by cedars 190 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
To believe God made Earth for the sole reason of bringing the physical to the spiritual would discourage learning how to make Earth last forever.
Why can't BOTH be true? Sons on Earth forever (but not living in flesh forever) and Sons being brought up to spirit to live forever.
Well, Wolfman - that would sort of be a modified "literalistic" view of it.
My scientific side causes me to have complete doubt that eating a certain fruit could result in sustained life past the natural cycle - in this case, reported to be for hundreds of years, past the point of last eating this fruit.
Wolfman - I'm grateful to you for sharing your views on this. However, once again, your hypothesis merely confirms what I have been saying all along - that the first three chapters of Genesis cannot be explained without conjecture, embelishment, or resorting to allegory. Once we delve into those realms, really anyone's guess is as good as the next person's. What was needed was a clear and unambiguous account right at the beginning that explains everything beyond reasonable doubt. That's not much to ask from a text inspired by God containing his wisdom, but sadly, that's not what we got. Hence the confusion.
Cedars
Its a fairytale.
Hey Cedars!
Thanks for an interesting and engaging topic and discussion.
By the way if you choose the correct country settings for Google Translator you get better results! Just keep trying mate, you'll get there in the end!
"Once you start venturing into the world of allegory, then can be any one of hundreds of explanations."
This sounds reasonable to me.
It seems one of the synonyms for allegory is "metaphor".
This is indeed how I understand and interpret the trees.
Whether they were literal trees or not is largely besides the much greater (spiritual) realities they metaphorically represent.
What would be wrong with allowing "one of hundreds of [possible] explanations" to be shaped by the unfolding narrative in the rest of the Bible, and by what we see in the world around us, and by what we are taught by Holy Spirit?
I reject the authoritarian control oriented Pharisaic religious notion that the Bible is my heavenly father's only definitive, final and absolute communication to me his son on all matters. My personal experience has been that he has woven into this long letter a "secret" map, message or medicine which would gradually lead me back to a living, vibrant, dynamic and healing personal relationship with him.
As a father have you ever allowed a negative situation to unfold as a life lesson for your children?
As a father has this negative situation ever been a custody battle over your children which included an evil step-father who through legal manoeuvring and lies secured custody over your children, abused them, enslaved them, and misrepresented you to them?
Could it be that the legal custody battle is being waged by means of two competing messages? One from our evil step-father, the other from our heavenly father? Religion versus the gospel?
Could this be why all religionists and especially Pharisees deplete or truncate the gospel message so badly that most of its 30-odd key ingredients or markers are removed?
Could this be why there is no mediator, saviour or salvation in the Watchtower's "good news" that they doorknock with? Could this be why there is no IMPUTED righteousness, holiness, sinlessness, perfection and sonship in the Watchtower's "good news" that they doorknock with?
Could this be why Jesus told the Pharisees that they were from their father the devil, because of lying to and enslaving his father's children?
Could it be that we are in the middle of the longest running and most important custody battle ever, where eternal legal precedents are being written? Is this a potentially valid scenario amidst "any one of hundreds of explanations"? What other explanation takes in so many dots and joins them to form such a compelling picture that fits so many scriptures and realities in life?
Fernando
I reject the authoritarian control oriented Pharisaic religious notion that the Bible is my heavenly father's only definitive, final and absolute communication to me his son on all matters. My personal experience has been that he has woven into this long letter a "secret" map, message or medicine which would gradually lead me back to a living, vibrant, dynamic and healing personal relationship with him.
I commend your non-pharasaic approach to the bible in not considering it as God's final word on all matters. However, I don't understand why there needs to be any "secret maps" contained therein. Sure, I can understand some of the more deeper or more profound ideas warranting meditation. However, the events described in the first three chapters of Genesis set the tone for the entire bible, and (as I've described) the narrative it provides does not fit with the way edenic events are interpreted later on in the scriptures, specifically in the Pauline letters of the New Testament. For example, nowhere in Genesis is it mentioned by precisely what mechanism mankind inherited sin. Surely such a straightforward concept, on which Christianity hinges, should have been mentioned even if only in passing - especially if the fate of mankind is in the balance. Why the ambiguity?
As a father have you ever allowed a negative situation to unfold as a life lesson for your children?
I'm not a father, so I can't really answer that question! However, if I were a parent, I think I would want to fulfil my duties towards my children with absolute transparency wherever possible. I also wouldn't permit them to undergo a "negative situation" that would cause undue distress to my children in order to teach them a "lesson".
Overall, I can appreciate what you're saying. I'm familiar with the idea of letting the bible interpret scriptures that are ambiguous, having been raised to use similar reasoning with householders as a JW. However, in my opinion, Paul's interpretation of the Genesis account (which was seldom referred to by Jesus despite his supposedly being the "seed") seems wildly at odds with what is actually said to have happened in Eden when those verses are read objectively.
Paul portrays sin as a disease that was contracted by Adam when he ate of the fruit, and which he passed on to his children. This is a fairly simple concept for even the earliest humans to grasp, but it wasn't described by Moses in this way when he wrote Genesis. Rather, Adam and Eve were said to have died because they were deprived access to the Tree of Life. If anything, they became MORE like God rather than sinful as a result of their actions, as acknowledged by God in Genesis 3:22.
Cedars
Hey Cedars!
Thanks for a stimulating conversation. It just goes to show that different perspectives can be shared and compared in a contemplative rather than combative exchange.
Congratulations on yet another very successful thread.
Best wishes.
Fernando
Hi Fernando - in saying all of that, I hope I haven't burst your balloon? Just because I fail to connect Genesis with the rest of the bible doesn't mean others shouldn't try to by means of metaphor if it gives them hope. The point of this thread was simply to raise the issue and see if anyone could show me anything I'd missed - which nobody could without resorting to allegory and inuendo.
If nothing else, I'm glad I've created a stimulating discussion. It's always good to talk these things through and explore important issues from a variety of angles - yours included.
Cedars
i believe teh problem in understanding what the tree of god and bad is understanding what good and bad actually meant to the authors. we in todays world simply assume this statement means the tree reoresented some form of morality. are we to believe without eatting from the tree that adam and eve didnt know the difference in our good and our bad? did they honestly not understand that hitting someone was bad? of course not thats stupid, all people have some system of good and bad other wise chaos would reign. lost tribes both now and even before european colonosation had their own rules for good and bad. i think it is safe to assume the good and bad of the trrwee must be soemthing else.
before i continue i would like to comment on the actors involved in this play. in the early scriptures jehovah or god is not some omnipresemt god, but rather loks and acts more like a king or ruler with very human limitations. in early genesis theres a bit where god is walking in the garden and is unaware of some news. we must also realise what the names of the first couple here mean. their names are very telling, adam means earth but also means mankind. eve or havvah also means the mother of everything. we can by their names its easy to see these characters represent the common man and the common woman. these two charcters are not individuals but repsrwsentations of subjects. adam and eve are the common man and jehovah is their ruler,. at no stage is jehovah floating about in hevaen or some other abstract place, but rather he walks and talks like a king.
we must also realise that knowledge is very powerful. back in those days few'people had any educatuon. one worry back then was simple knowledge of the calendar, knowing when to plant, soe and harvest were very important. as we know many lands expwrience certain events like major rains at certain times of the year. knowing these times was extremely imoortant and literally a life and death information. naturally those in power wanted to control who knew how to read this calendar.
i believe god or the king wish to keep this sort of knowledge just for them so they could direct and benefit from their position. if the common person learnt how to read the stars to determine the seasons, then the king lost considerable infleunce. we can see in history, the ancients were always trying to record and understand the seasons for reaosns like this. nearly all major powers built astronoucal observatories or tools. we see these monuments as religious, but for them these calendars kept them alive and healthy literally. without this knowledge these peoples went hungry and weak.
back to tye tree, we must understand that good represents life, bad is death. we can see this language in jesus and the gospels. the light is good, the sun gives us warmth, lights our day , gives us spring and summer makes tge plants and grow. the light is good, the opposite of light is dark. in the gosepls and even in xianity we always say and picture hades and death as cold dark and so on. plants, people, animals arr afriad and die when its cold, dark such as night and wimter.
the tree is simply a represemtation of knowledge to live and die.'as we knmow trees themselves were fertility symbols,. we can see this in many gods like asherah and even our own modern fertilitycelebrations like xmas. the xmas tree like the winter solstice is the rebirth of tye sun following the shortest day of the year. a green tree is alive, not dead. the passover is also a celebration of fertility, it features lambs, and is of course dated to the start of spring, the soring equinox,
lets not forget the priests who wrote most if not allof the old testament, were only interested in keeping total control to maintain their position and the benefits and qealth this generated for their own business. teh rants in the ot are because they hate others going to mother temples. templenworship was a business, sacrifices and money. the oruests told the people what to do, because they were spokesmen for god. the acriotures say the priesthood could eat of tye sacrifices and more. this is of course the origins of thereligon scam as it was present in ancient judea. all rants are not about worship to other gods being wrong, its about worshipping the wrong god at tye wrong temple. its always about money. the priests condemn others for many things when they themselves do it, they say divniation sis bad, and yet thats how the hi priest communciates with jehovah via his magic stones unim and thuranim which were prominantlynplaved on his chest. all thismis dicumented and made law in the torah. divination itself is not wrong, its all about control. we see another example where tye apsotles pick matthais to replace judas by casting lots which is supposedly banned. the actual thingbbanned is the fact the common people themselves must ask their holy superiors and not try and ask god by throwing rocks mor sticks.
i almost forgot no where in the snake story is sin mentioned or even satan. later on its said that women will have painful births, of course common people without physicians and similar knowledge have no jedicine and this of course is very importamy in birth. giving birth is a dangerous event, its very important to have the right help at such an important time. this message is reminding women, that without the system they might lose the establishment which includes midwives and other doctors or holy people which in their minds help tghem.
