Posts by peacefulpete

299

Who told the first lie?

by nicolaou in

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.

peacefulpete

Kaleb, glad you returned. What impressed me with the explanation I just laid out, was the absence of Torah in the J story. in fact the absence of polemics or moralizing at all.

The story has a Greek flavor, meaning nearly satirical. The story is neither endorsing nor condemning the choice to become like God, it's actually a rhetorical thought exercise itself. What ifs are meant to be pondered. Would we have traded our freewill for the safety of the garden if that meant being merely one of the animals?

I can't help noticing your comments blend the 2 stories together. The P story features Torah and has none of the philosophical feel. God blessed and gives the earth to man and woman, the blessing is implied connected to Sabbath and God's word.

299

Who told the first lie?

by nicolaou in

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.

peacefulpete

Just had an interesting interaction with a Rabbi online. His take was pretty interesting. In the spirit of comments from KaleboutWest, he emphasized the literary nature of the episode. His view, and apparently not an unusual one, is that 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.

This then suggests all these elements of the story are primarily etiological. Just as the story is a mythical origin story for why women struggle in childbirth while other animals generally don't and why snakes have no legs, the story is a folk-tale-style treatise on human nature. The man and woman represent all people, so describing them as the first makes narrative sense.

Rather than being a commentary opposing freewill it is actually celebrating the maturation to godlikeness of humans. In a parallel way it celebrates individual growth from children to psychologically developed adults.

This is a much different take than I had adopted and find the idea quite plausible. It requires we credit the Yahwist with a developed sophistication that, ironically, countless readers did/do not possess.

My mind goes to the Orwell Animal Farm story as a comparison. Not really a happy ending but powerful animal symbolism of human condition.

Some might object to the depiction of God as essentially suppressing human potential, but this is actually a recurring theme, recall the tower of Babel story. Yahweh, as a character in these tales, is often depicted morally ambiguous.

22

The Rapture

by Sea Breeze in

when i was pioneering, i don't remember ever addressing the rapture question.

does anyone know how a jw would respond to this verse?

for the lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of god.

peacefulpete

Pronger1....It's tempting to generalize about what Jews believed. However, the reality is 2nd temple Judaism was richly diverse. The extent literature from the time reveals no consensus regarding afterlife. Heaven, Gehenna, reincarnation, return to life on earth, no afterlife at all, all were accepted by various groups that identified as Jews. There were detailed depictions of multilayered heavens wherein OT characters were dwelling and martyrs could ascend to. The concept of 'Paradise' itself was just as diverse.

As a writer from a such a diverse period, Paul's understanding of the topic is open to debate. In fact, IMO, there seems to not be a clearly expressed concise belief in the writings attributed to him. He (as it reads today) seems to be struggling with the topic.

I'm going to step away for a while so best wishes on your research.

22

The Rapture

by Sea Breeze in

when i was pioneering, i don't remember ever addressing the rapture question.

does anyone know how a jw would respond to this verse?

for the lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of god.

peacefulpete

Prolog1....I can't agree that his description of spirit 'bodies' amounts to a denial of going to heavenly presence of Christ.

Paul uses earthly vs heavenly not as location but corruptible vs incorruptible.

I see Paul saying earthly is corruptible and heavenly is incorruptible.

How do you understand Phil.1:

If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! 23 I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; 24 but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body.

22

The Rapture

by Sea Breeze in

when i was pioneering, i don't remember ever addressing the rapture question.

does anyone know how a jw would respond to this verse?

for the lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of god.

peacefulpete

John Chrysostom: For as when a king ceremoniously entered a city, certain dignitaries and city rulers, and many others who were confident toward the sovereign, would go out of the city to meet him; but the guilty and the condemned criminals would be guarded within, awaiting the sentence which the king would deliver. In the same way, when the Lord comes, those who are confident toward him will meet him in the midst of the air, but the condemned, who are conscious of having committed many sins, will wait below for their judge.

It seems clear that Chrysostom understood 1 Thess as Pronger1 asserted , as a Roman style greeting procession. I've discussed this with others years ago. IMO it remains the best explanation. However the Pauline material (authorship aside) does clearly express hope of residing in heaven.(2 Cor 5:1)

For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.

This in fact was commonly accepted in a number of forms of Judaism including Pharisaism.

IMO, the writer was describing a processional greeting of the King upon his return but how he imagined the next stage is uncertain. Some have suggested the "and thus we shall forever be with the Lord" is an editor's or marginal gloss. This makes sense given the difficult sentence structure. Pauline material was otherwise extensively redacted and interpolated. But as is true of so much, we must accept we just can't be certain.

25

Trump assassination attempt??

by Diogenesister in

it happened at a rally in pennsylvania, apparently.

he seems ok i've seen a photo of him bleeding from his ear.

this is absolutely nutso....if it's too it doesn't surprise me the way they constantly describe him as "far right" and that his supporters are "maga republicans".

peacefulpete

As Biden said, everyone must condemn political violence. Everyone.

299

Who told the first lie?

by nicolaou in

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.

peacefulpete

Indeed, this is an aspect that is predominant in the Christian faith...the separation of God from his creation or anything else for that matter.

Many Jews and Christians would find that comment odd. Most would rather understand the animating of creation, including Adam, as the result of divine 'spirit/wind/breath' -a divine spark. Ecc 3 describes this divine 'spirit' as returning to God. Many saw the same in the trees and the wind.

This is still seen in pericopes like John 9:6 where the man's healing is accomplished by a wind. Same as John 5 where the invalids rushed to enter the water when a breeze (from God) disturbed the surface.

Not only that but on a theological level, the indwelling of Holy Spirit is the key identifier of a Christian. God/Christ dwells in Christians.

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.

Again, I'm not endorsing any theology here merely pointing out that many did not agree with the Deuteronomist. It's an interesting topic.

299

Who told the first lie?

by nicolaou in

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.

peacefulpete

Here, I was simply highlighting the inevitability of these stories to engage the most fundamental parts of ourselves...

Absolutely, I agree. Story and myth are powerful tools.

You might enjoy this classic:Amazon.com: The Power of Myth: 9780385418867: Joseph Campbell, Bill Moyers: Books

Regarding 'spirit' in inanimate processes and forces; many forms of religion, including that of the Jews, understood their world to be actively engaged/animated with spirit, as a causative agent. The deity was responsible for all that moves.

A famous example of this is at 1 Kings 19. It is a classic example of editorial redaction, interpolation. A standard theophany of Yahweh is painted, he reveals himself in wind, fire and earthquake. However, the Deuteronomist made some adjustments to the story that disturbed him. To keep this brief, he then repeatedly interjects a denial after each physical appearance/manifestation of Yahweh.

Here is the story, the bold is the redactors work.

11 The Lord said, “Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of Yahweh, for Yahweh is about to pass by.”
Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before Yahweh, (Yahweh was not in the wind). After the wind there was an earthquake, (Yahweh was not in the earthquake). 12 After the earthquake came a fire, (Yahweh was not in the fire). And after the fire came a gentle whisper. 13 When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave.

There much more to this episode worthy of discussion but, my point is the Deuteronomist's adamant denial that his God was directly inhabiting the physical natural world. I'd suggest he'd similarly deny the idea of the divine animation/inhabitation of chemistry or even biology. For him Yahweh was separated from the physical world and not actively animating it.

299

Who told the first lie?

by nicolaou in

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.

peacefulpete

Halcon are you suggesting 'spirit' is involved in chemical reactions?

BTW, my earlier comments do not endorse the theology of the Yahwist author, I was just describing it. As a scribe or committee of scribes, they sought to promote the nomistic aspect of the cult. Obedience/compliance was valued above individualism and intellect. Personally, I don't regard that as especially enlightened or attractive. We left a religion like that.

299

Who told the first lie?

by nicolaou in

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.

peacefulpete

I tend to repeat myself a lot but recall the P version of the creation story has no Eden, no fruit, no snake, no 'fall' from grace, no curse of the ground etc. Rather it ends with God's blessing of the pair and declaring all to be good.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”...

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.

2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

I wonder what the world would be like if the compiler had only included this version.