this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
@KOW:
Were you able to read the new manuscript, recently unearthed, that I had no hand in creating, documenting further interactions between God and Adam? I pasted the translation on page 6 of this thread.
Since you view these stories as a way of communicating deeper truths, not to be taken as literal history (a view I share), what sort of lesson do you see in the new manuscript text?
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Jeez Jeffro - the dude says he actually hates you. Wow. I mean, wow. What did you do to him?
He loves me though. I'm definitely in the "everyone else" category.
like the org just gives up and comes out saying that all of what they are saying is untrue and that there is no armageddon, nothing.
how do y’all think the the members still in it would react?.
there be a mental health crisis i perhaps.
Isn't this question kinda like : "What if all our cats turn to unicorns and solved world poverty by knitting quality jeans?"
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
i'm interested to know the age demographics here.
it must be significantly different to other exjw forums.
it would be a damning report for watchtower if most of us appear to have left for decades.. you don't have to mention your exact age, you could always say "in my 50s".. i am in my 70s.
Would you also like my home address, phone number, full name and SSN?
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Just had an interesting interaction with a Rabbi online.
I've never started a post with that statement. Congrats.
...the pericope is a dramatization of the superiority of humans over animals in their "being like God". This elevation has the consequences (cost) of self-awareness (nakedness) and acute sense of mortality (day you eat you will die). Rather than being a 'fall' in fact it was a celebration of human intelligence and psychology while acknowledging our mortality.
I agree.
There are stories like this in indigenous groups everywhere.
Yeap.
No argument from me.
But there are two categories of Bible readers: those that think Genesis is literal history, and those that do not. Clearly it's less insane to not think of it as actual history.
But if you do.. well, there's a lot of internal problems with the story.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
If you are saying that Adam was created without literal knowledge of "good and evil" and that God's command was therefore like expecting a dog to know the difference between sweet poison and sweet juice, then you are also saying that the other aspects of the text are literal too.
I'm just taking the story at face value. There was a tree of "knowledge of good and evil". At some point, if you believe this story as literal history, they ate the fruit. Ok, what did that act impart to those pre-humans? Was it the knowledge of good and evil?
Genesis 2:25 says they felt no shame before eating. Chapter 3:7 they became aware of their nakedness, felt shame. They had (v 5) began to "know good and evil".
So, before - no knowledge of good and evil. After, they are "like god" knowing good and evil. This is the story handed to us by JWs and other people who take this as history.
I was exploring what it means for a human (pre-human) to be in that state, and what it implies about their ability to take the "right" course of action. And what that means about the culpability of doing "wrong".
Everyone keeps focusing on the serpent, whether you believe it was Satan or not, as being so clever. Oh poor Eve. She was tricked, lied to, and now look at us. No, she wasn't tricked. She had no idea what was happening to her. She couldn't decern good from evil. She couldn't detect deception because she couldn't understand evil.
I compared them to a dog because without a moral compass there is nothing to guide self control, and even if they are incredibly intelligent, they would behave like dogs.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
And then if you are to be believed, why did you remember this narrative incorrectly in the first place? How can we trust someone who can't even remember the narrative correctly to start with?
Perhaps you are unaware of the new texts, unearthed recently, that I've dutifully copied into this thread on page 6, tens of thousands of years old, not made up by me at all, that help expand our knowledge of some of those most critical first days.
Also, note my first statement on page 6. I am approaching this from literalist/ JW perspective. You know, cause that's why we are here. Of course I think there are other less literal ways of interpreting that story. Orrrrrr, there is always the perspective that it has nothing at all to do with reality - a perpective that I favor. But hey, I'm not saying you can't find any meaning in it at all, especially after getting incredibly stoned on a Friday evening.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
I'm sticking with my theory that God lied to Adam and Eve because that's all he do to keep them in line. They had no way of successfully operating morally, even in a paradise garden.
Telling Adam not to eat the fruit of the tree because it was "wrong" would be like trying to convince your dog not to drink from the antifreeze spill in your garage - you just can't do it. All you can hope to do is swat him away when he gets too close.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Meanmustard brought up some good points regarding the very possible mental capacity of Adam and Eve at this juncture, which I believe further explains and justifies the simplicity of God's command to stay away from the tree of knowledge.
Yes, but also their ability to ward off even the most rudimentary deceptions. Even their capacity to "trust" God is severely handicapped. More below...
The command was so simple and elementary so as to borderline on 'dumb'.
The simplicity doesn't have anything to do with it.
Why did the snake insist on eating from this forbidden tree given all the circumstances? As mustard pointed out, Adam and Eve couldn't have fathomed the consequences of disobedience, since even the concept of 'death' was not clear to them...such was their lack of comprehension.
But it goes much deeper. "Trust" is a "reliance on the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone or something". How can they rely on the "truth" of God when they don't even understand what "lies" are? What we would call someone's "character" is based on whether they believe and display "good" traits, and not "evil" ones - none of which Adam or Eve would be able to decern.
I don't even think trust works here - at least not any sort of "trust" to which you could attach moral culpability.
Adam could have wondered the garden, blissfully and innocently raping lions and goats, with his wife, and neither of them would be able to even begin to grasp why that be wrong. Those actions would hold the same moral weight as eating from the tree of knowledge of good and bad.
In other words, the ability to "trust" is still contingent on a sense of morality. What you are considering "trust" is more akin to blind obedience in the face of a contradicted threat, with no way to reasonably evaluate the sides - correction - without any awareness there are "sides" at all.
