Zone1 Was Eve expelled from Eden, or did she leave with Adam?

[hobelim]

I hope not to upset anyone's sensibilities.

lol... I am not upset but some people do get upset if you point out flaws in their thinking. So what. If they can't deal with rational questions about their beliefs they shouldn't be here.

Give them hell! Including me. lol...

 

[Ace Nova]

Agreed on the consequences of our actions, good or bad.

An example is Matthew 6:24, the quotation of Jesus saying we have a choice between God and mammon. As other parts of this forum point out, all Trump supporters are mammon-worshipers and, therefore, have turned away from God. They are free to make the choice, but must also eventually faces the consequences of following Satan.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 6:24 - King James Version

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

www.biblegateway.com

I can see how someone on the surface can come to that conclusion - based on how one views Trump himself.

That said - the vast majority of Trump supporters do not "worship Mammon" - not in the sense that Jesus spoke about.

The majority of his supporters are middle class people - most making less than $100,000 per year. Many making less than $50,000 per year.

A large portion of his base are considered Christian conservatives.

The majority of his supporters follow him because they feel he will "Make America Great Again" - boost American jobs, the economy and certain conservative values.

Of course, there are a good portion of his supporters that support him primarily because they are capitalists and yes, want to make as much money possible - but they are far from the majority of his supporters.


Jesus spoke about focusing your life on God and his teachings instead of focusing your life primarily on material wealth.

He also spoke about how to live a good life in this material world by "Giving God what is God's and Caesar what is Caesar's"



If a person makes $50,000 per year but does nothing but focus on material things - spends all his money on himself and primarily values things like jewelry, expensive clothing, and trends but if someone asks him for a dollar on the street, he laughs them off.

If a person makes $200,000 a year but uses his money for expenses, to pay for his family's housing, schooling, food and all other expenses - does not spend on flashy clothing, material objects etc - lives a humble life - then also donates a portion to charities, non profits, and volunteers when he can - and doesn't show it off - that person is following Jesus' teachings better than the guy making $50,000 per year - regardless of whom either one of them voted for.



That said - there could be other reasons to be critical about some Trump supporters - But the same could be said about Democratic candidate supporters - both bases could have what others consider hypocritical components within them.



To conclude - the only ones truly justified to use that teaching criticizing or condemning others are the lay people of the world who have voluntarily taken vows of poverty and live their entire lives helping the less fortunate, the sick, underprivileged and live their lives not only by teaching but by example. The irony is those people would rarely (if ever) use that teaching condemning or criticizing other people for political reasons. That is what that teaching is about.

 

[hobelim]

Moses wrote what he knew. I have no doubt he was as honest as he could be.

Did you know that the earliest evidence of hypnotism, brainwashing, or mind control, was discovered in Egypt dated around 5000 years ago? That being said Moses was highly educated in the Egyptian royal court. According to the story he left all of that to be among his people, Hebrew slaves, which is not necessarily about beating people into submission.

Is it unbelievable to think Moses authored the story of A&E to educate children about losing your mind for life to a despicable deceiver? The children of former Hebrew slaves who had been victims of mind control, demonic possession, for hundreds of years? A fact is that the Pharaoh wore a serpent on his head and was a feared expert in sorcery, the magical arts.

Behold the Nachash! The crafty talking serpent of old who beguiles the gullible and faithless.

What many people don't seem to realize is that when intelligent Jewish people read scripture the question about whether it is historically accurate is as irrelevant as if the story of the boy who cried wolf is historically accurate. There is no archeological proof that the town where he lived ever existed. No one knows the language he spoke. There are no historical records to prove that it ever happened but still the story conveys a timeless truth.

So was the author dishonest? Or just sharing the fruit of his mind for the benefit of others?

 

[ding]

Ok I'll break it down for you. lol

And by that you mean you will break it into multiple posts.

 

[ding]

no, it doesn't and since you know nothing of Jewish law, claiming it does is just more arrogance.

"near as I can tell"? LOLOLOL! So jewish law explains it, but you have decided to trust your own, uninformed, opinion. Great. Just great.

yes, you should read to see exactly what that refers to. It isn't the gospels, and reading isn't forbidden in cases like I showed in the Hebrew (when I quoted Jewish law...is there a problem? Do you not read Hebrew? Have you not studied actual Jewish law?)

So try again.

I've already made my case. Judaism strictly prohibits reading any literature—including early splinter-sect or heretical texts (sfarim chitzonim)—if the explicit purpose or result is to lead Jews away from traditional, normative Judaism or to promote heretical ideas. [1, 2]

 

[rosends]

I've already made my case. Judaism strictly prohibits reading any literature—including early splinter-sect or heretical texts (sfarim chitzonim)—if the explicit purpose or result is to lead Jews away from traditional, normative Judaism or to promote heretical ideas. [1, 2]

but the definition of what the chitzonim includes is explained in the legal texts and it doesn't support your belief. And the legal texts also include that Hebrew line that I included which shows that your entire line of thinking is mistaken. Maybe if you want to discuss Jewish law, you should learn to read Jewish law.

If you want to dismiss Jewish law (which you have done) then what it says shouldn't matter to you and your ignorance of it need not be remediated.

 

[hobelim]

Suffice to say there's no such thing as magic,

Come on now. You can't act like you are rational and honest but fail to see that what the ancients called magic or sorcery was to them what is now well known as mind control.

The ancients called it magic. Now it's called brainwashing. Damn. No such thing? Yeah right.

Who in their right mind would believe a thing trump says, a career criminal, convicted rapist, alleged pedophile, and brazen liar and con artist who made his fortune ripping people off?

He blubbers incoherently, rambling on about nothing and then his supporters cheer instead of saying, "this freaking guy is demented, pure evil, a clear and present danger to the world."

No such thing as magic. Pft.

 

[ding]

but the definition of what the chitzonim includes is explained in the legal texts and it doesn't support your belief. And the legal texts also include that Hebrew line that I included which shows that your entire line of thinking is mistaken. Maybe if you want to discuss Jewish law, you should learn to read Jewish law.

If you want to dismiss Jewish law (which you have done) then what it says shouldn't matter to you and your ignorance of it need not be remediated.

"...But the Rabbis’ opinions on literature obviously explore texts beyond Tanakh. In the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, Rabbi Akiva states that Jews who read non-Jewish books are excluded from the World To Come. This does not only suggest that the study of literature is prohibited but even implies that doing so is tantamount to denying fundamental beliefs of Judaism. However, the Talmud later qualifies Rabbi Akiva’s statement about secular books to include only the books of heretics. Additionally, the Yerushalmi specifies that one who reads books like Homer is similar to one reading a letter—neither good nor bad. Although heretical books are viewed with great severity, the bulk of literature remains permissible to read..."

Reading with Sacred Intention – Machon Siach

machonsiach.org

 

[ding]

lol... I am not upset but some people do get upset if you point out flaws in their thinking. So what. If they can't deal with rational questions about their beliefs they shouldn't be here.

Give them hell! Including me. lol...

That's not what's you do. You get off spewing hate towards Christians. Your posts drip with hate.

 

[rosends]

"...But the Rabbis’ opinions on literature obviously explore texts beyond Tanakh. In the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, Rabbi Akiva states that Jews who read non-Jewish books are excluded from the World To Come. This does not only suggest that the study of literature is prohibited but even implies that doing so is tantamount to denying fundamental beliefs of Judaism. However, the Talmud later qualifies Rabbi Akiva’s statement about secular books to include only the books of heretics. Additionally, the Yerushalmi specifies that one who reads books like Homer is similar to one reading a letter—neither good nor bad. Although heretical books are viewed with great severity, the bulk of literature remains permissible to read..."

Reading with Sacred Intention – Machon Siach

machonsiach.org

wonderful. Do you know what the books of heretics refers to? Do you need me to find the actual works being discussed?

1. the books of the sectarians, such as the books of Aristotle the Greek and his colleagues. And included in this – a person who reads the chronicles of the heathen kings, “songs of sensuality” [=erotic poems], and “writings of desire” [=novels] that have no wisdom in them or purpose other than a waste of time alone.

2. וספר דתות של ע"ז, וספרי שאר אפיקורסים וכולן דוקא בקורא בהן קבע, אבל בדרך עראי, המאמין לא יחוש מלקרות בהן, כדי לידע מה להשיב לאפיקורוס

3. פירש הר"ב ספרי מינים. כגון ספרי אריסט"ו היוני. ובמשנה כ"ב פ"ה דאבות התיר בבית הכסא ובמרחץ

and number 3 is, indeed, the funniest.

 

[ding]

wonderful. Do you know what the books of heretics refers to? Do you need me to find the actual works being discussed?

1. the books of the sectarians, such as the books of Aristotle the Greek and his colleagues. And included in this – a person who reads the chronicles of the heathen kings, “songs of sensuality” [=erotic poems], and “writings of desire” [=novels] that have no wisdom in them or purpose other than a waste of time alone.

2. וספר דתות של ע"ז, וספרי שאר אפיקורסים וכולן דוקא בקורא בהן קבע, אבל בדרך עראי, המאמין לא יחוש מלקרות בהן, כדי לידע מה להשיב לאפיקורוס

3. פירש הר"ב ספרי מינים. כגון ספרי אריסט"ו היוני. ובמשנה כ"ב פ"ה דאבות התיר בבית הכסא ובמרחץ

and number 3 is, indeed, the funniest.

I know you are splitting hairs when you try to argue the New Testament isn't heretical to Jewish beliefs.

"...Although heretical books are viewed with great severity, the bulk of literature remains permissible to read..."

Reading with Sacred Intention – Machon Siach

machonsiach.org

 

[rylah]

Couple things.

Adam ate from Eve's hand, not the tree itself. God cursed Adam because he allowed Eve to convince him to eat the fruit.

God drove "mankind", both Adam and Eve, from the garden.
The word for "man" as the male of the species is a different Hebrew word.

Ok, let's see..

So why isn't Adam ever mentioned eating the fruit, rather only "of the tree"?

And how do you decide when Adam is the man, or the whole humanity?

At that point, the Serpent, Adam and Eve were separate individuals.

 

[rosends]

I know you are splitting hairs when you try to argue the New Testament isn't heretical to Jewish beliefs.

"splitting hairs"? If you want to dismiss Jewish law, do that. If you had read what I quoted you would have an answer to your question. In fact, 3 answers.

"...Although heretical books are viewed with great severity, the bulk of literature remains permissible to read..."

Reading with Sacred Intention – Machon Siach

machonsiach.org

Heretical books are written by מִינִים for a specific purpose. Just quoting things without understanding the technical language is useless.

 

[Divine Wind]

The OP started this thread as a trojan horse to attack what he perceives are Christian beliefs. He wasn't interested in what the account says.

Thanks for the info. Nonetheless, it's a Zone 1 topic regardless of the motives of the OP.

Back on topic: Both Adam and Eve were tossed out of the Garden in the story as quoted previously from Genesis.

 

[rylah]

Paul is stating a theological lesson about gullibility. Many scholars argue Paul is not slandering Eve, but rather summarizing the historical account in Genesis. You are a hammer looking for a nail.

Is the reason you created this thread to slander Christianity?

Again... you are reading non-canonical religious texts that were written by Jews which is forbidden by the dogma of YOUR religion.

You should worry about your dogma. It sends people to hell for not following it.

Would the Inquisition burn her alive?

 

[ding]

"splitting hairs"? If you want to dismiss Jewish law, do that. If you had read what I quoted you would have an answer to your question. In fact, 3 answers.

Heretical books are written by מִינִים for a specific purpose. Just quoting things without understanding the technical language is useless.

Feel free to rationalize reading religious texts, written by Jews that make a concerted effort to portray Jesus as divine.

 

[ding]

Would the Inquisition burn her alive?

Good Lord, you have an ax to grind with Christians.

 

[Divine Wind]

...Jesus spoke about focusing your life on God and his teachings instead of focusing your life primarily on material wealth....

Agreed, which is why many Christians believe both White Christian Nationalism and, especially in this case, Prosperity Christianity goes against the teachings of Jesus.

This thread is about Genesis, specifically Adam and Eve, which is primarily ancient stories about creation. Jesus came over 3000 years after Moses. As such, Jesus was much more enlightened about the nature of God than those who came before him.

The Differences Between the Prosperity Gospel and the Biblical Gospel

Charles Spurgeon said, “Discernment is not knowing the difference between right and wrong. It is knowing … The Differences Between the Prosperity Gospel and the Biblical Gospel Read More »

www.namb.net

When comparing the biblical Gospel and the prosperity gospel, we can see a stark difference. First, we can go directly to the Scripture, find the biblical Gospel, and see it clearly defined. Remember, “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,” (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). Nevertheless, the prosperity gospel takes Scripture out of context in order to say something it does not....

...The prosperity gospel resembles the parable of the rich man in Luke 12. The man in the parable sought to fill his barns to the brim instead of giving thought to eternal things. What were Jesus’ words regarding this man? “You fool! This very night your life is demanded of you. And the things you have prepared–whose will they be?” (Luke 12:20).

 

[rylah]

Which apparently you take to mean he was talking only about humans. Whereas I take it to mean everything he created because everything God created is good. God creates existence because God is existence. Existence is good. All of it.

In the creation account of Genesis 1, God explicitly says or sees that his work is "good" seven times. [1, 2]
Six times, after various stages of creation, the phrase used is "God saw that it was good" (verses 4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25). The seventh time, after creating humanity, the declaration is expanded to "very good" (verse 31). [1, 2]

Evil isn't extant. Evil is the negation of the thing that exists; goodness. Evil is the absence of good. That's my dogma.

Apparently humanity is the goal of creation,
Eve specifically was crowned as the mother of all living beings.
And the end of the 6th day, was concluded as the best of days in creation.

Thus it is relevant to ask, if Eve ever deserved the hate of dogmatic little men...

 

[ding]

Thanks for the info. Nonetheless, it's a Zone 1 topic regardless of the motives of the OP.

Actually motives of OP's are fair game even in zone 1.

Back on topic: Both Adam and Eve were tossed out of the Garden in the story as quoted previously from Genesis.

Yes, I know. It's obvious. Why any would argue otherwise boggles the mind.