It is an interesting take, if nothing else. The snake does have a very ancient association with wisdom in the Middle East, and it’s certainly possible that in some earlier version the snake was seen as good, or as part of a pantheon. Wikipedia draws a connection between the snake and the Babylonian god Ningishzida.
My take on the fruit and the fall of man is the ability to acquire that knowledge is a needed part of the true paradise. I see this story as very similar to the prodigal son, we were with God, but chose to make out own way, to do that we have to leave the Father’s ‘estate’. It is up to us to decide if we want to come back or stay w/o God.
My humble O
The true interpretation of the story is that Knowledge is bad for religion. Even today, if you eat from the Tree of Knowledge, the church punishes you. Anyone who looks at the stories in the Bible understand that they are not to be taken literally, but many people really believe they happened exactly like they are written. Those people are still afraid of the Tree of Knowledge.
Did a man really live in a “Big Fish” for three days and live? I think not.
No such thing. James 2:19: Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
One? You have a WHOLE Book on History and you pick ONE thing out of it? Talk about minoring in the majors and majoring in the minors. This is called Apartheid. Minority ruling over the majority. The Pharisees (religious fanatics of Jesus’ day that killed him) also had this same problem.
Nah, you are NOT prejudice. Way to be so broad-minded, tolerant and liberal. :rolleyes:
According to the Bible you say. It is a Book. Why are certain people so AFRAID of this Book? Truth perhaps? Truth about YOU? You’re lost condition? Because the Book is 100% negative regarding man? Because it is a HISTORY Book?
They absolutely KNEW right from wrong because God told them, and God walked (and they with God) with them EVERY DAY in a PERFECT environment. God said that the day that they eat of the fruit of that tree, “you shalt surely DIE.” And, they did die. Spiritually they died right away and physically they died later.
And, frankly, why don’t you just be a man and ask the REAL question instead of beating around the bush. What you’re getting it is this. If God KNEW all this then is He not directly or indirectly responsible for what happened (and the next 6,000 years of killing, etc.)? That is the crux of your question. You’re NOT interested in the FACTS. You’re interested in blaming God for YOUR sin or If God is God, why didn’t He make the thing perfect and have done with it, which is basically the same thing. Or, didn’t God know the result of the test before it occurred?
You really want to know what this whole thing was about? It’s simple. But, I should answer your questions that you would have. I will answer them. Ready? Go!
-
Why did God make the Heaven and the earth (Gen.1:1). Answer: He made them to be INHABITED! (Isa. 45:18; 2 Peter 3:13). This is a nasty turn of events! Can it be that the Bible and the unregenerate scholars, scientists, philosophers, and historians have the same plan?
-
If God made them (and God is perfect), why did He not make them perfect? Answer: He did make them perfect; you just have ignored the Bible for so long, you actually think that Genesis 1 is the original creation! Now, this time , go back and notice verses 3-28 are dealing with a re-creation of a former creation, which was finished in verse 1. (Even Satan was created perfect in Ezekiel 28:15; not as a “serpent” or as a “devil”, but as a “cherubim”. What is a cherubim? Quit rushing things to get out of facing the truth; go back to your first position and wait for the attack.
-
If God made them perfect, why are they NOT perfect now? Answer: Because something happened between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:3 to the physical creation and something happened between Genesis 2:7 and Genesis 3:13 to the spiritual creation—the first man and woman.
-
If God is perfect and loves the “perfection,” why did He not prevent this “something” from happening? Answer: Because although the material creation was perfect, the MAN that God created was not perfect; he was only sinless, but not perfect!
-
What on earth are you talking about? Answer: If God is perfect, no being is perfect until he is like God. Adam is made in God’s image (Gen 1:26-28)–hello, Darwin!—but Adam sinlessness is NOT confirmed as God’s, for he has not yet been tested.
-
Didn’t God know the result of the test before it occurred? (If He is perfect, He must have known.) Answer: Good thinking–He did (Acts 15:18). He knew Adam would fall, and knowing this He gave him a freedom of will and of choice, so he could (or could NOT) fail.
-
Then is NOT God indirectly or directly to blame from what took place in His creation at the start? Answer: YES. (Why be squemish about it? We’d better get it right this time coming through, before the bombs start dropping again.) Yes, the Lord could have prevented sin from entering, and HE DID NOT (Lam. 3:38; Job 2:10).
-
The is not God responsible for Adam’s sin and the mess in which man now finds himself? Answer: NO. God does not tempt any man, neither can He be tempted, but "every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lusts, and enticed (James 1:13-15).
-
Then who tempted Adam? Answer: Eve (Gen. 3:4-6; 1 Tim. 2:12-14).
-
Who tempted Eve? Answer: A “serpent” (2 Cor.11:1-3).
-
Who tempted the serpent, if it wasn’t God, Himself? Answer: Before the serpent was a “serpent” he was not a “serpent”, but a cherubim; and he was “drawn away of his own lust and enticed” to put his own will above the will of God. (See Ezek.28:12-17; Isa. 14:12-15.)
-
Get off that! If God is Eternal and knew the nd from the beginning, He could have prevented the “Lucifer” of Isaiah 14 from falling to the level of a Serpent! Answer: True. God lets alot of things “fall” in order to work out His original plan (Rom. 11:11-32.)
-
Then God is not only responsible for MAN’s sins, but the serpents also, since He allowed BOTH to take place—isnt’ that right? Answer: If I say YES, what then?
-
Then, Darwin and Marx are right. “There is no God” (Psalm 14:1), because a God that is so imperfect that He is responsible for imperfection, is NOT perfect! Answer: Let me ask you a question, bright eyes? "Suppose God remedied the entire thing and made right what was made wrong; has He not then cleared Himself of ALL guilt and responsibility in the matter? (Romans. 3:4-6).
-
Yes, but… Answer: Look out for that circular reasoning son. If the Bible can show you where God un-did what evil He allowed to enter, will you admit He is perfect?
-
Well, now that depends upon the definition of… Answer: You see, that’s your trouble. You are putting an obstacle wehre there is none; quit “butting” and “welling” adn sit still a minute.
At Calvary, God came down “in the flesh” (1 Tim. 3:16) and bore man’s guilt (2 Cor. 5:21). He became the personification of ALL sin (Gal. 3:13); so mcuh so, that He was said to resemble a serpent! (JOhn 3:14). If He, then reconciled all things to Himself by atoning for the imperfection in all things, He is clear, you cannot charge Him with a thing. (Romans 9:20)
- I don’t believe all that stuff! Answer: I knew you didn’t, you rascal, when I started, but the following truths hold whether you believe them or not: If God is perfect, then LOVE is one of His qualities (1 John 4:8) and this LOVE has to be perfect LOVE. For “love” to really be perfect LOVE, there have to be two parties. (ONe party loving the same party is not LOVE, for self-love is not real LOVE). God, therefore, creates a secondy party—MAN (Heb. 2:6)–on which to manifest this attribute. If the man does not have the free will and free-choice, then he cannot return God’s love. An automan cannot “love”. The man must have a choice (Josh 24:15), and to have a choice there must be a third part.
The “eternal triangle” is completed by a cherub who becomes a serpent. You can choose HIM (2 Cor. 4:4) or God (1 Kings 18:21). God alllows this being (the cherub) to appear and tempt mankind so that man can freely choose God as an object of love. Adam choose his wife as an object, and his wife chooses knowledge----as do all good intellectuals! The man falls, and God redeems the man by bearing the entire blame (Rom. 5:6-19) for both the man and the cherub. He does this sin-bearing by comning down and dying, as a man! (Phil.2 ; Isa53; Rom 10; 2 Cor. 3).
Having absolved Himself of ALL guilt, it is now possible for the man to be confirmed sinless forever by receiving a sinless Saviour as his own (John 1:10-12.)
YOUR MOVE! I said, it’s your move!
God has already done all that is possible, all that could be asked, more than is required; and He has done it through love for you—you sorry, old Christ-rejecting, Bible-denying PHarisee (John 3:16)! God has absolved himself from all guilt, proving that He is absolutely perfect and sinless. Now, how about you? How about your moral condition? Go on, move! Don’t sit there all day.
God is innnocent; YOU are guilty (1 Pet. 3:18). What are you doing to do? Go on, move!
If someone (Socrates, ARistotle, Plato, Huxley, Darwin, etc…) has a better answer to the original sin than this Biblical account. If they have a solution, you’d better apply it immediately. For as surely, as you breathe and read, the hospital beds and graves are waiting for YOU!
You haven’t move yet. God has already moved in history to RESTORE His original creation. He has plans, and these plans are going to “go through on schedule” no matter what your church teaches or no matter what rubbish your professors may have passed on to you. The first part of the plan was to populate the Heaven and the Earth with a sinless race of people, who wanted to glorify God becuase they loved Him.
How do you know this is right?
Because at this minute, you and your country (no matter who you are!) are expending dollars, by the billions, to get up and populate Heaven with a bunch of Christ-rejecting sinners, whose only profession is that they can use sacraments and churches to make gods out of Bible-rejecting Darwinian apes!
You see, there two ways to do it; your way and God’s way.
To be continued (I am too tired)…
Well, devils wouldn’t be atheists, would they? Many of us are, we don’t believe in devils either. You are going to have to do better than quoting the Bible.
Hoo boy - there is lots more than one thing. Clue: the Bible isn’t history, except in the sense historical fiction is - and poor historical fiction at that - on the level of Mr. Peabody and Sherman, not Gore Vidal.
You can start with giving some non-Biblical evidence the Garden of Eden existed. Without that, most of what you wrote is meaningless. The discussion so far has been about what the story meant - no one here thinks it is truthful.
Who is afraid of the Bible again? Not me. I read it from beginning to end. I was halfway atheist when I started, and was fully atheist when I finished.
Glurge snipped.
I’m confused. Are you talking about war or the space program?
BTW, I’m betting dollars to doughnuts you know nothing about Darwin and evolution. You claim we’re scared of the Bible, but most atheists I know have read it and know it quite well. No evolution denier I’ve seen here has ever given evidence of reading any real book on evolution, or evidence of knowing what evolution is all about, not the lies your dumb-ass minister writes in the church bulletin.
Here’s the facts. Whether god exists or not, there was no Adam, no Eve, no garden, no tree of knowledge, and no serpent. Odd that those of us who wrote the story don’t believe in original sin. The story is a just-so story, explaining why man has to work, woman has to suffer the pains of childbirth, why we have do die, and why snakes have no legs.
Y’know, before one wanders into a place and makes oneself objectionable to the regulars, it is generally a good idea to lurk at that place to discover the culture.
The name of this site is the Straight Dope Message Board–Straight Dope as in the slang phrase for “correct facts.” We posters who participate in these Fora refer to ourselves as Dopers.
This site leans toward the skeptical, so I am sure that you will encounter a fair amount of unpleasant commentary, but there is no need to take offense where none has been offered simply because you have not paid sufficient attention to the language of the site.
Hmm, got to take exception to this one.
Genesis 22:1 “And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham, and he said, Behold, here I am.”
Also, I’m curious as to why, if god does not tempt people, Jesus told people to pray to god that he not “lead them into temptation.” Just askin’.
Also, Acts 15:10 “Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples…”
Malachi 3:15 "And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea they that tempt God are even delivered.
Perhaps you’re talking about Second Nephi?
That’s one for sure.
There’s also something in Alma 19…wait…huh?? my book of Alma is different the Alma on that site? So is my 2nd Nephi.
I meant this
Thats interesting.
q.e.d.
Many unmentioned children between the boys and after the boys, presumably.
But doesn’t Genesis 4:13-14 suggest otherwise? “Cain said to the LORD, ‘My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.’”
No other offspring of Adam and Eve’s are mentioned until Seth is born after this, so it suggests that while Adam and Eve were the first people created by God, they may not have been the only. Unless we’re to interpret that as he’s worried about as of yet unborn siblings hunting him down in the future…
Don’t overplay the whole incest business. We don’t allow incest today because it would allow recessive genetic disorders to manifest. E & A were genetically flawless, so crossbreeding of their many offspring posed no such danger.
No.
There is no date given for the Cain & Abel story. It could have occured anytime before Seth’s birth. The only indication (from Eve’s statement in Gen 5) is that Seth was probably the first son born after Abel’s death.
The fact is that the Torah does not describe events in a purely chronological order, but rather finishes up one topic and then goes on to the next. This can be demonstrated in several places:
Gen 11:32 describes Terach’s death in Haran. Genesis 12 describes God’s command to Abram to leave his birthplace. Yet, Haran survived 65 years after Abram’s departure. He may have even seen Isaac at some point (he was still alive when Isaac was born), although his birth isn’t described until Gen 20. The reason is because Gen 11 finishes the discussion of the generations from Noah to Abraham. After that, Terach is no longer important, so the discussion turns away from him, as the Torah turns to discuss the descendants of Abraham, who will be the focus of the narrative from here on in.
Genesis 36 describes the descendents of Esau and lists the first eight kings to rule over Edom. Genesis 37 describes the sale of Joseph. That does not mean to indicate that all those kings were born, ruled and died before Joseph was sold. Rather, the idea is that the Torah is finishing it’s discussion of Esau before returning to discuss Jacob and his family (who will be the focus of the history from now on).
Likewise, with Cain and Abel. When did the story happen? No one knows. It was surely before Seth was born (again, see Eve’s comment upon Seth’s birth), but beyond that, there is no indication. There’s also nothing to say that other children weren’t born in the interim. The Torah simply finishes the discussion of what happened before Seth’s birth and then goes on to discuss Seth and his descendants, since that is going to be the focus of the narrative from then on.
Zev Steinhardt