Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I don't believe there was ever a tree of life. It is just part of a story.

Its kind of like saying that man was never meant to have a light-saber.

LOL at the bible being discussed as factual

Originally posted by Lestov16
LOL at the bible being discussed as factual

Who says its not...you?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Who says its not...you?
I for one.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I bet you never thought of this myth that way.

Can you see it?

Nope.

Nope.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Who says its not...you?

there are whole testiments and goepels of the bible that have been taken out or censored over the course of history. and this is a fact. im just saying its reliability and bias point of view (if it has one) can be called into question

Originally posted by Genesis-Soldier
there are whole testiments and goepels of the bible that have been taken out or censored over the course of history. and this is a fact. im just saying its reliability and bias point of view (if it has one) can be called into question

Again, many testaments were dismissed because there were actual tellings form first hand witnesses that contradicted the scriptures. Tradition is a very important element of early christianity, most witnesses left no written data for us to scrutinize.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Who says its not...you?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't believe there was ever a tree of life. It is just part of a story.

Its kind of like saying that man was never meant to have a light-saber.

Correct, man was meant to have two lightsabers:

http://www.geekologie.com/2011/12/07/lightsaber-unboxing.jpg

Originally posted by Robtard
... man was meant to have two lightsabers:

http://www.geekologie.com/2011/12/07/lightsaber-unboxing.jpg

Man was meant to have the BLUE lightsaber.

Red and green don't cut it.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I bet you never thought of this myth that way.

Can you see it?

Regards
DL

well, in the Bible, God appointed man to die a physical death from the start... that's the reason why He created man out of the dust of the ground, which is our flesh... when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they died spiritually...

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't believe there was ever a tree of life. It is just part of a story.

I agree but if not meant as I speculated, what doe it mean.

Bear in mind that nowhere in the story or bible is it's loss ever bemoaned.

It seems that even the biblical writers did not believe it to be an important part of the story.

Thoughts?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
They did eat the tree of life, they were allowed to eat that and that is why they had immortality. Once they ate the fruit of the tree of good and evil, they were prohibited from gaining access to the tree of life because they would have then been given immortality. States this all in the Bible.

If they ate of the tree of life and became immortal, where are they?

Please quote where the bible says they ate of the tree of life.

Also tell us why God would forbid them of doing what they had already done?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Lestov16
LOL at the bible being discussed as factual

It has been said that people of intelligence can discuss what they do not believe.

Sorry if I went above your pay scale.

You might wonder why I do it.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Who says its not...you?

Who says it is ...you?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
well, in the Bible, God appointed man to die a physical death from the start... that's the reason why He created man out of the dust of the ground, which is our flesh... when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they died spiritually...

Where is this shown in scriptures?

Further, how is, as God says in the narrative, A & E have become as Gods, knowing good and evil, dying spiritually.

That quote from God says they brought life to their spiritual thinking and not death as you indicate.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Robtard
Correct, man was meant to have two lightsabers:

http://www.geekologie.com/2011/12/07/lightsaber-unboxing.jpg

Bardocks twin.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
Man was meant to have the BLUE lightsaber.

Red and green don't cut it.
With that tree? Green and Red are most appropriate.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
I agree but if not meant as I speculated, what doe it mean.

Bear in mind that nowhere in the story or bible is it's loss ever bemoaned.

It seems that even the biblical writers did not believe it to be an important part of the story.

Thoughts?

Regards
DL

I think it is an artifact. I have read that the serpent was also an artifact. What I mean is that the original story was written in context of an older religion that is now all but gone.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Where is this shown in scriptures?

Further, how is, as God says in the narrative, A & E have become as Gods, knowing good and evil, dying spiritually.

That quote from God says they brought life to their spiritual thinking and not death as you indicate.

Regards
DL

"And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment,"
Hebrews 9:27

this basically solved the question won't the garden be overpopulated if Adam and Eve never ate the forbidden fruit... from the start, God appointed men to die, and that's the reason he created man from the dust of the ground of earth... once a person dies, the flesh/dust returns to earth...

"And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it."
Ecclesiastes 12:7

so when Adam died (physically) after living for 930 years, it's not because of eating the forbidden fruit... Adam and Eve's death by eating the forbidden fruit is spiritual because they transgressed God's law, they committed sin... and the wage of sin is death (Romans 6:23), that death is spiritual - you get alienated from the life of God:

"They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart;"
Ephesians 4:18

when you get alienated from the life of God, you die... spiritually... and to prove that:

"But she who gives herself to wanton pleasure is dead even while she lives."
I Timothy 5:6

a person can be considered "dead" (spiritually) even if he is still living (physically)...

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I think it is an artifact. I have read that the serpent was also an artifact. What I mean is that the original story was written in context of an older religion that is now all but gone.

No argument. It all came from Sumer and Egypt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En%C3%BBma_Eli%C5%A1

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
"And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment,"
Hebrews 9:27

this basically solved the question won't the garden be overpopulated if Adam and Eve never ate the forbidden fruit... from the start, God appointed men to die, and that's the reason he created man from the dust of the ground of earth... once a person dies, the flesh/dust returns to earth...

"And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it."
Ecclesiastes 12:7

so when Adam died (physically) after living for 930 years, it's not because of eating the forbidden fruit... Adam and Eve's death by eating the forbidden fruit is spiritual because they transgressed God's law, they committed sin... and the wage of sin is death (Romans 6:23), that death is spiritual - you get alienated from the life of God:

"They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart;"
Ephesians 4:18

when you get alienated from the life of God, you die... spiritually... and to prove that:

"But she who gives herself to wanton pleasure is dead even while she lives."
I Timothy 5:6

a person can be considered "dead" (spiritually) even if he is still living (physically)...

Sin requires intent to do evil.

A & E could not sin as they could not have evil intent as they had no knowledge of what evil was as they had yet to eat of it.

You will note that the Jews who wrote the story did not see a fall in Eden but an elevation.

http://www.mrrena.com/misc/judaism2.php

A & E, as God said, became as Gods in the knowing of good and evil and had their eyes opened.

Seems you think man is better without a moral sense and with their eyes closed.

Sin was impossible for A & E so what is sinful about becoming as Gods.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Sin requires intent to do evil.

A & E could not sin as they could not have evil intent as they had no knowledge of what evil was as they had yet to eat of it.

i beg to disagree... Adam and Eve have knowledge, and they transgressed God's commandment to them in particular...

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."
I John 3:4

"But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me."
Hosea 6:7

Originally posted by dyajeep
i beg to disagree... Adam and Eve have knowledge, and they transgressed God's commandment to them in particular...

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."
I John 3:4

"But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me."
Hosea 6:7

So following scriptures that tell us to be as perfect as God is transgression against God.

Ignoring a command to basically remains as bright as bricks is what you recommend.

You have followed God's command and are as bright as a brick.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
So following scriptures that tell us to be as perfect as God is transgression against God.

Ignoring a command to basically remains as bright as bricks is what you recommend.

You have followed God's command and are as bright as a brick.

Regards
DL

nope, you're contradicting things that should not be... all it takes is a little common sense... i don't think you even know the meaning of "perfect" in the Bible...

"You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:48

how can you be perfect?

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
So that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?
You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:44-48

that's what being perfect is, not your pre-conceived idea...

Originally posted by Greatest I am
So following scriptures that tell us to be as perfect as God is transgression against God.

Ignoring a command to basically remains as bright as bricks is what you recommend.

You have followed God's command and are as bright as a brick.

Regards
DL

People follow whatever scriptures support their beliefs, and excuse away the rest.

Also keep in mind that not every christian denomination reads the Bible in the same way, nor gives the Bible the same weight when it comes to settling their beliefs.

The christian Bible is not a sacred aspect of God like the Coran is meant to be on Islam.

Originally posted by Bentley
Also keep in mind that not every christian denomination reads the Bible in the same way, nor gives the Bible the same weight when it comes to settling their beliefs.

The christian Bible is not a sacred aspect of God like the Coran is meant to be on Islam.

I was born as a fundamentalist Christian, and they viewed the bible as the word of God. I would think that would be equivalent to a sacred aspect of God.

I guess it all depends of interpretation.

the Bible contains words of God, yes... but it also contains words of satan, words of angels, words of demons, words of good people, words of bad people...

it is wrong to generalize that the Bible is THE word of God...

true followers of Christ obey what's written in the Bible as teachings of Jesus, not the other way around... false christians find Bible verses that confirm to their own teaching...

even Saint John warned the brethren not to believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God... because there are many false prophets twisting the teachings of Jesus (I John 4:1)... heck, there are people pretending to be Christ themselves...

Originally posted by dyajeep
nope, you're contradicting things that should not be... all it takes is a little common sense... i don't think you even know the meaning of "perfect" in the Bible...

"You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:48

how can you be perfect?

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
So that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?
You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:44-48

that's what being perfect is, not your pre-conceived idea...

Love your enemy is a really stupid idea.

If you walk in on two brutes raping your wife and you happen to have a gun. Will you love your enemy or shoot two that you say you love?

Or will you turn the other cheek and offer them your daughter for their next.

Are you sure you want to love your enemy and turn the other cheek?

Do think about the stupid things you quote.

Do you think the Jews loved the S. S. while walking into the ovens?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
People follow whatever scriptures support their beliefs, and excuse away the rest.

Yes. Intellectual dissonance hard at work.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was born as a fundamentalist Christian, and they viewed the bible as the word of God. I would think that would be equivalent to a sacred aspect of God.

I guess it all depends of interpretation.

I was aware that kind of reading of the Bible existed, but it's rather uncommon as far as Christian practices go and I didn't know anyone who practiced such belief. Unrelated question, weren't you also catholic at some point?

Personally I'm not terribly attached to the idea of a Bible being an aspect of God. One of the main consolations I find in christian religion is that it's built upon failed and fragile men.

Originally posted by Bentley
I was aware that kind of reading of the Bible existed, but it's rather uncommon as far as Christian practices go and I didn't know anyone who practiced such belief. Unrelated question, weren't you also catholic at some point?

Personally I'm not terribly attached to the idea of a Bible being an aspect of God. One of the main consolations I find in christian religion is that it's built upon failed and fragile men.

No I was never a Catholic.

All religions are built upon failed and fragile humans.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No I was never a Catholic.

All religions are built upon failed and fragile humans.

All human religions you mean

But in the other cases you're right, I just think that allowing a holy book that is beyond human nature kind of undermines that element of the practice.

Originally posted by Bentley
All human religions you mean

But in the other cases you're right, I just think that allowing a holy book that is beyond human nature kind of undermines that element of the practice.

No, all religions. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism to mane the most popular, but the list goes on. All of these and more religions were created by humans, and humans are fallible.

What is the other case? I fell like you are trying to exclude something.

Animal religions? Aren't beasts allowed to have a little faith around here?

Originally posted by Bentley
Animal religions? Aren't beasts allowed to have a little faith around here?

I don't know. It seems that other animals do not have religions. Or it could be that we do not reprieve their religions. Perhaps, religion is a by product of our large brains, and animals with smaller brains do not have this by product. If aliens landed on Earth tomorrow and gave a news conference, one question I would ask would be: Do you have, or have you had in the past, any form of religion?

God say's "I will let you eat from the tree of life."

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Love your enemy is a really stupid idea.

If you walk in on two brutes raping your wife and you happen to have a gun. Will you love your enemy or shoot two that you say you love?

Or will you turn the other cheek and offer them your daughter for their next.

Are you sure you want to love your enemy and turn the other cheek?

Do think about the stupid things you quote.

Do you think the Jews loved the S. S. while walking into the ovens?

Regards
DL

and God will impute sin if you shoot the rapists? i honestly think that God will understand... what happened to "love your enemies" then? well, that's not the enemy the Bible talks about...

"Therefore If your enemy is hungry, feed him; If he is thirsty, give him a drink; For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head."
Romans 12:20

the enemy is a person who is angry at you... but not to the point of raping your wife and killing you, that's a stupid interpretation... how can you feed your enemy if he wants to kill you? the "enemy" is not that evil... it's a person who's angry at you and you have an opportunity to do good to him...

Originally posted by dyajeep
and God will impute sin if you shoot the rapists? i honestly think that God will understand... what happened to "love your enemies" then? well, that's not the enemy the Bible talks about...

"Therefore If your enemy is hungry, feed him; If he is thirsty, give him a drink; For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head."
Romans 12:20

the enemy is a person who is angry at you... but not to the point of raping your wife and killing you, that's a stupid interpretation... how can you feed your enemy if he wants to kill you? the "enemy" is not that evil... it's a person who's angry at you and you have an opportunity to do good to him...

Now you redefine well defined words. Tsk, tsk.

Is heaping coals on a head a sign of love?

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Wonder Man
God say's "I will let you eat from the tree of life."

Gen 3; 24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Quite the contradiction wouldn't you say?

Regards
DL

The tree was symbolic of the differences between Creator and creation, not an actual historic event (according to my Priest, at least).

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
The tree was symbolic of the differences between Creator and creation, not an actual historic event (according to my Priest, at least).

So why did God renege on letting man eat it when man became as Gods in terms of knowledge after eating of the tree of knowledge?

As above so below.

You would want your children to be at your level or better. I hope.

Why would God not want the same for his children?

Regards
DL

They didn't become gods. The whole point was that humans cannot become gods, and that we can never perceive life as God the Creator does.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
They didn't become gods. The whole point was that humans cannot become gods, and that we can never perceive life as God the Creator does.

Then why do some people claim to know so much about God?

Because they are naive, arrogant, and stubborn.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Because they are naive, arrogant, and stubborn.

Jesus said why. They like the praises of men more than the praises of God.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Now you redefine well defined words. Tsk, tsk.

Is heaping coals on a head a sign of love?

Regards
DL

you twist the Scriptures... heaping coals of fire on a head is not literal... i thought you're way better than that?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
They didn't become gods. The whole point was that humans cannot become gods, and that we can never perceive life as God the Creator does.

Hogwash. Your comment applies only to those foolish enough to read scriptures and other myths literally.

You damage your mind by belief in the supernatural and literal reading of myths.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Wonder Man
Jesus said why. They like the praises of men more than the praises of God.

God does not praise and whenever he comes around, people die.

God always takes the moral low ground and kills when he could just as easily cure.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by dyajeep
you twist the Scriptures... heaping coals of fire on a head is not literal... i thought you're way better than that?

Huh. That was considered a quality before stupid literalism reared it's ugly head and Christians started murdering others for not believing as they did.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Check out from about the 15 min. mark.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Huh. That was considered a quality before stupid literalism reared it's ugly head and Christians started murdering others for not believing as they did.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Check out from about the 15 min. mark.

Regards
DL

yeah, literalism is stupid... so why are you interpreting the Bible that way?

"No, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head."
Romans 12:20

Paul quoted this in the book of Proverbs:

"If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink;
For you will heap coals of fire on his head, and the Lord will reward you."
Proverbs 25:21-22

by just merely reading and understanding the passage, it is really stupid to believe that this should be interpreted literally... the earlier statement clearly says to give food and drink to your enemy - this is literal... and by doing this, you will heap burning coals upon his head - this is not literal...

it's actually more of a metaphoric comparison of doing good to your enemy and heaping burning coals on his head...

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Huh. That was considered a quality before stupid literalism reared it's ugly head and Christians started murdering others for not believing as they did.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Check out from about the 15 min. mark.

Regards
DL

Again another wrong viewpoint and not understanding the history of what you are talking about.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Again another wrong viewpoint and not understanding the history of what you are talking about.

Did you check out the video?

Originally posted by dyajeep
yeah, literalism is stupid... so why are you interpreting the Bible that way?


Because literalists are the ones who are killing religions and as a religionist, it is in my best interest in changing such idiots to a better way of understanding and morality.

Regards
DL

"No, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head."
Romans 12:20

Paul quoted this in the book of Proverbs:

"If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink;
For you will heap coals of fire on his head, and the Lord will reward you."
Proverbs 25:21-22

by just merely reading and understanding the passage, it is really stupid to believe that this should be interpreted literally... the earlier statement clearly says to give food and drink to your enemy - this is literal... and by doing this, you will heap burning coals upon his head - this is not literal...

it's actually more of a metaphoric comparison of doing good to your enemy and heaping burning coals on his head...

Seems you do not understand your own quote.

Are you saying that their are actual or metaphorical coals being put there?

Are those quotes talking of coal or do coals mean something else and what is that?

I have an idea and will share it after I see your take.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Again another wrong viewpoint and not understanding the history of what you are talking about.

Thanks for showing where I am wrong. I get that a lot from those to stupid to correct.

Chastisement without correction just shows the hate in your heart.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Did you check out the video?

No because he did not even attempt to gain points by correction.

Him and his other abusive friend are getting quite transparent.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
No because he did not even attempt to gain points by correction.

Him and his other abusive friend are getting quite transparent.

Regards
DL

Just be happy they don't burn people at the stake any more.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Just be happy they don't burn people at the stake any more.

Yes. enough Dark Ages and Inquisition for us.

Regards
DL

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Because literalists are the ones who are killing religions and as a religionist, it is in my best interest in changing such idiots to a better way of understanding and morality.

Regards
DL

that's why i'm asking you - if literalism is stupid, why are you interpreting the Bible that way?

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Seems you do not understand your own quote.

Are you saying that their are actual or metaphorical coals being put there?

Are those quotes talking of coal or do coals mean something else and what is that?

I have an idea and will share it after I see your take.

Regards
DL

if you are asking me if there are actual or metaphorical coals being put there, then you are the one who didn't understand the verse, dude... again, literalism is stupid, according to you...