1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziYou're missing the point of the story. If the account of Adam and Eve has a philosophy, it's all about obedience and authority, not about attaining enlightenment.
how can we know what the people who wrote genesis intended? maybe it really was simply narrative. i am asking what the philosophy of the story might be. what you understand from it.
consider a painting. maybe by looking at it you might be experiencing a whole different thing than the author.
back to the thing at hand. let's consider the meaning of ation of one's mortal condition and the desire to achieve something in the short time given.
I understand there is an entire misinterpretation of this passage which gives Satan a kind of Promethean heroism for awakening humanity to scientific thought and technological progress. This, too, misses the intended meaning (although it gets kudos for creativity).
God gave a specific command, "You must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." When Adam and Eve chose of their own free will not to obey God's command, their eyes were opened to evil. (More specifically, the difference between good and evil.)
What the story is in fact conveying is that by disobeying God evil was introduced to the world through Adam, and further, that the aboriginal problem with the entire human race, in a nutshell, is that none of us are capable of being obedient to God. It's not so much that we are tainted by Adam's own particular act of disobedience in the Garden, but that we ourselves are not capable of obeying God's will in our own lives.
Basically, all of humanity's troubles can be attributed to one thing: our problem with authority. That's the "philosophy" of Adam.
Originally posted by epiphinehasyou are missing the point of this exercise. and this perhaps the main reason i asked for a philosophy forum or even the blasphemy that is the replacing of spirituality with philosophy.
You're missing the point of the story. If the account of Adam and Eve has a philosophy, it's all about obedience and authority, not about attaining enlightenment.
I understand there is an entire misinterpretation of this passage which gives Satan a kind of Promethean heroism for awakening humanity to scientific thought and technological progress. Th ...[text shortened]... tributed to one thing: our problem with authority. That's the "philosophy" of Adam.
the point of this exercise is not to deal with absolutes. it doesn't help if someone says "this is the meaning and the only meaning and all others are wrong", because this debate would then be over in 2-3 posts.
the point of these exercise is to flex our brains, to present opinions, ideas, to discuss them without prejudice or fear that god may be offended by us thinking. and maybe to learn something.
Originally posted by epiphinehaswhat i do see from the story is that sooner or later adam would have eaten from the tree. god gave him choice and free will and not the ability to distinguish right from wrong. god knew he will eat it. he just found the alternative of binding adam to his will unacceptable. so by placing the tree withing adam's grasp he thought him two valuable lessons. one, that knowledge comes with a price. two, that choosing to leave the simple life of eden behind, he would have nobody to blame anymore, he would have to deal with the consequences.
You're missing the point of the story. If the account of Adam and Eve has a philosophy, it's all about obedience and authority, not about attaining enlightenment.
I understand there is an entire misinterpretation of this passage which gives Satan a kind of Promethean heroism for awakening humanity to scientific thought and technological progress. Th ...[text shortened]... tributed to one thing: our problem with authority. That's the "philosophy" of Adam.
i can't think of any way that adam would have possibly have remained in eden for eternity. and god knew that. but rather than plop him into the desert of the real from day one, he allowed him to glance the garden of eden and what he had lost by his own fault.
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziSo, in fact, you are developing a philosophy which really has nothing to do with the first three chapter of Genesis. All that you intend to do is borrow biblical symbolism. Would this be a fair assessment?
you are missing the point of this exercise. and this perhaps the main reason i asked for a philosophy forum or even the blasphemy that is the replacing of spirituality with philosophy.
the point of this exercise is not to deal with absolutes. it doesn't help if someone says "this is the meaning and the only meaning and all others are wrong", because this ...[text shortened]... hout prejudice or fear that god may be offended by us thinking. and maybe to learn something.
It is interesting to note that whenever I have discussed philosophy with people like Lemonjello and Bbarr, rarely have they allowed me the privilege of disregarding the accepted application of certain philosophical concepts in order to fit them into my own paradigm.
Don't say I never did anything for ya.
Originally posted by epiphinehasi don't forbid anything. i was just having a problem with your final solution. when discussing philosophy there is no ultimate truth. that is what makes it so enjoyable. some ideas are better than others but still there are no completely wrong ones.
So, in fact, you are developing a philosophy which really has nothing to do with the first three chapter of Genesis. All that you intend to do is borrow biblical symbolism. Would this be a fair assessment?
It is interesting to note that whenever I have discussed philosophy with people like Lemonjello and Bbarr, rarely have they allowed me the privil ...[text shortened]... ccepted application of certain philosophical concepts in order to fit them into my own paradigm.
just look at the painting and tell me what YOU see, not your pastor, or your grandpa who read the bible to you, etc.
Originally posted by epiphinehasTherefore I had right when I said that the tale of Adam and Eve is the perfect tool required for the manipulation of the humanity. No "original sin" means no "savior";
You're missing the point of the story. If the account of Adam and Eve has a philosophy, it's all about obedience and authority, not about attaining enlightenment.
I understand there is an entire misinterpretation of this passage which gives Satan a kind of Promethean heroism for awakening humanity to scientific thought and technological progress. Th ...[text shortened]... tributed to one thing: our problem with authority. That's the "philosophy" of Adam.
Originally posted by black beetlethere was also the notion "Jesus loves you and will love you even more if you send your money to me, praise Jesus!!"
Therefore I had right when I said that the tale of Adam and Eve is the perfect tool required for the manipulation of the humanity. No "original sin" means no "savior";
there was also the notion you could survive a nuclear attack by "duck and cover". under a desk. made of wood.
are you saying humans are stupid, easy to manipulate, children?
Originally posted by epiphinehasAnd obviously Adam did not believe him, or simply did not think too hard about it. He supposedly did not know good from evil and thus could not make his own judgment call based on his conscience.
God gave a specific command, "You must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." When Adam and Eve chose of their own free will not to obey God's command, their eyes were opened to evil. (More specifically, the difference between good and evil.)
What the story is in fact conveying is that by disobeying God evil was introduced to the world through Adam,
But via the snake. The story makes it quite clear that evil existed in heaven first and came to the world via Satan.
and further, that the aboriginal problem with the entire human race, in a nutshell, is that none of us are capable of being obedient to God.
Which surely is a design fault on Gods part?
It's not so much that we are tainted by Adam's own particular act of disobedience in the Garden, but that we ourselves are not capable of obeying God's will in our own lives.
Basically, all of humanity's troubles can be attributed to one thing: our problem with authority. That's the "philosophy" of Adam.
Yet others will argue that that 'problem with authority' is 'free will' and is a highly valuable thing that was specifically gifted to us by God.
Do you seriously believe that an infant dying from malaria is the result of the infants 'problem with authority'?
Originally posted by twhiteheadi am not sure our incapability to obey god is necessarily a design flaw. maybe it was intended. if we challenge authority, if we challenge the state of things and yearn for more, we better ourselves. which is why the apple had to be eaten. if god intended us to not obey him in every way, he at least put the apple in within reach so that man at least know the difference between right choices and wrong choices. and told us that to every choice there is a consequence. i will still give you rules but you are free not to obey them but suffer the consequences.
And obviously Adam did not believe him, or simply did not think too hard about it. He supposedly did not know good from evil and thus could not make his own judgment call based on his conscience.
[b]What the story is in fact conveying is that by disobeying God evil was introduced to the world through Adam,
But via the snake. The story makes it qu ...[text shortened]... an infant dying from malaria is the result of the infants 'problem with authority'?[/b]
Originally posted by ZahlanziYeap🙂
there was also the notion "Jesus loves you and will love you even more if you send your money to me, praise Jesus!!"
there was also the notion you could survive a nuclear attack by "duck and cover". under a desk. made of wood.
are you saying humans are stupid, easy to manipulate, children?
Originally posted by black beetlethe point of this thread was to present ideas. you simply say you don't wanna. therefore it is counter-productive. others will say it is spamming.
Why is it counter-productive? This is simply my opinion for the tale, not for the conversation itself;
it is like me posting in every thread in all the rhp forums "i don't like this thread" it is counter-productive.