Quick question about "original sin"

Originally posted by Agerg
Well I don't want to get drawn into a Bble quoting fest here, but the consequences of this act (as implied by Genesis chapter 3) suggest your God was mighty mighty p!ssed off at this act and caused that other not so nice things should befall them and their seed. (More than letting them just die)

The specifics of the story don't interest me so greatly to be xtent to which they *knew* eating from the tree of *knowledge of good and evil* was not good.

I will not quote the Bible. But the significance of eating is that something gets into the being and becomes a part of you.

What you should understand about the eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is that a foreign element entered into man. Something became a part of his constitution, his make up, which was a corrupting element.

If a mother tells her child not to drink from a certain bottle of poison and the child disobeys, there are two problems.

1.) The child has transgressed the command of the mother.

2.) Poison has gotten into the child's body.

In the same way this picture of Adam and Eve partaking of the tree of death, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil brought into man a foreign, corrupting, poisoness element corrupting man's being.

One one hand they have the problem now of having transgressed God's command. But also they have the problem of a pernicious poisoning of thier constitution. Something within them is now working to destroy them.

Do not mistake the simplicity of the account for niavete. It is actually something very profound communicate to us in terms which can be grasped easily by the most people.

On the other hand the tree of life represents God Himself as life. Man was created neutral and inbetween two sources - God and Satan. His choice moved him from a neutral and innocent position to either one reality or the other. The two are mutually exclusive.

Man was "organically" joined to the opposition party against God. Man was "Satanified" in eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

That's all for this post.

Originally posted by jaywill
...the significance of [b]eating is that something gets into the being and becomes a part of you....

[/b]

Heh heh...

Originally posted by jaywill
I will not quote the Bible. But the significance of [b]eating is that something gets into the being and becomes a part of you.

What you should understand about the eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is that a foreign element entered into man. Something became a part of his constitution, his make up, which was a corrupting element. ...[text shortened]... in eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

That's all for this post.[/b]

But taking the entire post...

I take it you come from the 'bible as allegory' camp of christianity then. Who makes all this stuff up in the first place?

As to the question of whether these two trees were allegorical or literal:

I think that it should be noticed that in the Bible some physical things also had spiritual significance associated with them. The example of the ark of the covenant. The priests had to handle it. And it had to be handled in a certain way.

One man died because he presumed to handle the ark of the covenant without the prescribed priestly instructions. (Refer 1 Samuel 6:19, 2 Samuel 2:7; 1 Chronicles 13:7-10) .

The point here is that though the ark of the covenant was physical object, the spiritual significance of it was enforced by God in a practical way.

I therefore have little problem with an actual two trees behind which God reserved deep spiritual significance. How they enteracted with the trees released God ordained spiritual and physical consequences.

Today, God wants us to understand that the tree of life is Jesus Christ. We needn't worry about looking for a tree. We need to take heed how we respond to the words and the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ.

"in Him was life"
" I am the bread of life"
" I am the resurrection and the life"
"I am the way the truth and the life"
"I have come that they may have life ..."
"When Christ our life shall appear ..."
"For me to live is Christ"
"the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus"

The tree of life to man today is none other than Jesus the Son of God. And we can "eat" of the tree of life by taking the Person of Jesus Christ into our innermost being through faith.

"the last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

This unusual Person is in a form in which He is available and can enter into a man or woman's spiritual being. To take Him in today is to eat the tree of life today and to drink of the water of life today.

Originally posted by Agerg
The specifics of the story don't interest me so greatly to be honest, more I'm interested in the extent to which they *knew* eating from the tree of *knowledge of good and evil* was not good.[/b]

They had no idea what the difference between good and evil was. All they had were dire warnings that if they partook they would surely die and not to do so.

This story is an illustration as to why faith is such a vital component of our relationship to God. We cannot grasp everything. In fact, you could argue that we don't grasp most things. However, God does so it would behoove us to LISTEN!! 😀

So what is required to 'listen" to God? It is faith in his benevalence as well as his omnipotence. Otherwise we will inevitably begin to question what he says as did Adam and Eve.

Having said all that, if God is all knowing and we are to relate to him, at times we would be required to simply "take his word" for things and listen. It is the only relationship possible between the infinite and finite.

Concerning the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

What is important to really note is that the tree of life is God's way. What is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? It is the other way. That is the most basic thing we should grasp.

The tree of life was God's way. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was NOT God's way but the OTHER way. Don't be overly fascinated with the way that is not the way of God.

God's way is eternal life. The other way is death.
The way of God is blessing, life, happiness, fulfillment, glory, ... and all things positive.

Don't be interested so much in the other way, the way that is not the way of God.
Take God's way. Just take God's way.

God's way is life - eternal life. The other way is death.

I'm reading an awful lot of 'interpretation' of the bible in this thread. I read the snake as a priest and the apple as a bible.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
I'm reading an awful lot of 'interpretation' of the bible in this thread. I read the snake as a priest and the apple as a bible.

But without interpretation the word are meaningless. You make it sound as though interpretation, by its very nature, should be excluded because of its subjective nature....or at least, that appears to be your interpretation.

Originally posted by whodey
But without interpretation the word are meaningless. You make it sound as though interpretation, by its very nature, should be excluded because of its subjective nature....or at least, that appears to be your interpretation.

My point is that by interpretation you strip your scripture of meaning anyway. I am endlessly baffled by the desire of people to find enlightenment in ancient stories now so far separated from their original context as to be almost beyond comprehension, when surely, if god exists, he would have made his message accessible to everyone without exception. If god is to be found in this life, I cannot believe it will be in a book!

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
My point is that by interpretation you strip your scripture of meaning anyway. I am endlessly baffled by the desire of people to find enlightenment in ancient stories now so far separated from their original context as to be almost beyond comprehension, when surely, if god exists, he would have made his message accessible to everyone without exception. If god is to be found in this life, I cannot believe it will be in a book!

So enlighten us. What are the "true" interpretation of the ancient stories?

You might as well say that you strip the meaning of data in general via your interpretation of it.

BTW, if you were God how would you do things? Perhaps you would walk and talk with your creation as though you and I talk on the web? Then again, a lot of good that did Adam and Eve. Perhaps you would do wonderous miracles by splitting seas and sending down pillars of fire to guide your steps? Than again, a lot of good that did the Israelites as they build a golden calf to worship in his stead. So tell us, how would you run the show?

Originally posted by whodey
So enlighten us. What are the "true" interpretation of the ancient stories?

You might as well say that you strip the meaning of data in general via your interpretation of it.

BTW, if you were God how would you do things? Perhaps you would walk and talk with your creation as though you and I talk on the web? Then again, a lot of good that did Adam an ...[text shortened]... as they build a golden calf to worship in his stead. So tell us, how would you run the show?

There is no "true" interpretation of these ancient stories. I believe they are ancient stories which have little relevance outside their original context.

Data in general has limited value without context.

As to what I would do were I god, what possible point could be served by such pontification?

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
[b]There is no "true" interpretation of these ancient stories. I believe they are ancient stories which have little relevance outside their original context.

Data in general has limited value without context.

Sure there is such a thing as "truth". The only difference is that I balieve in an entity who alone has access to such truth as where you view it as unknowable.

Having said that, what do Biblical archeaologists view in terms of Biblical verasity? I am sure you would know being in the feild.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
.

As to what I would do were I god, what possible point could be served by such pontification?[/b]

Because you are nothing more than a back seat driver. Get in the drivers seat and lets see how much better you can do.

Originally posted by whodey
Sure there is such a thing as "truth". The only difference is that I balieve in an entity who alone has access to such truth as where you view it as unknowable.

Having said that, what do Biblical archeaologists view in terms of Biblical verasity? I am sure you would know being in the feild.

I didn't say there wasn't such a thing as "truth". (edit - neither did I claim it was "unknowable".)

From an archaeological viewpoint the bible can tell us much about the ancient world, but it is generally regarded as being hopelessly garbled and extremely unreliable as historical source material. You will, of course, be able to find some opinions contrary to this, but they are in a vanishingly small minority.

Originally posted by whodey
Because you are nothing more than a back seat driver. Get in the drivers seat and lets see how much better you can do.

I'm sure that god, if he exists, is doing a fine job, I don't have a problem with him. I've never claimed I could do better. I don't understand how you think what I would do were I a god should be relevant to this thread.