Franz' statement is outrageously unreasonable!

by Schizm 137 Replies latest jw friends

  • Schizm
    Schizm
    They had permission to eat from every tree in the Garden except for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.

    Obviously, the angels were posted at the entrance to the Garden in order to prevent Adam and Eve from CONTINUING to eat from the tree of life. Which, btw, shows that merely eating from such tree only once would not result in them having everlasting life. It's obvious that Adam and Eve were created in such a way that they would need to regularly eat from the tree of life in order to keep on living. -- Schizm.

    Where in the Bible does it say that?--undercover.

    I'm not questioning about what permission they had, I'm questioning this:
    Obviously, the angels were posted at the entrance to the Garden in order to prevent Adam and Eve from CONTINUING to eat from the tree of life. Which, btw, shows that merely eating from such tree only once would not result in them having everlasting life. It's obvious that Adam and Eve were created in such a way that they would need to regularly eat from the tree of life in order to keep on living.

    Where do you get that from? Nothing in the account indicates that, so how do you reckon that?

    I assume that you're asking the reason for which I believe that Adam & Eve had already been partaking of the tree of life. It would be unreasonable to think that they ate of all the other trees, but then neglected to eat of a tree that had the distinction of being called the "tree of LIFE". Too, the fact that the tree of life was located, not on the outskirts of the garden but right in the very middle of the garden, made it impossible to be overlooked.

    And so WHY was it called the "tree of LIFE"? There's no question but what Adam NEEDED the fruit from this tree in order to continue living and not die. This is proven by the very fact that after he was cut off from having access to this "tree of life" he eventually died. Stop and think: If, as some suppose, eating from the tree of life just ONE time would have given Adam eternal life, then it would've been senseless for God to have barred Adam from being able to have further access to that tree. Well, surely both Adam and Eve had already eaten from that tree repeatedly. But in spite of having done so, they eventually died--which suggests that there was a need to REGULARLY injest the life-sustaining nutrients which were unique to that particular tree's fruit.

    Yes, the wages for Adam's sin was death, but the WAY in which his death actually came about was by means of him no longer being allowed to get his hands on the life-sustaining nutrients that could be gotten ONLY from the fruit of the tree of LIFE. This is the reason I said: "It's obvious that Adam and Eve were created in such a way that they would need to regularly eat from the tree of life in order to keep living."

    .

  • JosephMalik
    JosephMalik

    Schizm, You said: It would be unreasonable to think that they ate of all the other trees, but then neglected to eat of a tree that had the distinction of being called the "tree of LIFE". Not only is it not unreasonable, I gave a reason why it is very reasonable. What is your proof? We already know your opinion but you have not provided evidence for your opinion. Where does it say, “they ate of all the other trees.” They only had permission to eat of all the other trees, but you have no idea how many trees are involved or if they got around to them all. They may have had a few they liked very much and did not shop around as you imply. You said: Too, the fact that the tree of life was located, not on the outskirts of the garden but right in the very middle of the garden, made it impossible to be overlooked. So where was the tree of the knowledge of good and bad located? Next to it perhaps? Or maybe right outside their cave where it was easy to get to? Adam knew exactly where it was as did Eve. That is something we know for sure. 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. Where did Eve say it was? The same place the tree of life was. How about that? Right in the very middle of the garden, made it impossible to be overlooked as you said. Go figure? Not much room for error was there? Joseph

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Schizm:
    You make even less sense than your god, and that's difficult. I hereby award you a further ten points.

  • Schizm
  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Schizm's god shows lt the flaming, spinning sword. Match that, ya haggis eating, pole tossing skirt wearer.

    S

  • gumby
    gumby

    Gumby

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Gummybear

    You'ld think eve would have gotten a leopard skin or something cool. No taste at all, whoever made it for her. That flaming sword is cool, though.

    S

  • blondie
    blondie

    Actually the WTS does not say that eating literally from the "tree of life" was necessary for living forever The Bible does not say but the WTS feels qualified to add to the Bible.

    *** it-2 p. 247 Life ***

    When Adam was created, God placed in the garden of Eden "the tree of life." (Ge 2:9) This tree evidently had no intrinsic life-giving qualities in its fruit, but it represented God’s guarantee of life "to time indefinite" to the one whom God would allow to eat of its fruit

    *** w99 4/15 p. 8 Is Everlasting Life Really Possible? ***

    One Bible scholar speculated: "The tree of life must have had some virtue by which the human frame was to be kept free from the decrepitude of age, or the decay that terminates in death." He even claimed that "there was an herbal virtue in paradise capable of counteracting the effects" of aging. However, the Bible does not say that the tree of life in itself had life-giving qualities. Rather, that tree simply represented God’s guarantee of everlasting life to the one who would be allowed to eat its fruit.
    (google does not reveal who the Bible scholar is mentioned above)
  • Now What?
    Now What?

    Everytime I see a bowl of fruit salad it's a cruel reminder of death, destruction and eternal punishment, and I still can't eat fruit salad to this day.

    Is that unreasonable?

  • gumby
    gumby
    Everytime I see a bowl of fruit salad it's a cruel reminder of death, destruction and eternal punishment, and I still can't eat fruit salad to this day.

    Is that unreasonable?



    Yes little lady.....that's VERY unreasonable! You ever heard a Jack LaLane fer cripe sakes?!! He's like 149 years old and can still kick my arse....and why? Cuz the skinny little bastard eats fruit all day long......that's how come!

    Gumbanana

    Edited to add I just saw you weren't a little lady. Me bad. Sorry

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit