Botz Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 76 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,492 Content Per Day: 0.61 Reputation: 191 Days Won: 18 Joined: 03/29/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted March 23, 2009 Hmmm ....just finished catching up with all the posts, some really interesting thoughts/observations/revelation/ and inspired guess-work...I was particularly blessed with the reiteration of the idea that once Adam and Eve had disobediently partaken of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, G-d who punished them but loved them, could not allow them the opportunity to reach out and eat of the Tree of Life because they would have remained in their sinful state. When I lived in the Far-East there was a plant that apparently only flowered about once every 7 years, and then only in the light of a full moon...I was fortunate enough to actually see one of these flowers, and it was absolutely beautiful. I did think therefore that in His foreknowledge G-d may not have allowed the Tree of Life to bear fruit, all the time that Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, so it never became an issue. (Or is could have been similar to the Durian, and not tempting) Also picking up on what has previously been mentioned...the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, was not poisonous...nor were it's effects something evil...it seems it was the act of disobedience that led to them eating the forbidden fruit that disqualified them...they exercised their free will, and chose to entertain the subtle words of a persuasive enemy masquerading as a knowledgeable friend. In the words of James...Chapter One 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted March 23, 2009 It is my personal persuasion that what God was saying, and WHY he was saying it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 23, 2009 It is my personal persuasion that what God was saying, and WHY he was saying it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovedya Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 375 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 11,400 Content Per Day: 1.44 Reputation: 125 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/30/2002 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1971 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The question is easily answered: He went as many years not having eaten of the Tree of Knowledge either. It is therefore unreasonable to presume that Adam or Eve had eaten of the Tree of Life. Really? Unreasonable? The essential argument is: A) Adam was there for a period of time B) The Tree of Life was there for a period of time. C) Adam ate of the trees of the garden, so therefore, D) Adam ate of the Tree of Life. The flaw in the argument is lack of evidence. The mere fact that Adam and the Tree existed in the same space for a period of time does not necessitate his having partaken of the tree. I could say that I have lived in my home for 20 years. But does that necessitate my ever having been in the attic? Let's say that I walked into a room in which there was a flask of bourbon sitting on the table. Does the fact that I am in the room, or have been in the room mean that I partook of the flask? I believe that it is more reasonable to take God at His word when He said, "Now lest he stretch forth his hand and take also from the Tree of Life and eat, and live forever..." That lends stronger evidence to the fact that Adam had not previously eaten of that tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 23, 2009 The question is easily answered: He went as many years not having eaten of the Tree of Knowledge either. It is therefore unreasonable to presume that Adam or Eve had eaten of the Tree of Life. Really? Unreasonable? The essential argument is: A) Adam was there for a period of time B) The Tree of Life was there for a period of time. C) Adam ate of the trees of the garden, so therefore, D) Adam ate of the Tree of Life. The flaw in the argument is lack of evidence. The mere fact that Adam and the Tree existed in the same space for a period of time does not necessitate his having partaken of the tree. I could say that I have lived in my home for 20 years. But does that necessitate my ever having been in the attic? Let's say that I walked into a room in which there was a flask of bourbon sitting on the table. Does the fact that I am in the room, or have been in the room mean that I partook of the flask? I believe that it is more reasonable to take God at His word when He said, "Now lest he stretch forth his hand and take also from the Tree of Life and eat, and live forever..." That lends stronger evidence to the fact that Adam had not previously eaten of that tree. There are 17 Hebrew words in the following verse being translated/interpreted with 41 English words. That is 2.4 times as many English words as Hebrew, or 140% more English . . . which makes for sufficient room for a pure translation to be distorted by another culture/language Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kross Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 44 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,773 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 51 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/04/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/27/1957 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Why didn't Adam and Eve eat from the tree of Life rather than the tree of knowledge of good and evil if it was their desire to live forever? They probably did until it was taken away. They were designed to live forever and the treee of life would have been the means to do that. That is why GOD took it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kross Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 44 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,773 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 51 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/04/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/27/1957 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The question is easily answered: He went as many years not having eaten of the Tree of Knowledge either. It is therefore unreasonable to presume that Adam or Eve had eaten of the Tree of Life. Really? Unreasonable? While I would not say it is "unreasonable" I would say that Adam had no need to eat of it if he was not supposed to. There was no temptor telling him or Eve to taste of it. The deed was already done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovedya Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 375 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 11,400 Content Per Day: 1.44 Reputation: 125 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/30/2002 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1971 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The question is easily answered: He went as many years not having eaten of the Tree of Knowledge either. It is therefore unreasonable to presume that Adam or Eve had eaten of the Tree of Life. Really? Unreasonable? The essential argument is: A) Adam was there for a period of time B) The Tree of Life was there for a period of time. C) Adam ate of the trees of the garden, so therefore, D) Adam ate of the Tree of Life. The flaw in the argument is lack of evidence. The mere fact that Adam and the Tree existed in the same space for a period of time does not necessitate his having partaken of the tree. I could say that I have lived in my home for 20 years. But does that necessitate my ever having been in the attic? Let's say that I walked into a room in which there was a flask of bourbon sitting on the table. Does the fact that I am in the room, or have been in the room mean that I partook of the flask? I believe that it is more reasonable to take God at His word when He said, "Now lest he stretch forth his hand and take also from the Tree of Life and eat, and live forever..." That lends stronger evidence to the fact that Adam had not previously eaten of that tree. There are 17 Hebrew words in the following verse being translated/interpreted with 41 English words. That is 2.4 times as many English words as Hebrew, or 140% more English . . . which makes for sufficient room for a pure translation to be distorted by another culture/language Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 23, 2009 What of the other aspect of the argument which I presented on the first page? You didn't post the first page . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovedya Posted March 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 375 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 11,400 Content Per Day: 1.44 Reputation: 125 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/30/2002 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1971 Share Posted March 23, 2009 What of the other aspect of the argument which I presented on the first page? You didn't post the first page . . . http://www.worthychristianforums.com/index...t&p=1342709 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts