Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 139

Thread: Hey, when was Eve named?

  1. Top | #21
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    23,639
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    66,112
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarpedon View Post
    Wow, I'm sorry about that guys, I completely got the two confused.

    Though in my defense, Solomon was also a sex maniac who did unwise things despite being called wise.
    Well it is hard to keep the perverts apart in the Book of Holiness.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    I don't see how taking everything literally helps in the slightest. If the act of reaching for the tree of knowledge is a literal event with a literal tree, not a metaphor for reaching out after forbidden knowledge, why would it result in all this blood guilt? Literal trees don't do that to you. Symbolic ones do. Similarly, I don't see how a strictly literal Jesus could redeem anything. He is important, in the Augustinian theology, as a figure of Adam. Ie, a symbolic offering in expiation of our sins. IF he isn't a symbol, he's just a guy, and I fail to see how just a guy could somehow cure us all from a 5000 year old case of fruit poisoning.

    My point: Christianity is inherently symbolic, as are most religions, and indeed symbols are what give it power.
    That's nice. What does that have to do with a Hebrew Myth (the Jewish don't interpret it literally at all) found in the Hebrew Scriptures?

  2. Top | #22
    Veteran Member phands's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    New York, Manhattan, Upper West Side
    Posts
    1,976
    Archived
    1
    Total Posts
    1,977
    Rep Power
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post

    How do we know Jesus was Irish?

    He was over 30and unmarried, hung around with 12 men drinking, and his mother thought he was god.
    Actually jesus was from India......


    (View video on YouTube)
    “Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it.” Terry Pratchett

  3. Top | #23
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,333
    Rep Power
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    I don't see how taking everything literally helps in the slightest. If the act of reaching for the tree of knowledge is a literal event with a literal tree, not a metaphor for reaching out after forbidden knowledge, why would it result in all this blood guilt? Literal trees don't do that to you. Symbolic ones do. Similarly, I don't see how a strictly literal Jesus could redeem anything. He is important, in the Augustinian theology, as a figure of Adam. Ie, a symbolic offering in expiation of our sins. IF he isn't a symbol, he's just a guy, and I fail to see how just a guy could somehow cure us all from a 5000 year old case of fruit poisoning.

    My point: Christianity is inherently symbolic, as are most religions, and indeed symbols are what give it power.
    That's nice. What does that have to do with a Hebrew Myth (the Jewish don't interpret it literally at all) found in the Hebrew Scriptures?
    Everything in the world. My entire point is that the literalist hermeneutic is not consistent with the way Roman Christianity has interpreted the life of Christ and its importance. I am pretty darn sure that any Jew you asked would agree with me on that point; they would have no reason to either insist on the literality of the text, nor conclude that the events described somehow led necessarily to Calvary and the redemption of man. Neither would ever have been their assumption in the first place.

  4. Top | #24
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,333
    Rep Power
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Tigers! View Post
    Why do you say it is an apple? The Bible never states what type it was. Always called the 'fruit'.
    This is true, my apologies for indulging in medieval convention. Though we want to get all nitpicky, there's no great translation for the Hebrew word in question, ancient Hebrew handles plant classification differently than English. Apple is definitely wrong, but fruit isn't completely accurate either. "An object that corresponds sometimes but not always to the concept of 'fruit' in English" would be more precise.

  5. Top | #25
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    23,639
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    66,112
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Tigers! teeing it up View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post

    Is it the apple?
    Why do you say it is an apple? The Bible never states what type it was. Always called the 'fruit'.
    Why Satan? The Tanakh never states Satan was involved in The Fall.

    And please let us skip the "serpent" = "Satan" line as the scriptural text used to describe Satan in the Bible is not similar to the non-metaphorical word used to describe actual snakes... including in the Story of The Fall.

  6. Top | #26
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,857
    Rep Power
    12
    The Tree Of Knowledge Of Good And Evil. Metaphor for innocence vs self awareness. Satan would then be knowledge itself.

  7. Top | #27
    Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    8,767
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    26,673
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    I don't see how taking everything literally helps in the slightest.
    As pointed out, if there was no fall, no original sin, there is no need for a redeemer, no need for the Christ, no need for atonement......yet all of these things are central to the teachings of Christianity.

    If the central pillars of Christianity are not to be taken literally, no literal fall, no literal original sin, there is no need for a literal redeemer, no need for the blood of Christ, the sacrifice, so it all falls apart.....it's just fiction, an ancient morality tale .....a metaphor that tells people; 'if you disobey authority, this is what happens'' ''this is how the world became corrupt''

    But in the past, this was not how the central message was taken. It was taken literally....just questioning it's dogma could get you thrown to the church dungeons, tortured and burnt at the stake.

    I am not talking about the obviously poetic verses, allegory, metaphor, etc, which is obviously present, but the significance of the central pillars of the faith if not taken literally

  8. Top | #28
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,333
    Rep Power
    9
    What you continue to fail to explain is how a "literal" reading leads to any conclusions you draw. Which are themselves full of figurative language and allegory. A literal fall is what happens when you trip going down the hill, not a symbolic description of the state of humanity. And no fall, whether literal or figurative, is found in the literal text of scripture. Stating your point over and over isn't making it sound any more logical. Why would literally eating a literal fruit literally lead to any of the things you say it did?

    I'm also baffled as to your exception case of "obviously present" allegory. How do you about detecting allegory at all? For me, stories in which characters with names like The Man and Mother--of-All who perform symbolic acts in locations like the Tree Of Life And Death are very obvious allegories, not even trying to hide. They make no sense when you strip them of their symbolic weight. What to you IS an obviously present allegory? And who taught you that allegory can't be about significant or central concepts? Not only can allegory have important and real referents, it usually does. Your argument is like saying that because Maus is about a real and significant event, that it proves there wasn't a real Holocaust if there weren't literal talking mice in it. The symbols aren't the point. The thing those symbols are trying to portray is the point.

  9. Top | #29
    Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    8,767
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    26,673
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    What you continue to fail to explain is how a "literal" reading leads to any conclusions you draw. Which are themselves full of figurative language and allegory.

    I have given the reasons. The reasons being; if there was no actual fall, no actual Original Sin, what need is there for a redeemer? Without a literal fall or literal original sin, what is the role or purpose of the Christ?

    What is the need for Christ if there was no fall, no original sin? These are things that the early Christians believed. It was taken literally. A literal A&E, a literal Garden of Eden.

    If Genesis taken to be mere allegory and metaphor, where lies the foundation of Christianity?

    What is Christianity related to?


    Just to be clear, I don't take the stories literally, I am not a theist. I am just pointing out that without a literal interpretation, that there is a literal God of the Bible, a literal Jesus the Redeemer, there is nothing but myth and allegory.

    Of course, that is the case. However, that is not what fundamentalist Christians want to believe.


    ''The genealogies of Jesus presented in Matthew 1:1–17 and Luke 3:23–38 show that Genesis 1–11 is historical narrative. These genealogies must all be equally historical or else we must conclude that Jesus was descended from a myth and therefore He would not have been a real human being and therefore not our Savior and Lord.5

    Paul built his doctrine of sin and salvation on the fact that sin and death entered the world through Adam. Jesus, as the Last Adam, came into the world to bring righteousness and life to people and to undo the damaging work of the first Adam (Romans 5:12–19; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–47). Paul affirmed that the serpent deceived Eve, not Adam (2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13–14). He took Genesis 1–2 literally by affirming that Adam was created first and Eve was made from the body of Adam (1 Corinthians 11:8–9). In Romans 1:20, Paul indicated that people have seen the evidence of God’s existence and some of His attributes since the creation of the world.6 This means that Paul believed that man was right there at the beginning of history, not billions of years after the beginning.''
    Last edited by DBT; 09-20-2018 at 12:52 PM.

  10. Top | #30
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,333
    Rep Power
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    I have given the reasons. The reasons being; if there was no actual fall, no actual Original Sin, what need is there for a redeemer? Without a literal fall or literal original sin, what is the role or purpose of the Christ?
    What do you mean by an "actual fall", if non-literal readings aren't allowed? What, to you, is the literal meaning of the phrase, "a fall"?

    If Genesis taken to be mere allegory and metaphor, where lies the foundation of Christianity?
    I don't know what you mean by "mere" allegory and metaphor. We're talking about the description of the state of the relationship between God and man. Just because that is too complex to tackle with solely literal language doesn't mean that it isn't real, or important. Again, that's not how allegories work. Maus does not need literal talking mice to make its message real or important; there don't have a literal light at the end of a literal dock for there to be meaning in the social critique of the Great Gatsby; Human nature is in no way affected by whether the pig head in The Lord of the Flies was a literal physical object or a fevered dream of one of the characters, either for the characters or for us. A thing does not have to be literal or even factual to be communicative.

    Paul built his doctrine of sin and salvation on the fact that sin and death entered the world through Adam. Jesus, as the Last Adam, came into the world to bring righteousness and life to people and to undo the damaging work of the first Adam (Romans 5:12–19; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–47). Paul affirmed that the serpent deceived Eve, not Adam (2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13–14). He took Genesis 1–2 literally by affirming that Adam was created first and Eve was made from the body of Adam (1 Corinthians 11:8–9). In Romans 1:20, Paul indicated that people have seen the evidence of God’s existence and some of His attributes since the creation of the world.6 This means that Paul believed that man was right there at the beginning of history, not billions of years after the beginning.''
    AIG can call it whatever they like, but that is definitely a figurative reading of both Genesis and Jesus' life. "Jesus is the Last Adam" is a metaphor. Just like "You are a miracle" or "Trump is a monster" or "Bob in Accounting is the next Machiavelli". It is not literally true. Jesus was not Adam. They did not share a SSN. Jesus never fucked Eve. Jesus and Adam were, literally, different people. Not only are literal readings not necessary, they aren't even helpful. This is a figurative reading that you are basing all of this theology on.

    A literal reading of the Gospels would just leave you with Jesus' non-parabolic teachings and a couple of meaningless miracles really, and given that half of them are about universal love and the folly of wealth, I see where the prospect of a true literal reading would be terrifying to your average Christian conservative. But don't tell me that a rock is an orange, or that red is blue. You can't decry metaphor with one side of your mouth while spouting metaphors out the other.
    Last edited by Politesse; 09-20-2018 at 02:33 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Indystar Reports Pence to be Named VP to Trump
    By Jimmy Higgins in forum US Presidential Politics
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-14-2016, 11:16 PM
  2. School of Engineering at Harvard named after John Paulson.
    By NobleSavage in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-08-2015, 07:00 AM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-29-2015, 10:44 PM
  4. Religions of the Book - re-named
    By Rhea in forum General Religion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-08-2014, 11:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •