Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
There is knowledge in this fruit but you two can't have it.
More like.."Don't eat from the tree of good and evil or ye will die" No mention of man not being able to attain this knowledge.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm holding a KingJames bible right now it's not in there.
Good, look up the above verse. There is no mention from God, that they cannot have or obtain this knowledge.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Evidence 😉
Romans 5:17
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.
So yes, death and destruction were unfortunately brought on by a bad choice. But even though a poor choice was made, God still offered redemption.
Originally posted by Thundar
More like.."Don't eat from the tree of good and evil or ye will die" No mention of man not being able to attain this knowledge.
It's a tree of ****ing knowledge and he tells them it's poison. How is that not with holding information?
Originally posted by Thundar
Good, look up the above verse. There is no mention from God, that they cannot have or obtain this knowledge.
Nice attempt to change the subject. Check yours the BookOfAdamAndEve isn't in there.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It's a tree of ****ing knowledge and he tells them it's poison. How is that not with holding information?
You've given a partial truth. Let's look at the exact verses now.
Genesis 2:17
But 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.
So it doesn't in anyway say that this knowledge can't be obtained in other ways, just that man is not able to obtain this knowledge from the tree of good and evil. The obvious inference one can make from this is that this knowledge can be obtained in other ways. To me, logic and common sense dictates that God being a loving parent would have provided this knowledge to them, had they graciously asked him for it, rather than forcefully take it.
So the story really doesn't have much to do with one obtaining knowledge in the grand scheme of things. The allusion really being made here is that God is allowing man the choice to obey or disobey, or specifically, he's allowing them a chance to enact this thing called "free will" that he's instilled all of his creation with.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Nice attempt to change the subject. Check yours the BookOfAdamAndEve isn't in there.
The book of Adam and Eve as well as the book of Enoch were included in earlier biblical works I believe, most of which were found and translated upon unearthing the dead sea scrolls.
Many historians have noted that the books were removed from more modern translations of the bible, as the stories were originally believed at the time to be primarily fictional and not entirely accurate when describing biblical accounts.
Why all of the above might be true, like most folklore, the books still have much historical merit to them, as they were included in earlier texts. Jesus himself actually makes a reference to the book of Enoch in Jude, regarding fallen angels who were cast out of heaven for mating with women and producing the Nephilim.
Originally posted by Regret
This does not show consideration for the audience you have. You are not teaching if you do not start at the point your audience is capable of understanding. If you are not teaching you are only pontificating. It isn't incorrect or misleading to state that God is a just God, and it embraces the language of your audience. Regardless of a Biblically correct terminology, you are speaking to people that do not have a great understanding of such. You infer no such separation as you suggest, you merely use the definition. If the separation you suggest is feared then a statement explaining that a part of love as you are speaking of it encompasses justice as well, and thus [place argument here], would suffice. If you do not explain, or define, your definition of love, your audience will assume you are using love as they do.
I thought about it for a bit and I'm going to meet you half way on this one Regret. I think we were both partially correct. One needs to get their point across accurately as well as show consideration for the audience that they have.
So I think the best way to have expressed the argument would be first to communicate that God is loving, and then to express how justice or righteousnous is a part of being loving.
There might be some people eloquent enough to express it the other way around and still get the message across..unfortunately I'm not really one of them. 😉
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Can a Demon find Redemption ?No or Yes.
Man. Forgot this was the original topic. My bad. I think we may have already answered this question though. The answer was probably "yes", but then comes the follow up question. Do they really want to be forgiven? The answer was most likely "no", as they probably do not believe themselves to have anything they need to be forgiven for. Hmmm..Maybe we should open up another thread about this.
Originally posted by Thundar
Man. Forgot this was the original topic. My bad. I think we may have already answered this question though. The answer was probably "yes", but then comes the follow up question. Do they really want to be forgiven? The answer was most likely "no", as they probably do not believe themselves to have anything they need to be forgiven for. Hmmm..Maybe we should open up another thread about this.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Can a Demon find Redemption ?No or Yes. Because demons are all made up, so, the answer to the question, is something that must also be made up.
You forgot the rest of my quote.
Demons are made up.avatar52202_16
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonMormon theology would probably hold that yes they could.
Can a Demon find Redemption ?No or Yes. Because demons are all made up, so, the answer to the question, is something that must also be made up.
Mormons believe that demons, devils, evil spirits, etc. are all just the spirits, the same exact type of spirits as man is, that followed Satan prior to entering mortal life here, and thus gave up the opportunity to gain a physical form and never again will have the opportunity. We believe in a literal physical resurrection of all men regardless of their being good or bad people, and that the deity has a physical body as well, and such is required for progression. Thus, these spirits are severely limited in possibility for eternity, but yes, they could be forgiven, only they have missed an important opportunity.
Originally posted by FeceManThere is a view that mental energy can create whatever a mind thinks on. And if a mind is fearful, it will create it and it will seem real and the body will react.
I'm reminded of a quote from The Exorcism of Emily Rose: "Demons are real whether you believe in them or not."
Originally posted by Nellinator
Does based on a true story mean anything to you? The story isn't as far fetched as you are implying.
Based on a true story only means that the story is based on what people believe happened. It is no different then a story of alien abduction, it maybe based on a true story, but that does not mean that the story is factorial: unless you believe in alien abductions. There is no such thing as a demon; so, any story based on the account of a demon is no different then storied about trolls or goblin. They tell more about the beliefs of people then facts.
Originally posted by Nellinator
It was a real court case if I remember correctly, about a the negligence of a priest after an exorcism. Exorcisms occur rather often actually in real life and as of yet there is no good explanation for them.
Voodoo zombie rituals take place in the real world too. Can you explain them? Don’t answer that, it was rhetorical. I see no difference in Voodoo zombie rituals and an exorcism. They are both human actives that require belief.