Hello Schizm,
::: The fruit from the tree of life really had life-sustaining ingredients.
:: Such as? Do you have any evidence at all that people could live forever simply by eating the right food?
: Just that it seems quite reasonable.
Seeming reasonable has no necessary connection with reality. A lot of JW teachings seem reasonable on the surface but are seen to be complete nonsense when you dig deeper.
So you actually have no real evidence.
: People who eat properly generally fair better health-wise. We can eat ourselves into an early grave by eating too much of something that simply tastes good to the palate. So, yes, the kind of food that we feed on affects the health of our bodies ... and CAN have a direct affect on our longevity.
Yes, but only within limits. That's why you don't see many people living past the age of 100, no matter what they do.::: We die for the same reason that Adam and Eve died ... because we need the ingredients from the tree of life and aren't getting them.
:: [a] Do you have any evidence that if we ate the proper chemicals, we wouldn't die? [b] How about animals? If they ate whatever you think was contained in the tree of life, would they keep on living?
: [a] Things seem to point in that direction.
But again you present no evidence beyond "it seems reasonable".
: Also, since we have to eat in order to stay alive then it seems that *food* is the key to continual life.
Not at all. We breath air and we drink water in order to stay alive, but you're not proposing that *air* and *water* are keys to continual life. You're not arguing logically. Lack of any of these will kill us, but it doesn't follow that a sufficient supply or a supply of "the right kind" will allow us to live forever.
: [b] Hmmm ... it would appear that the animals would keep on living if they were allowed to partake of the "tree of life".
"It would appear" is based only on your presumption of "it seems reasonable".
: Were the animals allowed to eat from the tree life?
Genesis doesn't say.
: All that we're told is that Adam and Eve themselves were allowed to do so.
No, Genesis doesn't say that. You're jumping to a conclusion.
: Was the fruit from this tree somehow made in such a way that the animals didn't have an appetite for it, although Adam and Eve did enjoy the taste of it? Of course, we don't know the answer to this question. At least I can't say that reasoning on it provides the answer, at least not yet anyway.
You're engaging in wild speculation here.::: What are your thoughts with regards to what I've said up above, AlanF? Do you see any flaws in my reasoning?
:: Mainly that it's special pleading. In other words, you already know that the Watchtower explanation involving genetics (and yes, they really do claim this) is nonsensical, so I think you've come up with another theory -- one that's completely untestable and for which there's zero evidence -- to explain a myth that you want to believe is true.
: I think *reason* (the capacity for logical, rational, and analytic thought; intelligence) dictates otherwise. We use our reasoning powers with just about everything we think and do, with the exception of things we do as a matter of habit.
Reason is not evidence. Reason allows us to gather evidence and form conclusions. If your only evidence for your theory is that "it seems reasonable", I'm afraid your theory is simply wishful thinking and is without evidence.
: It seems only *reasonable* that the God of the entire universe would require all who would wish to have a permanent place in that universe to be willing to live in line with righteous standards. Only if such a standard is enforced can there be genuine peace an tranquillity.
But again, reason isn't evidence. Many Christians have no difficulty reasoning that God formed the universe billions of years ago and is now letting it run along on its own, with no input from God at all. But there's no real evidence for any of this, so I see little point in forming theories to base our lives on.
AlanF
