Did God Invent Swords? - Logic Fallacies and Anachronisms (page 4)

inbetween

tec, if it was to symbolize an impregnable barrier, why not describe it as "high wall" around it.

A sword, today and back then, symbolizies a weapon designed for killing. Any reader would have understood it that way.

Or a 'weapon' designed for defense against attack, or a guard against theivery... or truth and judgment to any who attempt to force their way in, without Christ (without having their robes washed clean in the blood of the lamb).

But the sword does not just symbolize killing the body; killing the person. It also symbolizes truth in the NT, in reference to Christ. When someone said "and a sword will pierce your own soul" to Mary; they did not mean that she would be killed by the sword.

Just saying there are other things to consider, depending upon what the 'sword' represents.

Peace,

tammy

inbetween

Hi tec, thanks for the reply, I always appreciate your comments, since they show a different perspective from most posters here, who tend towards atheism or agnosticism, so its good to have a balance, and for a good discussion differing viewpoints.

Regarding the sword-thing: its true, it came to symbolize more than just the use of it in war. However, this was later, its original purpose, as Moses and its readers must have understood, was its use as a weapon. Especially in connection with guards protecting something.

tec

Thanks inbetween.

It could also be that a flaming sword was the best way they could think to describe something that they did not fully understand. So flaming sword was the closest they came. That has happened before. Just something to consider.

Peace,

tammy

perfect1

So its made up but accurate:

Moses’ words "the flaming blade of a sword" enabled his readers to visualize to a degree what existed at the entrance of Eden. The information known in Moses’ day contributed to the understanding of such matters. And the language Moses employed must have been accurate, for Jehovah had it included in the Bible

This an example of one of those hypnotic contradictions that is meaningless. Hassan talks about this sort of sentence in his first book.

And to tec: If someone pulled out a gun to kill you, would you say they were just protecting themselves.

Same difference. a weapon is a weapon. If you believe in a god of annhilation already, why are you trying to put a spin on the weaponry.

tec

If someone pulled out a gun to kill you, would you say they were just protecting themselves.

Guess that would depend on what I was doing in regard to them, wouldn't it?

Point to note: There was no guard anywhere at all... until Adam and Eve proved untrustworthy.

I do not believe in a god of annihilation, but one of Life. But if there are those who threaten that life, then there is a need for such a God to protect life.

Peace,

tammy

Cold Steel

God killed no animals to give Adam and Eve their skin to wear. God gave Adam and Eve the skin/vessels which we now have... as opposed to the spiritual vessel that Adam and Eve had before. Vessels that could move within and without the spiritual (the garden of eden is a spiritual 'place'). It is just tradition that has men believing that God killed animals and gave their skin to Adam and Eve to wear as clothing. Their nakedness was not of the flesh. Why would that be a sin? Why would that be something to feel ashamed about? That is man's hangup, probably because of a misunderstanding of this.

God killed no animals to give Adam and Eve their skins to wear? It's just a tradition? And "their nakedness was not of the flesh"?

On what authority do you make these declarations, sir? And who said Adam and Eve's nakedness was a sin? They covered their nakedness after partaking of the forbidden fruit because they had a knowledge of good and evil. In other words, they became endowed with wisdom that made them aware of their nakedness. No sin...just awareness. The Lord, upon his return, said to the couple, "Who told thee thou wast naked?" God, we assume, was attired. He was not naked when he addressed Adam and Eve. How do we know this? Because they had become as gods, knowing good and evil. None of what you say is in the scriptures. Is it just conjecture on your part?

tec

On what authority do you make these declarations, sir?

The Spirit of Christ revealed these to me.

I'm not a sir, btw :)

You absolutely do not have to take my word for anything, though. I would not take yours for it. I would ask for understanding from Him on this matter, myself. If I do not hear, I would ask for ears to hear and eyes to see, and more faith. In fact, this is what I have done, and continue to do when someone else reveals something that they say is from the Spirit.

And who said Adam and Eve's nakedness was a sin?

Men and tradition?

They covered their nakedness after partaking of the forbidden fruit because they had a knowledge of good and evil. In other words, they became endowed with wisdom that made them aware of their nakedness.

Why?

Why would they feel the need to cover naked flesh? What was wrong with naked flesh in the first place?

No sin...just awareness.

Well, it was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... so what good or evil had they become aware of that required them to cover their skin?

The Lord, upon his return, said to the couple, "Who told thee thou wast naked?"

Yes...

God, we assume, was attired.

No, we do not assume. God is Spirit. The Garden of Eden is a spiritual 'place'. Why would He be attired at all? And in what? Animal skins? Why would God kill - take the life of something - for clothes that he had no need of to begin with?

But let us say that God was attired for a moment to follow that line of thought through... If God was attired, why no thought from Adam/Eve that he wore garments and they did not?

He was not naked when he addressed Adam and Eve.

He is spirit, so that word in the context you are using it does not apply.

In another context, He had no shame/sin to hide... so He also did not need a covering for that shame/sin.

How do we know this? Because they had become as gods, knowing good and evil.

This does not make any sense to me.

None of what you say is in the scriptures.

It is actually.

Saying that God killed animals to make animal skin is not in the scriptures.

Saying that God was wearing clothes is not in the scriptures.

Saying that being unclothed was a (evil?) state to be in, is not in the scriptures.

How are the things that you stated here not conjecture?

Out of curiosity, on what authority do you make the statements that you make?

Peace to you,

tammy

Did God Invent Swords? - Logic Fallacies and Anachronisms

Share this