Here's another thought. It states in the Bible that Adam committed the offence against God. God told Adam not to eat of the tree.
Now, can people state the sum or gist of a subject without including every single word pertaining to the subject. Was the problem that Eve forgot to use the word "freely" when she responded to the serpent? Did she not accurately relate the gist of the only restriction that God had given to Adam? Did her omission of the word "freely" cause of the problem or what it simply that Eve was deceived?
In otherwords, did it really matter that Eve didn't say freely? I don't think so. I believe that we can be right to summarize biblical issues without going to the nth degree to do so, and that Eve's failure to include the word freely had absolutely no effect on the situation.
It says that Eve was deceived. Adam was not deceived. He walk into it with his eyes wide open. He knew what he was doing. Eve did not. That would make the sin Adam’s and not Eve’s.
Biblefan Dave, the original self-pleasure was taught by VP, LCM taught it was Eve having homosexual sex with Satan who was manifested as woman. Now the part of that which is kooky (I jest, it's loaded with kooky) is if Adam was with Satan/Woman then it wouldn't have been homosexual sex for him.
I think it was a banana....sorry....joking.
Since God already had history with disobedience he probably saw fit to make it an option for mankind as well. I'm taking great liberty for God's thoughts of course, just IMHO. In following my thinking He would have also told Adam and Eve something of the choice made my Lucifer. Goodness, now I'm really taking liberties. But we don't know everything God said to them. Nor do we really know the fullness of what they had in the direct tie to God. Would he have taught them such things as Lucifer committing high treason (thanks WordWolf for given me the idea), or have I forgotten more than I learned and shouldn't even ask?
So following my reasoning it would be Satan (thanks CKnapp3) that committed the original "original sin". And the "original sin" would have been disobedience (thanks TheEvan).
quote: So following my reasoning it would be Satan (thanks CKnapp3) that committed the original "original sin". And the "original sin" would have been disobedience (thanks TheEvan).
I agree. Originally -- sin came to be known (my imho), after the first disobedience occurred --- aka -- rebellion in Heavan, and yes -- it was disobedience!!.
There is a theory within Judaism, I will explain it as best I can, but please bear with me.
You have to start with the idea that the first few chapters of Genesis are figurative, not literal. There was no literal "tree of life" or "tree of good and evil".
When God told Adam not to eat of the tree of good and evil, it was not so much a command as a "warning", or perhaps better yet an "explanation". Eating of the "tree" had to do with a choice regarding an action. If you eat of the tree, these things are going to occur. .
a) you will have a higher level of knowledge/thinking
b) you will eventually die, or perhaps simply have an awareness of the fact that eventually you will die.
It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences.
In this way, we all now have the ability to think, we all have a greater sense of self awareness, and we all have free will choice as opposed to basic instincts.
Many Jews do not believe in the concept of original sin and almost none believe we are all born sinners.
"It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences."
Abigail- I have to respectfully disagree with you on this because adam did name all the animals before his disobedience. So I think they were thinking far above the animals already. Cuz after all "satan" didn't try to deceive the animals....
But I do understand that you are taking this from judaism too.
The problem is not in knowing good but in knowing evil. They already knew good but perhaps didn't recognize it as such, not having a knowledge of evil. They were in a sense, spoiled :D-->.
"Gee I don't know Abi, "thou shalt not eat of it" sounds like a command to me.
I guess Moses gave the ten suggestions then?"
Well Def, there are many who view the Bible not as a concrete and absolute instruction book on how to live our lives but as a history of man's relationship with God. A relationship which has changed, evolved, grown over time. So, in that sense, there are no commandments.
However, there is certainly great wisdom contained therein which we can benefit from, if we choose to. There are certainly things from the Bible we can apply in our lives.
Personally, I prefer to "obey a commandment" because I can see the wisdom or love behind it and not simply out of "blind obedience". It is simply not my nature to blindly obey, wasn't as a child, wasn't in TWI, and still isn't now.
Vert,
"Abigail- I have to respectfully disagree with you on this because adam did name all the animals before his disobedience. So I think they were thinking far above the animals already. Cuz after all "satan" didn't try to deceive the animals...."
And perhaps that is exactly what the tree is. The choosing of what one wanted instead of what one was ordered to do. "you may not eat", "but I want to eat". Previously, they followed orders, then they made a choice. The act of choosing something instead of blindly following could be seen as an evolutionary step forward. Satan, likewise, does not have to be literal, but simply the thought processes that occured in the decision making.
Roy,
" But since there was only good there was no free will until he sin
Since the tree was of good and evil and he had good he receive evil knowledge"
Exactly. How can one have free will if one is not aware of a choice to be made. And think of all of the things humanity has learned over the centuries. We've certainly made a lot of mistakes, are still making mistakes, will make more mistakes. But we also are learning as individuals and as a species.
"And perhaps that is exactly what the tree is. The choosing of what one wanted instead of what one was ordered to do. "you may not eat", "but I want to eat". Previously, they followed orders, then they made a choice. The act of choosing something instead of blindly following could be seen as an evolutionary step forward. Satan, likewise, does not have to be literal, but simply the thought processes that occured in the decision making"
Good points Abigail, but I don't think they were blindly following what God said. The choice they made had a devasting effect on man. Fixed by the second Adam.
An interesting side note is this...
Gen 3:22And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
"the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"
Live for ever....
The way of the tree of life is there for those looking for it.
Blind obedience is not what God wants. As things come together in your mind you will know what to do and what not to do. Yet, still it helps to have help from others. We have seen the false prophets and apostles first hand and know what to avoid.
It says that Eve was deceived. Adam was not deceived. He walk into it with his eyes wide open. He knew what he was doing. Eve did not. That would make the sin Adam’s and not Eve’s.
A classic example of man thinking with his penis, no doubt :D-->
There is a theory within Judaism, I will explain it as best I can, but please bear with me.
You have to start with the idea that the first few chapters of Genesis are figurative, not literal. There was no literal "tree of life" or "tree of good and evil".
When God told Adam not to eat of the tree of good and evil, it was not so much a command as a "warning", or perhaps better yet an "explanation". Eating of the "tree" had to do with a choice regarding an action. If you eat of the tree, these things are going to occur. .
a) you will have a higher level of knowledge/thinking
b) you will eventually die, or perhaps simply have an awareness of the fact that eventually you will die.
It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences.
In this way, we all now have the ability to think, we all have a greater sense of self awareness, and we all have free will choice as opposed to basic instincts.
Many Jews do not believe in the concept of original sin and almost none believe we are all born sinners.
I have come to the conclusion that I really don't know what the original sin was. But, I see garden + tree + fruit + eat. There was a garden. Well, it was called the Garden of Eden, so I assume it had the characteristics of a garden regarding living and growth plants. I know there were animals because Adam was naming them.
Ok, in the Garden are trees. One particular tree has fruit which Adam and Eve are forbidden to eat. Garden, tree, fruit, and eat all seem too literal to me to be symbolic, not when they are all mentioned together in close connection. Therefore, I don't believe it to be self-pleasure, as taught in CFS. I forgot what LCM taught it was in his class, but that didn't sound right either. Nor could I definitely conclude it was an apple, although an apple is a fruit.
I have decided that most likely it was a mango. If man eats, man go out of garden.
could not resist the mango~~~ i think the garden of eden is the body and all the animals named are manifestations of the body and some of these animals named were given to the stars and the original sin is that we stopped thinking so wonderously and disobedient to freedom of will led to murder of our thoughts to be free~~~ or sumthink like that~~~
Hey, Moses parted a red sea and jc walked on the water~~~ some people knows how to do that type of thing for some reason and amazing randi can bend a spoon
that is one of the quickest, cleanest, smoothest explanations i have read on the subject of "the fall" in our modern Biblical context, Abi. not easy to do. and i thank you for your courage
it seems more or less a reversal to what is understood thru PFAL and most fundamental religions and methods. and so no wonder it is often taken as some sort of threatening deception (which seems like a quite natural reaction)
and thanks cm, for remembering it and bringing it back to the present
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
13
34
14
Popular Days
May 16
16
May 20
12
May 15
12
May 17
11
Top Posters In This Topic
sirguessalot 11 posts
Abigail 13 posts
CM 34 posts
lindyhopper 14 posts
Popular Days
May 16 2005
16 posts
May 20 2005
12 posts
May 15 2005
12 posts
May 17 2005
11 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame
Nopper. I just noticed you left out God. That's all. Unless you have another question~~~
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
Something like God did not create evil. God only made the free will the conduit for the original sin.
oh sht where do we go from now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biblefan Dave
Here's another thought. It states in the Bible that Adam committed the offence against God. God told Adam not to eat of the tree.
Now, can people state the sum or gist of a subject without including every single word pertaining to the subject. Was the problem that Eve forgot to use the word "freely" when she responded to the serpent? Did she not accurately relate the gist of the only restriction that God had given to Adam? Did her omission of the word "freely" cause of the problem or what it simply that Eve was deceived?
In otherwords, did it really matter that Eve didn't say freely? I don't think so. I believe that we can be right to summarize biblical issues without going to the nth degree to do so, and that Eve's failure to include the word freely had absolutely no effect on the situation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith
Again personal Opinion here.
It says that Eve was deceived. Adam was not deceived. He walk into it with his eyes wide open. He knew what he was doing. Eve did not. That would make the sin Adam’s and not Eve’s.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
The Bible also says Adam was with Eve when this happened. So Adam stood there while Eve and the serpent talked and never said a word.
He just ate the fruit along with Eve and then blamed her when God came looking for them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Biblefan Dave, the original self-pleasure was taught by VP, LCM taught it was Eve having homosexual sex with Satan who was manifested as woman. Now the part of that which is kooky (I jest, it's loaded with kooky) is if Adam was with Satan/Woman then it wouldn't have been homosexual sex for him.
I think it was a banana....sorry....joking.
Since God already had history with disobedience he probably saw fit to make it an option for mankind as well. I'm taking great liberty for God's thoughts of course, just IMHO. In following my thinking He would have also told Adam and Eve something of the choice made my Lucifer. Goodness, now I'm really taking liberties. But we don't know everything God said to them. Nor do we really know the fullness of what they had in the direct tie to God. Would he have taught them such things as Lucifer committing high treason (thanks WordWolf for given me the idea), or have I forgotten more than I learned and shouldn't even ask?
So following my reasoning it would be Satan (thanks CKnapp3) that committed the original "original sin". And the "original sin" would have been disobedience (thanks TheEvan).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I agree. Originally -- sin came to be known (my imho), after the first disobedience occurred --- aka -- rebellion in Heavan, and yes -- it was disobedience!!.
"If the Word doesn't say it, we don't know it."
(or sumthin like that) -- vpw
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Works doesn't it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
There is a theory within Judaism, I will explain it as best I can, but please bear with me.
You have to start with the idea that the first few chapters of Genesis are figurative, not literal. There was no literal "tree of life" or "tree of good and evil".
When God told Adam not to eat of the tree of good and evil, it was not so much a command as a "warning", or perhaps better yet an "explanation". Eating of the "tree" had to do with a choice regarding an action. If you eat of the tree, these things are going to occur. .
a) you will have a higher level of knowledge/thinking
b) you will eventually die, or perhaps simply have an awareness of the fact that eventually you will die.
It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences.
In this way, we all now have the ability to think, we all have a greater sense of self awareness, and we all have free will choice as opposed to basic instincts.
Many Jews do not believe in the concept of original sin and almost none believe we are all born sinners.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Gee I don't know Abi, "thou shalt not eat of it" sounds like a command to me.
I guess Moses gave the ten suggestions then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vertical Limit
"It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences."
Abigail- I have to respectfully disagree with you on this because adam did name all the animals before his disobedience. So I think they were thinking far above the animals already. Cuz after all "satan" didn't try to deceive the animals....
But I do understand that you are taking this from judaism too.
The problem is not in knowing good but in knowing evil. They already knew good but perhaps didn't recognize it as such, not having a knowledge of evil. They were in a sense, spoiled
:D-->.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved Abigail
Yes I love your post but my thinking on this is a little differ
I believe there was a tree and still is but the clue is that its a spiritual tree which can not be seen with the natural eyes
Yes Adam was thinking before but only with his spirit but his flesh had only basic instincts
But since there was only good there was no free will until he sin
Since the tree was of good and evil and he had good he receive evil knowledge
With we now have two choices walk by the flesh knowledge or walk by the spirital knowledge
with love and an holy kiss blow your way Roy
Beloved Limit
You said "It was sort of an evolutionary step forward....."
Yes you are right it was not a step forward but backward
Once we were greater than animals but we became equare to all soul life since our spiritual life was dead weight
with love and an holy kiss blow your way Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Def,
"Gee I don't know Abi, "thou shalt not eat of it" sounds like a command to me.
I guess Moses gave the ten suggestions then?"
Well Def, there are many who view the Bible not as a concrete and absolute instruction book on how to live our lives but as a history of man's relationship with God. A relationship which has changed, evolved, grown over time. So, in that sense, there are no commandments.
However, there is certainly great wisdom contained therein which we can benefit from, if we choose to. There are certainly things from the Bible we can apply in our lives.
Personally, I prefer to "obey a commandment" because I can see the wisdom or love behind it and not simply out of "blind obedience". It is simply not my nature to blindly obey, wasn't as a child, wasn't in TWI, and still isn't now.
Vert,
"Abigail- I have to respectfully disagree with you on this because adam did name all the animals before his disobedience. So I think they were thinking far above the animals already. Cuz after all "satan" didn't try to deceive the animals...."
And perhaps that is exactly what the tree is. The choosing of what one wanted instead of what one was ordered to do. "you may not eat", "but I want to eat". Previously, they followed orders, then they made a choice. The act of choosing something instead of blindly following could be seen as an evolutionary step forward. Satan, likewise, does not have to be literal, but simply the thought processes that occured in the decision making.
Roy,
" But since there was only good there was no free will until he sin
Since the tree was of good and evil and he had good he receive evil knowledge"
Exactly. How can one have free will if one is not aware of a choice to be made. And think of all of the things humanity has learned over the centuries. We've certainly made a lot of mistakes, are still making mistakes, will make more mistakes. But we also are learning as individuals and as a species.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vertical Limit
"And perhaps that is exactly what the tree is. The choosing of what one wanted instead of what one was ordered to do. "you may not eat", "but I want to eat". Previously, they followed orders, then they made a choice. The act of choosing something instead of blindly following could be seen as an evolutionary step forward. Satan, likewise, does not have to be literal, but simply the thought processes that occured in the decision making"
Good points Abigail, but I don't think they were blindly following what God said. The choice they made had a devasting effect on man. Fixed by the second Adam.
An interesting side note is this...
Gen 3:22And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
"the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"
Live for ever....
The way of the tree of life is there for those looking for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vertical Limit
Blind obedience is not what God wants. As things come together in your mind you will know what to do and what not to do. Yet, still it helps to have help from others. We have seen the false prophets and apostles first hand and know what to avoid.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved Abigail
Yes there can be no free will without evil or sin -v- good
They may of been free will but Adam did not know it until he sin
Maybe It was in God's plan for men to sin so man could understand why he should choice to walk by God's direction
He could not understand sin until it came into the world by his sin
That was Adam first great awakeing to good and evil
Now I think he evolved backwards but I look for the day when we can evolved to be like God
God may of plan sending his son to save us because he plan for us to sin
with love and an holy kiss blowed your way Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Okay God wouldn't have told Adam and Eve about Lucifer, I was just taking some liberties earlier, but that thought doesn't fit too well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
Screw the original sin~~~
I would like to know the tree ~~~
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
A classic example of man thinking with his penis, no doubt
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Bringing this back up because someone else brought it up to me.
:)-->
The post you are looking for is on page 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Yeah-that's it Abigail, thanks.
Need to consider it better.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
could not resist the mango~~~ i think the garden of eden is the body and all the animals named are manifestations of the body and some of these animals named were given to the stars and the original sin is that we stopped thinking so wonderously and disobedient to freedom of will led to murder of our thoughts to be free~~~ or sumthink like that~~~
Hey, Moses parted a red sea and jc walked on the water~~~ some people knows how to do that type of thing for some reason and amazing randi can bend a spoon
just a mango thot
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
it seems more or less a reversal to what is understood thru PFAL and most fundamental religions and methods. and so no wonder it is often taken as some sort of threatening deception (which seems like a quite natural reaction)
and thanks cm, for remembering it and bringing it back to the present
Link 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.