise" in Eden, or free will. Free will is the more desirable (to me, anyway), but with it comes the hard fruit of the tree knowledge of good and evil: a moral sense, knowing right from wrong.
[Come to think of it, why was the tree of knowledge of good and evil necessary in the first place? Why did God put it there, if not to let man choose free will on his own?]
Anyway, I look forward to reading your book. Will it discuss the Nephilim and how they got on earth?
The story in Genesis is a stretch to begin with. It conflicts with my knowledge of the laws of the physical universe. Dinosaurs walked on this earth millions of years ago. We have bones and fossils to prove it. And just because Moses didn't write about the Ice Age it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
(snip)
Seems like YOUR UNDERSTANDING of the story in Genesis is a stretch to begin with, and conflicts with your-
and my- laws of the physical universe. Plenty of Christians believe Genesis AND that dinosaurs were
on the Earth millions of years ago.
Who said the Bible was required to cover subjects not germane to the discussions at hand?
It was never meant to be a scientific textbook. As understood, what it DOES say hasn't
conflicted with scientific understanding as people have learned down the centuries,
despite people forcing incorrect meanings into text.
If you're interested, there's actually a lot of smart science all over the Bible.
It's not listed as "chapters 5 Scientific theory, chapter 6, Scientific application"
because the Bible was never intended to be a scientific textbook.
The books of the book (the codex, really) span thousands of years. Just because they're
not written in the CURRENT style is no reason, in and of itself, to throw up one's hands
and say "it's illogical, it's anti-science, it's anti-reason."
Of course, if one has ALREADY MADE UP THEIR MIND to dismiss the Bible, it doesn't matter
WHAT the contents say, the only thing one will see is pretexts to ignore it, and a reasoned
I tend to think they were both "real" too. If the tree of life was not real, I don't think God would have had two Cheribum guarding it up until the flood. Just as Satan chose to rebel, God had to give his Adam a choice. Without free will, man is nothing but a robot and God is unjust. Without free will, then God is truly unfair and unjust.
I think if Adam had told Satan to "get thee behind me" as the Second Adam, Jesus, did (note - was Jesus set up to fail? Thank God he didn't), Adam would have had the right to eat of the tree of life, he would have been ruler of the earth, God's regent on earth so to speak, and Christ would never have had to come redeem man - there would have been no redemption necessary. Every thing would be very different today.
As an aside, note the Cheribum's four faces: Man, lion (wild beast), ox (tame beast), bird - i.e., creation. When people came to worship God with burnt offerings outside of Eden, they saw the Cheribum guarding the Tree of Life. I have often wondered if the ancient gods man worshipped were not a corruption of the original Cheribum that Noah and his family saw and passed the info down to mankind who worshipped the "creature" rather than the Creator. Interesting.
No matter what language you translate it from, or what language you read it in, God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right next to the tree of life. He didn't put it in another land (in Nod, east of Eden, for instance) or five miles way, or down the road, or up the river, or on top of a mountain. He put it right there in the middle of the Garden of Eden where A & E were bound to see it. And the tree had some very interesting things growing on it. And then there was a serpent (where did he come from, anyway?).
(snip)
Ah, what language DID you read it in that says that "the tree of knowledge of good
and evil {is) right next to the tree of life"?
The tree "had some very interesting things growing in it", but, being in the midst of
a great big GARDEN like it was, so did lots of other trees nearby.
They were bound to see that tree, they were bound to see the other trees.
If you saw a really beautifully packaged box of RAT POISON,
and someone kept trying to tell you to try some, that all your life you've been told it's
deadly to you but that it's really the healthiest thing you could possibly eat,
it would taste fantastic, it would burn away belly fat, and regenerate hair,
how long would you be able to resist trying some,
and who would you blame if you decided to open the box and eat some?
In case you're wondering, NO, those are not RHETORICAL questions.
They relate DIRECTLY to the discussion by analogy.
Which means I'm expecting an answer.
If you want my answer as soon as you give yours, I'm fine with that.
So, if I wanted to appreciate the story of creation as an allegory -- which I might be persuaded to do -- I might be persuaded to believe that God actually gave early man a choice: "eternal paradise" in Eden, or free will. Free will is the more desirable (to me, anyway), but with it comes the hard fruit of the tree knowledge of good and evil: a moral sense, knowing right from wrong.
[Come to think of it, why was the tree of knowledge of good and evil necessary in the first place? Why did God put it there, if not to let man choose free will on his own?]
The entire situation, whether literal or allegorical, was one where free will was
THE BEGINNING of the situation. If Man had NO choice and couldn't sin,
Man would be denied the free will CHOICE to sin.
Sounds like you think the only sensible thing for a smart God to do would be to
make sinning impossible or nearly so, and block out Man's capacity to CHOOSE,
think and act for himself, and live with the consequences of his decisions and
actions.
I'm rather thankful for free will, myself. Granted, at the moment, there's a
lot of problems that would be bypassed if free will wasn't an option,
but we're here, and so is free will, and I prefer that to the most
Ah, what language DID you read it in that says that "the tree of knowledge of good
and evil {is) right next to the tree of life"?
Genesis 2:9 (NIV)
And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
In any polygon there is only one centroid, one middle point. The two trees couldn't have been that far away from each other. How big was the garden? Even if it was miles wide the trees wouldn't have been very far apart.
If you saw a really beautifully packaged box of RAT POISON,
and someone kept trying to tell you to try some, that all your life you've been told it's
deadly to you but that it's really the healthiest thing you could possibly eat,
it would taste fantastic, it would burn away belly fat, and regenerate hair,
how long would you be able to resist trying some,
and who would you blame if you decided to open the box and eat some?.
In case you're wondering, NO, those are not RHETORICAL questions.
They relate DIRECTLY to the discussion by analogy.
I suppose that would depend on a) whether I was hungry, b) had belly fat and c) needed hair. At any rate, who would I blame for my choice except myself?
I "sidestepped" your questions (actually I ignored them) because I honestly thought they were rhetorical. Either way, I thought they were irrelevant and, truth be told, somewhat patronizing.
Well, God knows I've done my share of mocking over the years. But even so, I wasn't mocking...
No matter what language you translate it from, or what language you read it in, God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right next to the tree of life. He didn't put it in another land (in Nod, east of Eden, for instance) or five miles way, or down the road, or up the river, or on top of a mountain. He put it right there in the middle of the Garden of Eden where A & E were bound to see it. And the tree had some very interesting things growing on it. And then there was a serpent (where did he come from, anyway?).
So, if I wanted to appreciate the story of creation as an allegory -- which I might be persuaded to do -- I might be persuaded to believe that God actually gave early man a choice: "eternal paradise" in Eden, or free will. Free will is the more desirable (to me, anyway), but with it comes the hard fruit of the tree knowledge of good and evil: a moral sense, knowing right from wrong.
[Come to think of it, why was the tree of knowledge of good and evil necessary in the first place? Why did God put it there, if not to let man choose free will on his own?]
Anyway, I look forward to reading your book. Will it discuss the Nephilim and how they got on earth?
Please excuse my former "tone of voice". I "went off" rather quickly instead of asking a couple more questions first. MY BAD!
I can see why my writing appeared rhetorical. Sorry for calling you a "mocker". (And thank you for the nice post on another thread recently!)
Sounds to me you give some merit to my evaluation of the "tree in question" here. (based upon that which I marked in red in your quote)
In any event, why God put that tree precisely where he did and why it was there in the first place, and why allow the "serpent" to be in the already tempting situation - who knows?
Nevertheless, things today are the way they are, and God certainly was aware of all this even from the very beginning. And people need to "deal with it" the best they can.
So, the best I can offer is that God's heart was to prepare a way out, "providing believers an edge in life over the rest".
Curiously enough (and there is neither room here, nor desire at the present time to expound in detail) it seems that my "23-year project" - my book - boils down to the fact that perhaps the Bible could have been entitled, "How to walk by the spirit in 7 easy lessons". Nuff for now. Glad you are looking forward to reading it. (August for advanced copies; November for official release)
I have not addressed the subject of Nephilim in my book. In fact, I show very little about "ancient Earth history or evolution". However, I believe sufficient groundwork may have been laid to perhaps explore those in more detail in a "sequel" later on. BUT OH MY GOD - what amount of time and thought and research will that take?!
It's rather ironic that my entire "project" all started as a rather "innocent-looking" word-study on "abundance" (Gk: perissos), and now there seems to be no end to it! I feel like I have somehow opened up the proverbial "Pandora's Box"!
Some have said, "Be careful what you ask for - you might just get it!" My next word-study shall be on "small", or "tiny"!
And to you, WordWolf, your post made lots of sense! You penned, "If you're interested, there's actually a lot of smart science all over the Bible."
My book will reveal (among other things) a breathtaking example of this which (I hope) will stun the world, for it is a "rather new concept" - but very logical - which has been "hidden in plain sight" in the Bible for thousands of years now. Why I seem to have it first is somewhat of a "mystery".
Please forgive the ambiguity - I don't mean to "dangle a carrot" in front of people. I just don't want to "let the cat out of the bag just yet".
SPEC
:)
PS: I see that posts 10-13 had been written as I was responding to 8 & 9. I am reading those now.
So then I take it that you reject a purely literal reading of the bible. Would that be right?
Because when I read it literally, I have difficulty. Not the least of which is that the order of creation according to Genesis 1 is plants, then animals, then man. But Genesis 2 says it was man, then plants, then animals.
I always wondered why God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right smack in the middle of the garden Eden (directly next to the tree of life) where either Adam or Eve was bound to find it.
Anyway, I think the fall of A & E was bound to happen: you had two innocent humans (what did they know?), the tree was there beckoning, the serpent was there goading Eve on. God specifically told them not to eat the fruit, but did He really expect them to forever resist the temptation? Could God have foreknown the outcome?
I have had the same questions SS. The "What did God expect?" questions.
Maybe, God expected them to be thankful for His ample provision and to obey Him . . . their creator God. Seems plausible He could expect faith in His word and the expression of His goodness. Wouldn't you?
What did they know? They knew God provided them dominion and bounty. They knew He said eat freely of any of the trees . . . whatever you want. . . but, this one tree you will not eat of because if you do. . . you will SURELY die. They knew His instruction. They knew His generosity. They knew His fellowship and kindness. They knew their purpose.
It was Satan who tempted, not God. It was Satan who was crafty and sewed the seed of doubt in what Eve knew about God. Her perception became an exaggerated one of God's severity in the prohibition of one thing. It went from freely eat any. . . to . . . Yeah we can eat. It went from this one tree you cannot eat from. . . to . . .Yeah, we can't even touch it lest we die. God didn't say lest you die. . . He said, you will surely die, and He never said they could not touch it. She lost sight of God's goodness and His judgment.
What I find interesting is no one repented. They hid. Job speaks of Adam's transgression. . . How he responded. .. Have I covered my transgressions like Adam, By hiding my iniquity in my bosom. . . . yet, God still provided them a covering and He has generously provided, at great cost, a better way.
I hope this makes you all laugh! (And I hope WordWolf doesn't mind.)
He sent me a link to a site to possibly prevent me from "taking credit from others" concerning my "science-related" discovery in the Bible. Below is my response:
--------------------------
"Thanks, but NO THANKS, WordWolf! (just kidding!)
I had just spent almost an hour responding (with "multiquote") to posts 10-13 in "tree of knowledge" topic when your private message automatically popped up.
I was anxious to see it, so I clicked on it. (more about that later)
After I was done perusing "your link", I returned to give a final look at my post and click to submit it - and IT WAS TOTALLY GONE!
Now I have to start ALL OVER - thanks to YOU! (gotta blame somebody, huh? - and better you than me! - LOL)
Actually, I learned something here - and I damned sure won't be making that mistake again!
Anyway, a quick (but rather thorough) search on that site showed nothing even close to what I "have hidden".
But thanks for the possible "alert". I don't truly want to take other people's credit, as did many at TWI.
Now - back to "the grind" - NO THANKS AGAIN TO YOU, SIR! (Har! Har!)
SPEC"
----------------------
Yes, folks - back to "the grind"...and (in addition to reconstructing my post about items 10-13), I now see it has gone even further - the last I saw was post #18!
SPEC
PS: This is a classic example of the first of my two "original quotes"! (see just below) The laugh is on me!
I tend to think they were both "real" too. If the tree of life was not real, I don't think God would have had two Cheribum guarding it up until the flood. Just as Satan chose to rebel, God had to give his Adam a choice. Without free will, man is nothing but a robot and God is unjust. Without free will, then God is truly unfair and unjust.
I think if Adam had told Satan to "get thee behind me" as the Second Adam, Jesus, did (note - was Jesus set up to fail? Thank God he didn't), Adam would have had the right to eat of the tree of life, he would have been ruler of the earth, God's regent on earth so to speak, and Christ would never have had to come redeem man - there would have been no redemption necessary. Every thing would be very different today.
As an aside, note the Cheribum's four faces: Man, lion (wild beast), ox (tame beast), bird - i.e., creation. When people came to worship God with burnt offerings outside of Eden, they saw the Cheribum guarding the Tree of Life. I have often wondered if the ancient gods man worshipped were not a corruption of the original Cheribum that Noah and his family saw and passed the info down to mankind who worshipped the "creature" rather than the Creator. Interesting.
-------------------
IMHO: Right on Sunesis! "Your take" on Cheribum is interesting also.
I have often wondered - (since after the flood had receeded and vegetation had resumed its normal growth) - whatever became of the two trees in question? ("life" & "knowledge")
-------------------
Ah, what language DID you read it in that says that "the tree of knowledge of good
and evil {is) right next to the tree of life"?
-------------------
KJV:
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Gen 3:3 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.
Both of these trees were in close proximity: "The midst of the garden".
-------------------
The entire situation, whether literal or allegorical, was one where free will was
THE BEGINNING of the situation. If Man had NO choice and couldn't sin,
Man would be denied the free will CHOICE to sin.
Sounds like you think the only sensible thing for a smart God to do would be to
make sinning impossible or nearly so, and block out Man's capacity to CHOOSE,
think and act for himself, and live with the consequences of his decisions and
actions.
I'm rather thankful for free will, myself. Granted, at the moment, there's a
lot of problems that would be bypassed if free will wasn't an option,
but we're here, and so is free will, and I prefer that to the most
comfortable, idyllic PRISON God could construct.
-----------------------
I totally agree with your last 3 paragraphs!
-----------------------
...I suppose that would depend on a) whether I was hungry, b) had belly fat and c) needed hair. At any rate, who would I blame for my choice except myself?
And what's the point, anyway?
---------------------
Your response here (to WordWolf) made me laugh! I heard that in the Great Depression people were actually chewing on shoe leather!
And (as an "aside") I have heard that people all over the planet have been eating what they term "staples"! I have some of those here in my office, but I would never consider making a steady diet of them!
---------------------
No problem, Spec. Good luck on your book.
Do you have a working title? Publisher?
----------------------
Thanks for the encouragement - to me it's a "roller coaster ride", for damn sure!
I believe I will entitle it, "Genesis One: God's Table of Contents".
My publisher is Tate Publishing. (No comments from the "peanut gallery", please!)
----------------------
I'm aware there's "young earth Creationists" out there, but I think they reflect a misunderstanding of both science AND Scripture, and poor scholarship towards both...
...I don't think that evidence exists purely to exist, and that we're designed to at least ATTEMPT to be logical, and were given a logical universe and a logical planet to work with. (I begin with those presumptions...)
------------------------
I believe you have made some good points here WordWolf!
------------------------
Because when I read it [the Bible] literally, I have difficulty. Not the least of which is that the order of creation according to Genesis 1 is plants, then animals, then man. But Genesis 2 says it was man, then plants, then animals.
All I'm trying to do is get the story in my head.
-----------------------
My book contains a logical response to this "dilemma". You might like it.
-----------------------
I have had the same questions SS. The "What did God expect?" questions.
Maybe, God expected them to be thankful for His ample provision and to obey Him . . . their creator God. Seems plausible He could expect faith in His word and the expression of His goodness. Wouldn't you?
What did they know? They knew God provided them dominion and bounty. They knew He said eat freely of any of the trees . . . whatever you want. . . but, this one tree you will not eat of because if you do. . . you will SURELY die. They knew His instruction. They knew His generosity. They knew His fellowship and kindness. They knew their purpose.
It was Satan who tempted, not God. It was Satan who was crafty and sewed the seed of doubt in what Eve knew about God. Her perception became an exaggerated one of God's severity in the prohibition of one thing. It went from freely eat any. . . to . . . Yeah we can eat. It went from this one tree you cannot eat from. . . to . . .Yeah, we can't even touch it lest we die. God didn't say lest you die. . . He said, you will surely die, and He never said they could not touch it. She lost sight of God's goodness and His judgment.
What I find interesting is no one repented. They hid. Job speaks of Adam's transgression. . . How he responded. .. Have I covered my transgressions like Adam, By hiding my iniquity in my bosom. . . . yet, God still provided them a covering and He has generously provided, at great cost, a better way.
-------------------------
Very well-thought-out geisha779! Makes a lot of sense to me.
-------------------------
Well, folks - I am glad to have finally answered all the recent posts - and again...NO THANKS TO WORDWOLF for his "rude interruption". (Just kidding!)
Actually I had another "private message interruption", but I had gotten got smart! I started a Word Document and constantly cut and pasted every new revision into it as I was was making this post. That worked just fine! I also went into my "settings" and "opted out" of the option to "notify me immediately online for any private messages". (I will just watch my e-mail - at my own damn convenience!)
1 Then when God, who is merciful and full of pity, heard Adam's voice, He said to him: --
2 "O Adam, so long as the good angel was obedient to Me, a bright light rested on him and on his hosts.
3 But when he transgressed My commandment, I deprived him of that bright nature, and he became dark.
4 And when he was in the heavens, in the realms of light, he knew nothing of darkness.
5 But he transgressed, and I made him fall from the heaven onto the earth; and it was this darkness that came over him.
6 And on you, O Adam, while in My garden and obedient to Me, did that bright light rest also.
7 But when I heard of your transgression, I deprived you of that bright light. Yet, of My mercy, I did not turn you into darkness, but I made you your body of flesh, over which I spread this skin, in order that it may bear cold and heat.
8 If I had let My wrath fall heavily on you, I should have destroyed you; and had I turned you into darkness, it would have been as if I had killed you.
9 But in My mercy, I have made you as you are; when you transgressed My commandment, O Adam, I drove you from the garden, and made you come forth into this land; and commanded you to live in this cave; and darkness covered you, as it did over him who transgressed My commandment.
10 Thus, O Adam, has this night deceived you. It is not to last forever; but is only of twelve hours; when it is over, daylight will return.
11 Sigh not, therefore, neither be moved; and say not in your heart that this darkness is long and drags on wearily; and say not in your heart that I plague you with it.
12 Strengthen your heart, and be not afraid. This darkness is not a punishment. But, O Adam, I have made the day, and have placed the sun in it to give light; in order that you and your children should do your work.
13 For I knew you would sin and transgress, and come out into this land. Yet I wouldn't force you, nor be heard over you, nor shut up; nor doom you through your fall; nor through your coming out from light into darkness; nor yet through your coming from the garden into this land.
14 For I made you of the light; and I willed to bring out children of light from you and like to you.
15 But you did not keep My commandment one day; until I had finished the creation and blessed everything in it.
16 Then, concerning the tree, I commanded you not to eat of it. Yet I knew that Satan, who deceived himself, would also deceive you.
17 So I made known to you by means of the tree, not to come near him. And I told you not to eat of the fruit thereof, nor to taste of it, nor yet to sit under it, nor to yield to it.
18 Had I not been and spoken to you, O Adam, concerning the tree, and had I left you without a commandment, and you had sinned -- it would have been an offence on My part, for not having given you any order; you would turn around and blame Me for it.
19 But I commanded you, and warned you, and you fell. So that My creatures cannot blame Me; but the blame rests on them alone.
20 And, O Adam, I have made the day so that you and your descendants can work and toil in it. And I have made the night for them to rest in it from their work; and for the beasts of the field to go forth by night and look for their food.
21 But little of darkness now remains, O Adam, and daylight will soon appear."
"tree of good + evil" is the classic illustration of a dualistic system
as if to say "if your spiritual nourishment is from systems of "good/bad" you will be playing God, live in shame, make life harder in general, and suffering will stand between you and paradise."
because in the eyes of God...all is ultimately good, true and beautiful...and "evil" is a relative concept
Jesus seemed to agree...and lived and died in (and for) awareness of nonduality
the end of enmity = no more enemies = making friends of enemies
So then I take it that you reject a purely literal reading of the bible. Would that be right?
Because when I read it literally, I have difficulty. Not the least of which is that the order of creation according to Genesis 1 is plants, then animals, then man. But Genesis 2 says it was man, then plants, then animals.
All I'm trying to do is get the story in my head.
Actually the order of living things in Genesis 1 is vegetation and seed bearing plants, then the water and seas with living creatures, then the fowls of the air, then animals on the ground, then man. This order actually lines up with some scientific theories which state that the fish slowly evolved and came out of the seas to become the fowls of the air who slowly evolved to become land animals. And the days listed below gives a chronoligical order to creation, but a day does not have to represent one day. It could represent a long time period. And yes, there are many things in the bible which are figurative and not literal. And this is not uncommon with man's communication. For example, if one were to describe a heavy rain by saying it was raining cats and dogs or Jesus teaching with one of his parables as recorded in the gospels.
2 Peter 3:7-9
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
NKJV
Ps 90:4
4 For a thousand years in Your sight
Are like yesterday when it is past,
And like a watch in the night.
NKJV
Gen 1:9-31
9 Then God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 So the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 Then God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. 16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
NKJV
20 Then God said, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens." 21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." 23 So the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."
29 And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. 30 Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food"; and it was so. 31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Recommended Posts
waysider
I heard Wierwille teach on this subject. I have always thought that this particular version I'm about to share was in CF&S, but no one seems to remember it being there. So, I'm at a loss as to where and when he taught it. Anyway, I think his explanation was all a bunch of *%*&$#@*, so, I am simply repeating this for informational purposes.
Wierwille taught that Eve either masturbated Adam or performed oral sex on him. (I don't recall which.) Then, claimed Wierwille, Eve consumed the "byproduct" (and the following was supposed to be the "sin" part.) and convinced Adam to do the same. (Consume it, that is)
Yeah, I know. That's some really bizarre stuff to be coming from a guy who was supposed to be a minister.
Like I said, I think it's a bunch of nonsense "and then some", but, I wanted to put it out there as a matter of reference so people could see what kind of twisted mind drove someone we all thought was some kind of great Man of God.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
I always wondered why God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right smack in the middle of the garden Eden (directly next to the tree of life) where either Adam or Eve was bound to find it.
Anyway, I think the fall of A & E was bound to happen: you had two innocent humans (what did they know?), the tree was there beckoning, the serpent was there goading Eve on. God specifically told them not to eat the fruit, but did He really expect them to forever resist the temptation? Could God have foreknown the outcome?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Forgive me soul searcher, but you almost sound like you believe God intentionally set man up "for a fall". Do you suppose the same thing is true when wise and mature parents instruct their children?
Do they know ahead of time that the children will sometimes disobey? Are they instructing their kids to "set them up" or to keep them on "the right track", so they may grow up safe and healthy?
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
What do I know about God's ways? Innocent people suffer and die everyday.
The story in Genesis is a stretch to begin with. It conflicts with my knowledge of the laws of the physical universe. Dinosaurs walked on this earth millions of years ago. We have bones and fossils to prove it. And just because Moses didn't write about the Ice Age it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Finally, it seems to me that God did many mean things in the OT. I've posted some examples.
Edited by soul searcherLink to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
You'd be surprised what you can see about science, evolution and "the ice age" from the Bible. I have a book coming out soon. (My first!) It will be called, "Genesis One: God's Table of Contents".
Although you probably won't agree with it totally, many things you have brought up are addressed and explained logically.
It should be ready for release around November.
SPEC
:)
PS: And why did you SIDESTEP the issue at hand? I asked you to comment on:
"Do they (parents) know ahead of time that the children will sometimes disobey? Are they instructing their kids to "set them up" or to keep them on "the right track", so they may grow up safe and healthy?"
Did you avoid this because it makes "too damn much sense"? Maybe perhaps because you don't have a proper and logical response?
In an "honest debate", you STICK TO THE ITEM AT HAND - not just go "somewhere else" and start a new "argument" while the other is still there!
You said yourself (in your signature):
The mocker seeks wisdom and finds none,
but knowledge comes easily to the discerning.
Proverbs 14:6 (NIV)
Sounds to me like you may be a "mocker".
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
I remember that well, Waysider. And didn't LCM take it to a WHOLE OTHER LEVEL when he expounded (in the "new class", "The Way of Abundance and Power" - 1995) about the sin really being Eve in a lesbian relationship with the serpent, who had taken on the "form of a woman"!
He even found some related artwork ("Temptation and Fall", by Miche) to "prove his point": [Click to enlarge]
Perhaps LCM had "carnal knowledge" (LOL) of what may have been going on between his wife Donna and the current "president" (RFR), and was making some attempt at reproof. (?)
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
I "sidestepped" your questions (actually I ignored them) because I honestly thought they were rhetorical. Either way, I thought they were irrelevant and, truth be told, somewhat patronizing.
Well, God knows I've done my share of mocking over the years. But even so, I wasn't mocking...
No matter what language you translate it from, or what language you read it in, God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil right next to the tree of life. He didn't put it in another land (in Nod, east of Eden, for instance) or five miles way, or down the road, or up the river, or on top of a mountain. He put it right there in the middle of the Garden of Eden where A & E were bound to see it. And the tree had some very interesting things growing on it. And then there was a serpent (where did he come from, anyway?).
So, if I wanted to appreciate the story of creation as an allegory -- which I might be persuaded to do -- I might be persuaded to believe that God actually gave early man a choice: "eternal paradise" in Eden, or free will. Free will is the more desirable (to me, anyway), but with it comes the hard fruit of the tree knowledge of good and evil: a moral sense, knowing right from wrong.
[Come to think of it, why was the tree of knowledge of good and evil necessary in the first place? Why did God put it there, if not to let man choose free will on his own?]
Anyway, I look forward to reading your book. Will it discuss the Nephilim and how they got on earth?
Edited by soul searcherLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Seems like YOUR UNDERSTANDING of the story in Genesis is a stretch to begin with, and conflicts with your-
and my- laws of the physical universe. Plenty of Christians believe Genesis AND that dinosaurs were
on the Earth millions of years ago.
Who said the Bible was required to cover subjects not germane to the discussions at hand?
It was never meant to be a scientific textbook. As understood, what it DOES say hasn't
conflicted with scientific understanding as people have learned down the centuries,
despite people forcing incorrect meanings into text.
If you're interested, there's actually a lot of smart science all over the Bible.
It's not listed as "chapters 5 Scientific theory, chapter 6, Scientific application"
because the Bible was never intended to be a scientific textbook.
The books of the book (the codex, really) span thousands of years. Just because they're
not written in the CURRENT style is no reason, in and of itself, to throw up one's hands
and say "it's illogical, it's anti-science, it's anti-reason."
Of course, if one has ALREADY MADE UP THEIR MIND to dismiss the Bible, it doesn't matter
WHAT the contents say, the only thing one will see is pretexts to ignore it, and a reasoned
discussion is already precluded.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
I tend to think they were both "real" too. If the tree of life was not real, I don't think God would have had two Cheribum guarding it up until the flood. Just as Satan chose to rebel, God had to give his Adam a choice. Without free will, man is nothing but a robot and God is unjust. Without free will, then God is truly unfair and unjust.
I think if Adam had told Satan to "get thee behind me" as the Second Adam, Jesus, did (note - was Jesus set up to fail? Thank God he didn't), Adam would have had the right to eat of the tree of life, he would have been ruler of the earth, God's regent on earth so to speak, and Christ would never have had to come redeem man - there would have been no redemption necessary. Every thing would be very different today.
As an aside, note the Cheribum's four faces: Man, lion (wild beast), ox (tame beast), bird - i.e., creation. When people came to worship God with burnt offerings outside of Eden, they saw the Cheribum guarding the Tree of Life. I have often wondered if the ancient gods man worshipped were not a corruption of the original Cheribum that Noah and his family saw and passed the info down to mankind who worshipped the "creature" rather than the Creator. Interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Ah, what language DID you read it in that says that "the tree of knowledge of good
and evil {is) right next to the tree of life"?
The tree "had some very interesting things growing in it", but, being in the midst of
a great big GARDEN like it was, so did lots of other trees nearby.
They were bound to see that tree, they were bound to see the other trees.
If you saw a really beautifully packaged box of RAT POISON,
and someone kept trying to tell you to try some, that all your life you've been told it's
deadly to you but that it's really the healthiest thing you could possibly eat,
it would taste fantastic, it would burn away belly fat, and regenerate hair,
how long would you be able to resist trying some,
and who would you blame if you decided to open the box and eat some?
In case you're wondering, NO, those are not RHETORICAL questions.
They relate DIRECTLY to the discussion by analogy.
Which means I'm expecting an answer.
If you want my answer as soon as you give yours, I'm fine with that.
The entire situation, whether literal or allegorical, was one where free will was
THE BEGINNING of the situation. If Man had NO choice and couldn't sin,
Man would be denied the free will CHOICE to sin.
Sounds like you think the only sensible thing for a smart God to do would be to
make sinning impossible or nearly so, and block out Man's capacity to CHOOSE,
think and act for himself, and live with the consequences of his decisions and
actions.
I'm rather thankful for free will, myself. Granted, at the moment, there's a
lot of problems that would be bypassed if free will wasn't an option,
but we're here, and so is free will, and I prefer that to the most
comfortable, idyllic PRISON God could construct.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
Well, okay. And plenty don't.
How old do you believe the earth to be?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
Genesis 2:9 (NIV)
And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
In any polygon there is only one centroid, one middle point. The two trees couldn't have been that far away from each other. How big was the garden? Even if it was miles wide the trees wouldn't have been very far apart.
I suppose that would depend on a) whether I was hungry, b) had belly fat and c) needed hair. At any rate, who would I blame for my choice except myself?
And what's the point, anyway?
Edited by soul searcherLink to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Please excuse my former "tone of voice". I "went off" rather quickly instead of asking a couple more questions first. MY BAD!
I can see why my writing appeared rhetorical. Sorry for calling you a "mocker". (And thank you for the nice post on another thread recently!)
Sounds to me you give some merit to my evaluation of the "tree in question" here. (based upon that which I marked in red in your quote)
In any event, why God put that tree precisely where he did and why it was there in the first place, and why allow the "serpent" to be in the already tempting situation - who knows?
Nevertheless, things today are the way they are, and God certainly was aware of all this even from the very beginning. And people need to "deal with it" the best they can.
So, the best I can offer is that God's heart was to prepare a way out, "providing believers an edge in life over the rest".
Curiously enough (and there is neither room here, nor desire at the present time to expound in detail) it seems that my "23-year project" - my book - boils down to the fact that perhaps the Bible could have been entitled, "How to walk by the spirit in 7 easy lessons". Nuff for now. Glad you are looking forward to reading it. (August for advanced copies; November for official release)
I have not addressed the subject of Nephilim in my book. In fact, I show very little about "ancient Earth history or evolution". However, I believe sufficient groundwork may have been laid to perhaps explore those in more detail in a "sequel" later on. BUT OH MY GOD - what amount of time and thought and research will that take?!
It's rather ironic that my entire "project" all started as a rather "innocent-looking" word-study on "abundance" (Gk: perissos), and now there seems to be no end to it! I feel like I have somehow opened up the proverbial "Pandora's Box"!
Some have said, "Be careful what you ask for - you might just get it!" My next word-study shall be on "small", or "tiny"!
And to you, WordWolf, your post made lots of sense! You penned, "If you're interested, there's actually a lot of smart science all over the Bible."
My book will reveal (among other things) a breathtaking example of this which (I hope) will stun the world, for it is a "rather new concept" - but very logical - which has been "hidden in plain sight" in the Bible for thousands of years now. Why I seem to have it first is somewhat of a "mystery".
Please forgive the ambiguity - I don't mean to "dangle a carrot" in front of people. I just don't want to "let the cat out of the bag just yet".
SPEC
:)
PS: I see that posts 10-13 had been written as I was responding to 8 & 9. I am reading those now.
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
No problem, Spec. Good luck on your book.
Do you have a working title? Publisher?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Millions of years old, possibly billions. I really don't care the specifics once
we get past one million. Like Genesis, I don't think the exact number matters much
in the discussion.
I'm aware there's "young earth Creationists" out there, but I think they reflect
a misunderstanding of both science AND Scripture, and poor scholarship towards both.
We know from science that the Earth APPEARS very old, millions or billions of years old.
That means the Earth either IS millions of years old (or older),
or that the Earth is younger but was created to APPEAR millions of years old (or older.)
Either answer, technically, fits the evidence.
Personally, I reject the second position because I don't think that evidence exists
purely to exist, and that we're designed to at least ATTEMPT to be logical, and were
given a logical universe and a logical planet to work with. (I begin with those
presumptions. Some people begin with those, some begin with others. These are mine.)
Those who think the scientific evidence reflects a young Earth, IMHO, lack an understanding
of the scientific evidence, ignore the limitations of some things, and completely
disregard the most reliable methods of determination. I think that's a shame.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
So then I take it that you reject a purely literal reading of the bible. Would that be right?
Because when I read it literally, I have difficulty. Not the least of which is that the order of creation according to Genesis 1 is plants, then animals, then man. But Genesis 2 says it was man, then plants, then animals.
All I'm trying to do is get the story in my head.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I have had the same questions SS. The "What did God expect?" questions.
Maybe, God expected them to be thankful for His ample provision and to obey Him . . . their creator God. Seems plausible He could expect faith in His word and the expression of His goodness. Wouldn't you?
What did they know? They knew God provided them dominion and bounty. They knew He said eat freely of any of the trees . . . whatever you want. . . but, this one tree you will not eat of because if you do. . . you will SURELY die. They knew His instruction. They knew His generosity. They knew His fellowship and kindness. They knew their purpose.
It was Satan who tempted, not God. It was Satan who was crafty and sewed the seed of doubt in what Eve knew about God. Her perception became an exaggerated one of God's severity in the prohibition of one thing. It went from freely eat any. . . to . . . Yeah we can eat. It went from this one tree you cannot eat from. . . to . . .Yeah, we can't even touch it lest we die. God didn't say lest you die. . . He said, you will surely die, and He never said they could not touch it. She lost sight of God's goodness and His judgment.
What I find interesting is no one repented. They hid. Job speaks of Adam's transgression. . . How he responded. .. Have I covered my transgressions like Adam, By hiding my iniquity in my bosom. . . . yet, God still provided them a covering and He has generously provided, at great cost, a better way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
I hope this makes you all laugh! (And I hope WordWolf doesn't mind.)
He sent me a link to a site to possibly prevent me from "taking credit from others" concerning my "science-related" discovery in the Bible. Below is my response:
--------------------------
"Thanks, but NO THANKS, WordWolf! (just kidding!)
I had just spent almost an hour responding (with "multiquote") to posts 10-13 in "tree of knowledge" topic when your private message automatically popped up.
I was anxious to see it, so I clicked on it. (more about that later)
After I was done perusing "your link", I returned to give a final look at my post and click to submit it - and IT WAS TOTALLY GONE!
Now I have to start ALL OVER - thanks to YOU! (gotta blame somebody, huh? - and better you than me! - LOL)
Actually, I learned something here - and I damned sure won't be making that mistake again!
Anyway, a quick (but rather thorough) search on that site showed nothing even close to what I "have hidden".
But thanks for the possible "alert". I don't truly want to take other people's credit, as did many at TWI.
Now - back to "the grind" - NO THANKS AGAIN TO YOU, SIR! (Har! Har!)
SPEC"
----------------------
Yes, folks - back to "the grind"...and (in addition to reconstructing my post about items 10-13), I now see it has gone even further - the last I saw was post #18!
SPEC
PS: This is a classic example of the first of my two "original quotes"! (see just below) The laugh is on me!
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
Thanks, geisha. Your post makes a lot of sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
-------------------
IMHO: Right on Sunesis! "Your take" on Cheribum is interesting also.
I have often wondered - (since after the flood had receeded and vegetation had resumed its normal growth) - whatever became of the two trees in question? ("life" & "knowledge")
-------------------
Well, folks - I am glad to have finally answered all the recent posts - and again...NO THANKS TO WORDWOLF for his "rude interruption". (Just kidding!)
Actually I had another "private message interruption", but I had gotten got smart! I started a Word Document and constantly cut and pasted every new revision into it as I was was making this post. That worked just fine! I also went into my "settings" and "opted out" of the option to "notify me immediately online for any private messages". (I will just watch my e-mail - at my own damn convenience!)
I'm learning!
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks SPEC
why do people think the dinosaurs live a long time ago?
the creation took many millions of years for dirt to form more dirt so God could create man kind or dinosaur kind
In the beginning is what one book
NO NO God did not make the Bible King James did that
can anyone quote from it
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/freebook/adameve/adameve1.html
one of many books about Adam and Eve
God is the devil and the devil is God
God had to teach us about evil
we know bad by good
I see still people thinking with way brains
trow away those dictionaries
the word is being wrote today
you can hear God your self
that God uses a tree because a tells a story of its life
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
hi everyone
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
"tree of good + evil" is the classic illustration of a dualistic system
as if to say "if your spiritual nourishment is from systems of "good/bad" you will be playing God, live in shame, make life harder in general, and suffering will stand between you and paradise."
because in the eyes of God...all is ultimately good, true and beautiful...and "evil" is a relative concept
Jesus seemed to agree...and lived and died in (and for) awareness of nonduality
the end of enmity = no more enemies = making friends of enemies
this includes the fourth horseman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
[twitter][/twitter]
Actually the order of living things in Genesis 1 is vegetation and seed bearing plants, then the water and seas with living creatures, then the fowls of the air, then animals on the ground, then man. This order actually lines up with some scientific theories which state that the fish slowly evolved and came out of the seas to become the fowls of the air who slowly evolved to become land animals. And the days listed below gives a chronoligical order to creation, but a day does not have to represent one day. It could represent a long time period. And yes, there are many things in the bible which are figurative and not literal. And this is not uncommon with man's communication. For example, if one were to describe a heavy rain by saying it was raining cats and dogs or Jesus teaching with one of his parables as recorded in the gospels.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.