Was Eve correct in rejecting God?

[Greatest I am]

Greatest I am,




You're aware that ''perfect'' in the OT means ''complete, whole, entire, etc..
And not ''flawless''. It most likely means the same thing in the NT as well.


jan.

Whatever. We are still to hold him up as our target for emulation.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Eve didn't reject God? She told Adam of the tree, and he ate of it. Then he shared with her.

You may be right for before she ate, not after.
After, equipped with a moral sense, she rejected his command and his dominion over man by initiating Adam instead of heading God.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I didn't say the having of knowledge was sinful. Lusting over it is. It is God's knowledge, he thought it first, and still you show him no respect.

Should one respect genocidal maniacs?

Regards
DL

 

[kx000]

You may be right for before she ate, not after.
After, equipped with a moral sense, she rejected his command and his dominion over man by initiating Adam instead of heading God.

Regards
DL

She was decieved. She thought knowledge would make her as God, but she already was. BEHOLD the man has become as one of us, to know of good and evil.

 

[Dywyddyr]

She thought knowledge would make her as God, but she already was.

Wrong, as shown by your next sentence.

BEHOLD the man has become as one of us, to know of good and evil.

I.e. he wasn't before, but he is now.

 

[Pineal]

“
Originally Posted by Pineal
I dislike this story, but I don't think she was rejecting God. She was disobeying God in a specific instance.

”

Rejecting may not be the best word.
She decided to take a better path might be more appropriate.
When you choose one over another, the other often feels like he has been rejected.

Again, if I jaywalk, am I rejecting civil government? If a kid sneaks into the kitchen at night and eats some ice cream, after being told not to, are they rejecting their parents or even, taking another path.

It could, perhaps, be part of some large decision to go another way than God did/wanted. But I don't see the support in Genesis.


That seems to be reading things in. Also, God is not mankind's example.

”
Matthew 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

This says we are to emulate him. Take him as our example.

No. This is confused. God KNEW good and evil. So Eve by eating the fruit was being like God. Only that was not what He wanted. Or at least he made the ban on apple eating. See what I mean. Do as I say, not as I do.

“

Eating the fruit would be using God as the example, since this would lead to being more like God.

”

Exactly what Eve did.

So then she DID use God as an example, but you said she didn't.

“

Master, sure. Though again, she broke a rule.
”

Yes. A rule that said, stay as dumb as all the other animals without a moral sense.

That's a separate issue. I am not defending the rule. I am criticizing what I think you are adding in to the story by saying you are adding it in to the story or even being confused about logically.

To say she is rejecting everything about God as master is not clear in the story and even in-house this was not the way it was explained to me. She was like a naughty kid breaking a rule.
”
See above. Further, the originators of Genesis, the Jews, saw Eden as man's elevation and not his fall.

http://www.mrrena.com/misc/judaism2.php

Who's interpretation do you think should take precedence. The authors or the usurpers of their scriptures?

It could be that God wanted them to break the rule, or hoped they would, but he made a rule, and Eve went against that. My issue is whether this can be seen as a decision on her part to reject God in general, as part of a philosophy or plan, rather than say a reckless act, a giving in to desire, etc. Given how women are viewed in these religions - tending towards irrational, emotion and desire driven creatures - it seems more likely to me it was an isolated act, rather than part of a cognitive rejection of God and his ways.

True but if it was good for Jesus then I infer that it was good for Eve.

I don't think that works. Jesus, for example, did not suggest his followers rush off to be crucified. In most religions the saint/guru/holy man and in this case perhaps God himself, are not supposed to be directly emulated in all ways - except perhaps on the level of love. They are special cases.

As God or God's sun, Jesus already knew everything Eve got from the apple.

It also explains why after she was elevated, she chose to elevate Adam as well and ignore God's debilitating and rather stupid command.

Except in both traditions Eve tends to be seen as having been bad here.

 

[kx000]

Wrong, as shown by your next sentence.


I.e. he wasn't before, but he is now.

Wrong wrong. They both were before, and they were both set to be living angels. Man was ment to live forever, but lust for knowledge made us vulnerable to death. Adam Micahel, Eve Gabriel.

EDIT: He did not know of good and evil, because he was born a man, and all his knowledge lost until remembered.

 

[kx000]

Double EDIT: God didn't want man to become of him through sciences, he wanted man to become like God through hope, and faith.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Wrong wrong. They both were before, and they were both set to be living angels. Man was ment to live forever, but lust for knowledge made us vulnerable to death. Adam Micahel, Eve Gabriel.

Incorrect.
That's why god said (per your own words) "BEHOLD the man has become as one of us".

EDIT: He did not know of good and evil, because he was born a man, and all his knowledge lost until remembered.

Whatever that means.

Double EDIT: God didn't want man to become of him through sciences, he wanted man to become like God through hope, and faith.

Also incorrect.
You have no shred of evidence for this, PLUS, due to eating the fruit of the tree, we are ALREADY god-like (per your own words AGAIN).

 

[kx000]

We are not god-like until you ankowledge it. Now, we will reach the apex of knowledge and know we are already god-like, or we will give into faith and just be god-like. yea

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

we put a fence around a pool cause it is to enticing for a child . There was no fence around the tree of knowledge. After they ate of the tree of knowledge a fence was put around the tree of life . An Angel guarded the tree with a sword . Why would that be ? What is one of humanities quests ? What does a quest do ? Motivates perhaps . Why is it called the journey of life ? What is Christianity built on ? What is the ultimate promise of Christianity . What does the medical profession work towards ?

You might even start to understand Doctor God complex if you get that one

 

[Dywyddyr]

We are not god-like until you ankowledge it. Now, we will reach the apex of knowledge and know we are already god-like, or we will give into faith and just be god-like. yea

Nonsense.
According to the bible we're already god like.
It says nothing whatsoever about acknowledging it.

 

[Aqueous Id]

Knowledge, in the Eden myth, would not necessarily correlate with knowledge as we mean it today. The interpretation of this, that learning competes with the lesson of the story is, to me, off kilter.

The myth seems to try to explain that earlier humans must have been animal-like and undisturbed by human emotion, thus free of its consequences. That would be one literal view.

Among other underlying purposes of Genesis is the need establish the supremacy of the Hebrew God. So the issue with Eve brings God the dominion over humans as an emotional father of humans. He can be appeased only by strict obedience. This prepares for the argument that lesser gods will have to submit to Him also.

There is quite a bit of fuss over the issue with competing gods as the story progresses.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

Wrong wrong. They both were before, and they were both set to be living angels. Man was ment to live forever, but lust for knowledge made us vulnerable to death. Adam Micahel, Eve Gabriel.

EDIT: He did not know of good and evil, because he was born a man, and all his knowledge lost until remembered.

Adam-Michael ? Really . Eve Gabriel ? really . I like that spermanator . Kind of has a ring . It would sound better with out the Adam being first . Even better with out the Adam . How bout "Michael Gabriel". Now that is a power name if I ever seen one. Yeah I like that name real good

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

Knowledge, in the Eden myth, would not necessarily correlate with knowledge as we mean it today. The interpretation of this, that learning competes with the lesson of the story is, to me, off kilter.

The myth seems to try to explain that earlier humans must have been animal-like and undisturbed by human emotion, thus free of its consequences. That would be one literal view.

Among other underlying purposes of Genesis is the need establish the supremacy of the Hebrew God. So the issue with Eve brings God the dominion over humans as an emotional father of humans. He can be appeased only by strict obedience. This prepares for the argument that lesser gods will have to submit to Him also.

There is quite a bit of fuss over the issue with competing gods as the story progresses.

Maybe it is the other way around ? Humanity was in touch with there emotion and knowledge caused the dissociation of completeness by emotional rejection. Big boys don't cry and all that . Dislodged from the natural state of emotional connection with the environment.

When I see a grizzle bear all mad about someone getting to close to there cub it looks pretty emotional response to Me . When the dog bites cause I got to close to there owner with out warning it looks like an emotional response . When the bee stings and gives up life by stinging you What would you call that ? These are a few of my favorite things . Then I don't feel so bad . Not so sad

 

[Aqueous Id]

Me-Ki-Gal:
I see what you mean. What I meant about being undisturbed, is the way animals don't have to worry about something like shame or remorse - the things that really tug at a person, the things you hate about yourself.. I assume the notions were well developed in the early Hebrew era, and shame and rejection are certainly what the Eden myth is all about.

 

[kx000]

Nonsense.
According to the bible we're already god like.
It says nothing whatsoever about acknowledging it.

Why would you believe a book of lies over the son of God?

 

[kx000]

I will tell you all you need to know. As I have said, I can rewrite the bible from memory in two pages.. all i need is the write questions.

 

[Pineal]

I will tell you all you need to know. As I have said, I can rewrite the bible from memory in two pages.. all i need is the write questions.

'Write questions' is cute.

If you can rewrite the Bible in 2 pages, why did God send it down to people who needed hundreds?

Think of all the debates over doctrine and confusion it would save if God you to update the Bible.

 

[kx000]

we put a fence around a pool cause it is to enticing for a child . There was no fence around the tree of knowledge. After they ate of the tree of knowledge a fence was put around the tree of life . An Angel guarded the tree with a sword . Why would that be ? What is one of humanities quests ? What does a quest do ? Motivates perhaps . Why is it called the journey of life ? What is Christianity built on ? What is the ultimate promise of Christianity . What does the medical profession work towards ?

You might even start to understand Doctor God complex if you get that one

The main purpose of "christianity" is to to create a follower of Christ out of you. They have failed. He who hath a ear. My Christ would not marry a whore. My Christ did not discriminate against men women, or homosexuals. My Christ is a virtue, he is passive. My Christ would not go to war because another man came up with a new God, he would say, sorry, one God. There is no "promise" of Christianity. You, however promise to be a good man, have demonstrate faith. FAIL planet earth. You are all idiots, prepare for the worst.