Discussion in 'Religion' started by Beer w/Straw, Nov 14, 2018.
Where does it state that?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
As promised .....
The Spirit of God is known by two other names in the Christian lexicon. One is Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost. The other is Logos (Word).
In short the Logos is the very substance of creation which permeates all of existence. It is said that these two entities are responsible for devine inspiration. God, by his holy ghost transmits his divine will through the Logos. Hence the scriptures devine origin though written by humans.
The prolog of the Gospel of John draws on these very words and concepts when he wrote:
Here the English word "Word" is actually Logos in the original Greek. I bring that up just to show how important these ideas to the early Christian theology.
Who is "us"/"our"? Could it be Angels, Jesus, Sophia, the "Sons of God" from Gen 6:1-4 or maybe it's just a Royal "we"?
Someone or something was with him but if you asked 100 people you're likely to get 100 different answers.
This brings us to your second question.
I don't know why but that verse always cracks me up heh....
After this point God is just hanging out with Adam and Eve all the time. They would chat to all ends of the night, play fun games like "What's the first word that comes to mind when you see THIS critter". Good times.
Even after they where kicked out of the garden ... which of course was Eves fault. As we all know only a woman could be responsible for the curse of mortality on Gods chosen people.... God still hung out with them. He would chill with their sons all the time. Once each gave God a meal based on their profession and God was like, "I'm not a vegetarian blaaa, I'm a meat guy". That kind of pissed Cain off but in his defense, that does sound like a reason justification for Fratricide.
So Cain is banished and his seed sows corruption in the world. Abel is replaced by Seth and then a whole lot of begot-ing goes on.
Now, This is not in the bible but Adam lived to be 930 years old so.... I can imagine him sitting around the fire with his grandchildren recalling the good old days when he use to role with God. Like that one time God took a duck, beaver and a lizard and mashed them up into one creature ... lol ... Platypus. ... what a prankster.
All this leads to the answer. The 6th decedent from Adam, Noahs Great Grandfather. Enoch ... this is all the old testament says about him:
Not only did he not die because God "took him". He also wrote a book we call 1st Enoch.
It is considered the oldest and first retelling of all the events handed down orally to him. It also speaks of his contemporary life such as the fallen angels, angelology, his visits to heaven, the impending flood and much much more.
In closing, this is the tale of how the creation of the world was passed down from God to Adam and eventually to Enoch whom was the first to write these down for future generations. And how the Holy Spirit worked through the Logos to implement Gods will by Divinely Inspiring Mosses, through their first hand account of the creation, to craft the book of Genesis and all other Divine Scriptures.
If you are interested in other details I recommend reading the commentaries of Philo of Alexandria and Flavius Joesphus books called Antiquities. Both can be found here:
You have terrible reading skills. From Genesis 2:
"The Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."
No men yet.
"But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. And 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."
The first man, Adam. The first woman soon followed. And as we already established, this occurred BEFORE the creation of Man listed in Genesis 1.
Keep this in mind:
Genesis 1:10 - And God called the dry landEarth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good
The Garden of Eden was a paradise...
Paradise - (in some religions) heaven as the ultimate abode ...
The abode of Adam and Eve before the Fall in the biblical account of the Creation; the Garden of Eden.
“Earth” as in land”, not in planet earth (based on genesis 1.10).
Yes God fashioned a man, not a bunch of men and women, as in Genesis 1, where He created man and woman simultaneously.
God created this man specifically. To start a specific linage.
It says nothing about them being the FIRST human beings.
The Quran gives a little more detail. Adam wasn’t fashioned on the earth. He was fashioned in heaven, or paradise.
The bible states that God made The Garden of Eden, and placed the man he had created, in it.
In genesis 5.1 it is reiterated that God created mankind, both male and female, symultaneosly.
Genesis 2 relates to a particular genealogy, which begins with Adam. The whole bible is based on this linage.
So no, There is no mention in the bible that Adam and Eve were the first human beings, from which all other humans come from.
In genesis 3.20, it says that Adam named his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all living. But unless you think Adam and Eve gave birth elephants and scorpions, it should be obvious what that refers to. Especially as Adam was a Viceroy (according to Quran), or King. That would make his wife Queen, who, especially in ancient times would have been respected as “Mother”, a high ranking position.
You didn’t establish anything.
You like the idea of there being two contradictory accounts, because it helps to maintain your delusion. :roll eyes:
Heaven has dirt - or more likely clay, as in pottery. Apparently.
On alternate Wednesdays, these people deny they are Abrahamic theists.
What he is doing is creating pretexts for things like this:
which is his agenda. Notice that discussing the theist's psychology behind any of this scriptural exegesis is not on the table. God is not up for discussion as a protagonist in a story, a creation of a storyteller, here.
This statement in quotes is clearly made up.
the author of the story just decided to make up a creation myth and did not even sign his name.
And that much is clear given the things we now know he got wrong...
In fact who was the author?
The greatest event of all time and no author signs his name ...and no witness or evidence not even a name of who made the wild unsupported claim ...shows it is made up....So our good book startes with a statement..we dont know who made it ... and Jan does not find that odd.
Obviously made up and we dont even know who made it up...but thats good enough for Jan...someone said God did it so it must be true...unbelievable.
Who witnessed this creation such that he could write this unsupported account of creation.
Firstly in an eternal universe there was no point of creation☺.
So the psychology of our theist Jan indicates that he is able to accept and believe the unevidenced authors account of something no one could witness and believes all the minor details including impossible human life spans and yet he cant accept evolution which has many many identifiable and qualified scientists offerring irrefutable facts in support of evolution.
I think the Adam and Eve story can be found in other places...just like the many many JC types these myths made the rounds and most over time died out.
The origins of religion can be found in astrology....
It is a great pity Jan that you can not approach the good book on the same questioning basis you apply to folk here...
Here is a link for an earlier garden of eden myth.
And do you know where the ten commandments came from...https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...DhAZ&usg=AOvVaw2sNdFg7hdx1-p6FOYGATkA&cf=1
Right. That's not the point. The point is that that passage says there was "no man" yet. Which agrees with the previous line that states Genesis 2 occurred "before any plant of the field was in the earth and before any herb of the field had grown."
It absolutely does. In order, there is "no man" (i.e. this is the story of creation before the creation of Man) and in the very next line "the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground." Which, by the way, is where the phrase "for dust you are and to dust you will return" comes from - thus confirming that Genesis 2 describes the creation of both the first human and, through him, all of Mankind.
I like that idea because it gives you insight into the history of the Bible, which is a fascinating subject. It is unfortunate that your beliefs blind you to such a study of the origins of the Bible.
If you are trying to use the Quran to alter what the Bible says, you have already lost the argument.
Exactly. She was the mother of all humanity (with the exception of herself and Adam of course.) Which, again, proves that the Bible states that Adam and Eve were the first humans, and all humanity descended from them.
Thank you for proving that Beer with Straw's point was quite valid, and that "the Adam and Eve thing" is a strong argument that the Bible is fiction.
No. It states the genealogy of a new race of people starting with the specific creation of Adam. Just like it says.
It states that on the sixth day God created mankind, both men an women simultaneously.
God instructed them to be fruitful, multiply, and re-plenish the earth. That’s what it actually says.
Note that God did not teach them all the names of the animals. This God taught to Adam.
He formed one man out of the dust, and placed him in a garden which God had created. Adam wasn’t created in the same place mankind was.
It says the earth was formless, and void. Obviously there was no rains, or men to till the land.
Adam, and his linage were the heavenly descendants, and mankind were the earthly ones, mentioned in Genesis 2.
Feel free to show where anything is not corroborated with the Bible itself. Unlike you who have to lie.
Like I’m going to take advise, from such a dishonest atheist as yourself. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No. That’s not what it says.
It does not state that at all, and you haven’t shown that it has. All you have done is lie and misquote, to defend your atheism.
You’re a liar bilvon. You’ve proven that in this dialogue.
Why do you feel the need to lie?
Is it that you know there is a God, but you cannot accept it, because you are subconsciously committed to “there is no God”?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The earth was without form and void "in the beginning". The land masses were formed on day three and plants began to grow the same day. It is not "obvious" that there was no rain; in fact, it's impossible.
Yet she didn’t give rise to elephants and scorpions. She is as much mother to them as she is to mankind, according to that text.
What it doesn’t say is that Adam and Eve are the first human beings. They are the first of their linage. A different thing altogether.
You denied the statement that, "She was the mother of all humanity." It clearly does say that.
How so? Are you suggesting that Adam and Eve weren't human?
Where does it say “Eve is the mother of all humanity”?
Why do think “the mother of all”, is the same as “the mother of humanity”, in the sense that from them comes all humans?
I quoted where it says Eve was the mother of all living. Humanity are living.
I ask again, Are you suggesting that Adam and Eve weren't human?
So are elephants and scorpions. Did s
I think you need to ask yourself that question, given what you and bilvon are proposing.
The question is not whether Eve was the mother of elephants and scorpions. It is possible to conclude that from the text, though it doesn't seem very sensible to do so.
I have asked myself that question and I have answered it: Yes, Adam and Eve were human. There is nothing controversial about that view. It's what genesis clearly says.
What's YOUR answer?
It is precisely the question.
If she is the mother, in the sense you prefer to accept, then she is as much mother to elephants and scorpions, as she is to humans.
You can conclude what you like.
It doesn’t allude to the idea that Adam and Eve were the first ever human beings.
Unless you can show where it says these are the first ever humans, you have no case.
Yes they human. But they aren’t the first ever humans, and the bible doesn’t say, or imply they are.
I QUOTED where it says that Eve was the mother of all living. Humans are living. Therefore Eve was the mother of all humans, including the first humans. There is no escaping that.
I did not say that Adam and Eve were the first humans.
No. That would mean she is equally mother to elephants and scorpions. She isn’t. Then again you know that, you’ve just nowhere else to turn.
“Mother” , in the context used in that particular text, is a translation of the word ‘em, which means mother, in the bonding sense. Not in the biological sense (Mother Earth).
But it is interesting why you are so desperate to maintain the lie.
So what are you saying?
Separate names with a comma.