09 Aug 15
1 edit
Was The Fruit An Apple?
The apple idea stems back to a Latin pun, where the Latin word malum means both evil and apple. Genesis was written in Hebrew so we should not place any reliability on a Latin pun. Some believe the fruit was a fig because, after Adam and Eve ate from it, they sewed fig leaves together to cover their nakedness.
It may not matter what type of fruit was eaten, but what really mattered was the fact that man failed to obey and trust God, whose way is good, and choose the evil way of the serpent, who is Satan the devil.
Then He told them a parable: "Behold the fig tree and all the trees; as soon as they put forth leaves, you see it and know for yourselves that summer is now near.…
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMFYou still haven't shown how the metaphor is somehow not part of "our typical dichotomy of good verses evil" other than to simply assert that you consider it to be "too wise".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still haven't shown that huh? That's too bad.
What you can do is take my post, arrange it as a question loaded with what you want to hear me say, and ask " So, you're saying .... ? "
It seems rather far fetched that the credibility of your God figure's metaphor in the eyes of others might hinge upon whether or not you personally happen to think it is "too wise" to be of human origin?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some "far fetched" things have validity. But I didn't use the word "hinge" as if my opinion was the sole reason for considering it revelation.
Your job is to keep asking stuff like "So you're saying ....?"
and inserting things which reinforce your skepticism about the Bible.
Watch your next post.
10 Aug 15
Originally posted by sonshipThis post is just a deflection.
[b] You still haven't shown how the metaphor is somehow not part of "our typical dichotomy of good verses evil" other than to simply assert that you consider it to be "too wise".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still haven't shown that huh? That's too bad.
What you can do is take my post, arrange ...[text shortened]... and inserting things which reinforce your skepticism about the Bible.
Watch your next post.[/b]
10 Aug 15
Originally posted by sonshipWhat reason did you give other than to say that it was your opinion that the metaphor was "too wise" to be anything other than supernatural in origin? Your answer hinged upon this opinion of yours. Your certainty and sincerity are not evidence of anything other than the contents of your own thoughts.
Some "far fetched" things have validity. But I didn't use the word "hinge" as if my opinion was the sole reason for considering it revelation.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMFThat sounds right to me.
I think I only mentioned that one matter.
And this brief note of interest was not meant to be a full fledged all-encompassing apologetic for the Christian faith.
In these debates the bottom line comes out to be "Who do you trust?" At the end of the day it comes down to a matter of who you want to trust.
My point was simple and pretty much a single one. Once you move about among various reasonings, logics, and arguments, at the end of the day it comes down to trusting someone.
Reasonings and intellectual discussion have their place. But in the final analysis it comes down to who you trust.
Anyway, to repeat, I think the content of that story of the origins of the human situation, is divinely communicated. imitations abound in various cultures of antiquity.
As for the unusual matters of a speaking animal, I think one objective of God letting it happen that way, was to insure that human beings understand that their origins are rooted in the supernatural.
Originally posted by FMF"Hi, I'm Vivian (aka V7)'s older brother CR; it's her day off today and her internet workload has been assigned to me. We were both born on February 21, 2001 and 2007 respectively. The ratio of human years to mouse years is approximately 4 to 1 depending on proper care and handling. So my dear baby sister is approximately 32 (8x4) years old while I'm about 56 years old (14x4). Since the "supernatural" is one of the topics the owner of this lively online spirituality forum wisely suggested, I believe the observation which follows is apropos. The common verb "live" obviously has several meanings depending on the context in which it's used. While human beings may casually say, "Oh, I live in Kent not too far from London" or "I live in a suburb of Boston" or "I live in Sydney, Australia" they misuse the word. A human being's soul lives/resides in his or her body while his or her unique soul and body may "live in Kent not to far from London" or "in a suburb of Boston" or "in Sydney, Australia." If a laptop mouse such as Vivian and/or I had also been supernaturally given a human soul at birth when its owner first plugged in our built in extension cords [not the urban slang "tails"] our immaterial souls would be our most priceless possession. Why? Simply because that soul is the quintessential person for finite time and infinite eternity."
So it's supernatural because you think it must be supernatural, is that what you're saying?
Regards, CR (aka V14 placed in service the same year Red Hot Pawn was born)
Originally posted by sonshipLike I said, the strength of your convictions and sincerity do not amount to actual evidence of anything other than what your personal opinion happens to be.
In these debates the bottom line comes out to be [b] "Who do you trust?" At the end of the day it comes down to a matter of who you want to trust. My point was simple and pretty much a single one. Once you move about among various reasonings, logics, and arguments, at the end of the day it comes down to trusting someone. Reasonings and intellectual discussion have their place. But in the final analysis it comes down to who you trust.[/b]
13 Aug 15
Originally posted by sonshipIt is you who makes extraordinary and specific claims about immortality and supposed instructions from "God", not me. The onus regarding evidence for things such as these is therefore on you, not me. And it is - of course - your right to just cop out over and over again ~ as you did with your claim that torture for eternity for thoughtcrimes was "perfect justice" ~ by offering variations on the theme of because-sonship-thinks-so, as is the case now with this.
And the strength of your skepticism is evidence of .... ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
13 Aug 15
6 edits
Originally posted by FMFIt is you who makes extraordinary and specific claims about immortality and supposed instructions from "God", not me. The onus regarding evidence for things such as these is therefore on you, not me. And it is - of course - your right to just cop out over and over again ~ as you did with your claim that torture for eternity for thoughtcrimes was "perfect justice" ~ by offering variations on the theme of because-sonship-thinks-so, as is the case now with this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you quote this specific claim:
"I am a snake, not an apple. What does that mean? Well, our civilization - the Judeo-Christian - in its founding myth portrayed the deliverer of knowledge as the source of evil - the devil - and the loss of innocence as a catastrophe. This probably had less to do with religion than with the standard desire of those in authority to control those who are not." ~ John Ralston Saul 'The Unconscious Civilization'.
If you agree with John Ralston Saul, then some burden falls on you according to your own criteria.
The claim may not be about "immortality and supposed instructions ... etc." but they are your claims. That is unless you want to say all the burden conveniently falls on John Ralston Saul.
... the controlling and withholding of knowledge creates power for some, and the gaining of 'proscribed' knowledge can create danger for others.
Absolutely no burden on you ? All burden falls on me ?
That's strangely jury rigged to protect you from responsibility from anything except to assert your opinion.
More specific claims:
While followers of the Abrahamic religions may have incorporated the metaphor into their traditions and given it a supernatural edge, surely the knowledge-authority thing is in fact merely an inevitable upshot of the human condition and of the relationships and interactions between people?
Just nod "Yes, whatever you say FMF" ?
So I make a somewhat peripheral comment, which I probably shouldn't have addressed to you personally and suddenly all burden is on me:
It is you who makes extraordinary and specific claims about immortality and supposed instructions from "God", not me.
No onus regarding evidence need be provided by you. I suppose you could hide behind telling me to go off and read John Paul Ralston's book.
And it is - of course - your right to just cop out over and over again ~ as you did with your claim that torture for eternity for thoughtcrimes was "perfect justice"
I don't recall opting out of such a discussion. I recall having the right not to argue perpetually with someone. Some people regard it as significant that a argument not be indefinitely held with no final word from one side. I am not sure exactly what it is suppose to prove that one guy writes the last post and another decides enough time has been spent.
As I am recalling the four of five threads (or more) concerning God's eternal judgment I don't recall feeling the need to speak further. If that comes over as "opting out" to you, that's ok with me.
~ by offering variations on the theme of because-sonship-thinks-so, as is the case now with this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think more than once I said "It is my opinion". And I still would say it. I don't think human wisdom alone is responsible for the writing of the book of Genesis. And I presented one item of evidence.
Evidence is not persuasion.
Might not the snake & apple metaphor have been the product of minds seeking to consolidate earthly power and might not the religious trappings have merely been a means of ensuring that the exercise of that power was perceived with deadly seriousness and - most importantly - conformity and obedience?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think so. But suspicion really knows no end if one if overly paranoid about the Bible.
13 Aug 15
Originally posted by sonshipIf you disagree that the management of knowledge creates power for some and disadvantage or even danger for others then you can simply say so. I believe it is an uncontroversial observation about the history of power and the human condition. It's not as if I am claiming that humans who train themselves to think certain things can thus become immortal and that they have heard instructions to that end from "God".
FMF: "...the controlling and withholding of knowledge creates power for some, and the gaining of 'proscribed' knowledge can create danger for others."
Absolutely no burden on you ? All burden falls on me ?
That's strangely jury rigged to protect you from responsibility do from anything except assert your opinion.