15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
then Gen 3:4,5
quote:
4And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
then Gen.3:22
quote:
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:
It is obviously figuretive, but I will do the best I can with what I think are some interesting things if you look at it in a literal or semi-literal way as twi did.
1) Of all the trees in the Garden the tree of life was not in it. Or it was there but God didn't want them to eat it yet.
2) The truth of the matter seems to be in the combination of what God and the serpent said. God did not say anything about becoming like one of them, just that they would surely die. Satan said, they wouldn't surely die, but they would become like one of them. Later God said, "behold they have become like one of us". Holy crap, Satan reveals some truth that God left out!
So they surely die. Not really it was all in the big guy in the sky's plan. But man was put in place and told exactly what God wanted them to hear. Did they surely die? TWI said that it was spiritual death, but later spirit could be upon. Doesn't sound like certain death. Eventually, I assume, they die a natural death. But will be raised again some day to live forever. That doesn't sound so "surely" either. Surely they died in this life. the truth of the matter doesn't seem to appear so clearly from one side or the other, but in knowing the good and the evil. Know what I'm saying?
3) Both God and Satan knew good and evil? I don't remember what kind of "know" that was...OK I'll look it up.
OK
strongs # 03045 - yada'
1) to know
a) (Qal)
1) to know
a) to know, learn to know
b) to perceive
c) to perceive and see, find out and discern
d) to discriminate, distinguish
e) to know by experience
f) to recognise, admit, acknowledge, confess
g) to consider
2) to know, be acquainted with
3) to know (a person carnally)
4) to know how, be skilful in
5) to have knowledge, be wise
b) (Niphal)
1) to be made known, be or become known, be revealed
2) to make oneself known
3) to be perceived
4) to be instructed
c) (Piel) to cause to know
d) (Poal) to cause to know
e) (Pual)
1) to be known
2) known, one known, acquaintance (participle)
f) (Hiphil) to make known, declare
g) (Hophal) to be made know
h) (Hithpael) to make oneself known, reveal oneself
and yep the LXX makes it ginosko
I'll be back this site I am looking at is interesting.
"And the LORD God said (8799) , Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know (8800) good and evil: and now, lest he put forth (8799) his hand, and take (8804) also of the tree of life, and eat (8804) , and live (8804) for ever: "
Lest in our dictionarys today means "for fear that". As in "lest you die".
As a side bar, I will say this: can you see mankind's perspective there? TWI we were taught not to fear. The God of the Bible says to his creation "FEAR NOT", yet God said, "you shall surely die" and Eve said, "LEST you die". Perhaps it was not a matter of adding, changing, and deleating words. Perhaps it was a difference in perspective. God says "don't fear, but..." and we say, "holy ****, don't fear what?!" Perhaps even before sin there was fear...the "fear of God".
Speaking of the fear of God, back to what I was going to say. Gen. 3:22 says that God said "lest". It sounds as though GOd realised, "Behold", that man was like them, "knowing good and evil", and could still live forever if they ate of the tree of life. Kinda like what the serpent said, "you will not surely die." He knew there was a way around that, eating of the tree of life. So what does God do? Kicks them out of the garden forcibly, flaming swords and all. Was he threatened? Is that why the serpent tempted? an attempt to overthrow God? Is that what GOd was concerned about?
Well, I've thought about this lately. I almost think Gen. 1 and 2 is two different stories about the creation of mankind. The first version, you have the creation of generic mankind. Then, there was no one to till the field (rule the world?) and God creates Adam, the one who was to be king and rule over mankind on earth - to show God to humanity, to be God's spokesman, so mankind can dwell with God. Then Eve was specifically created out of his rib in Chapt 2.
I see no reason why Adam and Eve could not have been inserted into mankind, just as Christ was inserted later.
We also know that Satan was present in the Garden when Adam - the king - was created. We also know from various sources that literal fallen angels were ruling over the general populace and people were worshipping them as Gods - not evil fallen angels, but as beings of the true God.
Now comes this new King - Adam - who is given authority over the earth and to lead and teach mankind. If Satan can get Adam to give him his authority, Satan wins, the earth is now his to do his will and pleasure - he and his minions can rule. At that point, they had no authority to rule the people or the earth. God had created it for the specific purpose of his creation of mankind - which the Word says the Sons of God (Angels) rejoiced at when this was created and done. The concept of mankind was a thrilling thing to them.
We know from Isaiah and other places that Satan was splendid looking. My question was, what did Eve see that was so pleasant to look at? What incredible things or beings did she see, that seemed so beautiful and knowledgeable, with knowledge and wisdom way beyond that of puny humans - such a lovely creature or creatures, that she thinks, hmmm... God hasn't told us all - but these Gods know - they have special spiritual knowledge. If I do this thing, I can be like them... I can be as these Gods. I think when Satan told her you shall be as God - he was pointing at a literal being or beings - unearthly, spiritual, beautiful, seemingly advanced.
I think she saw literal fallen angels and gave her allegiance to them, they taught her marvelous things and she got Adam to go with her and commune. He then somehow gave his authority and rule to Satan (remember Satan said to Jesus, it was given to me?).
They switched their allegiance from God, to these beautiful (seemingly) unearthly creations and consorted with them.
The tree of life - DNA? Another god offering genetic manipulation, hybredization, some kind of transformation so they may now not only know as these gods know, but live like, and as, these beautiful beings forever? Something man is not to fool with? Who knows. Whatever it was, the consequences were too horrific for God to contemplate.
Original sin, man has chosen and committed high treason against God, there will now be no harmony on the earth, mankind has invited misery upon himself by this transfer of his power and authority to this leader of the gods. God must, out of justice, step aside and let Satan rule, the creation groans under Satans terrible weight, rule and corruptive nature. Yet, God has mercy and compassion and says, I will send a redeemer...
Sunesis --- WHOAH, hot post... I gotta think about that awhile. Are you kind of extending the whole Nephilim thing backwards to Gen. 2 and 3?? I can see some real possibilities there...
i recall that all of creation was considered all good at first, in 7 nested layers of goodness, if you will. the serpent was there and lucifer was there, good and wonderful, within the nature of man and creation.
and this tree of good and evil was a valid thing to eat from. even though somehow encouraging a system of classifying things as good or evil was contrary to the deeper truth...that all things are inherently good. how else we gonna learn to "live forever" unless we learn to die to the flesh?
and so, to systematically classify things into categories of good and evil was to put a bullet in the head of the classifier. as planned. naturally.
as one sees the world in such black and white terms (rather than the full wonderful spectrum it already always is), one is konked over the head and put to sleep...and the soul is more or less dead to the truth of self. dead to the truth of others. unable to unravel mysteries in a strictly good/evil context. we become pretty much unconcious to the deeper truths of what causes what, and why things happen, and why people behave so crazily and/or wonderfully...simply because we make the mistake of calling things good and evil...when there is no such dichotomy, except as an illusion to be removed (which makes the illusion as true as anything else...a true lie, if you will)
to somehow remove this enmity is the next step. get back to the pure garden of thought, a pure ground of being that was good from the start. and it is right here, right now, in spite of all the hate.
this process of becoming free of that illusionary good and evil classifying system is that path we inherently seek. that reconciliation with God. that lifting up of the serpent.
"oh lucifer, how art thou fallen?" does not apply to a being out there somewhere.
and so we are to become disciples of this good news. not disciples of bad news. though even good news may seem like bad news at times, depending on the perspective of the listener, of course.
and to add...imo, this system of classifying things as good and evil is valid because it is the crude and early form of a useful tool of classifying things, in general.
its just that we must naturally start with 2ness before we can get to 3ness and 4ness and 5ness and 6ness and 7ness etc...
so the serpent, as man's own inner "climbing thinker," was "on the divine payroll," so to speak, starting from ground zero
serpent 1.0, if you will.
but not yet the full caduceus of Christ.
on a side note..i thought this was really cool:Flying Snakes
I came away from last night’s round table greatly enriched. We discussed “ritualâ€. Abi brought it up, I think, because she’s beginning to teach her children what she wants them to know.
I read this thread this morning with the “teaching filter†full on (tee hee) and composed my thoughts on this section of Scripture, because whether we take it literally or figuratively doesn’t matter to young minds. My children are fully grown now but if I were teaching “Sunday School†to children I loved I think it would go something like this; and if they asked me a question about what kind of fruit it was, I’d simply tell them that I don’t know. Kids (as we all should) understand “I don’t know†without judging you as being stupid because they understand that everybody can’t know everything.
So – I’ll just set this down here. If you want to use it, be my guest. If you don’t that's ok too...doesn't matter to me. But if you see something inaccurate or wrong, please correct it….’cause God’s kids need to be carefully taught and they deserve to be taught correctly (hmmm that stinks a little of “right doctrine†- - but I mean it in the purest sense)
At this point in my life, I don’t want to know exactly what that tree is/was because it will likely put me back into an enforced and ungodly law. That kind of thing choked the life out of me in twi.
There is plenty of value in studying specifically what that particular tree or fruit was…but God works with each of us where we are and at this moment, I choose to think in terms of concepts or ideas rather than the significance of a particular word…so when I read this passage in Genesis I understand that:
1. He has put them in a place of great beauty, prosperity and health
2. They are asked to take care of His garden, actually it’s their garden now in the sense that it’s theirs to steward.
3. They can touch the tree. and could even sew its leaves together for clothing .They can rest under it’s canopy in the shade
4. They can pick its blossoms and wear them in their hair if they want. They just can’t eat the fruit. He told them to not eat it and he told them why…â€They would dieâ€
If we keep reading our Primer we turn a few pages and we see God in a discussion (with the angels perhaps?) stating that since we ate the forbidden fruit, we now know good and evil. We know by experience both. (ginosko…thank you Lindyhopper). Well up until now we’ve ginosko’d good…but now we ginosko evil too.
I’m thinking that it’s the “ginosko-ing evil†that got them into trouble because God hates evil. So what’s evil?
According to the Amplified Bible Proverbs 6:16 ff it’s:
16These six things the Lord hates, indeed, seven are an abomination to Him:
17A proud look [the spirit that makes one overestimate himself and underestimate others], a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,(D)
18A heart that manufactures wicked thoughts and plans, feet that are swift in running to evil,
19A false witness who breathes out lies [even under oath], and he who sows discord among his brethren
I'm tickled to see you really taking part here at the Greasespot. You can add a lot though you are NBW. Uh, that's Never-Been-Way :D-->. I gotta' warn you though.. you hang out here in the Doctrinal forums and you'll have people trying to save your soul!!
Judaism completely rejects the notion of original sin. According to Judaism, a child is born pure, completely free from sin. We pray daily "Oh G-d, the soul which you gave me is pure. You created it, you fashioned it, you breathed it into me."
In Genesis 2:7, the Bible states that G-d formed (vayyitzer) man. The spelling of this word is unusual: it uses two consecutive Yods instead of the one you would expect. The rabbis inferred that these Yods stand for the word "yetzer," which means impulse, and the existence of two Yods here indicates that humanity was formed with two impulses: a good impulse (the yetzer tov) and an evil impulse (the yetzer ra).
The yetzer tov is the moral conscience, the inner voice that reminds you of G-d's law when you consider doing something that is forbidden. According to some views, it does not enter a person until his 13th birthday, when he becomes responsible for following the commandments.
The yetzer ra is more difficult to define, because there are many different ideas about it. It is not a desire to do evil in the way we normally think of it in Western society: a desire to cause senseless harm. Rather, it is usually conceived as the selfish nature, the desire to satisfy personal needs (food, shelter, sex, etc.) without regard for the moral consequences of fulfilling those desires.
The yetzer ra is not a bad thing. It was created by G-d, and all things created by G-d are good. The Talmud notes that without the yetzer ra (the desire to satisfy personal needs), man would not build a house, marry a wife, have children or conduct business affairs. But the yetzer ra can lead to wrongdoing when it is not controlled by the yetzer tov. There is nothing inherently wrong with sexual desire, but it can lead you to commit rape, adultery, or incest.
The yetzer ra is generally seen as something internal to a person, not as an external force acting on a person. Although it has been said that Satan and the yetzer ra are one and the same, this is more often understood as meaning that Satan is merely a personification of our own selfish desires, rather than that our selfish desires are caused by some external force.
People have the ability to choose which impulse to follow: the yetzer tov or the yetzer ra. That is the heart of the Jewish understanding of free will. The Talmud notes that all people are descended from Adam, so no one can blame his own wickedness on his ancestry. On the contrary, we all have the ability to make our own choices, and we will all be held responsible for the choices we make.
until we see this duality for the unity it truly is and was from the beginning, we have very little freewill in our lives, and thus, the heart of the early Christian idea of forgiveness.
to be driven by our selfish impulses may bring many consequences for us and others, and justly so (or the universe would be broken, i suppose), but it seems hard to blame this consequence on any sort of conscious active effort, though there is still always hell to pay in the present.
just as you can't blame a snake for biting someone who panics upon finding it in their sleeping bag, nor the person for panicking upon finding a snake in their sleeping bag.
sure, we have the ability to choose, but if we've never had the knowledge to choose...absolute freewill is mostly out of reach. choices are more like trying to hit a few limited moving targets from afar with a dirty scope and crooked barrel
imo, we spend our lives seeking a choice that is truly free. it does not start there. it ends there, and thus, enables us to start again once we find it (as in spiritual rebirth).
and too...re: these two Yods....this is that which we can come to understand more as the dance and romance of a marriage, rather than enmity and war
Psalm 51:5Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. 6Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
Romans 3:9What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 11There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
These illustrate the two and the choices that are there.
And all of Romans illustrates the dance very well. That has been going on since the beginning.
I am suprised no one has chewed more on what I brought up abour Gen. 3:22. It was a shocking realization to the lingering bits of my former Christian self. God does not tell the whole truth in Gen. 2. The serpent (Satan?) reveals the truth, you won't surely die, just doesn't tell them how to get around it. God confirms what the serpent said was true and to himself or ?others? reveals how they would still live forever, ie eat of the tree of life. Then upon this realization he forces them out of the garden seemingly so they can't get to the tree of life, protecting it with Ceribums and spinning flaming swords. I know it is figuretive (just a story IMO) but to my former self this is craziness.
Krisilis,
your welcome about the ginosko, but I think maybe we were taught to jump to "know by experience" reflexively. That isn't the only definition for it and it doesn't seem to fit here, at least not if God is all good. Which I'll assume just to not take me off onto yet another tangent. The hebrew word is yad one of the many definitions of it is "know by experience", but then they use the same word as in "know sexually", and every other form of know. But could God know good and evil by experience? If not then what does that mean for Adam and Eve. Did they really know by experience or did they just know as in they learned to know? As in the serpent taught them, showed them, or whatever how to learn and not just to know what they knew or just do. Which then makes you wonder: how wonderful was this "paradise" of "do what your told without knowing all the options". Perhaps that is what Roy was saying about not having free will untill they sinned.
It seems to make sense that, as SirG said, that the serpent was on the payroll. It seems almost like a political move. God doesn't tell you all the options so that it can be the serpent that comes along to tell you that the option he left out is actually more appealing and when you chose it you and the serpent are the bad guys. Seems like manipulation if you ask me...now that you've done this, I have to punish you, you've tied my hands.
OR maybe the great mystery is that it sucks being a god, lol, and out of love for his children God says, "Oh no, they're gonna end up like me if they at any time eat of the tree of life. I need to protect them, get them outta there!" LOL
The punishment is interesting too. Some of the things that humans get stressed out about the most and the things you just wish you didn't HAVE to do...the pain and strain of birthing a kid and putting food on the table. Why can't it be easy? Well it was that damn Adam and Eve. lol It gives an answer to one of lifes simplest and universal questions.
I also find the dirt an intersting aspect of the story. Maybe some sort of metaphor. The serpent is made to slither on his belly (how'd he get around before?) and eat the dirt and man is made to take what he was made from and make something with it. Food. Then crap it right back to the ground.
Another weird tidbit of insight on those who wrote the book...nakedness was evil. You know this because 1) after the serpent "beguils" them, A and E put fig leaf aprons over their sexual parts and 2) God makes them skin clothes to cover up after he scolds them. So before the serpent, A and E didn't realise that being naked was being naked? They looked down at each other and said, "that's for making babies"? Makes you wonder what was going on before the beguiling.
Lindyhopper I will re-evaluate the "ginosko". However I was considering that after Adam and Eve "ate" the apple, they certainly did know it by experience. They did it...whatever it was.
While I think what you have explained is a more interesting and healthy outlook on the Garden of Eden story than the way the literalist Christians have spun it, I disagree on the two Yods. Not that it is necessarily your view, the view you explained. I don't see there being 2 impulses, one being good, the other evil, selfish, or bad. I see both impulses as selfish but one being an impulse to ignore the larger picture. In doing so they act "without regard for the moral consequences of fulfilling those desires." No that is not a good thing, in that many times it harms others, and therefore harms you in maybe a not so apparent way or maybe an immediate and glaringly apparent way.
Although, on the flip side, whether we realise it or not, whether we admit it or not, to consider the consiquences and act accordingly or to not act in the commonly thought of as a selfish way, is still in a way selfish. Why? Because it always comes back to you. Whether we are talking about not fighting saving you and others from a black eye or whether we are talking about an act that perpetuates or helps to divert your family, community, society, planet in a direction that will ultamately negatively affect your life.
I understand and agree with Todd's point about choices. Trying to figure out the "right" or perfect choice when we don't have all the choices may be futile. Many issues are very complex and a perfect answer is not there. But I think most of the time if we just exercise a little common sense with a healthy dose of empathy, sympathy, and compassion many of the everyday "evils" of the world would not exist. I also think that the mistakes and annoyances of life that would undoubtedly still be around would not escalate beyond "the little things". For the most part anyway.
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
sirguessalot
the outer book someone else wrote was forgotten, therefore the inner book you wrote was "read." and the summing up was your doing, no?
and this is what i was praising, i suppose
cuz believe me, i know how difficult it can be to sum such things up and/or remember where it was originally read or heard
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
I've never seen this before....
Gen 2:15-17
then Gen 3:4,5
then Gen.3:22
It is obviously figuretive, but I will do the best I can with what I think are some interesting things if you look at it in a literal or semi-literal way as twi did.
1) Of all the trees in the Garden the tree of life was not in it. Or it was there but God didn't want them to eat it yet.
2) The truth of the matter seems to be in the combination of what God and the serpent said. God did not say anything about becoming like one of them, just that they would surely die. Satan said, they wouldn't surely die, but they would become like one of them. Later God said, "behold they have become like one of us". Holy crap, Satan reveals some truth that God left out!
So they surely die. Not really it was all in the big guy in the sky's plan. But man was put in place and told exactly what God wanted them to hear. Did they surely die? TWI said that it was spiritual death, but later spirit could be upon. Doesn't sound like certain death. Eventually, I assume, they die a natural death. But will be raised again some day to live forever. That doesn't sound so "surely" either. Surely they died in this life. the truth of the matter doesn't seem to appear so clearly from one side or the other, but in knowing the good and the evil. Know what I'm saying?
3) Both God and Satan knew good and evil? I don't remember what kind of "know" that was...OK I'll look it up.
OK
strongs # 03045 - yada'
1) to know
a) (Qal)
1) to know
a) to know, learn to know
b) to perceive
c) to perceive and see, find out and discern
d) to discriminate, distinguish
e) to know by experience
f) to recognise, admit, acknowledge, confess
g) to consider
2) to know, be acquainted with
3) to know (a person carnally)
4) to know how, be skilful in
5) to have knowledge, be wise
b) (Niphal)
1) to be made known, be or become known, be revealed
2) to make oneself known
3) to be perceived
4) to be instructed
c) (Piel) to cause to know
d) (Poal) to cause to know
e) (Pual)
1) to be known
2) known, one known, acquaintance (participle)
f) (Hiphil) to make known, declare
g) (Hophal) to be made know
h) (Hithpael) to make oneself known, reveal oneself
and yep the LXX makes it ginosko
I'll be back this site I am looking at is interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
OK take what I said about #1 back.
I forgot the tree of life was in the midst of the garden
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
Which brings us to "lest".
"And the LORD God said (8799) , Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know (8800) good and evil: and now, lest he put forth (8799) his hand, and take (8804) also of the tree of life, and eat (8804) , and live (8804) for ever: "
Lest in our dictionarys today means "for fear that". As in "lest you die".
As a side bar, I will say this: can you see mankind's perspective there? TWI we were taught not to fear. The God of the Bible says to his creation "FEAR NOT", yet God said, "you shall surely die" and Eve said, "LEST you die". Perhaps it was not a matter of adding, changing, and deleating words. Perhaps it was a difference in perspective. God says "don't fear, but..." and we say, "holy ****, don't fear what?!" Perhaps even before sin there was fear...the "fear of God".
Speaking of the fear of God, back to what I was going to say. Gen. 3:22 says that God said "lest". It sounds as though GOd realised, "Behold", that man was like them, "knowing good and evil", and could still live forever if they ate of the tree of life. Kinda like what the serpent said, "you will not surely die." He knew there was a way around that, eating of the tree of life. So what does God do? Kicks them out of the garden forcibly, flaming swords and all. Was he threatened? Is that why the serpent tempted? an attempt to overthrow God? Is that what GOd was concerned about?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Well....this does open a can of worms
:D-->
There's still only One God.
So who's really talking to who?
And where are they?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
Well, I've thought about this lately. I almost think Gen. 1 and 2 is two different stories about the creation of mankind. The first version, you have the creation of generic mankind. Then, there was no one to till the field (rule the world?) and God creates Adam, the one who was to be king and rule over mankind on earth - to show God to humanity, to be God's spokesman, so mankind can dwell with God. Then Eve was specifically created out of his rib in Chapt 2.
I see no reason why Adam and Eve could not have been inserted into mankind, just as Christ was inserted later.
We also know that Satan was present in the Garden when Adam - the king - was created. We also know from various sources that literal fallen angels were ruling over the general populace and people were worshipping them as Gods - not evil fallen angels, but as beings of the true God.
Now comes this new King - Adam - who is given authority over the earth and to lead and teach mankind. If Satan can get Adam to give him his authority, Satan wins, the earth is now his to do his will and pleasure - he and his minions can rule. At that point, they had no authority to rule the people or the earth. God had created it for the specific purpose of his creation of mankind - which the Word says the Sons of God (Angels) rejoiced at when this was created and done. The concept of mankind was a thrilling thing to them.
We know from Isaiah and other places that Satan was splendid looking. My question was, what did Eve see that was so pleasant to look at? What incredible things or beings did she see, that seemed so beautiful and knowledgeable, with knowledge and wisdom way beyond that of puny humans - such a lovely creature or creatures, that she thinks, hmmm... God hasn't told us all - but these Gods know - they have special spiritual knowledge. If I do this thing, I can be like them... I can be as these Gods. I think when Satan told her you shall be as God - he was pointing at a literal being or beings - unearthly, spiritual, beautiful, seemingly advanced.
I think she saw literal fallen angels and gave her allegiance to them, they taught her marvelous things and she got Adam to go with her and commune. He then somehow gave his authority and rule to Satan (remember Satan said to Jesus, it was given to me?).
They switched their allegiance from God, to these beautiful (seemingly) unearthly creations and consorted with them.
The tree of life - DNA? Another god offering genetic manipulation, hybredization, some kind of transformation so they may now not only know as these gods know, but live like, and as, these beautiful beings forever? Something man is not to fool with? Who knows. Whatever it was, the consequences were too horrific for God to contemplate.
Original sin, man has chosen and committed high treason against God, there will now be no harmony on the earth, mankind has invited misery upon himself by this transfer of his power and authority to this leader of the gods. God must, out of justice, step aside and let Satan rule, the creation groans under Satans terrible weight, rule and corruptive nature. Yet, God has mercy and compassion and says, I will send a redeemer...
Much to think about. Just my .02 cents.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
Sunesis --- WHOAH, hot post... I gotta think about that awhile. Are you kind of extending the whole Nephilim thing backwards to Gen. 2 and 3?? I can see some real possibilities there...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
i recall that all of creation was considered all good at first, in 7 nested layers of goodness, if you will. the serpent was there and lucifer was there, good and wonderful, within the nature of man and creation.
and this tree of good and evil was a valid thing to eat from. even though somehow encouraging a system of classifying things as good or evil was contrary to the deeper truth...that all things are inherently good. how else we gonna learn to "live forever" unless we learn to die to the flesh?
and so, to systematically classify things into categories of good and evil was to put a bullet in the head of the classifier. as planned. naturally.
as one sees the world in such black and white terms (rather than the full wonderful spectrum it already always is), one is konked over the head and put to sleep...and the soul is more or less dead to the truth of self. dead to the truth of others. unable to unravel mysteries in a strictly good/evil context. we become pretty much unconcious to the deeper truths of what causes what, and why things happen, and why people behave so crazily and/or wonderfully...simply because we make the mistake of calling things good and evil...when there is no such dichotomy, except as an illusion to be removed (which makes the illusion as true as anything else...a true lie, if you will)
to somehow remove this enmity is the next step. get back to the pure garden of thought, a pure ground of being that was good from the start. and it is right here, right now, in spite of all the hate.
this process of becoming free of that illusionary good and evil classifying system is that path we inherently seek. that reconciliation with God. that lifting up of the serpent.
"oh lucifer, how art thou fallen?" does not apply to a being out there somewhere.
and so we are to become disciples of this good news. not disciples of bad news. though even good news may seem like bad news at times, depending on the perspective of the listener, of course.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
and to add...imo, this system of classifying things as good and evil is valid because it is the crude and early form of a useful tool of classifying things, in general.
its just that we must naturally start with 2ness before we can get to 3ness and 4ness and 5ness and 6ness and 7ness etc...
so the serpent, as man's own inner "climbing thinker," was "on the divine payroll," so to speak, starting from ground zero
serpent 1.0, if you will.
but not yet the full caduceus of Christ.
on a side note..i thought this was really cool:Flying Snakes
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
I came away from last night’s round table greatly enriched. We discussed “ritualâ€. Abi brought it up, I think, because she’s beginning to teach her children what she wants them to know.
I read this thread this morning with the “teaching filter†full on (tee hee) and composed my thoughts on this section of Scripture, because whether we take it literally or figuratively doesn’t matter to young minds. My children are fully grown now but if I were teaching “Sunday School†to children I loved I think it would go something like this; and if they asked me a question about what kind of fruit it was, I’d simply tell them that I don’t know. Kids (as we all should) understand “I don’t know†without judging you as being stupid because they understand that everybody can’t know everything.
So – I’ll just set this down here. If you want to use it, be my guest. If you don’t that's ok too...doesn't matter to me. But if you see something inaccurate or wrong, please correct it….’cause God’s kids need to be carefully taught and they deserve to be taught correctly (hmmm that stinks a little of “right doctrine†- - but I mean it in the purest sense)
At this point in my life, I don’t want to know exactly what that tree is/was because it will likely put me back into an enforced and ungodly law. That kind of thing choked the life out of me in twi.
There is plenty of value in studying specifically what that particular tree or fruit was…but God works with each of us where we are and at this moment, I choose to think in terms of concepts or ideas rather than the significance of a particular word…so when I read this passage in Genesis I understand that:
1. He has put them in a place of great beauty, prosperity and health
2. They are asked to take care of His garden, actually it’s their garden now in the sense that it’s theirs to steward.
3. They can touch the tree. and could even sew its leaves together for clothing .They can rest under it’s canopy in the shade
4. They can pick its blossoms and wear them in their hair if they want. They just can’t eat the fruit. He told them to not eat it and he told them why…â€They would dieâ€
If we keep reading our Primer we turn a few pages and we see God in a discussion (with the angels perhaps?) stating that since we ate the forbidden fruit, we now know good and evil. We know by experience both. (ginosko…thank you Lindyhopper). Well up until now we’ve ginosko’d good…but now we ginosko evil too.
I’m thinking that it’s the “ginosko-ing evil†that got them into trouble because God hates evil. So what’s evil?
According to the Amplified Bible Proverbs 6:16 ff it’s:
16These six things the Lord hates, indeed, seven are an abomination to Him:
17A proud look [the spirit that makes one overestimate himself and underestimate others], a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,(D)
18A heart that manufactures wicked thoughts and plans, feet that are swift in running to evil,
19A false witness who breathes out lies [even under oath], and he who sows discord among his brethren
I think you parents can take it from there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawnbroker
if anyone is interested i could probably explain original sin and the dual nature, as seen in Judaism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
i'm interested
go for it
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Pawnbroker,
I'm tickled to see you really taking part here at the Greasespot. You can add a lot though you are NBW. Uh, that's Never-Been-Way
:D-->. I gotta' warn you though.. you hang out here in the Doctrinal forums and you'll have people trying to save your soul!! 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawnbroker
Judaism completely rejects the notion of original sin. According to Judaism, a child is born pure, completely free from sin. We pray daily "Oh G-d, the soul which you gave me is pure. You created it, you fashioned it, you breathed it into me."
In Genesis 2:7, the Bible states that G-d formed (vayyitzer) man. The spelling of this word is unusual: it uses two consecutive Yods instead of the one you would expect. The rabbis inferred that these Yods stand for the word "yetzer," which means impulse, and the existence of two Yods here indicates that humanity was formed with two impulses: a good impulse (the yetzer tov) and an evil impulse (the yetzer ra).
The yetzer tov is the moral conscience, the inner voice that reminds you of G-d's law when you consider doing something that is forbidden. According to some views, it does not enter a person until his 13th birthday, when he becomes responsible for following the commandments.
The yetzer ra is more difficult to define, because there are many different ideas about it. It is not a desire to do evil in the way we normally think of it in Western society: a desire to cause senseless harm. Rather, it is usually conceived as the selfish nature, the desire to satisfy personal needs (food, shelter, sex, etc.) without regard for the moral consequences of fulfilling those desires.
The yetzer ra is not a bad thing. It was created by G-d, and all things created by G-d are good. The Talmud notes that without the yetzer ra (the desire to satisfy personal needs), man would not build a house, marry a wife, have children or conduct business affairs. But the yetzer ra can lead to wrongdoing when it is not controlled by the yetzer tov. There is nothing inherently wrong with sexual desire, but it can lead you to commit rape, adultery, or incest.
The yetzer ra is generally seen as something internal to a person, not as an external force acting on a person. Although it has been said that Satan and the yetzer ra are one and the same, this is more often understood as meaning that Satan is merely a personification of our own selfish desires, rather than that our selfish desires are caused by some external force.
People have the ability to choose which impulse to follow: the yetzer tov or the yetzer ra. That is the heart of the Jewish understanding of free will. The Talmud notes that all people are descended from Adam, so no one can blame his own wickedness on his ancestry. On the contrary, we all have the ability to make our own choices, and we will all be held responsible for the choices we make.
I hope that helps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
Thanks Pawnbroker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
thanks for that, pawbroker
and to add, if i may...
until we see this duality for the unity it truly is and was from the beginning, we have very little freewill in our lives, and thus, the heart of the early Christian idea of forgiveness.
to be driven by our selfish impulses may bring many consequences for us and others, and justly so (or the universe would be broken, i suppose), but it seems hard to blame this consequence on any sort of conscious active effort, though there is still always hell to pay in the present.
just as you can't blame a snake for biting someone who panics upon finding it in their sleeping bag, nor the person for panicking upon finding a snake in their sleeping bag.
sure, we have the ability to choose, but if we've never had the knowledge to choose...absolute freewill is mostly out of reach. choices are more like trying to hit a few limited moving targets from afar with a dirty scope and crooked barrel
imo, we spend our lives seeking a choice that is truly free. it does not start there. it ends there, and thus, enables us to start again once we find it (as in spiritual rebirth).
and too...re: these two Yods....this is that which we can come to understand more as the dance and romance of a marriage, rather than enmity and war
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Psalm 51:5Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. 6Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
Romans 3:9What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 11There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
These illustrate the two and the choices that are there.
And all of Romans illustrates the dance very well. That has been going on since the beginning.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
in sin did my mother conceive me
and
thou desirest truth in the inward parts
both are there (and in the Mom too)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
yes, the hidden part....
that which we can't see
but can see
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
and isn't it interesting to compare
Adam and Eve with Joseph and Mary
the results of both encounters with angels
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Pawnbroker
Thank you for explaining that in such an easy to understand way. And Sir - your addition of thoughts are also worthy of much pondering.
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
I am suprised no one has chewed more on what I brought up abour Gen. 3:22. It was a shocking realization to the lingering bits of my former Christian self. God does not tell the whole truth in Gen. 2. The serpent (Satan?) reveals the truth, you won't surely die, just doesn't tell them how to get around it. God confirms what the serpent said was true and to himself or ?others? reveals how they would still live forever, ie eat of the tree of life. Then upon this realization he forces them out of the garden seemingly so they can't get to the tree of life, protecting it with Ceribums and spinning flaming swords. I know it is figuretive (just a story IMO) but to my former self this is craziness.
Krisilis,
your welcome about the ginosko, but I think maybe we were taught to jump to "know by experience" reflexively. That isn't the only definition for it and it doesn't seem to fit here, at least not if God is all good. Which I'll assume just to not take me off onto yet another tangent. The hebrew word is yad one of the many definitions of it is "know by experience", but then they use the same word as in "know sexually", and every other form of know. But could God know good and evil by experience? If not then what does that mean for Adam and Eve. Did they really know by experience or did they just know as in they learned to know? As in the serpent taught them, showed them, or whatever how to learn and not just to know what they knew or just do. Which then makes you wonder: how wonderful was this "paradise" of "do what your told without knowing all the options". Perhaps that is what Roy was saying about not having free will untill they sinned.
It seems to make sense that, as SirG said, that the serpent was on the payroll. It seems almost like a political move. God doesn't tell you all the options so that it can be the serpent that comes along to tell you that the option he left out is actually more appealing and when you chose it you and the serpent are the bad guys. Seems like manipulation if you ask me...now that you've done this, I have to punish you, you've tied my hands.
OR maybe the great mystery is that it sucks being a god, lol, and out of love for his children God says, "Oh no, they're gonna end up like me if they at any time eat of the tree of life. I need to protect them, get them outta there!" LOL
The punishment is interesting too. Some of the things that humans get stressed out about the most and the things you just wish you didn't HAVE to do...the pain and strain of birthing a kid and putting food on the table. Why can't it be easy? Well it was that damn Adam and Eve. lol It gives an answer to one of lifes simplest and universal questions.
I also find the dirt an intersting aspect of the story. Maybe some sort of metaphor. The serpent is made to slither on his belly (how'd he get around before?) and eat the dirt and man is made to take what he was made from and make something with it. Food. Then crap it right back to the ground.
Another weird tidbit of insight on those who wrote the book...nakedness was evil. You know this because 1) after the serpent "beguils" them, A and E put fig leaf aprons over their sexual parts and 2) God makes them skin clothes to cover up after he scolds them. So before the serpent, A and E didn't realise that being naked was being naked? They looked down at each other and said, "that's for making babies"? Makes you wonder what was going on before the beguiling.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
Lindyhopper I will re-evaluate the "ginosko". However I was considering that after Adam and Eve "ate" the apple, they certainly did know it by experience. They did it...whatever it was.
About the rest....still pondering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
Pawn,
While I think what you have explained is a more interesting and healthy outlook on the Garden of Eden story than the way the literalist Christians have spun it, I disagree on the two Yods. Not that it is necessarily your view, the view you explained. I don't see there being 2 impulses, one being good, the other evil, selfish, or bad. I see both impulses as selfish but one being an impulse to ignore the larger picture. In doing so they act "without regard for the moral consequences of fulfilling those desires." No that is not a good thing, in that many times it harms others, and therefore harms you in maybe a not so apparent way or maybe an immediate and glaringly apparent way.
Although, on the flip side, whether we realise it or not, whether we admit it or not, to consider the consiquences and act accordingly or to not act in the commonly thought of as a selfish way, is still in a way selfish. Why? Because it always comes back to you. Whether we are talking about not fighting saving you and others from a black eye or whether we are talking about an act that perpetuates or helps to divert your family, community, society, planet in a direction that will ultamately negatively affect your life.
I understand and agree with Todd's point about choices. Trying to figure out the "right" or perfect choice when we don't have all the choices may be futile. Many issues are very complex and a perfect answer is not there. But I think most of the time if we just exercise a little common sense with a healthy dose of empathy, sympathy, and compassion many of the everyday "evils" of the world would not exist. I also think that the mistakes and annoyances of life that would undoubtedly still be around would not escalate beyond "the little things". For the most part anyway.
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.