It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Forbidden Fruit

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vamp333
my question is.. after they ate from the tree did god they just go "well F#%K it.. u all might as well eat from it now" OR is everyone still disobeying GOD by still eating this Fruit...??

OR does this said fruit no longer exist as it only came from that one tree..

+ i say again... please keep in mind that this was just a random non-important thought i had that i thought i'd throw out there...

It was a unique tree, just as the Tree of Life was unique. And I'm sure that if we were not to eat a certain type of fruit then God would have told us. In fact, there are explicit statements that there are no "unclean" foods for Christians, but that we are to be considerate of anyone who thinks some foods are and not flaunt our freedom in front of them. Hope that helps. :-)




posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Vamp333
 


I don't think it was an apple, banana or any edible fruit as such.
The 'fruit' was good and evil. And yes, i do think that people are still 'eating' the good and evil fruit that god advised people (Adam and Eve represent all mankind) not to eat.
People 'eat' the fruit (believe in good and evil) and judge themselves and others.

I can see why the 'bible' does not 'work' when people take what it says literally.
Each story has meaning, the lines have to be read between.



edit on 2-6-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
I don't think it was an apple, banana or any edible fruit as such.
The 'fruit' was good and evil.

Based on what evidence? If it's the Bible we're talking about, which we are if we stay on topic, then it was a literal tree with literal fruit.


I can see why the 'bible' does not 'work' when people take what it says literally.
Each story has meaning, the lines have to be read between.

Based on what evidence? Can the Bible not have a variety of genre, such that some parts should be taken figuratively and others taken literally? And can we not use the established principles of language and textual criticism to determine when to do what? Reading between the lines is half the problem; we can't just allegorize EVERYTHING or only allegorize that which we refuse to take literally. The text itself tells us how to read it, and clearly Genesis is written as history, not a parable. Further support for this view is found in other parts of the Bible that refer to Genesis, such as the Ten Commandments ("Remember the Sabbath day... for in six days God created the heavens and the earth...") and the teachings of Jesus and Paul (both cited Genesis as literal history). Good teachers take the concrete and use it to convey the abstract, so since Jesus and Paul drew illustrations and lessons from Genesis, these were very likely to be literal events and people.

Contrary to your baseless assertion, the Bible DOES 'work' when people take it literally as the text allows-- NOT as modern sensibilities demand.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 





Based on what evidence?...

Based on what evidence?


Well, duuuuuh. The best evidence available,..

prejudicial arbitrary conjecture evidence.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Well, duuuuuh. The best evidence available,..

prejudicial arbitrary conjecture evidence.

Doh! There I go again, trying to apply the same standards to both sides. Silly me.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaberTruth

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Well, duuuuuh. The best evidence available,..

prejudicial arbitrary conjecture evidence.

Doh! There I go again, trying to apply the same standards to both sides. Silly me.


One day you'll learn that ATS is a parallel universe. Where truth is lies, myths are facts, and arbitrary opinions and conjectures are solid evidence.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
One day you'll learn that ATS is a parallel universe. Where truth is lies, myths are facts, and arbitrary opinions and conjectures are solid evidence.

So THAT'S it!

It's all becoming clear now... here, blogs, real life... I don't belong on this planet. Reminds me of an old hymn:

This world is not my home, I'm just a-passin' through
My treasures are laid up, somewhere beyond the blue
The angels beckon me from heaven's open door
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore

(And I'm sure there will be plenty around ATS who'd like to volunteer to get me out!)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 



28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.


Romans 1:28-32



That's how you get people who will say prophecy in the Bible is fuzzy, vague interpretations, and post hoc rationalizations and with the same breath state molecules to man Evolution is a fact and there is irrefutable evidence in favor of. While people like Peter said Biblical prophecy is a "more sure word" than his own first-hand eyewitness.

Parallel universe.




posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
That's how you get people who will say prophecy in the Bible is fuzzy, vague interpretations, and post hoc rationalizations and with the same breath state molecules to man Evolution is a fact and there is irrefutable evidence in favor of. While people like Peter said Biblical prophecy is a "more sure word" than his own first-hand eyewitness.

Parallel universe.


Yep. But as we too have gone off topic, this might be an interesting thread of its own.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
It was not an Apple, it was a PC - thus, all the problems since then. What the Serpent told Eve was classic spam.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


You wrote:

["And can we not use the established principles of language and textual criticism to determine when to do what? Reading between the lines is half the problem; we can't just allegorize EVERYTHING or only allegorize that which we refuse to take literally."]

For once I agree with you. But as is probably known to you, there's no end to claims of 'TRUE' christianity and its associated methods on bible-interpretation. A sorting-out would be a clarifyng step for everybody.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
It was not an Apple, it was a PC - thus, all the problems since then. What the Serpent told Eve was classic spam.

And perhaps Linux is... the Third Way...



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
so the snake was just trolling.




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


So the question is what fruit was it then, an apple, a banana?
What does it literally say in the bible?



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vamp333

if 'God' requested Adam & Eve not to eat from the Apple tree .. and they were punished for disobeying his request .. why do people who are believers in God still eat Apples to this day...??

Because it wasn't an apple! It's not stated anywhere what it actually was. Also, BTW, it's not to be taken literally! Which you no doubt know...



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


So the question is what fruit was it then, an apple, a banana?
What does it literally say in the bible?

As stated repeatedly in this thread so far, the text does NOT SPECIFY the type of fruit, and there is NO indication that this type of tree ever existed anywhere outside of the Garden of Eden. I can't make this any clearer.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


And it's a story, it's not clear whether it's an anology, a metaphor or an account of an historical event. The bible doesn't have to specify, and preists and believers will play the "hidden meaning" card when their dogma shows itself to be obviously incorrect, conflicting, unscientific and ethically and morally ambivilant.

en.wikipedia.org...

They will pass off these profound claims to truth as simply eschatology, the extraordinary supernatural claims have been made, and it's gained them power in light of the gullible, fearful and poor. (FOR CENTURIES!!!)

Noah's ark is the story of conservation of life in the knowledge that God would be starting a new geological catastrophe, and no mention of plants!

Screw you plants! You're not life!

But heck, doesn't mention Bacteria in the bible, and Jesus never actively condemns slavery, Surely that aspect of human suffering is worth preaching?
edit on 3/6/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


And it's a story, it's not clear ... The bible doesn't have to specify... dogma shows itself to be obviously incorrect, conflicting, unscientific and ethically and morally ambivilant.

Gosh, I sure am glad you're here to enlighten us backward, stupid peons. You have declared it a "story", made the authoritative pronouncement that apparently only religious people have "dogma", and declared said dogma "incorrect, conflicting, unscientific and ethically and morally ambivilant"-- all without having to lift a finger to justify it! Wow, I wish I too could simply pronounce other people wrong like that, making myself godlike in the process. All this having to explain and justify one's opinions is for losers I guess.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 



incorrect, conflicting, unscientific and ethically and morally ambivilant"-- all without having to lift a finger to justify it!


Please, if you disagree with my arguments - Perhaps you'd like me to further expand; providing sources, passages from the bible? I'm more than happy to do so, to verify my arguments.

Just say the word.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware

Please, if you disagree with my arguments - Perhaps you'd like me to further expand; providing sources, passages from the bible? I'm more than happy to do so, to verify my arguments.

Just say the word.

What "arguments"? You didn't build a case, you made blanket condemnations, and did so with a very condescending tone. I honestly have no interest in trying to carry on a discussion with anyone who is so eager to tell other people what's wrong with them and their beliefs.

The OP asked a simple question about a specific Bible passage, and it's been answered thoroughly by people who read and study the Bible. If you really enjoy a good Christian bashing, there are plenty of threads for that already. Thanks for understanding.




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join