Spirituality
08 Aug 14
12 Aug 14
Originally posted by lemon limeBefore we potentially move on, can I refer you to my response to Galveston about about the fruit of the spirit not coming from fruit trees.
[b]The tree is not described as a "fruit tree" it is described as a tree which gives a particular knowledge.
I use different translations of the Bible, and they all say it was a tree that had fruit. It doesn't literally say "fruit tree", so in that regard you are correct. But how many fruit trees do not produce fruit? What version (translation) of ...[text shortened]... how would you, using another example, define the word "up" if there was no such thing as "down"?[/b]
12 Aug 14
Originally posted by moonbusCould I ask why you feel the garden and Adam and Eve were not real? What makes you think this and what proof do you or anyone else have other then mans philosophies that it isn't real?
"What did the soil in the garden consist of?" is a facilely materialistic interpretation of the Garden myth. It's not about rocks and soil. It's an allegory about growing up, about achieving moral maturity. Man starts out in a child-like state of ignorance and knows nothing about morality or mortality. Man comes to a knowledge of his true nature ("in the ima ...[text shortened]... man to do it. Had God not forbidden it, man would have remained ignorant and child-like forever.
I'm curious as to where this idea started because all of God's followers right up to Jesus and beyond took it literal.
12 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterJuvenile? So are you going to start the insults again or are we going to have a civil discussion?
I'm shocked by your juvenile understanding of spiritual concepts.
When Christ talks about the fruit of the spirit, do you think that fruit comes from a fruit tree also?
No Jesus is not talking of literal friut, do you think he was?
Do you really not understand what he is speaking of?
When the Bible speaks of producing fruit from ones actions either good or bad, do you think it is speaking of real fruit?
12 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75The fruit of the spirit is not a fruit.
Juvenile? So are you going to start the insults again or are we going to have a civil discussion?
No Jesus is not talking of literal friut, do you think he was?
Do you really not understand what he is speaking of?
When the Bible speaks of producing fruit from ones actions either good or bad, do you think it is speaking of real fruit?
The fruit of the the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not a fruit either.
These are called parables, they are symbolic explanations of something deeper and more spiritual.
You are welcome to stick with the regimented dogmatic teaching from your religious group of course.
12 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterWell first of all it's not just the JW's that take it literal in case you missed that.
The fruit of the spirit is not a fruit.
The fruit of the the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not a fruit either.
These are called parables, they are symbolic explanations of something deeper and more spiritual.
You are welcome to stick with the regimented dogmatic teaching from your religious group of course.
And why don't you take it literal? Did not all the men of old who believed in God and his son Jesus not take it literal including Jesus himself? Did any of them ever say it wasn't literal? No not one.
So why do you say it's not real? Because some man who doesn't believe in the bible says so? Just as satan himself said that God lied and what he said wasn't so?
Last question... What makes you deside to believe in some parts of the bible but then not other parts? It would seem that if your going to believe in some of it, why not all of it?
12 Aug 14
Originally posted by divegeester"These are called parables, they are symbolic explanations of something deeper and more spiritual."
The fruit of the spirit is not a fruit.
The fruit of the the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not a fruit either.
These are called parables, they are symbolic explanations of something deeper and more spiritual.
You are welcome to stick with the regimented dogmatic teaching from your religious group of course.
Prove to me it is a parable...from the Bible.
12 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75I never said I did. I'm arguing that you say there are no other accounts that say the bible is wrong (in this matter).
So before I do, do they agree with the Bible? If not why not and at what point do you not believe th bible and take mans ideas over it?
12 Aug 14
2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75Who cares that other groups besides the JWs think like JWs do on this matter? Are you appealing to them for evidence you are right?
Well first of all it's not just the JW's that take it literal in case you missed that.
And why don't you take it literal? Did not all the men of old who believed in God and his son Jesus not take it literal including Jesus himself? Did any of them ever say it wasn't literal? No not one.
So why do you say it's not real? Because some man who doesn' ...[text shortened]... n not other parts? It would seem that if your going to believe in some of it, why not all of it?
Why don't I take it as literal? Because it is so obvious that it's symbolic for the reasons and examples I've already given in this thread. It's ok if you don't agree; we rarely agree on anything because your world and spiritual view is very different to mine.
I believe in all parts of the bible; what makes you think I don't, because I disagree with you? Why is thinking something is symbolic a problem to you?
12 Aug 14
3 edits
Originally posted by divegeesterI don't have a problem with your beliefs. I don't agree with most but that's nothing new.
Who cares that other groups besides the JWs think like JWs do on this matter? Are you appealing to them for evidence you are right?
Why don't I take it as literal? Because it is so obvious that it's symbolic for the reasons and examples I've already given in this thread. It's ok if you don't agree; we rarely agree on anything because your world and sp ...[text shortened]... nk I don't, because I disagree with you? Why is thinking something is symbolic a problem to you?
But take the time if you can and prove to me it's not literal?
In turn I don't have to prove it's a literal because nothing or no one in the Bible ever even slightly hints that it's not real.
+++++++++ So the bibles account of Jesus's lineage coming from Adam is not real and a lie? +++++++++++
Do you believe Adam even existed?
13 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterAre you comparing the fruit of the spirit to literal fruit that comes from a tree? People bear fruit too, according to the Bible... "you will know them by their fruits", but this doesn't mean you might find plums growing in someones armpits, does it...
Before we potentially move on, can I refer you to my response to Galveston about about the fruit of the spirit not coming from fruit trees.
There is nothing to suggest in the book of Genesis that the tree of knowledge of good and evil is not a literal tree, or that it necessarily must be a supernatural tree bearing supernatural fruit. There was also a tree of life, but they were prevented from eating of that tree and again there is nothing to suggest it wasn't a literal tree. Imagine what it would be like to live forever in sin, and forever growing more and more disfigured and disabled from sin.
What you don't seem to realize is that it could have been a literal event that also foreshadowed what would come later. God is not limited to doing only one thing at a time... or for one thing or event to mean only one thing.