Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Autonemesis · 10-10-2002, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Genesis 3:22
And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.

Who was the Lord God addressing in these passages? "Let us make man in our image." "Behold, the man has become as one of us." One of whom? To whom is the Lord God speaking here? Who was there taking dictation, so that the author of Genesis could write down the transcript?

Then, having recognized that "the man is become as one of us" why would the Lord God then decide to prevent the man from eating of the tree of life, and live for ever? The Lord God was unable or unwilling to prevent the man from eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Why is that?

It seems that the story is saying that it was possible for man to choose to become a God by eating the fruit of the two trees. This was forbidden, but the choice was still left open to the man. Why did the Lord God intervene, if the man was to have a choice? Did God prevent the man from eating of the Tree of Life to forestall a rival God from emerging?

Why did the Lord God put the two trees in the Garden if this undesirable outcome - the man becoming "as one of us" - was a likely possibility? Wouldn't it have made more sense to leave the trees out of the Lord God's creation altogether?

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: Kind Bud ]

Toto · 10-10-2002, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kind Bud:


Who was the Lord God addressing in these passages? "Let us make man in our image." "Behold, the man has become as one of us." One of whom? To whom is the Lord God speaking here? Who was there taking dictation, so that the author of Genesis could write down the transcript?

. . .

The Lord is speaking to the other gods in heaven. After the Jews became strict(er) monotheists, they redefined those other gods to be angels.

As to the rest of it, why should it make sense?

Autonemesis · 10-10-2002, 03:13 PM

Forgive me If I am wrong, Toto, but I assumed that BC&A was set up so Bible-believers can answer challenges like mine.

offa · 10-10-2002, 03:18 PM

Offa;
Please define heaven. Heaven is the haven of priests. Moses built a tent and made one room heaven. The "holy of holies" is heaven. The "world" that GOD created was smaller than a township. My world is my basement and heaven is driving home after work with a beer in hand.

Vanderzyden · 10-10-2002, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kind Bud:


Who was the Lord God addressing in these passages? "Let us make man in our image." "Behold, the man has become as one of us." One of whom? To whom is the Lord God speaking here? Who was there taking dictation, so that the author of Genesis could write down the transcript?

How interesting, Kind Bud. You claim you have examined the Scriptures.

If you had read the NT, and then compared it with this and other references in the OT, then it would be quite obvious to whom the Lord God is speaking.

Vanderzyden

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]

Liquidrage · 10-10-2002, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:


How interesting, Kind Bud. You claim you have examined the Scriptures.

If you had read the NT, and then compared it with this and other references in the OT, then it would be quite obvious to whom the Lord God is speaking.

Vanderzyden

How about answering the question?

There is no need for such egotistical displays.
Maybe he hasn't read the NT well. Maybe he has and it isn't obvious to him.

If someone has a question and you know the answer, it takes just as much effort to belittle as it does to answer it. If you choose to answer the question you have helped someone. If you choose to belittle you have done nothing but belittle.

I can respect someone that does not bother to do either. But to choose to belittle instead of answering warrants no such respect.

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: Liquidrage ]

Autonemesis · 10-10-2002, 03:40 PM

If Vanderzyden begins one more reply with "How interesting..." or "Indeed..." when in fact, he is not interested and does not agree, I will SCREAM.

Vanderzyden · 10-10-2002, 03:45 PM

My intention isn't to belittle. Rather, it is to attempt to show the futility of the arrogance that is clearly evident in Kind Bud's posts.

I don't think Kind Bud is serious. It would seem that he is bent on fighting, not discussing. He also seems to enjoy luring theists into his little "traps". Then he tucks tail and withdraws into an evasive or diversionary mode.

This is why I won't bother answering his question directly. Let him scream.

Vanderzyden

Mageth · 10-10-2002, 03:52 PM

(I strongly suspect Van's posts and mine will get deleted by the mods, and I apologize for this off-topic post in advance.)

My intention isn't to belittle. Rather, it is to attempt to show the futility of the arrogance that is clearly evident in Kind Bud's posts.

This forum is for discussing the bible and biblical archaeology, not for "attempting to show the futility of the arrogance that is clearly evident." Discuss, or shut up.

I don't think Kind Bud is serious. It would seem that he is bent on fighting, not discussing.

Based on your two posts in this thread, the irony is killing me.

He also seems to enjoy luring theists into his little "traps". Then he tucks tail and withdraws into an evasive or diversionary mode.

The irony continues.

This is why I won't bother answering his question directly. Let him scream.

Nope, no belittlement going on here.

Mageth · 10-10-2002, 03:55 PM

On topic, I think modern xians might claim that he was addressing the rest of himself, the other two members of the trinity. As the writer of Genesis apparently had no trinity in their theological arsenal, I don't think this holds much water.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-10-2002, 03:13 PM	#3
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	Forgive me If I am wrong, Toto, but I assumed that BC&A was set up so Bible-believers can answer challenges like mine.

10-10-2002, 03:18 PM	#4
offa Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Monroeville, Ohio, USA Posts: 440	Offa; Please define heaven. Heaven is the haven of priests. Moses built a tent and made one room heaven. The "holy of holies" is heaven. The "world" that GOD created was smaller than a township. My world is my basement and heaven is driving home after work with a beer in hand.

10-10-2002, 03:40 PM	#7
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	If Vanderzyden begins one more reply with "How interesting..." or "Indeed..." when in fact, he is not interested and does not agree, I will SCREAM.

10-10-2002, 03:45 PM	#8
Vanderzyden Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: California Posts: 694	My intention isn't to belittle. Rather, it is to attempt to show the futility of the arrogance that is clearly evident in Kind Bud's posts. I don't think Kind Bud is serious. It would seem that he is bent on fighting, not discussing. He also seems to enjoy luring theists into his little "traps". Then he tucks tail and withdraws into an evasive or diversionary mode. This is why I won't bother answering his question directly. Let him scream. Vanderzyden

10-10-2002, 03:52 PM	#9
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	(I strongly suspect Van's posts and mine will get deleted by the mods, and I apologize for this off-topic post in advance.) My intention isn't to belittle. Rather, it is to attempt to show the futility of the arrogance that is clearly evident in Kind Bud's posts. This forum is for discussing the bible and biblical archaeology, not for "attempting to show the futility of the arrogance that is clearly evident." Discuss, or shut up. I don't think Kind Bud is serious. It would seem that he is bent on fighting, not discussing. Based on your two posts in this thread, the irony is killing me. He also seems to enjoy luring theists into his little "traps". Then he tucks tail and withdraws into an evasive or diversionary mode. The irony continues. This is why I won't bother answering his question directly. Let him scream. Nope, no belittlement going on here.

10-10-2002, 03:55 PM	#10
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	On topic, I think modern xians might claim that he was addressing the rest of himself, the other two members of the trinity. As the writer of Genesis apparently had no trinity in their theological arsenal, I don't think this holds much water.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.