Protestantism

» Migisi - Interesting Tree symbolism

.
it was only this one tree's fruit which was forbidden by God.
.
And that's odd, because there was one other tree. Gen 2:9 - "... In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." Funny that God didn't mention any prohibition against eating fruit from the Tree of Life. But he did banish them before they could eat that fruit, and put guards at the Garden gates. So it was obviously a prohibited tree. Imagine if they'd come upon the Life Tree first. If the serpent was so cunning, he'd have pointed the kids to that tree. But then they'd have had eternal life and become gods themselves. I guess the serpent had enough gods to deal with without adding two more, ay? What punishment could God have threatened the kids with, or metered out, had they obtained eternal life first?
.
We get the sense that all the trees in the Garden were fully matured.
.
Yes, that's the impression we get from the legend. But if everything in the Garden was fully mature - then what needed tending by Adam? God assigned Adam "to work it and take care of it" (vs 15), and he even needed a 'helper'. What kind of gardening work did Adam do? Rake up fallen leaves and fruit? Nope. There was no death in Eden. Leaves didn't die and fruit didn't rot. Pull weeds and pick tomatoes? That would kill the weeds and tomatoes - bringing death into existence in Eden. The very act of harvesting their food brought death into Eden. But death to one creation so the other creation could live was God's idea (Gen 1:29). And he deemed it good.
.
God spoke all things into being except the man and woman both of whom [He] created with [His] hands.
.
Perhaps he wanted to get his hands dirty with his last creation. Can you see God with dirt under his fingernails? (wink)

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by Migisi:
.

.
You point out the inconsistencies about which we are supposed to in ignorance. We could say that we don't understand God's ways; but, that we trust them whatever they are or were or shall be. That's how some people view the situation.
.
I think religionists have every right to promote their ideas of reality just as we all do to question them. But, when they start in on their supposed "absolute truths" it comes to my mind that all of us bear a responsibility to check them and their claims out--just as Wendell is claiming that he is going to prove something or other to you. None of them likes it when any person stands in opposition to their "absolute truths" and they react as though we are the Devil's agents if not the Satan itself. And, they can be Muslims as well as Jews or Christians. I don't know about the far east religionists; but, I imagine they're about the same as the ones we have here.
.
I can imagine the discussions our Evangelicals have with inner circle acquaintances. I'm sure we're not being painted as honest persons seeking any true understandings. Mostly, we'll be seen as agents of Satan--maybe knowing or unknowing; but, agents just the same.
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by pink101:
.
Mostly, we'll be seen as agents of Satan...
.
I guess their ridicule might have some impact on someone who believes in an evil supernatural troublemaker (created by God, BTW). Ah yes, the King of Hell whom men conveniently blame for their own despicable thoughts and behavior, which enables them to avoid personal responsibility. Was it Flip Wilson?... "Da Devil made me do it!"
.
Gotta go. The Devil's making me cut my grass. Tee hee.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brother_Jones - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by Migisi:

Mostly, we'll be seen as agents of Satan...

Well, here is where stuff gets a little convoluted. In the New Testament, Jesus talks to Satan and spends quite a bit of time with the character.
In another highly useful thread, Pinky states that he believes Jesus is a reliable source of info about God, but Pinky did not mention nuttin much about the Devil. But it is sorta important that if you regard the words and speeches of Jesus regarding God, that you would regard and respect His words concerning Satan. I'm sorta pickin up some sorta vibe from migisi that Jesus' example with the Devil is not so very important. And from Pinky, I'm pickin up that the Devil is in the mix somewhere (maybe in the Twilight Zone) but that Christians make Him out to be in all the details where he maybe ain't. It is sorta the age old problem of Is You Is or Is You Ain't. According to Jesus, there is a Satan. Back to you guys.

i'm the Lord's Oldtimer

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» pink101 - There You Go Again

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by Brother_Jones:
.
In the words of an old cow hand, long since gone, "there you go again", Brother Jones--running off and putting words into other peoples' mouths.
.
The main thing that Jesus tells us about God is that we can have a relationship with God not based on the rules of any religionists who might think rather highly of themselves.
.
Jesus claims it is a personal relationship--one on one and not mediated by any third party.
.
I don't recall anyone ever having claimed that Jesus wrote any part of the Bible. Do you?
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - The few remaining truths

The few remaining truths are graffiti, suicide notes, shopping lists. ~Francesca da Rimini

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» Migisi - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by Brother_Jones:
.
Jesus talks to Satan and spends quite a bit of time with the character.
.
I especially like the 40 days/nights desert drama.
.
But who was with Jesus in the desert and the temple in the holy city? Who was the eyewitness to the encounter and heard and wrote down their dialogue?
.
Who saw the 'Spirit' that led Jesus into the desert?
Why would the Spirit intentionally put Jesus in that position? If Jesus was God-on-earth (as Christians claim), can God be tempted? And if the devil knew Jesus as a heavenly being way before Earth's creation, surely he'd have known that Jesus couldn't be tempted. So why did he even try?
.
Who saw the 'tempter' or 'devil' (the name 'Satan' isn't used in Mat. 4) with his own eyes, and saw angels attend to Jesus afterwards?
.
But it is sorta important that if you regard the words and speeches of Jesus regarding God, that you would regard and respect His words concerning Satan.
.
I guess it would be important - to a believer.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brother_Jones - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by Migisi:

But who was with Jesus in the desert and the temple in the holy city?
The bible doesn't indicate who if anyone was with Jesus and the devil.
Who was the eyewitness to the encounter and heard and wrote down their dialogue?

We aren't told. However, if you believe that God can inspire and reveal things to writers, it shouldn't be such a great task for God and man to write about what actually happened, if there is cooperation between the divine and the believer.

Why would the Spirit intentionally put Jesus in that position?

To be tempted of the devil. matt 4:1 Would it make sense to you to follow a Jesus that was raised as some kind of rich prince and never tested with any real life crises?

Who saw the 'Spirit' that led Jesus into the desert?

The bible doesn't indicate that anyone saw it.

If Jesus was God-on-earth (as Christians claim), can God be tempted?

Sorry, but this question deserves more of an answer than I am prepared to give in a short reply. It reaches into the mystery of how God could be born as a human being and then 'grow in wisdom, stature, and favor with God and men.' Lk 2:52 As a human being, 'he was tempted for forty days.' Lk 4:2

And if the devil knew Jesus as a heavenly being way before Earth's creation, surely he'd have known that Jesus couldn't be tempted. So why did he even try?

It seems like you are wanting to give supernatural knowledge to the devil that the bible doesn't indicate. There is no reason to believe the devil is omnipresent or all-knowing.

Who saw the 'tempter' or 'devil' (the name 'Satan' isn't used in Mat. 4) with his own eyes, and saw angels attend to Jesus afterwards?

Again back to the idea of inspiration. Would it really help you to believe if five hundred people saw it? That is the approximate number who saw the risen Jesus on one occasion yet still many do not believe. 1 Cor. 15:6

I guess it would be important - to a believer.

The ideas, speeches, and actions of Jesus are important in many ways to all people... believers and non-believers. The entire Western Civilization stands on His words in one way or another. We are forced everyday to consider Jesus either by culture, by each other, or perhaps if you are a believer... the Grace of God that never gives up on a living being.

i'm just an oldtimer for the Lord.

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» Brian Tubbs - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by pink101:

You and Migisi haven't shown any inconsistencies or problems in this discussion. Stop giving yourselves credit where it ain't due.

Adam and Eve would NOT have been banished from the Garden had they not fallen into sin. And there would've been no problem with them partaking of the Tree of Life. In fact, it's implied that they were partaking of it while in the Garden. The banishment from the Garden and separation from the Tree of Life is meant to EMPHASIZE mankind's loss of "everlasting life" or immortality thanks to sin.

» Migisi - Interesting Tree symbolism

In response to Interesting Tree symbolism posted by Brother_Jones:
.
I'm awestruck, Jones. Some ~direct~ answers from you. Atta boy! Now let's have a discussion.
.
"The bible doesn't indicate"... "We aren't told"... "The bible doesn't indicate"... seems to be the prevailing answer. So, all we have left is a Christian writer's 'inspiration' and 'divine revelation' as evidence that an unwitnessed event actually happened. Myths and legends are made from the same stuff.
.
-----------------
.
Would it make sense to you to follow a Jesus that was raised as some kind of rich prince and never tested with any real life crises?
.
Even rich princes have real life crises which test their mettle. They're as human as poor princes.
.
----------------
.
It reaches into the mystery of how God could be born as a human being and then 'grow in wisdom, stature, and favor with God and men.'
.
It's a "mystery" indeed. Translated: there's no logical explanation.
.
---------------
.
As a human being, 'he was tempted for forty days.' Lk 4:2
.
Luke links Jesus with Moses and Elijah - both of whom had fasted 40 days and 40 nights. Another link of the three in Matthew 17 - where Jesus is transfigured, Moses and Elijah appear, and the three of them have a chat.
.
You agree that Jesus was human. Same verse: "He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry." Who wouldn't be hungry?! Forty days sounds impossible, but it IS survivable. Ten political prisoners in Ireland lived 46 to 73 days before succumbing to starvation. Mahatma Gandhi survived a 3-week fast while in his 70s. And it's documented that obese people (otherwise healthy) can live 3 weeks to 25 weeks or more without food. But, after only a few days without food, the human body and mind are taxed. One would suffer irritability, low moral, lethargy, physical weakness, confusion and disorientation, poor judgment, weakened immune system, inability to maintain body temperature (which can lead to hypothermia in cold temps, or heat exhaustion/stroke in hot environs - like the desert wilderness Jesus was in). Now, given these, was Jesus really tempted ~~by the devil~~, or was he tormented by the physical conditions associated with his self-imposed starvation? Was his alleged encounter with Satan a dilusion due to lack of food? Even more astounding, the story says he climbed a 'high mountain' (Mat 4), and walked to Jerusalem and climbed to the 'highest point of the temple'. To do this, Jesus must've had superhuman strength despite his emaciated condition - in such a low physical state that angels were needed to attend to him afterwards.
.
--------------------
.
I wrote: "And if the devil knew Jesus as a heavenly being way before Earth's creation, surely he'd have known that Jesus couldn't be tempted. So why did he even try?"
.
You replied: "It seems like you are wanting to give supernatural knowledge to the devil that the bible doesn't indicate. There is no reason to believe the devil is omnipresent or all-knowing."
.
I was just saying Jesus and Satan knew each other, according to the stories. You've read Matthew 8 (two possessed men) and Luke 8 (one possessed man), where demons recognized Jesus and begged to be sent into pigs. Surely, if these insignificant demons knew Jesus, their boss Satan did. In another story (Luke 10), Jesus said, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" - implying that he'd been present when God cast Satan from heaven. As you know, Satan was Lucifer - the "shining star of the dawn," or "light-bringer". This great heavenly being had been created by God as one of the three named archangels, and was extremely close to the God family. If Jesus was part of the God family from the beginning (as Christians claim), then Satan and Jesus knew each other well.
.
------------------
.
Would it really help you to believe if five hundred people saw it? That is the approximate number who saw the risen Jesus on one occasion yet still many do not believe. 1 Cor. 15:6
.
I'd believe -- if I was one of the 500 eyewitnesses to a dead man walking and talking. (wink)
.
Here's what Paul claims: "5and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."
.
Paul's accounting and chronology is suspect. Do the Gospels affirm that Jesus appeared to Peter first? No. Matthew, Mark, and John have Mary seeing Jesus first. Luke has Jesus' appearing first to Cleopas and one other disciple as they walked to Emmaus. Secondly, there were only ELEVEN apostles after the crucifixion and resurrection - not Twelve. Judas was dead. Only TEN, if you read John -- Judas was dead, and Thomas was absent when Jesus first appeared to the apostles. Thirdly, do any of the Gospels mention Jesus appearing to more than 500 brothers at the same time? I haven't found any reference to it. Which 'James' did Jesus appear to... James, son of Zebedee (James the Greater) - James, son of Alphaeus (James the Less) - or James, the brother of Jesus? Paul doesn't identify which. As to Jesus appearing to Paul. Well, that's what he ~CLAIMED~, despite the fact that his traveling buddies who were there never saw or heard Jesus.
.
----------------------
.
We are forced everyday to consider Jesus either by culture, by each other, or perhaps if you are a believer... the Grace of God that never gives up on a living being.
.
Good word choice: 'forced'.

-- posted by Migisi