Originally posted by Green Paladin
"Come down off the cross, we can use the wood."
I'm not interested in pursuing various doctrinal interpretations. Just because it is possible to interpret a biblical passage in a certain way doesn't mean that this supported by history. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is alternatively known as the Tree of Knowledge.
I suppose you woul commit an immoral act I can't have the slate wiped clean by repentance.
I'm not interested in pursuing various doctrinal interpretations.
But you are interested in putting forth your
with mockery and boasting of the dimwittedness of other Bible readers.
Don't you think it is kind of arrogant for you to fire your interpretive arrows at the Bible and retreat into disinterest
when those interpretations are examined ?
Just because it is possible to interpret a biblical passage in a certain way doesn't mean that this supported by history. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is alternatively known as the Tree of Knowledge.
Knowledge has not always been condemned as evil and arrogance.
If so why would a medical doctor, Luke, be assigned by God as one of the writers of the four Gospels?
says "Also it is not good for a person to be without knowledge ..."
I would regard a broad generalization that either the Bible or Christians disdain knowledge as warped bias at best. Such a generalization is not objective about history.
I would agree that during the Dark Ages the clerical class locked up the Bible so that the common people could not read it. And there was some opposition to knowledge. But the unlocking of the Bible to be read by the populace, I think, was the catalyst to the so called Age of Enlightenment.
As much as it may serve a atheistic Anti Belief
bigotry to generalize that Christians oppose knowledge, history would not verify such a bigoted position.
You would not like it if I generalized about history and said "Atheist are all immoral."
I suppose you would disagree with this quote: "The serpent had suggested to Eve that eating the fruit would make one wise."
This is what was said "You shall not surely die! For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree ... was desired to make one wise, sje took of its fruit ..."
So I have no real objection to your sentence. But this is what you wrote:
" This act brought evil into the world. Ever since, knowledge has been associated with evil and arrogance. [Besides the fact that women have become thought of as easily corrupted and morally inferior.] "
What brought sin and death into the world was their being joined to God's enemy Satan. You should read more of the Bible for a fuller understanding.
Paul writes about the fallen mankind - " ... the ruler of the authority of the air ... the spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience ..." (Eph. 2:2)
A cosmic evil and rebellious intelligence began to operate in man's being. I told you that we cannot fully perform the good that we know. Nor can we fully resist the evil that we know. I count this joining man with Satan as the main cause of corruption of human morality.
God used the symbol of eating because what we eat we assimilate into our being and it becomes us. As the nutrionists say "You are what you eat."
God is very wise. By using food
He could convey to the majority of humans of reasonable intelligence that man's problem was that he has injested something foreign and damaging into his system.
The picture may be simple - that of man between two trees - the tree of life
representing God's eternal and divine life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
reprenting God's enemy Satan.
Man was meant to take into his being the divine nature of God. Man was enticed to seek independence which really was not so. It was bondage to the Satanic spirit which now operates in man and seeking to ruin man for God's eternal purpose.
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat; for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely DIE." (Genesis 2:17)
This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Did they die that day? Or about 900 years later? Oh, right... a day is not a day.
If you count only the physical being as all there is to man, that may be true. But the Bible refers to the spirit of man, the soul of man, and the body of man.
And spiritually his human spirit became comatose, deadened. Death began from the kernel of his being, his human spirit. Death then took time to work its way through the rest of his being until he physically expired.
Before I received Christ, part of my being was dead. I had no sense of a certain dimension of life which is now very real to me. I know something was missing but I did not know what.
That was the comatose human spirit, the kernel of man's innermost being. And it needs to be regenerated:
The deadened human spirit can be made alive through receiving Jesus Christ. "In Him was life, and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4)
That word life
there is not the Greek BIOS or Psyche, either physical life or psychological life. It is ZOE
, the divine and uncreated life of God uniting Himself to man.
be born again.
You cite covering a wide range of topics as evidence for the writer of Genesis' knowledge. It's quite clear that your conclusion doesn't follow. Is J. K. Rowling an expert on aeronautics because she describes Harry Potter flying around on a broomstick? I very much doubt you would see her consulting at NASA.
There are tremendous differences between a Harry Potter novel and the Bible.
And just because the treatment is cursory of these subjects and not exhaustive, is no less impressive.
Within the first say 6 chapters of Genesis you have the mentioning of so many vital pieces of information. The treatment of them is not exhaustive. But they are mentioned in connection to God's overall plan of salvation.
The detail Moses gave to the construction of the Tabernacle with all of its measurements suggests that he was very intelligent to master many technical details. Had God revealed to Moses an exhaustive accoung of how He [God] created all things, then there perhaps would have been 60 books dealing with the construction of a water molecule alone.
So while the information is not exhaustive it is broad in scope. An that more so in an economical way than any other book in human history.
And the thought that the Creator of the universe is upscaled by man because he can land a man on the moon, I think is laughable.
Were it not for the precision of God's creation they might not have been able to apply the mathematics to know how to land on the moon.
I think the really wise people do not display your arrogance. Rather the more they learn the more they realize they do not know.
I dare say that you could not find one other book on earth which dislpays [sic] in such economical terms knowledge of so many fundamentally important matters as Genesis.
How can its economy be considered an advantage?
To keep one from getting distracted from the main point, it is an advantage.
How we die, exactly, God did not go into. That
death pulls us all down since the sin of Adam is the main point. All the things are related to God's plan of salvation and His eternal purpose.
Here again: the celebration of irrationality. This "deeper understanding" usually takes on an ad hoc character.
No it doesn't. It involves reading the Bible with a willingness to have God change your life.
Maybe your stuck in considering the Bible as existing only to tickle your curiousity. No, the book is here to transform your life and bring you into fellowship with God. In this fellowship we see things both about life and ourselves in a deeper way.
When we come to the Bible we should have an attitude that we are simultaneously coming to God too. And if you allow His Spirit to work in your heart your insight into the Bible will deepen. How you think about yourself and others will also be transformed.
There are some paradoxical things in the revelation of the Bible. There are some things difficult to reconcile. I have found none of them barriers to experiencing the God of the Bible and growing in the knowledge of Him.
Thanks for proving my point. Entertaining paradoxical notions is not seen as cognitive dissonance but "a deeper understanding of scripture".
That is not what I said. Paradoxical matters in the Bible call for deeper experience and deeper understanding.
For example, you complain that it says that Adam would die that day yet he did not until 900 years latter or so.
Yet you have not realized perhaps that your having no fellowship with God is a spiritual death
that you have. Some realize the lack real life.
Jimi Hendrix wrote a song called I Don't Live Today
. In that song the rock musician complains that he feels like he does not live today. He says he feels like he is living at the bottom of a grave. There was in Hendrix a sense of death even as a successfully popular celebrity who should have been satisfied with life.
I think this sense of not really living was spiritual sense in the man. Though I cannot say for sure what he read in the Bible, I am confident that the Holy Spirit of God was working in him.
So likewise, in the mid...