Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > SPECIALTY FORUMS > Discussions of Faith
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-24-2018, 3:03 PM
WASR10's Avatar
WASR10 WASR10 is offline
Just Me
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,455
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

Op, you state that story and metaphor is a superior way to pass on wisdom. I don’t know if that is true, but it certainly was the practice for millennia, and in many ways, still is. The phrase in which you question is, “da’ath towb ra,’ meaning “knowledge of (physically and spiritually) good and (physically and spiritually) evil.” The knowledge, according to the story, that Eve and Adam received by eating of the fruit, was the ability to discern what is good and what is bad; they became aware of the consequences of their actions. Vulnerability doesn’t exactly describe the new found awareness. They were cast out, not for this knowledge, but for the disobedience. They lost paradise by sin (disobedience) and suffered the consequence. (It is important to note that I do not believe this accounts for the doctrine known as ‘Original Sin’)

There is no negative commentary of the nobility of farming because of this story. The Bible never describes farming as a tainted profession because of the fall of man; many notable people within the scriptures are farmers. The implication is the consequence of sin. The invention of agriculture, and more significantly irrigation, was a huge step forward for mankind. It allowed time for thought and progress. That is not averse to the welfare of man on a moral basis.

The story of Cain is not an indictment of the farmer; both Cain and Abel were farmers. The indictment is that the offering of Cain was not a true sacrifice. He gave of his bounty, but it meant nothing to him. Abel’s offering was a detriment to him. He had loved and cared for the animals he offered. It literally hurt him to give them up, making it a 'sacrifice.' Thus began the practice of ‘blood sacrifice,’ a true offering that left the person in deficit. This ultimately became the significance of the death of a Nazarene named Jesus. I fear the themes you are searching for in Genesis may not be there, or may be misunderstood.

The core of the Adam and Eve story, whether literal or metaphorical, is obedience. Gaining knowledge is not a bad thing, and is never expressed so in the scriptures. Dependence on God is a very specific issue. Dependent on what? On happiness? On success? On acquisition of physical means? Or is it on spiritual matters? Is it on forgiveness despite our weaknesses? Is it on grace in the face of our own delusion of superiority? Is it on how to make better decisions for our welfare and our peace?

How do I view the story of Genesis? Or do you mean the story of Adam and Eve? Well, I will say that Moses put in to writing the oral history of his people, as they related to God. As with Native Americans, Intuit people, African tribes… they were stories to explain the world around them. Moses wrote them down. Yet I believe God is the ultimate author of the scriptures, and while these stories may or may not be taken literally, it is He who wanted us to know them and they therefore have value to how we live our lives and how we practice our religion. Adam, Eve, the spirit as Satan, the tree.. the story tells us to trust in the Lord, to remain obedient, to know that we don’t know everything, and to trust in that in which we are commanded. There is plenty of reason to believe that this leads to a beneficial life - and plenty of room for faith that this leads to a wonderful life afterwards.

Our current cultural values are not a reflection, necessarily, of the values we can extract from the scriptures. If anything they are a reflection of our separation from such values. The current culture climate certainly has had an influence on some forms of Christianity, Judaism, and other religions today, but they don’t have to. You can study, you can know what was written, and you can know what was meant by these writings, apart from any modern cultural influence.

Thanks for asking.
__________________
Mark 16:16
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-24-2018, 3:34 PM
CVShooter CVShooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,234
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

WASR10 - Thank you for your thoughts. Seems pretty universal among folks here to view the primary sin as disobedience to authority, not a hunger for knowledge that belongs to God alone.

Personally, I would view Cain & Abel as practicing two very different forms of agriculture. Cain was a farmer (planter of crops) and Abel was a herder. These differences are huge to me. One is settled and manipulates the environment while the other reacts to the environment by moving (nomadic or semi nomadic). I also wouldn't put them as actual individual people so much as groups or tribes in the area. There is certainly nothing in the text to suggest that. But stories work best when they're simple and metaphorical rather than literal. It's an oral form of data compression, if you catch the analogy.

I would also put the stories of Adam/Eve, Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau as part of the same narrative -- not intended to be separate at all.

All the same, these are only my thoughts. I appreciate reading yours & your willingness to share.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-24-2018, 3:42 PM
WASR10's Avatar
WASR10 WASR10 is offline
Just Me
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,455
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVShooter View Post
WASR10 - Thank you for your thoughts. Seems pretty universal among folks here to view the primary sin as disobedience to authority, not a hunger for knowledge that belongs to God alone.

Personally, I would view Cain & Abel as practicing two very different forms of agriculture. Cain was a farmer (planter of crops) and Abel was a herder. These differences are huge to me. One is settled and manipulates the environment while the other reacts to the environment by moving (nomadic or semi nomadic). I also wouldn't put them as actual individual people so much as groups or tribes in the area. There is certainly nothing in the text to suggest that. But stories work best when they're simple and metaphorical rather than literal. It's an oral form of data compression, if you catch the analogy.

I would also put the stories of Adam/Eve, Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau as part of the same narrative -- not intended to be separate at all.

All the same, these are only my thoughts. I appreciate reading yours & your willingness to share.
Thanks. I would disagree with some of these points, but I am happy to exchange thoughts on the matter. Its an interesting subject to explore, to be sure. Thanks again for challenging us with it.
__________________
Mark 16:16

Last edited by WASR10; 05-24-2018 at 3:47 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-24-2018, 10:01 PM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,784
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVShooter View Post
WASR10 - Thank you for your thoughts. Seems pretty universal among folks here to view the primary sin as disobedience to authority, not a hunger for knowledge that belongs to God alone.

Personally, I would view Cain & Abel as practicing two very different forms of agriculture. Cain was a farmer (planter of crops) and Abel was a herder. These differences are huge to me. One is settled and manipulates the environment while the other reacts to the environment by moving (nomadic or semi nomadic). I also wouldn't put them as actual individual people so much as groups or tribes in the area. There is certainly nothing in the text to suggest that. But stories work best when they're simple and metaphorical rather than literal. It's an oral form of data compression, if you catch the analogy.

I would also put the stories of Adam/Eve, Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau as part of the same narrative -- not intended to be separate at all.

All the same, these are only my thoughts. I appreciate reading yours & your willingness to share.
This is another point that gets twisted. Neither Cain nor Abel was looked on as disapproved for what they did to obtain livelihood or specifically what items they offered. In fact, the command given was to make the earth a garden, not herd animals, therefore one could rightly argue, based on the context, that Cain was more correctly following the command. But that's not how it worked out. One offered what he grew, one offered his animals. It was about intent. The story of Cain and Abel is about giving out of gratitude vs giving out of obligation. Abel had a more thorough understanding of the context and gave because he wanted to. Cain is warned before killing Abel about his thought process and internal motivations being wrong and leading him down a dark path. Abel evidently also had a better understanding of the import of the sacrifice itself, but that's a different discussion.

This story is, at its core, about mans' main driving factors and motivations. Does one do good things because they're the right things to do, or does one do good things because of fear of punishment or hope of reward and recognition? As we can see around us every day, those who do good things, treat others well, follow moral codes that benefit their neighbor simply because it IS right, much more often do this longer and better than those who do good because doing bad is punished or somehow more detrimental to THEM than doing good. Does the good come from caring more about the benefit to another, or is it about the benefit to ourselves? We see the eventual outcome of these motivating factors in the results. Cain killed his brother because his entire motivation was wrong from its core. Jealousy over the perceived lack of approval, based on incorrect thinking patterns, led Cain to kill Abel. Whether one sees this as a true story, allegory, tribes, or any other literary allusion, the core concept is the same.

It's the core concept of the entire bible. Does one do things for selfless reasons or selfish reasons? It was the question raised in Eden. If one wants to actually understand the entire bible, read Job. It explains everything. The lie to told Eve was about selfishness. Satan's argument has always been that man is a flawed creation that will only serve the greater good when it benefits man. That has never changed.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth

Last edited by njineermike; 05-25-2018 at 1:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-25-2018, 9:35 AM
CVShooter CVShooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,234
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

njineermike - I get it. We see things differently. No harm in that.

I have an obvious flaw in my point of view in that I lack direct evidence. But I've learned enough about the ancient world, mythology, story & such to know that themes and meanings are often presented indirectly. And that the intended meaning isn't always known by those who transmit the story. Often, the intended meanings are lost even if the stories endure. To me, this is fascinating. One culture starts the story and a different one picks it up, changes it and passes it on. A good example is the Ba'al/Yam battle I've mentioned before. The Canaanites started it. The author of Daniel changed it to their cultural beliefs & deities. Then John adapted it yet again in Revelation. Each had a message that had nothing to do with the details of the story. Each was trying to soothe the pains and ills of their people during difficult times.

Similar things happened with Job -- it's a tale much older than the historical man of Job could have been and was widespread among ancient Semitic cultures. I realize that this flies in the face of many folks' beliefs about the infallible word of God and the supremacy of Christianity. But I don't share that belief anyway.

Clearly, if I wanted to PROVE my thesis scientifically or something, I'd be up the creek without a paddle. You've got me there. But I'll also challenge the notion that an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Our scientific method and our rules of courtroom proof have little street cred in the interpretation of ancient mythology. It's a world of its own with its own rules and codes of conduct. I wouldn't rely on the Bible to PROVE that an event happened historically (some of the details are just flat wrong after all). But it's worth a look as a good starting point.

So if you're hoping to convince me that I'm wrong, it's going to take a different point of view than what you have since I don't hold the Bible to be the infallible word of God. I see it as a lot of valuable ancient wisdom with a ton of mystery and even some problems of its own. Near Eastern history, anthropology, archaeology, language, mythology, etc. are far more convincing to me than a collection of writings spanning 1300 years of massive changes in a country the size of New Jersey. When the all gel together, I'm inclined to pay attention. When they diverge, I remain skeptical of anything being definitive one way or another.

So I'm open to some challenges of the interpretation I've given -- I'm not married to it. But I also don't need to convince you I'm right either. Ultimately, I'm a man of action. Words, thoughts and beliefs, to me, are just the ways that we rationalize our behavior. And only what we do matters. If our words contradict our behavior, then our words are meaningless. So, since I do a little bit of farming and live a my life in the benefits of civilization, it's all just BS anyway -- mere thought experiments and nothing to get upset about one way or another. Again, just my 2-cents.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-25-2018, 11:24 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,784
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVShooter View Post
njineermike - I get it. We see things differently. No harm in that.

I have an obvious flaw in my point of view in that I lack direct evidence. But I've learned enough about the ancient world, mythology, story & such to know that themes and meanings are often presented indirectly. And that the intended meaning isn't always known by those who transmit the story. Often, the intended meanings are lost even if the stories endure. To me, this is fascinating. One culture starts the story and a different one picks it up, changes it and passes it on. A good example is the Ba'al/Yam battle I've mentioned before. The Canaanites started it. The author of Daniel changed it to their cultural beliefs & deities. Then John adapted it yet again in Revelation. Each had a message that had nothing to do with the details of the story. Each was trying to soothe the pains and ills of their people during difficult times.

Similar things happened with Job -- it's a tale much older than the historical man of Job could have been and was widespread among ancient Semitic cultures. I realize that this flies in the face of many folks' beliefs about the infallible word of God and the supremacy of Christianity. But I don't share that belief anyway.

Clearly, if I wanted to PROVE my thesis scientifically or something, I'd be up the creek without a paddle. You've got me there. But I'll also challenge the notion that an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Our scientific method and our rules of courtroom proof have little street cred in the interpretation of ancient mythology. It's a world of its own with its own rules and codes of conduct. I wouldn't rely on the Bible to PROVE that an event happened historically (some of the details are just flat wrong after all). But it's worth a look as a good starting point.

So if you're hoping to convince me that I'm wrong, it's going to take a different point of view than what you have since I don't hold the Bible to be the infallible word of God. I see it as a lot of valuable ancient wisdom with a ton of mystery and even some problems of its own. Near Eastern history, anthropology, archaeology, language, mythology, etc. are far more convincing to me than a collection of writings spanning 1300 years of massive changes in a country the size of New Jersey. When the all gel together, I'm inclined to pay attention. When they diverge, I remain skeptical of anything being definitive one way or another.

So I'm open to some challenges of the interpretation I've given -- I'm not married to it. But I also don't need to convince you I'm right either. Ultimately, I'm a man of action. Words, thoughts and beliefs, to me, are just the ways that we rationalize our behavior. And only what we do matters. If our words contradict our behavior, then our words are meaningless. So, since I do a little bit of farming and live a my life in the benefits of civilization, it's all just BS anyway -- mere thought experiments and nothing to get upset about one way or another. Again, just my 2-cents.
Wrong or right isn't my judgement to make. I look at it this way: Just because other cultures had similar stories doesn't make those from the bible less legitimate. Take the flood. Many cultures all over the planet have very similar flood stories. Does the fact that they have one invalidate any other? Could something be rooted in fact, but spread through migration?
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-25-2018, 4:33 PM
CVShooter CVShooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,234
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
Wrong or right isn't my judgement to make. I look at it this way: Just because other cultures had similar stories doesn't make those from the bible less legitimate. Take the flood. Many cultures all over the planet have very similar flood stories. Does the fact that they have one invalidate any other? Could something be rooted in fact, but spread through migration?
Yea, we agree there. The deluge is a perfect example, too -- good call there. Yes, stories spread via migration, via conquest, via assimilation, etc. They also change via context, time, language, etc. And they mean different things to different people and it's not always what the teller of the story intended.

A good example of that is Jesus's triumphant entry into the Eastern Gate of Jerusalem. Here in America and most of the west, we tell the story to emphasize Jesus's humility. Yet the opposite would have been understood by anybody in the ancient Near East. Nobility rode donkeys. Servants walked. Few would have rode horses because stirrups weren't used outside of the far east until the middle ages. Horses pulled chariots in warfare but without stirrups, they're uncomfortable to ride, mount and dismount. So Jesus rode in on a donkey through the Eastern gate as a show of power, not humility. And it's no wonder the authorities came after him shortly after that -- he had to have known what to expect from such a gesture of political rebellion. Details aside, we tell the story here to emphasize what we like about Jesus -- his humility. Yet the story was intended to show his growing political strength just before his subsequent arrest and execution. The story is likely true. There's no reason to think otherwise. But the meaning has changed to be the exact opposite of what was intended. More importantly, nobody seems to care and the story remains changed.

There are other examples, such as the parable of the talents (taking interest was illegal under the Torah yet it is encouraged by the parable as a minimum effort of stewardship). But I think you get my point.

To answer your question, I wouldn't say that it makes the Bible any less legitimate than all the other stories. But neither would I say that it is more legitimate either. It's just a piece of the puzzle to me. It's a heck of a good piece in that puzzle. But still limited. Again, just my opinion.

So going back to my original post, I am curious if others have seen any similar themes from Genesis. But it appears that nobody in this group has any other interpretations other than the traditional ones or just an outright rejection of it all together.

Perhaps a good follow up post would be one to explore alternative interpretations in other parts of the Bible. I'm not as well-versed in the scriptures of other religions so I can't speak to those. But it would be fun to read, nonetheless.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-26-2018, 5:02 AM
mif_slim's Avatar
mif_slim mif_slim is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fresh-Snow
Posts: 10,090
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

CVS, you. brought up Jesus and the donkey. What are your thoughts on the resurrection?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-26-2018, 7:43 PM
Dezrat's Avatar
Dezrat Dezrat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 665
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVShooter View Post
Yea, we agree there. The deluge is a perfect example, too -- good call there. Yes, stories spread via migration, via conquest, via assimilation, etc. They also change via context, time, language, etc. And they mean different things to different people and it's not always what the teller of the story intended.

A good example of that is Jesus's triumphant entry into the Eastern Gate of Jerusalem. Here in America and most of the west, we tell the story to emphasize Jesus's humility. Yet the opposite would have been understood by anybody in the ancient Near East. Nobility rode donkeys. Servants walked. Few would have rode horses because stirrups weren't used outside of the far east until the middle ages. Horses pulled chariots in warfare but without stirrups, they're uncomfortable to ride, mount and dismount. So Jesus rode in on a donkey through the Eastern gate as a show of power, not humility. And it's no wonder the authorities came after him shortly after that -- he had to have known what to expect from such a gesture of political rebellion. Details aside, we tell the story here to emphasize what we like about Jesus -- his humility. Yet the story was intended to show his growing political strength just before his subsequent arrest and execution. The story is likely true. There's no reason to think otherwise. But the meaning has changed to be the exact opposite of what was intended. More importantly, nobody seems to care and the story remains changed.

There are other examples, such as the parable of the talents (taking interest was illegal under the Torah yet it is encouraged by the parable as a minimum effort of stewardship). But I think you get my point.

To answer your question, I wouldn't say that it makes the Bible any less legitimate than all the other stories. But neither would I say that it is more legitimate either. It's just a piece of the puzzle to me. It's a heck of a good piece in that puzzle. But still limited. Again, just my opinion.

So going back to my original post, I am curious if others have seen any similar themes from Genesis. But it appears that nobody in this group has any other interpretations other than the traditional ones or just an outright rejection of it all together.

Perhaps a good follow up post would be one to explore alternative interpretations in other parts of the Bible. I'm not as well-versed in the scriptures of other religions so I can't speak to those. But it would be fun to read, nonetheless.
Zech 9:9- Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King is coming to you; He is just and having salvation, Lowly and riding on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.

Prophesy concerning the triumphal entry penned at the hand of an ancient Near Easterner, but then what would he have known about ancient Near Easterners....... But what's amazing is that this prophetic depiction of the event was penned hundreds of years prior to the event, so the meaning of the story had been morphed into something it wasn't supposed to mean, by an ancient Near Easterner, before the event ever even took place. The mind boggles!

Last edited by Dezrat; 05-26-2018 at 8:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 05-27-2018, 3:06 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,784
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezrat View Post
Zech 9:9- Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King is coming to you; He is just and having salvation, Lowly and riding on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.

Prophesy concerning the triumphal entry penned at the hand of an ancient Near Easterner, but then what would he have known about ancient Near Easterners....... But what's amazing is that this prophetic depiction of the event was penned hundreds of years prior to the event, so the meaning of the story had been morphed into something it wasn't supposed to mean, by an ancient Near Easterner, before the event ever even took place. The mind boggles!
The donkey riding was symbolic of the Jewish royalty. Kings rode on a donkey to symbolize peace and humility, in that weren't supposed to be above the people, but one with the people. Kings of other lands rose horses, indicating superiority. The bible indicates there was never supposed to be a king. Man chose that for themselves (seems to be a pattern here), and that is also why the kings were commanded to write the law (torah) in their own hand, also symbolizing adherence to the religious law as a guideline. The law was supposed to encourage a humble attitude. Jesus riding the donkey wasn't to display humility, he was already humble. It was a sign he was the promised king arriving. The people misunderstood how his rule would be implemented. They expected a military leader.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 05-28-2018, 5:44 AM
CVShooter CVShooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,234
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Don’t confuse “lowly and riding on a donkey” with “lowly because he’s riding on a donkey” or “riding on a donkey because he’s lowly.” These aren’t the same thing.

Check your history. Horses are used in war. Donkeys in peace or non-war business. It’s not a poor-man’s transportation.

Then there’s the issue of Jesus specifically asking his disciples to get a donkey with its foal in order to try to fulfill the prophecy. Once again, he was making a statement. One strong & bold enough to get people’s attention. Sort of a Toruk-Makto kind of thing. Hardly something you do when you’re humble.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 05-28-2018, 5:48 AM
CVShooter CVShooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,234
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Oops-looks like njineermike already got that one.

There is definitely some confusion on the king vs no king idea. The entire book of judges was a setup argument for why they needed a king. Chaos, disorder, warring tribes, etc. Then it finishes with “In those days, there was no king and every man did what was right in his own eyes.” Or something like that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 3:12 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy