Adam/Eve Jesus and the tree of knowledge of good and Evil

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

What am I saying that does not agree with this passage?
A lot. I mean that you are not just posting so many verses and then commenting by saying something like, "Isn't it so inspiring to one if they read these verses, as organized here by myself, and then meditated on?"
You are drawing conclusions and making leaps of logic along a long chain of argumentation.
Now where you started and where you finished may very well be defensible general statements but almost all of your insertions in between seem to be misstatements to me, injecting as fact, things you got from some sort of popular folklore or your own imagination.
What I object to are the specific things that I mention. Don't project onto me, please, anything other than what I state.

What you say does not agree but what I say is exactly what it says above.
See my comment above.
Would you like to be a bit more specific by maybe pointing out what I said that you think is wrong?

I do not use my own words as you suggest, I simply have put to memory most of the NT so the words are simply the translation that God has provided me.
So you believe that your having read the Bible has given you a special ability to 'translate' it so that it is as good or better than the Bible itself?

. . . he was here to teach man to love, because they are loved, because God is love.
My suggestion, not just to you, but to anyone who wants to understand the New Testament, is to study the Greek language that it was written in rather than just the English translation that does not always convey precisly what the writer was trying to get across in a particular passage.
It's not as difficult as it may be imagined, thanks to what is the virtual magic of the internet. Look at this page I am linking to here, biblesuite.com... It lists all the NT uses of this particular form of the Greek word tanslated as "love" in 1 John 4:8.
What it is described as is the verb, present participle active. If you don't know what a participle is, it is a word in English and pertains to sentence structure that applies to any language. In Greek, they were so nice as to put participles in a different form than non-participle verbs so you can know how it is being used just by how it sounds.
Study participles and get to know them and appreciate them, which is a good thing anyway, but is especially so if you want to understand the NT.
For right now, the easy thing to maybe grasp is the difference between a verb and a noun. A noun describes a thing, and a verb describes an action.
God is continuously involved in the practice of loving.
The verse is not making this ethereal 'thing' out there that God is somehow 'made' of.

Here is the scripture that supports my claim that Jesus is the light . . .
John 1:7-9 . . . He was not the light . . .
I don't think I am going against the scripture but that you have a problem not seeing certain things in it. And not just you, I should add, but by almost all Christians trying to understand John 1 with their heads full of a misunderstanding of it because of how it has been bent over the centuries in order to support dogma.

For us to live God must be in us, when we sin we lose the feeling of God/love in us but he is still there, we are being punished.
I would recommend for everyone to read this book, Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit, by Troels Engberg-Pedersen
According to Paul in the NT, as pointed out by Troels, we are born with a 'natural' spirit that is able by Jesus to be replaced by the 'spirit of God'.
edit on 20-3-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

Notice the use of the word "our". This is one of the most debated words in the Bible. Why? The father and the son and the spirit of love, if you drop the RCC trinity for what the bible really says, then it begins to make since.
If you were to read it in Hebrew, you might notice the word, Elohim.
If, like you say, it means Jesus was there, don't you think that something as important as that would be mentioned in the New Testament?
Well, it's not, and for that matter, the NT doesn't hold the Old Testament up exactly as any real authority other than in some people's minds, and will use phraseology like, "or so it has been written" rather than to say that it is in fact true because the OT says so.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 



If we want to live in a world of love and peace we need to act on it, indifference is not the path to peace.


Neither is judgment...hint hint.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


The New Testament says Jesus was the firstborn over all creation. Jesus himself says "I am the light of the world". Yes it does say exactly what I am claiming. The only thing in Genesis that is both the first born or first thing created and also is called "light", is the "light in Genesis 1:3.

We can know for certain the "light" in Genesis 1:3 is not natural light, because there is no sun or moon yet. So it must be referring to the spiritual light of the world who is Jesus. This is the only way to reconcile all of the verses without contradiction.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

This is the only way to reconcile all of the verses without contradiction.
This is how you "reconcile" the verses, by first recognizing what the universe looked like to the writers of the Old Testament.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


WOW! Are you ever reading a whole bunch of stuff into Genesis that simply isn't there. Not only that, but you are taking the questionable words of Paul and others to back engineer Genesis to fit your theory.

I have another theory.

If Jesus was indeed in the Garden of Eden, and I"m not convinced that he was, he was "The Tree of Life."


Genesis 2:8
In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Genesis 3:24
After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.



John 5:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

John 11:26
And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

John 10:27-28
My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them away from me.

John 8:51
Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.


And then, of course, there's all "that" about eating his body and drinking his blood, equals, fruit and nectar from the "Tree of Life."




posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Good argument.


But I still fail to see why I would want to live forever...as I mentioned to someone else:


What will you do when you are so complete that life no longer provides challenges for you? Will you sit and twiddle your thumbs for the rest of eternity? What does that do for you, in contrast to being an imperfect creature that experiences both pain and joy? A creature that is still capable of wonder and surprise?

Would you give up change for monotony? Give up the ability to be hurt for the inability to grow? If so, you are a sad, frightened little being who doesn't understand the first thing of what it is to truly live.


Immortality holds no appeal for me.
edit on 20-3-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


The New Testament says Jesus was the firstborn over all creation. Jesus himself says "I am the light of the world". Yes it does say exactly what I am claiming. The only thing in Genesis that is both the first born or first thing created and also is called "light", is the "light in Genesis 1:3.

We can know for certain the "light" in Genesis 1:3 is not natural light, because there is no sun or moon yet. So it must be referring to the spiritual light of the world who is Jesus. This is the only way to reconcile all of the verses without contradiction. The RCC trinity causes only confusion with the trinity dogma. He is love and so is his son, so it matters very little what you believe of their relationship, it matters more that you do what love is instructing you to do.

I want to explain myself in the begging of this post. Much of what I say will sound self-righteous, I do understand this. Let me try to explain that you should actually expect someone who has found the truth to sound this way. The bible tells you that the one sent by God will speak as one sent by God, because it will be God himself that puts the words into his mouth. The bible tells us specifically to not prepare responses because he himself will give us the answer at the appropriate time.

I don't understand completely how this works but I do know that in reference to scripture I merely do what I was instructed. You also must understand that many times the teacher is the student. Meaning even some of the concepts that I share with ATS and my children don't fully make since to me even when I say them with utmost assurance that I am right. How do I know the message is from God, because every word both clarifies and simplifies what the bible really says.

Because the message agrees with scripture and points towards love I know it must be from God. So whether I fully understand it or not I simply have faith to believe.

The funny thing is "God is love". Only a child would be foolish enough to believe this. Thank God my daughter was foolish enough to believe God, that when he taught her through me he simply said tell her I am love. And through her God has taught me that I can trust him, because he is love.

I prayed to the father to help me to raise my daughter. He told me tell her God is love and she will understand. You see I told her this 2 years before God revealed to me that this is exactly what the bible says. Without watching her for the last 2 years I may have rejected this, but through her God has proven to me that he is love.

John 4:8
New International Version (©2011)
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
New Living Translation (©2007)
But anyone who does not love does not know God, for God is love.
English Standard Version (©2001)
Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Holman Christian Standard Bible (©2009)
The one who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
International Standard Version (©2012)
The person who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
NET Bible (©2006)
The person who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
Because God is love, and everyone who does not love does not know God.
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
The person who doesn't love doesn't know God, because God is love.
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
He that loves not knows not God; for God is love.
American King James Version
He that loves not knows not God; for God is love.
American Standard Version
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Douay-Rheims Bible
He that loveth not, knoweth not God: for God is charity.
Darby Bible Translation
He that loves not has not known God; for God is love.
English Revised Version
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
Webster's Bible Translation
He that loveth not, knoweth not God; for God is love.
Weymouth New Testament
He who is destitute of love has never had any knowledge of God; because God is love.
World English Bible
He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
Young's Literal Translation
he who is not loving did not know God, because God is love.

Even in Greek it says God is love. So every translation but one says the same thing. God is love, and since charity is a part of love, even the incorrect translation leads to loving one another. Because to worship charity would still be to worship loving one another.

What is worth pursing, worshiping, or even dying for? Only love. I suppose you could say God because he created love, but it is clear that he would prefer to be simply considered love and not merely the creator of it.


John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

The modern church has a few ways to look at this.

Pure Grace, believe Jesus came in the flesh, son of God, rose, saved. Don't believe hell.

The more legalistic view follow laws ordained by God to be followed so we can go to heaven. Break the laws and believe in Jesus and you will be saved, but there are certain laws that always seem to rise to the top for immediate condemnation.

Or you can believe this.

John 3:16-21
God so loved the world that he sent his love into the world. Whoever believes in love should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not sin his love into the world to condemn the world but to save the world through love. Whoever believes in love is not condemned, but whoever does not believe in love stands condemned already, because they have not believed in God's love. This is the verdict, love has come into the world but people loved darkness and would not choose to love because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil is against love, and will not come to the father for love in fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into love. So that it may be seen plainly that what has been done has been done in the sight of God.

Stop defending what you believe and answer this simple question.

In this interpretation what have I said that is against Christ?

All I have done is shown that the gifts are available to all who pursue love and it is said in a way that all can truly understand and relate too, without causing religion or seperation. Jesus is love so I have not spoken against him. I have just chosen one of his many names to clarify the meaning of this passage. And of all of his names, each is a part of the whole, which is love. Both the father and son are love. Exactly what this means I don't know. But it is definitely the way they want us to think about them.

Again what am I saying that is against Christ? Surely telling you that God is love must be for Christ, since he left us only 2 commands. Love God and love your neighbor. If I purue God and believe that he is love, than I will most certainly not fail at following the 2 most important commands that Christ gave us. To love and to love
edit on 20-3-2013 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


What is the light in Genesis 1:3 if I am wrong?
Who is the "US" in the creation account?
Why does Jesus claim he is the light? If he is not the light in Genesis 1:3 what is he referring too?
Why does the bible claim that Jesus is the firstborn over all creation and Jesus claim he is the light?
When was Jesus born?
Why would God leave that out of the Genesis account?
How can Jesus be the son but be equal to the father?
Why does Jesus say if you have seen me you have seen the father?
Why does Jesus not find it blasphemy that he is considered equal to God and worthy of worship?
Why does it say that at the current time creation is subject to Christ but in the end everyone will become subject to the father, even the son?

Because God is love, Jesus is love. Jesus was the firstborn over all creation, the "light"/love of this world. He is the exact representation of love and God is love, therefore to worship him is to worship love. To worship love is to worship the father. The father and the son are in agreement, the son can do only what he sees the father do. Jesus loved everyone, especially sinners, and so must God. Because God is love.

The logic I am presenting to you answers all of the above questions both logically and lovingly. And the interpretation agrees completely with the message in the NT. I challenge anyone to show me a greater love than what is revealed with this understanding.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

The New Testament says Jesus was the firstborn over all creation.
Colossians says.

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

Firstborn "over", not, "of" creation. ALL things would include the creation of light on the first 'day'.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. so even if you were going with just the 'first" idea, the first would have been the heavens (see picture above).



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by sacgamer25
 



If we want to live in a world of love and peace we need to act on it, indifference is not the path to peace.


Neither is judgment...hint hint.


What am I saying that is in judgment of anyone? For which one of these concepts do you accuse me of judging you or anyone?

God is love.

Jesus is love.

Both the father and son love you.

Love keeps no records of wrongdoing.

Jesus was created to be perfect love, to come and teach us the path to be made perfect through love and become like him.

Jesus is the light in Genesis.

I am bringing you a "love interpretation" that removes the boundaries set in place by Christianity, and all religions.

God loves everyone the same, not just Christians.

The pursuit of love is the pursuit of God.

Pursue love at all times and you will fulfill the law without the need to know it or understand it. Because love is never against God's law, because God is love.

Which one of these statements has offended anyone? If anyone is offended it is because instead of judging based on merely what I say, I am judged based on the simple fact that what I say is against what you believe. And if what I say is correct than you have no choice but to believe. In your mind you know if you pursue anything less than love, than you will not find love. But you refuse to acknowledge God is love.

You can believe whatever you like, but I most certainly am not your judge, nor am I attempting to judge you or anyone. The choice to believe is yours, I am merely a man who has a message that he has received from God. God is love.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

. . . every word both clarifies and simplifies what the bible really says.
First you have to know what the Bible says. I realize you listen to recordings of the Bible being read but I don't think that is a substitute for real Bible study.
I'm not convinced that you know what the Bible really says in order to be able to make interpretations of it.

The funny thing is "God is love".
Didn't you even read what I said about that?
Are you saying ignorant delusions are best when faced with evidence of reality?
edit on 20-3-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


If he is the "light" than he is still first. How is that complicated?

And yes love is the authority over all creation. So yes we should love love and the author of love.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

. . . every word both clarifies and simplifies what the bible really says.
First you have to know what the Bible says. I realize you listen to recordings of the Bible being read but I don't think that is a substitute for real Bible study.
I'm not convinced that you know what the Bible really says in order to be able to make interpretations of it.
edit on 20-3-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


I ask you the same question.

What have I stated that is against Christ? I cannot debate you what is against what you believe, I can only debate you what is against Christ?

The church says many things against Christ.

Find what I have said that is against Christ.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 

If he is the "light" than he is still first. How is that complicated?
How is it so difficult to accept that it never says that?



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 





What is the light in Genesis 1:3 if I am wrong?


An awakening?



Who is the "US" in the creation account?


A corporation of off world beings creating a terraformed planet.



Why does Jesus claim he is the light? If he is not the light in Genesis 1:3 what is he referring too?


The Ain Soph is the light of wisdom and a spiritual state of awareness. Jesus wasn't claiming to be the "light bulb" but was trying to get us to turn on the switch to our own light bulbs.



Why does the bible claim that Jesus is the firstborn over all creation and Jesus claim he is the light? When was Jesus born?


You're assuming that we all agree that the Bible is the inerrable word of God. I don't believe that. Nor, do I believe that Paul's words are of God and I don't think that they should be taken as fact. So, I don't believe that Jesus was the first born of creation.



Why would God leave that out of the Genesis account?


God didn't write the book of Genesis. It's another version of the The Babylonian Creation Story (Enuma elish)


Genesis God creates all matter, but is independent of it Earth is in darkness and chaos over the deep (Tehom).

Enuma Elish The Divine Spirits and cosmic matters coexist and are coeternal. There is a primeval chaos in which the gods war against the deep (Tiamat).

Genesis 1st day the creation of light Enuma Elish

Light emanates from the gods

Genesis 2nd day the dome of the sky is created

Enuma Elish creation of the firmament (dome)

Genesis 3rd day creation of dry land

Enuma Elish creation of dry land

Genesis 4th day creation of heavenly lights

Enuma Elish creation of heavenly lights

Genesis 5th day creation of animals --------

Genesis 6th day creation of man

Enuma Elish creation of man

Genesis God rests and sanctifies the sabbath

Enuma Elish the gods rest and celebrate with a banquet
www.skeptically.org...




How can Jesus be the son but be equal to the father? Why does Jesus say if you have seen me you have seen the father? Why does Jesus not find it blasphemy that he is considered equal to God and worthy of worship?



Geneis 3:
22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us





Because God is love, Jesus is love.



First of all, there is nothing in the OT to indicate that the God of the OT is "LOVE" or anything even close to love. I don't believe that Jesus taught that God was Yahweh.

Secondly, Jesus was a man who embodied a loving spirit, but he was more that just a bucket of love.


Matthew 10:34
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.


Thirdly, what is love? Does the ocean love the rocks it's smashed to sand? Does an asteroid love the earth that it smashes into? Does a volcano love the ground it covers in lava? Does the sun shine outwardly because of love?

From your OP:



Jesus watched as the father sent the serpent to tempt Eve, knowing that the father had foreknowledge of the outcome. What did Eve and Adam eat, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The father intended to teach us both "GOOD" and "EVIL". He wanted us to learn so that we could love like intelligent beings and not like on command robots.


This is your projection and is in no way Biblical. The God of the OT never wanted Adam and Eve to learn what attributes the tree offered, and there is no indication that he intended Adam and Eve to learn those things from him any any way.


edit on 20-3-2013 by windword because: link



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Adam and Eve are a summerian creation myth that was re-written by the Jews to make it their own.

In the story, when Cain slew Able, Cain was then afraid of 'the others' who lived outside the garden. Is this a story by Cro-mags afraid of Neanderthals? Dunno. Could be.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 



What am I saying that is in judgment of anyone? For which one of these concepts do you accuse me of judging you or anyone?


You are only one follower. For every follower who does not judge, there are three more who do because the Bible encourages them to. That's something that irritates me - the Bible gives just as many reasons to divide and conquer as it does to unite and rejoice.

That was what the tree did - it gave us the ability to label something as "good" or "evil" based on how we perceive it. It gave us the ability to judge, something we've never been capable of handling.


God is love.

Jesus is love.

Both the father and son love you.

Love keeps no records of wrongdoing.


So the Bible tells us. It also gives us a list of things it does keep a record of.


I am bringing you a "love interpretation" that removes the boundaries set in place by Christianity, and all religions.


You can't preach Christianity and contradict its teachings in the same sentence. Or rather, you can, but you'll just sound ignorant.


You can believe whatever you like, but I most certainly am not your judge, nor am I attempting to judge you or anyone. The choice to believe is yours, I am merely a man who has a message that he has received from God. God is love.


It sounds to me as though you're merely cherry picking the convenient bits.



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



How is it so difficult to accept that it never says that?


It says in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with "God", and the Word was "God". It's also been established that "God" is composed of a Holy Trinity that is distinct within itself but a united entity to all others. Jesus was one of the three elements, which means he was there in the beginning because all three elements were engaged in their union long before the universe was born.

Or so the Bible seems to say. Now, don't mistake me - I am merely translating the Bible within its own dialect of logic. The logical realm as observed and recorded in our universe exists independently of the system by which I've interpreted the holy scriptures, a system compiled specifically for the purpose of lending credence to the claims made therein.
edit on 20-3-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 





It says in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with "God", and the Word was "God".


You know this isn't in Genesis, right? It comes from the New Testament, John, to be exact. This concept of the "voice" of God wasn't new, even though it was cutting edge. It comes from the Pythagreans.

Pythagoras, as you may recall was the father of "harmonics."


There is geometry in the humming of the strings, there is music in the spacing of the spheres. Read more at www.brainyquote.com...





It's also been established that "God" is composed of a Holy Trinity that is distinct within itself but a united entity to all others. Jesus was one of the three elements, which means he was there in the beginning because all three elements were engaged in their union long before the universe was born.


There is nothing in the Bible that supports or describes the "Trinity". This is a Catholic construct.





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join