Yadirf,
:I’m reluctant to get into a debate with you because you are so reluctant to use your reasoning abilities, besides the fact that you have proven to be a faultfinder rather than a knowledge-seeker. I learned that much about you over on the H20 board. But, we’ll see if anything has changed about you.
Has it ever occurred to you that people may feel the same way about you? You are the one that has resorted to ad hominem, attacks especially the ones dealing educational level dealing with grammar and spelling errors. I have never resorted to this trick with anybody, except to you, and only point out to you that you had also made the same type of errors you accused me of doing. You also keep on calling people demeaning names and insulting them. This has been pointed out to you ad nauseam by many people but you insist on this behavior as if it would help you gain points to the debating issue. Debates are won by demonstrating the truth of an argument, not by insulting people.
:: Where in the bible does it say that they had already eaten from this tree at least once?
:Would you agree that if something is implied that it is as good as having been said? If you are the sort that insists that unless it said so directly, then we might as well end this discussion right now. It’s sort of like the “Star of Bethlehem” thread, where the person said that unless someone could show her where in the Bible it said that Satan was the real source of the “star” then she wouldn’t believe it was of Satan. Of course there is no one scripture that directly blames Satan for that “star”, but the same can be said for it being the doings of God either. However, such doesn’t mean that it can’t be determined who the true source was. When one considers all the facts surrounding the “star”, it becomes easy to determine its source. And so that’s sort of the way it is insofar as settling the question as to whether or not Adam and Eve had ever partook of the “tree of life”.
I will agree that if something is implied it is *almost* as good as having been said. There is no substitute for a direct quote. I see nothing being implied by you or the bible that backs what you say, though. I do not want to get sidetracked on the star issue but I believe that if the bible was true, then Yahweh would be ultimately responsible for those deaths because even a leaf does not move without his will.
:The thing about it, is that the “tree of life” was not placed way out near the fringes of the Garden so that the first human pair might overlook its being there. Instead, it was positioned in the middle of the Garden along with the other tree of consequence. That being the case, what was there to prevent Adam and Eve from partaking of it too? Particularly so, since God had told Adam that “every” (Ge 1:29: 2:16) tree in the Garden, with the exception of one, was to serve as food for them. This being the case, they were given authorization to eat of the “tree of life”. There absolutely is to be found no prohibition against eating from but a single tree, and that was the “tree of the knowledge of good and bad”.
True, but that does not mean that humans knew about its life giving properties or that they ate from it before or after they ate the fruit of good and evil.
:Then you quoted Genesis 3:22, as follows:
quote:
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
:Then you said this about that text:
:: The words "to take ALSO from the tree of life and eat" indicate that humans had never eaten from the tree of life before.
:No it doesn’t mean that at all … not in view of what we have already learned that God had previously told Adam. Remember? … God had given Adam permission to eat of “EVERY” tree in the Garden, except the one. In view of that fact we therefore need to scrutinize the words of Genesis 3:22 very carefully. When we do that, what do we find? Do we not see that an alternate way of understanding that text is for it to be saying that Adam must not be allowed to reach out his hand and to continue taking from the tree of life and eat, and live forever. Certainly, if one is looking for an inconsistency in the Bible he will find it. But by doing so that same person is stunting his knowledge, because he closes off his mind. In order to get at the truths of the Bible one must approach it as one big harmonious book.
Your last sentence on the previous paragraph gives you the key to your misunderstandings. You approach the bible as one big, harmonious, book when it is in fact a collection of books that contradict not only themselves, but other books. Your frame of mind will dismiss the truth because any contradictions will be blocked by your mind. You are telling me that in fact, I must believe in the bible as harmonious before I even read it. In other words, I must put aside any contradictions and doubts in order to understand it. I must justify everything and put blind faith in it. Notice that you said “Do we not see that an alternate way of understanding that text is for it to be saying that Adam must not be allowed to reach out his hand and to continue taking from the tree of life and eat, and live forever”. You are changing what the bible says. Why is it then that the bible does not say: “continue taking from the tree”?
Should there be any inconsistencies in the bible if it was the true word of God?
Doesn’t even the bible itself tell us to check for errors?
:: "and eat, and live forever" indicate that, just as they only needed to eat from the tree of good an evil once, they would need to eat from the tree of life only once in order to live forever.
:That’s not necessarily correct, not at all. True, Adam only needed to partake of the one tree in order to prove his willingness to be disobey God’s law, but that fact in itself doesn’t have to dictate that one serving each of the tree of life would impart everlasting life to Adam and Eve. Even as we must eat regularly in order to maintain bodily strength and health, it seems reasonable and only to be expected that God would rejuvenate Adam and Eve’s bodies in order to ward off the aging process in a similar way, by the taking in regularly of what ever it takes (what ever it was that was in the fruit of the “tree of life”). What is so complicated about that? Why complicate it by making anything more out of it than what one needs to?
No, again you are prejudiced. The text clearly says "and eat, and live forever". It does not say "and eat, and keep on living (or being young) until they eat again". Ask around to see what most people understand by this verse.
:: Where in the bible does it say they both bore seedless fruit?
:In my writings, which you have read, I had said: “Needless to say, they both bore seedless fruit.” And now here you go asking, “Where does it say that in the Bible?”
:I really can’t believe that you need help in seeing that. Have you not given this any thought at all? With regards to the “tree of the knowledge of good and bad” how many of those do you think there were in the Garden of Eden? Aren’t the Scriptures quite plain in that there was only one? Yes there was a “tree”, not “trees”. The same can be said for the “tree of life”. See Genesis 2:9. Also, is it not obvious that since there were at the time only two humans that one such “tree of life” would serve the needs of just the two of them.
The purpose of a fruit is to reproduce the tree where it came from. It does it by the seeds it contains. The reason that tomatoes and cucumbers are fruit is because they have seeds inside. If there was only a tree in the garden, it would produce not reproduce because, as far as I know, fruit-producing trees do not self-pollinate. They need a similar tree in order to do so.
Although Genesis does mention that they ate from the fruit of the tree of good and evil, nowhere does it mention that in order to live forever they had to eat from the fruit of the tree of life. It could also have meant to eat its leaves, roots, bark, etc.
:: If the Jewish war god’s plan was to populate Earth with humans, and all had to eat from this fruit periodically, does it mean all humans would have to travel periodically to eat this fruit, just like Muslims travel to Mecca?
:Once again, reasoning must me used. Afterall isn’t that why we are superior to the animals, is because we possess the ability to use our powers of reason.
So you agree with me that reasoning makes us superior to animals. Why is it then that we should only examine the bible without reasoning? Why must we believe everything, dismiss inconsistencies and always look for excuses to make the bible look good?
:Is it unreasonable to assume that God would create other trees of life? Such is even indicated in the Revelation account. See chapter 22, verse 2.
Revelation 22 :2
In the midst of the street of it, and on EITHER SIDE of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
No, but you said they those two trees were seedless (you again affirmed this, although it is not in the bible), and the bible says that there was only one tree of life. How do you know that it was not the leaves, or the bark, or the flowers, or the roots, that gave humans life? (I assume that the tree of good and evil would not be needed anymore on the descendants of the first humans, or would they also be tested?). Note that it is the LEAVES that are used for the healing of the nations. Note also that such a tree could be self-pollinating since it has many varieties of fruit. Examples of these are some apple trees that contain many varieties of apples in the same tree. Also note that there were two trees although only one (“and yielded HER fruit every month”, NOT “and yielded THEIR fruit every month”). Note also that this tree(s) is/are symbolic since it is referred to as HER and not IT.
:: How often would humans have to eat this fruit in order to keep on living forever.
:I guess at the first sign of a new wrinkle then one better head for the trees of life again. I don’t know, why don’t you ask God.
I have asked but I have never received an answer from her in my life.
Genesis 3 22
New International Version (NIV)
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Then the LORD God said, ""Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from <*2> the tree of life, and eat, and live forever''
New Living Translation (NLT)
Then the LORD God said, "The people have become as we are, knowing everything, both good and evil. What if they eat the fruit of the tree of life? Then they will live forever!"
King James Version (KJV)
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
New King James Version (NKJV)
Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"—
Revised Standard Version (RSV)
Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" --
21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
And the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become as one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever"--
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
And Jehovah God saith, `Lo, the man was as one of Us, as to the knowledge of good and evil; and now, lest he send forth his hand, and have taken also of the tree of life, and eaten, and lived to the age,' --
Darby Translation (DARBY)
And Jehovah Elohim said, Behold, Man is become as one of us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever ...!
Note the New Living Translation: “WhatIf they eat from the tree of life then they will live forever.” That implies that humans had never eaten from it before. As you probably know, adam is not a proper name. It means humanity.
Note the Darby Translation: Jehovah Elohim. This literally translated means Jehovah of the GODS, not Jehovah God. This is why Jehovah says “Man[kind] is become as one of US”. He was talking to other gods.
Anybody not obfuscated by religion will see that all these translations clearly state that Jehovah is talking to other gods and is afraid that if humans eat from the tree of life, they will live FOREVER. In not one of this translations it is claimed that by eating from this tree they will remain young for SOME TIME, or that they will be HEALED for a limited amount of time. The operating word here is FOREVER. This means for all ETERNITY.
JRP
