About Adam & Eve

originally posted by: gottaknow

I'm an atheist, so I see the entire story as a fable at best, but mostly engineered to establish male dominance in the Christian faith rather than how Pagan beliefs held the female in higher regard.

Great points re Adam and Eve, you have a good understanding of what you read into that part of Genesis at least
Though
I am remiss how you could then go on to suggest there is a male dominance in the Christian faith.
How do you arrive at that? Jesus taught equality and love for all, even slaves were to be treated well by there masters according to the Gospel

originally posted by: Tindalos2013
a reply to: UB2120

Thanks for the Urantia links. What you wrote about this is intriguing.

No problem. There are other papers relating to Adam and Eve that are very interesting. If you have any questions PM me.

a reply to: Tindalos2013

In addition, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil represents the learnings of science while the tree of life is a representation of faith without science.

Have you considered the concept of the tree of life being in paradise and paradise being located in New Jerusalem and New Jerusalem being located in the third heaven and the third heaven being located outside of this universe as the kingdom of God?

Have you considered that the tree and water of life are the means of sustaining everlasting celestial life as shown by John and Isaiah and are not a metaphor as supposed by many?

It is partially true that knowledge is learning science but not as you present it. You have taken biblical theology and twisted it to suite your secular world of understanding and it simply is not practical to try to convert both into one union.

I do not see the connection that you are trying to postulate as common ground.

a reply to: Seede

Have you considered the concept of the tree of life being in paradise and paradise being located in New Jerusalem and New Jerusalem being located in the third heaven and the third heaven being located outside of this universe as the kingdom of God?

If "heaven" is outside of THIS universe, does that mean Heaven exists in a parallel universe? If yes, and a parallel universe exists, couldn't infinite parallel universes exist? If there are infinite parallel universes, does that mean there is in one big mega universe?

Could there be parallel mega universes?

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

I can tell you have not read it and only did some searching and are just re-posting what others, who also have not read it, think. You should not judge a book by its cover. Your assumptions are incorrect, "every single bit of 'science' " has not been dis-proven. There is actually a lot of it that at the time of publishing was not in line with main stream science but now is. As directly stated in the book, no unearned scientific knowledge can be given. So the authors could only use the existing available knowledge and try to pick and chose and carefully use words to make their given point. Those who actually read and study such things realize that science that is mentioned from time to time is presented in such a way as really to only be a conceptual guide. The real benefit of the book is spiritual.

I am a huge fan of the book and my only agenda is to share and help those stuck in the closed minded mud of other religions. All existing religions have some truth in them, but they have more that is nonspiritual in nature. The story of Adam and Eve, though the names are different, exist in nearly all cultures. There is scientific evidence of how our DNA was up-stepped by some unknown source about 35,000 years ago. The story of humanity both before and after the times of Adam and Eve as presented in the Urantia Book is very interesting.

If you don't like it, don't believe in it or what ever that is fine, but you shouldn't make sweeping statements for something you clearly know nothing about. It is a very intimidating book simply due to its size. It is 2097 pages consisting of 196 papers and divided into 4 parts. So it is not a causal read by any means. Only those serious about quenching spiritual thirst seem to be readers. Others prefer for their religion to be spoon fed to them or simply have no personal religion at all. That is fine. One thing you quickly learn is that there is not only one way to approach God. Your relationship with God is personal and therefore will be different from anyone elses. God desires unity, not uniformity.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

By one man entered sin. That man was Adam. If you throw out the notion that Adam and Eve were two existing individuals, then just discard the bible entirely.

Is that permission?

Okay! Thanks. I was worried you wouldn't let us.

a reply to: borntowatch

I am remiss how you could then go on to suggest there is a male dominance in the Christian faith.
How do you arrive at that? Jesus taught equality and love for all, even slaves were to be treated well by there masters according to the Gospel

Did he? Why, then, were all of Jesus' 12 apostles males? There was no room for women in leadership, even among the disciples of Jesus.

Jesus told slaves to be submissive to their masters. There's no equality in a master/slave relationship, or in a marriage when one party is required to be submissive to the other.

Jesus and God are male deities. Jesus is, supposedly, coming for his "bride", the female component to a male God deity, which consists of human submissive, not equal, believers in Jesus and his father.

Christians never assume that they will be equal to Jesus, even as his bride, or equal to God, even as his Daughter in Law. There is no mention of a divine Mother in Law, either.

There isn't equality in the teachings of Christianity, not even in Heaven.

a reply to: windword

If "heaven" is outside of THIS universe, does that mean Heaven exists in a parallel universe? If yes, and a parallel universe exists, couldn't infinite parallel universes exist? If there are infinite parallel universes, does that mean there is in one big mega universe? Could there be parallel mega universes?

At best it is still theology. Yes, in theoretical science it is possible that there are parallel universes but it would be still theoretical till this date. Just a few months ago it was accepted that this universe was expanding but that has kind of died out now after the question became common place as to where it was expanding into.

It seems that science is confronted with a problem of substance change which would completely change the sciences of the mother universe of which our universe is expanding into. Also it presents a problem of eventual ending of universes.
Actually it makes no difference of whether we are one of many or simply one of two, there must be a outside source of expansion in order to satisfy science. A mega universe would still have to have a source outside of itself.

On the other hand we have some theology of a Creator who has an everlasting celestial substance in which this universe is encapsulated. Whether this universe is expanding makes no matter because the celestial heaven is both eternal and without end. The difference being that there is a definite difference in terrestrial and celestial substances in some religious philosophies. But then all we are doing is guessing at best. Mega universes could exist with various sub universes and the sciences could also be vastly different among these mega universes. In fact so different that inhabitants could live thousands or perhaps millions of our time years.

Christianity has a similar philosophy in that this universe is encapsulated in a celestial realm of altogether foreign science to us and that as the inhabitants enter into this realm they indeed do live out of time and space and enjoy everlasting life. Actually science and some religions are fully compatible with out realizing just how close they are related.

a reply to: borntowatch

I am remiss how you could then go on to suggest there is a male dominance in the Christian faith.

Genesis 3:16 NIV
To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

Jesus taught equality and love for all, even slaves were to be treated well

Slavery in of itself is an issue of inequality is it not?

Ephesians 6:5 NIV
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.

Unconditional respect? Live in fear under them?

Doesn't sound like a relationship you are 'treated well' in to me.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Well that is interesting. Does scripture then explain the origins for the people in the land of Nod? If not that's a little odd considering the intent of Genesis.

a reply to: Seede

At best it is still theology. Yes, in theoretical science it is possible that there are parallel universes but it would be still theoretical till this date. Just a few months ago it was accepted that this universe was expanding but that has kind of died out now after the question became common place as to where it was expanding into.

Our understanding of the universe had nothing to do with it's nature. It matters not to me if the Universe is expanding, or expanding and contracting or if it's shaped like a Torus and moves eternally.

My question has to do with the theological concept of a place, where God(s) exist, that is outside of the universe. If "God(s)" live somewhere, isn't that, in and of itself, a universe?

Mega universes could exist with various sub universes and the sciences could also be vastly different among these mega universes. In fact so different that inhabitants could live thousands or perhaps millions of our time years.

Why couldn't that be true in the universe we live in now? It seems to me eternal life has to do with our spiritual self awareness. If we, in theory, could manipulate matter and create bodies to act as vehicles to assist our spiritual selves to move through space, matter and time, we could live as long as we can confront the consequences of our choices and actions.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: borntowatch

I am remiss how you could then go on to suggest there is a male dominance in the Christian faith.

Genesis 3:16 NIV
To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

Jesus taught equality and love for all, even slaves were to be treated well

Slavery in of itself is an issue of inequality is it not?

Ephesians 6:5 NIV
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.

Unconditional respect? Live in fear under them?

Doesn't sound like a relationship you are 'treated well' in to me.

Its really sad you have chosen the verse that supports your assumption and ignored the other verses that state the opposite.
Remember the Bible is written down to people and those people who follow it are Christians

Adam (man) was cursed as well as Eve
Earthly masters are called to be accountable to their slaves and
Men are told they are to treat their wives as Christ treated His church, literally to die for them

As I said you know lots and then nothing as well.

originally posted by: UB2120
There is scientific evidence of how our DNA was up-stepped by some unknown source about 35,000 years ago.

Really....Then please provide a scientific source to back up your claim....

a reply to: borntowatch

I chose that verse because the OP is about Adam and Eve. I chose that verse because it demonstrates 'male dominance'. Which is what you were doubting/disbelieving. Also you specifically mentioned Jesus and the treatment of slaves. I don't think it was 'sad' of me to post what I did. I think it was the pertinent thing to do.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: borntowatch

I chose that verse because the OP is about Adam and Eve. I chose that verse because it demonstrates 'male dominance'. Which is what you were doubting/disbelieving. Also you specifically mentioned Jesus and the treatment of slaves. I don't think it was 'sad' of me to post what I did. I think it was the pertinent thing to do.

I think its sad because you have taken verses way out of context, basically quote mining the Gospel

Take Ephesians 5 for example
What it asks of a wife is no less or more that what it asks of a husband

Instructions for Christian Households
21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.



25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Again you only quoted what you want the bible to say, the onus is on the husband as much as the wife.
I cant see how you dont get that

A similar thing is said to masters of slaves. Its true Jesus didnt come to end slavery, He came to bring humanity eternal life.
Also if Jesus had have demanded slaves be set free He would have started a slave revolt.

as for Adam and Eve, look at the curse man received, do you ignore that part

17 And He said to Adam, “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘Do not eat from it’:

The ground is cursed because of you.
You will eat from it by means of painful labor[e]
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 You will eat bread[f] by the sweat of your brow
until you return to the ground,
since you were taken from it.
For you are dust,
and you will return to dust.”
''
You just read into the bible what you want, what justifies your argument it seems to me



sorry about the bold I dont know what I done

edit on b2015Sun, 22 Mar 2015 09:03:40 -050033120150am312015-03-22T09:03:40-05:00 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: UB2120
There is scientific evidence of how our DNA was up-stepped by some unknown source about 35,000 years ago.

Really....Then please provide a scientific source to back up your claim....

The research into Microcephalin indicates that new genetic material was introduced into the Microcephalin gene about 37,000 years ago and that the rest of the Microcephalin gene was approximately 990,000 years old.

The Microcephalin gene play a critical role in the growth of the brain.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

a reply to: windword

My question has to do with the theological concept of a place, where God(s) exist, that is outside of the universe. If "God(s)" live somewhere, isn't that, in and of itself, a universe?

You can call it whatever you like but you still must have either a substance change or a collision of like sources. Two like existences can not occupy the same space time without either a collision or a change of either substance. That is according to our understanding today.

In some Christian theology, the outside source of this terrestrial universe is referred to as celestial or spirit. You can call it whatever you like but it is believed to be celestial and is infinite. I cannot wrap my mind around infinite because I am a creature of finite. This celestial substance, which some call heaven, is believed to be a continuous infinite substance which encapsulates this finite terrestrial universe.

Now there were some Jews that believed there were seven or ten heavens in which one encapsulates the other in a like manner of finite earth in a infinite heaven. At the top of this chain was the mother of all heavens which engulfs all other creations. The mother heaven (mega universe) is then believed to be an infinite source of celestial existence. I cannot even dwell on that because it plays havoc with my mind.

When you understand this old premise you then can realize that in principal it is similar to your nomenclature but you still must have substance change in our understanding. That is to say from terrestrial to celestial. Actually we cannot understand celestial substance simply because if there were seven heavens then how would one begin and one end? Where and how are the boundaries set. Actually we know nothing of this other universe or heaven or heavens.

a reply to: Seede

Good morning Seede,

Thanks for your response.

When you understand this old premise you then can realize that in principal it is similar to your nomenclature but you still must have substance change in our understanding.

Ah, but I do understand the underlying premise of the principal, at least in my opinion. I've spent 4 decades studying and meditating on these premises. I'm content with what I've learned so far.

Two like existences can not occupy the same space time without either a collision or a change of either substance. That is according to our understanding today.

I'm not sure I agree with you. The way I see it, we are all "spiritual" or "celestial" beings, an emanation of "source", or God, if you like, temporarily residing in physical bodies, coexisting like in a relationship that can be compared to "marriage". We humans, and in my mind all living things, are aleady operating on at least two levels of existence, the spiritual, or celestial universe, AND the physical universe.

I cannot wrap my mind around infinite because I am a creature of finite.

See? And I can't imagine, wrap my mind around, a universe in which I haven't existed, always!

a reply to: borntowatch

From what you posted:

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husband is the head of the wife. Wives are commanded by god to submit to their husbands in everything.

The fact the next verse says they are to love their wives as they love themselves doesn't change that...

Again you only quoted what you want the bible to say

..and now I re-quoted what you quoted.

as for Adam and Eve, look at the curse man received, do you ignore that part

Ignore it, no? It's not relevant. Yes they are both cursed. So? Part of women's curse was for man to rule over them...

The argument wasn't whether god only cursed Eve. It was about 'male dominance' in scripture.

a reply to: Tindalos2013

Since 2 humans would never be able to populate the earth with humans, then it is likely that Adam and Eve had to be more than just individuals in order for the story to even be remotely true. Heck even your idea of Adam and Eve being two clans is unlikely. You need something like 600 people at a minimum, but that comes with some heavy inbreeding.