In the Beginning...

So what was actually said about Jupiter being smaller than the other gas giants?! I tried to follow the paper trail back a few pages but still never found the original comment. I'm curious as to what it was.
 
Men and women are both created in God's image in 1:28 and commanded to be fruitful, but by 2:5 there are no people to till the land for some reason, leading to Adam and Eve being created in 2:7 and 2:22. Where did the first lot of people go?

Trying to put the chapters into some chronological order is not logical and leads to speculation. Chapter 2 is still the 6th day story, and the part about separate Gardens is consistent on what was happening all over the continent no matter what direction you go. The Adam narrative is just about one human, and he lost his mate, but in this account she is not even mentioned. The account was not about her, nor the rest of the humans. After naming all the animals, then God cloned Adam, since that is what it says. It does not say the God dragged another female from the first group, and put her in the Garden with Adam.

Also, it is clearly stated that eating from the Tree allows man to live forever, so speculating that it's "actually" a coded reference to procreation is again without evidence.

In a biological sense, nothing about the trees, would change a human. The same symbolism is given to the communion of the church as actually becoming the blood and flesh of Christ, but neither impart any physical changes, but a symbolic one.

I agree that that isn't illogical, but innocence is traditionally associated with virginity, so on a stylistic note it would make more sense for Adam and Eve to have children after the Fall.

They did, but the account of Cain and Abel is still in the Garden setting, and Cain is also driven from this Garden and communicated with God in the same way Adam did. Chapter 3,4 and5 all start out as separate accounts. But no where does it say, "after a time" for each account. It does state that time passes in the accounts. There is nothing that says they cannot overlap each other. It would be more logical to say that Cain was the first to leave, even though it would not make sense to brake up one narrative and insert the one about Cain in a literary sense.

It would seem to me, and it is referenced that humans with long life spans were still considered adolescent until the age of 100. Not that they could not have children before that. Instead of having a 21 year limit on development, that limit was much longer. To add to that, the first humans were created being able to procreate, meaning they were already adolescent past puberty. It would seem natural then that humans may have had longer periods. At least before the flood. It may have been in cycles of years instead of months.

Even considering that, 130 years, at the point when Seth was born, we do not get the impression that time dragged on. Yet a lot of events can occur in that period, and we are only told of 2. The sin of Cain, and his dismissal, and the sin of Adam and his dismissal. If Seth was born 30 years or less, after Adam left, then Cain and Abel were born in the Garden, as they were already of age to do things on their own, before the one was killed, and the other one had to leave. While it is quite plausible that Cain and Able were born after Adam was 100+, we are not told that. It would also mean that nothing happened for decades, and we do not get that impression. You have to allow some of that 100 years to Adam naming all the animals that were created. Not just the ones we know as domesticated, but even the wild ones, who were domicile for the event. Even allowing 70 years, there was still a 30 year time period that still could have happened in the Garden after the birth of Cain and Abel. Adam could have been kicked out at age 70. But for all we know, he could have been kicked out and then given an age, as part of his curse, and lived for 130 years before Seth was born as it seems the story indicates.
 
So what was actually said about Jupiter being smaller than the other gas giants?! I tried to follow the paper trail back a few pages but still never found the original comment. I'm curious as to what it was.

post #605, p31

Trying to put the chapters into some chronological order is not logical and leads to speculation. Chapter 2 is still the 6th day story

On the 6th day gods made man and woman in their image and gave them instructions - be fruitful, multiply, and (re)fill the Earth, etc... After the 6th day ended we are told God planted a Garden eastward in Eden and God took a/the man there to work.

What happened to the woman?

The Adam was a generic term for mankind and basically means earthling. So the text doesn't tell us if there were multiple men & women, but if those 6th day people were following their instructions and multiplying then the individual named Adam may have been their offspring.

Mesopotamian myth says people were modified, the serpent deity Enki was in charge of our development as a species (the Adapa story) and thats what we see in the Garden story - the serpent and the acquisition of a god-like power.

After naming all the animals, then God cloned Adam, since that is what it says. It does not say the God dragged another female from the first group, and put her in the Garden with Adam.

Eve was the mother of the living and made from a rib. This stems from the Mesopotamian myth of Ninhursag and Enki, the two primary deities responsible for making us. One of her epitaphs was lady of life and she healed Enki's rib, so she became lady of the rib too.
 
If Eve's child bearing suffering was increased, then she would of had to have given birth for it to increase.

Or her pain would be more severe than the women made on the 6th day. Or somebody else... Maybe our hominin ancestors who were giving birth to babies with smaller heads/shoulders. I think thats another clue about the antiquity of these stories. Anyway, Cain was her first-born and he was conceived after Adam and Eve were booted out of the Garden.

Besides after God kicked them all out of the Garden they no longer heard from God. Cain complained to God, when God kicked him out for killing his brother. There was a separation from God after sin was introduced to a human. Either Cain was kicked out first, Or Cain and Abel were still in the Garden when Adam and Eve left, and Abel was killed, and Cain was the last human to leave the Garden.

Cain and Abel were never in the Garden, the whole point of kicking Adam and Eve out was to block their access to the tree of life. Their boys brought food to God as an offering and Cain murdered Abel. Do you think God was raising Cain and Abel from birth?

It would not make sense if after leaving, Adam and Eve had to give up their children, who were sent back into the Garden.

So why do you think Cain was living in the Garden while his parents were living east of it?

It was never mentioned that sex was wrong. What was mentioned was they were ashamed of their nakedness. When God presented Eve to Adam, he called her his wife. From the account it was an act of marriage. Now it is sin, if a married couple have offspring? I am pretty sure that if a lot of people went around naked, it would not insinuate, nor produce sexual desire.

God didn't want people proliferating in his Garden and having access to eternal life. Thats why he kicked them out, one of the modifications produced by the serpent and tree was the ability to procreate. What happens right after their expulsion? They conceive Cain.

At the least innocence was lost, but even losing one's virginity is hardly the same thing as sin. Being a virgin just means that one has not had sex, not that they can or cannot have sex.

They could have sex, just not children...

It is ok to procreate as long as you are not in prison or a slave? That would also contradict the Mesopotamian myths where the very purpose for humans was for perpetual slave labor.

According to those myths Enlil and Enki were not in complete agreement about humanity. The latter warned the Sumerian Noah about the flood in defiance of Enlil's command it remain a secret. Genesis combined both gods, one who wants to see us wiped out and another who saves us.

So, in other words, it proves nothing and this has all been a pointless waste of time?

You didn't answer my question, why would the Enuma Elish explain the Hopi ant people? And this has all been a pointless waste of time because a Hopi myth about ant friends was mentioned?

Men and women are both created in God's image in 1:28 and commanded to be fruitful, but by 2:5 there are no people to till the land for some reason, leading to Adam and Eve being created in 2:7 and 2:22. Where did the first lot of people go?

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Sounds like a recap and segue to the Garden

Also, it is clearly stated that eating from the Tree allows man to live forever, so speculating that it's "actually" a coded reference to procreation is again without evidence.

The coded reference to procreation was the description of Adam and Eve following the tree of knowledge (not life), they were naked and ashamed so they covered up their genitalia. And they left the Garden and conceived two boys... No kids in the Garden, two upon expulsion.
 
You didn't answer my question, why would the Enuma Elish explain the Hopi ant people? And this has all been a pointless waste of time because a Hopi myth about ant friends was mentioned?

I wouldn't expect it to, but you're the one who keeps saying that "most" world mythologies support this bizarre story, so short of merely febrile imagination on Sitchen's part, I'm still wanting to know where all that Star Trek stuff comes from.

The coded reference to procreation was the description of Adam and Eve following the tree of knowledge (not life), they were naked and ashamed so they covered up their genitalia. And they left the Garden and conceived two boys... No kids in the Garden, two upon expulsion.

Right, but that's not proof of anything, particularly not something as off-the-wall as "humans were created by ancient aliens and the Fall is a description of humanity somehow gaining the biological ability to procreate". (I should hardly need add that all natural living things have the ability to procreate as one of their fundamental properties.)
 
On the 6th day gods made man and woman in their image and gave them instructions - be fruitful, multiply, and (re)fill the Earth, etc... After the 6th day ended we are told God planted a Garden eastward in Eden and God took a/the man there to work.

What happened to the woman?

The Adam was a generic term for mankind and basically means earthling. So the text doesn't tell us if there were multiple men & women, but if those 6th day people were following their instructions and multiplying then the individual named Adam may have been their offspring.

The 2nd chapter is not another creation event. It was the 6th day event, and the Garden was already there before the 6th day. It was prepared before the human, unless the human was in stasis somewhere. Time is not really relative to God, so it could have been done all at once, but we have to have some order and chronology of time. But unless it specifies that it was not done on the 6th day or that it was done at a later specific time, then it is the same account with a different perspective.

See Hebrew legends for Adam's first wife.

Adam is the generic baseline model who seemed to be humanities link to God, and represented the rest of humanity for God.

Mesopotamian myth says people were modified, the serpent deity Enki was in charge of our development as a species (the Adapa story) and thats what we see in the Garden story - the serpent and the acquisition of a god-like power.

I cannot find in accepted mythology where Enki was a serpent. Sounds like a made up point to fit the account. Enki or Ea: Son of Anu, husband of Damkina, and father of Marduk. Ruler of all the gods after Apsu. (Sumerian son of Nintu and ruler of the earth.) Enki/Ea represented fresh water after Apsu/God was killed. It was the mixture of fresh water and salt water, ie Apsu and Tiemet that combined and started the creation of the solar system. Remember that they all thought that water came first. Fresh water and salt water coming together and giving birth to the cosmos.

Ea represents the earth out of which man was made. "Dust of the earth" Ea may be representative as the double helix which is "snake" like. The only connection would be if you replaced Satan as the serpent, Lord of the Earth. Satan was never associated in Hebrew or Christianity nor any other myth (as Satan) as being the giver of life and fertility. Now the Hebrews and by extension Christianity may have hid the point as they gave El or God all the personality of all the gods. They did not divide God up, nor stated that God had divine offspring. They state clearly that God created all beings, including Sons of god, humans, or angels and demons. IMO, God created all human forms on day 6. The Sons of god left the earth or were destroyed in the Flood. They were the angels and fallen angels. Adam was the one who God changed from a Son of god, and we are all human from his offspring with Eve.

The Indian religions have a near similar term Atman meaning "spririt". We today have the term atom which at one point represented the smallest known substance. There may be no correlation between the words, but at the time of the account dust was the major building block. God breathed the Spirit into the Earth and man became a living soul; Adam. The soul being the point of eternal life. When the Flood happened God said that the spirit or eternal life was removed from man. When Adam sinned, he lost his connection with God and had to actually go to work for his subsistence.

I understand that the Mesopotamians believed in evolution. I have mentioned that throughout the thread. God evolved and had offspring without being anthropomorphized. It was heavenly bodies at first and then evolved into human counterparts.

Eve was the mother of the living and made from a rib. This stems from the Mesopotamian myth of Ninhursag and Enki, the two primary deities responsible for making us. One of her epitaphs was lady of life and she healed Enki's rib, so she became lady of the rib too.

I have no problem with God creating a clone. There is one God and creator of all. That is not the same thing as evolution though.

Or her pain would be more severe than the women made on the 6th day. Or somebody else... Maybe our hominin ancestors who were giving birth to babies with smaller heads/shoulders. I think thats another clue about the antiquity of these stories. Anyway, Cain was her first-born and he was conceived after Adam and Eve were booted out of the Garden.

I do not see evolution in the Genesis account. At least not until chapter 30 and verse 37. I see God creating all humans in the first chapter. I see God cloning Eve from Adam. I see people having babies, but no evolution.

Cain and Abel were never in the Garden, the whole point of kicking Adam and Eve out was to block their access to the tree of life. Their boys brought food to God as an offering and Cain murdered Abel. Do you think God was raising Cain and Abel from birth?

There is no proof they were not in the Garden, but there is proof that they were. Cain complained about being forced to leave the Garden. He was the first person who was stated to actually do any gardening. Adam named the animals and was supposed to do something. All we see Adam doing is eating from trees, and getting his wife pregnant, and knowing human nature not necessarily in that order. I am sure that Adam more than likely wanted to have fun before he contemplated something that would take his fun away. Where in the account does it say that if they ate of the tree they would have children, or if they had children they had to leave. I am not seeing it.

I think that Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel lived in their own Garden like all natural human families do. There is no reason to think that for at least 100 years there was no need for the family unit to split apart, until after the age of 100, the boys were ready to leave and go settle their own gardens with their own wives, the offspring of local families in the area. Of course nothing is ideal even, in a perfect setting. God even warned Cain that sin was waiting at the entrance of the Garden and he should not invite it in. Cain decided to let it in by killing Abel. He then had to leave before his time to leave actually came. I do not think that it matters who sinned first. Cain was not the father, nor married the mother of all humans. That was still Adam and Eve, and there is no indication that they did that on day 7 or day 8 or probably only years after they were put in the Garden. When did Adam name all those animals even before Eve was cloned? Did he have no age, until he sinned? Loosing both her sons may have been a tipping point to listen to the Serpent. Some Hebrews claim that Eve did not even eat right away, when tempted by the Serpent, but that it was an ongoing attempt by the Serpent and it may have taken quite some time, even years.

So why do you think Cain was living in the Garden while his parents were living east of it?

I don't. Cain had to leave before his time to leave came, and Abel dies there, and both were there and left before Eve ate of the fruit and gave it to Adam and he ate.

God didn't want people proliferating in his Garden and having access to eternal life. Thats why he kicked them out, one of the modifications produced by the serpent and tree was the ability to procreate. What happens right after their expulsion? They conceive Cain.

The Garden was not God's garden. It was a place where sin was not present as God and sin cannot be present in the same place. That is the whole point of Holy ground. All things belong to God as in a sense of all are created by God. Sin is why Cain, Eve, and Adam were not allowed back into the Garden. What happens after they left is that Seth was born in the image of Adam and humans were no longer Sons of god, or the godlike humans of whom the legends are based on.

According to those myths Enlil and Enki were not in complete agreement about humanity. The latter warned the Sumerian Noah about the flood in defiance of Enlil's command it remain a secret. Genesis combined both gods, one who wants to see us wiped out and another who saves us.

Genesis states there is only one God, and everything else in the universe was created by God. Outside of God, there is nothing. God, the Word, and Spirit were the creator, physical embodiment of all creation, and the force that kept all the universe connected. When it says that God spoke that was the Word that gave the physical created universe. The hovering Spirit, and the Light was the force and energy that allows the universe to have form and motion. It was the Mesopotamians who seemed to be confused on who and what were gods and planets.

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Sounds like a recap and segue to the Garden.

Yes, because the Hebrews thought that the Accounts that took place in this Garden were important in the history of mankind. It was the "house" and home of Adam and Eve and their two sons, Cain and Abel, the model family of what not to do. Abel was the only human living in the Garden who obeyed God, and he ended up being killed because he was pleasing to God. If there is a metaphor to be had, it was that the tree was named "Knowledge of Good and Evil". God told Adam not to eat, and Adam disobeyed and ate. Metaphorically Adam lost his innocence and found out what sin and disobedience was.

The coded reference to procreation was the description of Adam and Eve following the tree of knowledge (not life), they were naked and ashamed so they covered up their genitalia. And they left the Garden and conceived two boys... No kids in the Garden, two upon expulsion.

The account about Adam and Eve, and Cain and Abel were two accounts redacted from different sources into one view of humans at the beginning of Humanity when humans were still Sons of God, and before they lost their connection to God.

Most of the creation accounts tell how there was a God and humans lost that God. One of the points with astrology and later images of "the gods" was that humans claimed it was their only way to connect and communicate with the gods that existed before the catastrophic event that caused a global flood, and humans lost contact with the world that existed before the Flood. Are there stone carvings with writings from before the Flood? Humans cannot even agree when the Flood actually happened.
 
Timtofly, I don't believe that in the Garden of Eden Abel would have been a hunter in or that Cain would have needed to become a gardener. According to the story, sin enters the Garden when Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit.

Connected thought: Cain is marked after his brother's murder and sent off into the Land of Nod, so that others may know and not touch him. Who are the others? Cain has just reduced the world's population by 25% with one death!
 
Last night I watched Noah, does that catch me up in this thread?
 
The bit I liked about Noah was making him a vegetarian. And throwing in the Fallen was cool too. I didn't like the movie much, but I appreciated that I couldn't predict it (having read the chapters the tale was based on).
 
The 2nd chapter is not another creation event. It was the 6th day event and the Garden was already there before the 6th day. It was prepared before the human, unless the human was in stasis somewhere.

I have to correct myself, the 6th day creation refers to male and female, not man and woman. The former can mean several or many humans, not just two. The 6th day people (and the one called Adam) were made before the Garden. Adam was somewhere else, westward of the location God chose for his Garden.

And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

The opening of ch 2 appears to be a recap of ch 1 and a segue to the Garden

Time is not really relative to God, so it could have been done all at once, but we have to have some order and chronology of time. But unless it specifies that it was not done on the 6th day or that it was done at a later specific time, then it is the same account with a different perspective.

At what point does the 6th day end?

See Hebrew legends for Adam's first wife.

Lilith?

I cannot find in accepted mythology where Enki was a serpent. Sounds like a made up point to fit the account.

http://www.bibleorigins.net/Serpentningishzida.html

Its a long read but worth it

Ea may be representative as the double helix which is "snake" like. The only connection would be if you replaced Satan as the serpent, Lord of the Earth.

According to the NT, when Jesus was tempted by Satan he was offered rulership over any Earthly kingdom. Jesus declines the offer, but he does not dispute Satan's authority to make it.

When the Flood happened God said that the spirit or eternal life was removed from man. When Adam sinned, he lost his connection with God and had to actually go to work for his subsistence.

Man was never eternal, the Adam's path to the tree of life was blocked. Adapa declined the food of life when given the chance.

There is no proof they were not in the Garden, but there is proof that they were. Cain complained about being forced to leave the Garden.

Cain didn't mention the Garden

Where in the account does it say that if they ate of the tree they would have children, or if they had children they had to leave. I am not seeing it.

When they covered their genitalia and had children... But they acquired the ability, God kicked them out before they actually had any kids.

God even warned Cain that sin was waiting at the entrance of the Garden and he should not invite it in. Cain decided to let it in by killing Abel.

The Garden was not God's garden. It was a place where sin was not present as God and sin cannot be present in the same place. That is the whole point of Holy ground.

Sin was waiting at Cain's door, not the entrance to the Garden. If sin cannot be in the presence of God then Cain couldn't introduce it into the Garden.

Sin is why Cain, Eve, and Adam were not allowed back into the Garden.

They were not allowed in because God didn't want them partaking from the tree of life.

Genesis states there is only one God, and everything else in the universe was created by God.

It doesn't say that, the water preceded God, Heaven and Earth

Metaphorically Adam lost his innocence and found out what sin and disobedience was.

How can sin exist in God's Garden?
 
Timtofly, I don't believe that in the Garden of Eden Abel would have been a hunter in or that Cain would have needed to become a gardener. According to the story, sin enters the Garden when Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit.

Connected thought: Cain is marked after his brother's murder and sent off into the Land of Nod, so that others may know and not touch him. Who are the others? Cain has just reduced the world's population by 25% with one death!

Abel was not a hunter. He was a shepherd. Most hunters, would not call that hunting. There were animals and agriculture in the Garden.

The others: Jesus was the only human birthed Son of God. All the other Sons of God were created. That happened on the 6th day, Adam was a created Son of God. Becoming human, was why he could claim that Eve was the mother of all humans. Seth was a human. I do not believe that Cain and Abel were. They were born before the curse. The sons of God later took human wives, and the human and god lines intermingled. The account about Cain and Abel really does not fit in the narrative about humans, and it seems to lead nowhere. It is there, so someone must have thought it needed to be put there. A guess would be that bringing an offering to God and declaring that it started in the Garden would make it preeminent. It does not make sense that God would make him go, if they had already left the Garden. And he was not really punished, as he found a wife, and had his own city, like nothing bad ever happened. The only punishment that would make sense is he could not have access to the tree of life either. He had to be in the Garden to be kicked out of it. And that seemed to be his only punishment. I do not see the "others" even acknowledging him, if he was not considered one of them. He was a second generation "god". If he was human he would not need to be marked, his humanity would mark him. He was marked, so none of the "others" would take justice out on him. He retained his godness.

A connected thought: God does not call murder a sin. What happened was the ground refused to cooperate with Cain and he lost the ability to do what he wanted to do, and that was agriculture. God punished him by making him leave the Garden which seemed to tend itself, and one just had to pick the harvest. For all intense and purpose, the Garden would no longer provide for Cain, and it seemed that wherever he went the ground would refuse to yield it's fruit. He ended up having to rely on others for his lively hood .

@ Berzerker

The Garden was God's presence on earth. Cain had to leave God's presence. Later Adam and Eve had to leave. Sin could not enter the Garden, and no one in the Garden could let sin in.

A day is an evening and a morning, according to the account. A day ended at dusk.

I read the argument put forth. Would it be a miracle if the Hebrews distilled the actual truth from reading all the myths? The point is they turned the myths into their own mythology. That would work if there was no God. If God exist, then they would still have the true account, and the Mesopotamians are still left with their myths instead of the truth.
 
Abel was not a hunter. He was a shepherd. Most hunters, would not call that hunting. There were animals and agriculture in the Garden.

Agriculture only enters the scene after Adam's expulsion. Agriculture means work, and work was part of Adam's punishment. Which makes sense, even for the Bible.

The others: Jesus was the only human birthed Son of God. All the other Sons of God were created. That happened on the 6th day, Adam was a created Son of God.

The concept of Son of God has nothing to do with Adam, who was created from clay. And we're still left with the remarkable absence of any others in this point of the story.

The Garden was God's presence on earth. Cain had to leave God's presence. Later Adam and Eve had to leave. Sin could not enter the Garden, and no one in the Garden could let sin in.

Cain was never in the Garden. Sin is not something that can 'enter' anything. It's an act. And sin happened in the garden when Adam ate of the tree of knowledge. Which, incidentally, also shows that sin and God can be in the same 'place' at the same time.
 
Berzerker said:
Lotsa words and nothing to say
You've just described your own posts perfectly.

Honestly, what a load of utter nonsense, for which you haven't provided a shred of evidence other than von Daniken/Velikovsky-style ramblings.

Your irrational claims about Lot's wife... first of all, there's no evidence that there ever was such a person. Secondly, there's no evidence for the advanced weaponry you claim zapped her.

Many civilizations have myths and legends about geographical features. That doesn't equate to space aliens and advanced tech at a time when we know people were still in the Bronze age, or earlier.
 
No offense to Berzerker, but what is happening in those posts is an attempt to mould the available evidence to fit already decided upon conclusions, as opposed to trying to mould a conclusion out of the available evidence.

That's why it comes off so Daniken/ancient aliens like - because that's exactly what they do.
 
Agriculture only enters the scene after Adam's expulsion. Agriculture means work, and work was part of Adam's punishment. Which makes sense, even for the Bible.

Agriculture does not mean work. It can be work, but it does not have to be. A farmer can slave labor his farm, and do nothing, and still be the master of his agriculture. The punishment was that it meant Adam had to work. He may have even ended up being a slave of the others who were created at the same time that he was. All humans/sons of God were created on day 6, and God could have created billions of humanoid beings.

The concept of Son of God has nothing to do with Adam, who was created from clay. And we're still left with the remarkable absence of any others in this point of the story.

All the sons of God were created from dust. Chapter 1 told when God made them. Chapter 2 told how he made them, when it went into detail on Adam who was singled out from all the rest of these sons of God.

Cain was never in the Garden. Sin is not something that can 'enter' anything. It's an act. And sin happened in the garden when Adam ate of the tree of knowledge. Which, incidentally, also shows that sin and God can be in the same 'place' at the same time.

Sin is not an act. Jesus said it was not an act, but what a person was thinking was the sin. God said that the imaginations of a human's thoughts before the Flood became only evil continually. The act is just an outward manifestation of what is in the mind. Humans are not sinners because they act out their desires and imaginations. They are sinners, because that is the knowledge that is in the mind. Sin entered the world because Adam disobeyed God. God overturned what Adam did, when Jesus obeyed God, and gave up the Spirit on the Cross. When Adam ate, God was not present. Sin does not have it's own corporal body, that lives in humans. Sin is the continual disregard of God and what God asks you to do as an individual. Adam was driven from the Garden as a free moral agent to do as he chose, but sin is in the mind, and as long as it is there, God cannot be there either. Technically sin has nothing to do with morality. Sin is just the inability to commune directly with God. IMO, God overlooks moral transgressions as long as one obeys God directly and does not follow after the whims, and governance of other humans.

The reason that humans view it as an act, is because they can then justify it. One cannot justify their thoughts, because they have no control over them, as in where they come from. One can control what they do with their thoughts, unless they give into them, and let thoughts control them. There are multiple ways a human can be controlled by their thoughts.

Cain was not sent out of the garden because of sin, his act, or lack of knowledge, because in the Garden, he did not have the knowledge of good and evil. He had to leave because the Garden complained, and refused to give him the sustenance he needed to live.

The Garden was a test of obedience without the hassle of morality. All the other created beings that had a soul/the breath of God in them, had the knowledge of good and evil, ie morality built into their natural innate reasoning, and they were their own bearers of law, as they saw fit to progress society, or not. That would be part of being a god. When God commanded to have no other god's before him that would include all human governments.

The story of Cain and Abel was not a story about the other's nor about humans after the fall. It was a second generation that lived in the Garden and they enjoyed the presence of God. The others had a council that met with God, but were more than likely, not in constant communication with God. That is the sense that is even in the other creation myths. The first creator God was no longer around. Other than on certain occasions like communicating with Moses, Jesus, and maybe a few others, God basically leaves humans to their own free moral selves. I would assume that a very righteous person who had control over their thoughts would have the ability to commune with God even to this day. I am sure that would be their word against ours though.

Having the knowledge of good and evil, makes us feel like gods, who do not need any outside intervention.

I think that the Hebrews reiterated the truth of generation over and over again, because that is the true result of evolution. There is not a progressive aspect of evolution and only what was created as kind, can evolve as kind through the process of generational copying of DNA. Adam was a son of God, he just lacked morality, the knowledge of good and evil.

The myths about Adam's offspring being slaves to the gods, would not contradict what the Bible said. Like all people groups they left gory details out, and the Flood changed all that any way. There is no need to place Cain outside of the Garden, nor is there a need to place him inside the Garden. I just think that the evidence presented, tends to place him in the Garden as long as one understands how sin is portrayed through out the Bible. The apostle Paul even mentioned that the giving of the law to Moses proliferated sin, because the more laws there are the more chances of acting out the sin that is in the mind. There is really nothing a human can do about sin, the only combat is controlling ones thoughts and it would seem the more laws one makes to do that, the worse one applies guilt to the equation.

Not to mention a simple little point, and that is, as long as sin is confused with morality, one does not have to believe in a God either.
 
Sitchin believed the first people were made between 200-300 kya. That was before DNA studies placed our mtdna Eve at over 200k ago or Ethiopian discoveries of anatomically modern humans.

I have evidence too... What do you have?

Stitchin in wrong.

Don't be too harsh. You know that there were no scholars to invent writing, which is much more implausible.

J
If you want to know how writing came about in Mesopotamia, this is a great book. http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/books/schhop

Writing developed from counting and the necessity of keeping track of goods. The story of how it developed is really interesting and it shows just how practical and inventive people are. The author above only looks at how cuneiform developed and not any other written langues, but her science is excellent.
 
can't believe that nobody has responded to the OP with "...was Napoléon" yet
 
I've gotten the impression the OP was merely intended to go off on various tangents. CFC has a specialized thread for theological questions. Clearly the OP poster wasn't interested in getting expert response.

Agriculture does not mean work. It can be work, but it does not have to be. A farmer can slave labor his farm, and do nothing, and still be the master of his agriculture. The punishment was that it meant Adam had to work. He may have even ended up being a slave of the others who were created at the same time that he was. All humans/sons of God were created on day 6, and God could have created billions of humanoid beings.

I see we like to go off on a tangent... I'm not sure what these 'others' are supposed to be you keep referring to. There's Adam, there's Eve... and nobody. And it's pretty clear you've not worked in agriculture either. I have. It's work.

All the sons of God were created from dust. Chapter 1 told when God made them. Chapter 2 told how he made them, when it went into detail on Adam who was singled out from all the rest of these sons of God.

Fashioning a being from dust hardly makes you a 'son of God'. It makes you a dustling though.

Sin is not an act. Jesus said it was not an act, but what a person was thinking was the sin.

No, he said the thought was already sinful. Which is a bit ore radical than the act itself being sinful, but it doesn't contradict that sinning i an act. Not the act of thinking about sin, but still.

God said that the imaginations of a human's thoughts before the Flood became only evil continually.

And you have this 'knowledge' from where?

The act is just an outward manifestation of what is in the mind. Humans are not sinners because they act out their desires and imaginations. They are sinners, because that is the knowledge that is in the mind. Sin entered the world because Adam disobeyed God. God overturned what Adam did, when Jesus obeyed God, and gave up the Spirit on the Cross. When Adam ate, God was not present.

He was at the corner shop? Doesn't really matter, because after the act (which according to you isn't the sin) God was still present wit sinful Adam. QED.

The reason that humans view it as an act, is because they can then justify it.

I'm sure humans can justify sinning, but again that doesn't contradict it being an act. I can justify eating an apple, but it's still an act, whether I 'justify' it or not.

One cannot justify their thoughts, because they have no control over them, as in where they come from. One can control what they do with their thoughts, unless they give into them, and let thoughts control them. There are multiple ways a human can be controlled by their thoughts.

So now you're arguing humans have no control over their sinning. Brilliant.

Cain was not sent out of the garden because of sin, his act, or lack of knowledge, because in the Garden, he did not have the knowledge of good and evil. He had to leave because the Garden complained, and refused to give him the sustenance he needed to live.

Once again, only Adam and Eve were in the garden. Cain and Abel only appear after they were expulsed. Stop making up your own bible.

The Garden was a test of obedience without the hassle of morality. All the other created beings that had a soul/the breath of God in them, had the knowledge of good and evil, ie morality built into their natural innate reasoning, and they were their own bearers of law, as they saw fit to progress society, or not. That would be part of being a god. When God commanded to have no other god's before him that would include all human governments.

I'm sure that's why the Hebrews were given a king. The Garden was not 'a test of obedience'. Man being created in God's image, God could (and should) easily have foreseen Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge.

'All the other beings... had the knowledge of good and evil... built into their natural innate reasoning': but reasoning is sin, you claimed earlier. And yet we 'have no control over our thoughts.'

Having the knowledge of good and evil, makes us feel like gods, who do not need any outside intervention.

I wouldn't know why. It certainly doesn't apply to me.

I think that the Hebrews reiterated the truth of generation over and over again, because that is the true result of evolution.

No, it really really isn't. Truth and biology are two entirely different concepts.

Adam was a son of God, he just lacked morality, the knowledge of good and evil.

If he lacked morality, how can he be blamed for sinning?

The myths about Adam's offspring being slaves to the gods, would not contradict what the Bible said. Like all people groups they left gory details out, and the Flood changed all that any way. There is no need to place Cain outside of the Garden, nor is there a need to place him inside the Garden.

So he's in a limbo now. Nice. FWIW, I've never heard 'these myths about Adam's offspring being slaves to the gods'. It certainly doesn't strike me as biblical.

Not to mention a simple little point, and that is, as long as sin is confused with morality, one does not have to believe in a God either.

Actually morality and God have very little in common.
 
I've gotten the impression the OP was merely intended to go off on various tangents. CFC has a specialized thread for theological questions. Clearly the OP poster wasn't interested in getting expert response.
There's also a thread called "Ask an Atlanteologist." It covers a lot of the same nonsense this one does.

Agent327 said:
timtofly said:
Cain was not sent out of the garden because of sin, his act, or lack of knowledge, because in the Garden, he did not have the knowledge of good and evil. He had to leave because the Garden complained, and refused to give him the sustenance he needed to live.
Once again, only Adam and Eve were in the garden. Cain and Abel only appear after they were expulsed. Stop making up your own bible.Once again, only Adam and Eve were in the garden. Cain and Abel only appear after they were expulsed. Stop making up your own bible.
Evidently the garden was unhappy at being preyed on by vegans.
 
Back
Top Bottom