Why was Adam comdemned?

[SkepticOfBible]

The devil was inhabiting the body of the serpent

 

Where does it say that in Genesis?

 

God explicitly told in the OT that he creates evil and uses it to play out his cosmic games

 

God offcourse has no problem using evil has a tool to play out his cosmic games

 

Isa 45:7 (KJV)

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

 

Exodus 32:14 (KJV)

14And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

 

Deuteronomy 29:21 (KJV)

21And the LORD shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant that are written in this book of the law:

29For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.

 

Deuteronomy 31:29 (KJV)

29For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.

 

1 Kings 14:10 (KJV)

Therefore, behold, I will bring evil upon the house of Jeroboam, and will cut off from Jeroboam him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel, and will take away the remnant of the house of Jeroboam, as a man taketh away dung, till it be all gone.

[mwc]

Adam disobeyed. And yes, his "punishment" was gaining the knowledge of good and evil by experience. That's the "punishment" all of us got.

 

God knew Adam would disobey.

So our "punishment" is that we must experience good and evil as opposed to just good (which is neutral without evil)?

 

If "god" knew this then he set Adam up and then plays dumb for the rest of time. Nice.

 

God planned that an offspring ("seed") of the woman -- in other words, a human whose descent could be traced to Eve, would one day "bruise the Serpent's head" -- that is, deliver a mortal wound that would kill the serpent.

Where'd you get this from? Is this from Genesis 3 (3:15 to be specific)? If so, you're seeing something that I am not.

 

The Hebrew word translated "serpent is "nachash" -- it means literally to whisper or mutter or enchant, and

I thought the word for serpent used (in every instance of Genesis 3) was Strong's Concodance 5175: "nachash naw-khawsh' from 5172; a snake (from its hiss):--serpent."

 

Now the root for this, as mentioned, 5172 matches up to what you say which is "nachash naw-khash' a primitive root; properly, to hiss, i.e. whisper a (magic) spell; generally, to prognosticate:--X certainly, divine, enchanter, (use) X enchantment, learn by experience, X indeed, diligently observe."

 

There's not a single occurance of 5172 being used in the bible (that I could see).

 

(This was looked up using http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html)

 

has a secondary meaning of brightness. Ezekiel 28:11-19 indicates that Lucifer was in the garden, was

Ezekiel says nothing of the sort. Like Isaiah, it is twisted to be something that it is not. This was a warning to the King of Tyre. There is no concept of using the same prophecy to mean two things anyway so this is a one time warning to the king and nothing more.

 

incredibly bright and beautiful, and was proud. 2nd Corinthians 11:3 and 14 speak of the serpent, clearly not a snake but a clever spirit being, and mentioning that he transforms himself into an "angel of light". So the

Well, the NT redefined the Jewish take on things, but Paul is likely talking about a literal snake here (although it can mean a snake or a deceptive person, according to Strongs, but Satan has a specific word assigned to it so the reference should have been to word 4567 if that was his intent).

 

Garden of Eden account is a historic record of a man and woman being approached by an angel to get them to disobey their creator. Their effort worked, and the angel seems to have won; the wording about "eating dust", etc. -- snakes -- is metaphorical, a literary description common in literature, to make the point that someday the winner will be the creator, not the angel who deceived humanity into thinking it had to disobey God in order to learn useful things.

Well, I'd argue there's anything "historic" about this story at all.

 

There's no mention of an angel, Satan, the devil or anything else. There's a snake. The parallel to the devil (not Satan as they are two different concepts) comes from the NT.

 

Now, I have to plead ignorance when it comes to literature (especially ancient literature). Could you give me some references to other, ancient, literature when the metaphors used ("eating dust" and so on) are used so I can compare the usage?

 

I suggest you read the last 3 chapters of Revelation (20-22) and compare any of the places, characters, symbolisms or metaphors you find there with the metaphors and characters of Genesis chapters 1-3. This is a good exercise in seeing the trajectory of themes in the Bible.

Okay, I read over it (okay, I skimmed it but I'm familiar with the story). Now, am I to take Revelations literally or metaphorically? You seem to imply it's metaphorically just as I should take the Genesis story. So do I take the bible literally or metaphorically? If both, then do you have a guidebook handy so I know when I should switch modes?

 

Short of that I don't know what to get out of the comparison between Genesis and Revelations. If you want me to see that in Genesis we had paradise and the tree of life and all that, lost it, learned a lesson and then gain it all back...well...so? Go to your local library (or video store if you prefer) and read/watch this story play out any number of ways. It doesn't mean anything.

 

All good xians should read something like http://www.usbible.com/Sin/adams_sin.htm

 

mwc

[Amethyst]

IMHO, the reason Adam was condemned and the earth cursed was because it was a fairy tale, and the church leaders needed an example to show to people of how not to behave. Don't question, just do what god wants you to. Question him, and you will be damned.

[thomas]

Don't question, just do what god wants you to. Question him, and you will be damned.

 

This reminds me of when I was young and attended Church of the Nazarene. The pastor there had an analogy for the relationship with god. He said, that if you try to turn on the light in your house, but finds that it doesn't work, then you won't start the problem solving by checking if the power plant works properly.

 

While this of course is fine when talking about light and supply of electrical power, it is certaninly unhelthy that christians are taught to always examine and blame them selves, when they experience problems.

[Amethyst]

While this of course is fine when talking about light and supply of electrical power, it is certaninly unhelthy that christians are taught to always examine and blame them selves, when they experience problems.

 

Exactly. It's the type of belief that leads to low self-esteem, which keeps the Christian coming back to church for an emotional high to feel loved and wanted.

[Ouroboros]

While this of course is fine when talking about light and supply of electrical power, it is certaninly unhelthy that christians are taught to always examine and blame them selves, when they experience problems.

 

Exactly. It's the type of belief that leads to low self-esteem, which keeps the Christian coming back to church for an emotional high to feel loved and wanted.

Correct. Create the market for your product.

 

That's what the story is about.

 

For the alleged God to come in and punish or reward humanity, there has to be the "first cause" even in the guilt system. The Adam story was made up to explain why everyone is a sinner and why people do bad things, and why God must fix it.

 

So if Adam never existed, sin never existed, and God's purpose to exist is nullified, hence no need for God anymore.

[blueheron]

Is the Devil even in the OT or is it a Christian fabrication? I think it was made up by the Christians. Is Satan in the book of Job supposed to be capitalized as a proper name? It just means "accuser". It seems to me Yahweh and this accuser were working together. The name Lucifer is mistakenly made to be a name for the devil, and that's wrong. It is the name of an earthly king.

 

There was no fiery forever hell until Christianity either. See websites such as http://www.tentmaker.org and do some reading there.

 

I think the Adam, Eve (and Lilith) story is just another way for men to put women down as "ignorant" and naive. A friend of mine attended a church like this. They said the woman was the root of all evil, it was her fault we were in this mess, woman should have lots of children to save themselves, no woman could be right, etc. etc.

[Ouroboros]

I think it's wrong to accuse Eve for the fall, since the Bible says Adam was with her when she took the fruit. He was an idiot standing next to her, and not stopping her. The blame should be on Adam if anyone, and not Eve.

[Taphophilia]

I remember reading about an archeological find of an island (I don't remember all the details). The Island was a desolate waste land much like a dessert but at one time in pre-history it was a lush tropical "paradise."

When archeologists excavated the graves, they found these ancient people buried with snakes in such a way as the people believed the snakes to be mythical creatures. I believe that the legends of this island coupled with the Greek myth of Pandora are the basis of the Adam and Eve story of Genisis.

[Amethyst]

Is the Devil even in the OT or is it a Christian fabrication? I think it was made up by the Christians. Is Satan in the book of Job supposed to be capitalized as a proper name? It just means "accuser". It seems to me Yahweh and this accuser were working together. The name Lucifer is mistakenly made to be a name for the devil, and that's wrong. It is the name of an earthly king.

 

Well, I'm of the opinion that the entire Bible was made up by the Christians and the devil is a literary character, and hell was created for the purposes of controlling the general populace. However, I did a quick search here:

 

He is mentioned in the following books in the OT:

 

Job, 1st Chronicles, Psalms and Zechariah. All the rest were NT and there was one book that was part of the Apocrypha that came up in the search.

[thomas]

 

 

He is mentioned in the following books in the OT:

 

Job, 1st Chronicles, Psalms and Zechariah. All the rest were NT and there was one book that was part of the Apocrypha that came up in the search.

 

In OT it seems (given that the writers were not mistaken), that satan either is a part of god or at least on god's team:

 

Again the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go and take a census of Israel and Judah." (2. Samuel 24:1)

 

Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (1 Chronicles 21:1)

[SkepticOfBible]

 

 

He is mentioned in the following books in the OT:

 

Job, 1st Chronicles, Psalms and Zechariah. All the rest were NT and there was one book that was part of the Apocrypha that came up in the search.

 

In OT it seems (given that the writers were not mistaken), that satan either is a part of god or at least on god's team:

 

Again the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go and take a census of Israel and Judah." (2. Samuel 24:1)

 

Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (1 Chronicles 21:1)

 

Two great items which discuss about this issue

 

Let's Take A Look At Satan

Rebel Angel

[Gnosis of Disbelief]

I think it's wrong to accuse Eve for the fall, since the Bible says Adam was with her when she took the fruit. He was an idiot standing next to her, and not stopping her. The blame should be on Adam if anyone, and not Eve.

 

 

Why should either Adam or Eve get blamed? Prior to eating

from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, neither of them

had the ability to distinguish right from wrong. They did not

gain this ability until AFTER they ate from the tree (Genesis 3:7).

So, at the point in time that they made their decision, they did

not and could not understand that what they were about to do

was "wrong". When god condemned them for disobeying him,

he was condemning them for making an "immoral" decision at

a point in time when they could not understand the moral

implications of what they were doing. This condemnation is

nonsensical - it would be like sending a mentally retarded

person to the electric chair for committing a crime, when that

mentally retarded person had no ability to understand what a

crime is.

[Ouroboros]

I think it's wrong to accuse Eve for the fall, since the Bible says Adam was with her when she took the fruit. He was an idiot standing next to her, and not stopping her. The blame should be on Adam if anyone, and not Eve.

 

 

Why should either Adam or Eve get blamed? Prior to eating

from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, neither of them

had the ability to distinguish right from wrong. They did not

gain this ability until AFTER they ate from the tree (Genesis 3:7).

So, at the point in time that they made their decision, they did

not and could not understand that what they were about to do

was "wrong". When god condemned them for disobeying him,

he was condemning them for making an "immoral" decision at

a point in time when they could not understand the moral

implications of what they were doing. This condemnation is

nonsensical - it would be like sending a mentally retarded

person to the electric chair for committing a crime, when that

mentally retarded person had no ability to understand what a

crime is.

I totally agree. I made the same point in some discussion some months ago. But it is an argument we can make as apostates, because we can see the stupidity of the story and we can see the story only to be a metaphor.

 

But for the literalist Christian to blame Eve, they make a huge mistake. They should read the text literally where it says Adam was with Eve, and they should not generalize the blame unto women for what supposedly happened. They contradict their own belief, and throw blame in the wrong direction, which shows how disingenuous they really are. They're claiming to be a fundamentalist but not believing the fundamentals.

[willybilly30]

I say its bible gods fault for putting the tree in the garden and letting the serpent in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it's wrong to accuse Eve for the fall, since the Bible says Adam was with her when she took the fruit. He was an idiot standing next to her, and not stopping her. The blame should be on Adam if anyone, and not Eve.

[blueheron]

I say its bible gods fault for putting the tree in the garden and letting the serpent in it.

 

Yes, I agree. The blame should be on the god who set them up.

 

I also believe the bible was thrown together and edited to contain the doctrines (such as eternal hell) that would have CONTROL over people. I don't believe anything in it, really. Other than the "do good unto..and love..." verses that actually did not originate with Jesus in the first place, but are just common sense good stuff to do, bad stuff to avoid.

[duderonomy]

Adam was punished because he listened to his naughty naked girlfriend instead of listening to God.

 

Having been 'put' in the Garden by God, Adam was in a world in which he must not only work for the first time in his life, but he was alone, without the only other living entity he had ever seen, or been touched by. We know this because God comes to the Garden later calling out for him.

 

Meanwhile, this young nude male fell asleep and woke up to see the Perfect Woman. A woman created in the image of God! The Image Of GOD! And what's more, this young man realized that he felt a one-ness with this new creature he saw, as if she had been created from his very flesh and bones!

 

So she stood there in the Garden of Eden...young, naked, perfect. A creature of God, unlike so many of the ones God had brought to Adam in the past. Like the animals..."I'll name them", Adam said, "but none of them please me".

 

But this creature was different. She held the truth of all life. Wasn't she the mother of all? Wasn't her seed the seed that would bruise the evil one that had put his thoughts into her head in the first place?

 

Of course...and she held out her temptation to the man. And he took it, and did eat.

 

And at that very moment they knew that what they had done was wrong!

So they took fig leaves and sewed them together to cover their 'nakedness'.

 

What was their 'nakedness', then?

Their brains?

 

 

Sorry for all of this... I went to the website that Serenity Now had a link to...and what I read made me so horny that I can hardly get past it.

 

Where is that church??

 

 

 

or... Adam was condemned because he did what God created him to do...

 

or... Adam was condemned because he thought for himself,

 

or... Adam was condemned because God f*ck*d up and knew it, and who else was there for Him to blame for everything??...

 

or... The whole story is as thin as a hamburger pattie at McDonalds but so many eat it anyway because of tradition and good marketing?

[Gnosis of Disbelief]

or... The whole story is as thin as a hamburger pattie at McDonalds but so many eat it anyway because of tradition and good marketing?

 

 

Well put!

[Amethyst]

or... The whole story is as thin as a hamburger pattie at McDonalds but so many eat it anyway because of tradition and good marketing?

 

Or because it's cheap and greasy?

 

Wait a minute, most people get their bibles free, and parts of the bible are rather slippery. Hmm...

[mwc]

I just had another thought on this story. "God" creates everything and then warns them not to eat of the tree of good and evil. They, of course, do. They're then kicked out before they could eat from the tree of life. It just occured to me that "god" never tells them about this wonderful tree. There's a "bad" tree and somewhere "hidden" among the others is the tree of life. Maybe they'll eat from it before they die (naturally) and maybe they won't (same applies to any offspring they might have...it's up to "us" to "find" eternal life). I know that if "god" himself told me that there was this special live forever tree I'd run over and take a big bite from it's fruit...unless of course "god" was just as big of a dick he shows himself to be later on in the bible because then I think I might go for the "bad" tree hoping for a quick death (that I wouldn't get).

 

It also appears that the only significant difference between Adam and "god(s)" is that god's have knowledge of both good and evil and god's live forever. It would seem that the argument of not having a conscience would apply to Adam and Eve prior to this knowledge (not to before jesus as some xians like to claim for some reason) so the snake represents their conscience in an externalzed form (when they knew they were naked and felt shame could be the internalizing of their conscience). Now we know good and evil just like "god(s)." So what does making us in "god's" image mean then if it left out a few key "features?"

 

mwc

[Alice]

 

 

Meanwhile, this young nude male fell asleep and woke up to see the Perfect Woman. A woman created in the image of God! The Image Of GOD! And what's more, this young man realized that he felt a one-ness with this new creature he saw, as if she had been created from his very flesh and bones!

 

So she stood there in the Garden of Eden...young, naked, perfect.

 

 

'Stand back Eve - I've no idea how big this thing gets ...'

[Karissa]

I think it is important to remember that no one, not even xtians, can take the bible literally. To do so is even worse than just believing all of it in some sense. There are two different accounts of the creation story and of adam and eve...it's all just a bunch of people trying to explain something by a story that is passed down through oral tradition. you will find similarly ridiculous stories in mythology, such as the golden apple that basically started the trojan war, but we don't cling to those legends as truth, do we?

 

I think probably the questions have been answered about God and Satan and where they were, but just in case:

 

Satan was supposedly the serpant, but no one interpreted it that way until christianity. God was there and watching the whole thing...he was quick to call out adam and eve after they ate of the fruit. He acted like he didn't know why they were hiding and covering themselves with fig leaves until the confessed. He was having fun needless to say.

 

This brings up another interesting point...if anyone has ever taken the time to read the bible, the way god is portrayed changes so often, it's hard to get a real read on the dude's character.

[blueheron]

This brings up another interesting point...if anyone has ever taken the time to read the bible, the way god is portrayed changes so often, it's hard to get a real read on the dude's character.

 

 

NOT saying I believe this, but you gotta read it. It is about as good an explanation as anything I've ever seen, and actually makes MORE sense than the schizophrenic god of xtians!

http://www.universalway.org/anyout.html#Yahweh/Jehovah

[essence]

This brings up another interesting point...if anyone has ever taken the time to read the bible, the way god is portrayed changes so often, it's hard to get a real read on the dude's character.

 

 

NOT saying I believe this, but you gotta read it. It is about as good an explanation as anything I've ever seen, and actually makes MORE sense than the schizophrenic god of xtians!

http://www.universalway.org/anyout.html#Yahweh/Jehovah

 

 

In the story of Adam and Eve what was to be learned? What were the writers attempting to teach future generations of Jews? From Adam to Christ is stated the genealogies in sons of Jacob called Israel.

 

Fast forward to NT and Jesus comparison of the flood as "taking them all away." However, Jesus states that unless those days had been shortened no flesh would be saved but for the elects sake.

 

 

Noah was elected to be saved from the overriding flood of wickedness in the world.

 

Adam failed to recognize how evil could corrupt absolutely. He failed to maintain loyalty to his country, Eden. He brought into his own domain tolerance for another tradition which killed his own in the day that he was created to "keep it and till it".

 

What religion can survive when tolerating another as equal to its own? Jesus preached Judaism without interference from other traditions. Non-Jews, Christians seek to impose their form of religion onto Judaism and thus kill it out. Judaism says no, whereas Adam said ok. Adam died, Judaism lives.

 

"Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin". Christians preach this as a saving grace, or somesuch. Christianity kills for the purpose of keeping itself alive, thus Christianity attempts to kill out the Muslim faith. They do so in fear of Allah being more supreme than their Gawd.

[duderonomy]

Well I learned a lot from this thread!

 

(Hesitent... by the way!)

 

I know now that I must learn Hebrew (ancient Hebrew at that), and Greek (although I don't think Greek was mentioned in this thread, I'd better learn that too), or I won't ever understand the Word of God.

 

Of all the proof-texts ever quoted, of all the sermons thundered from the pulpits of the mighty chosen of God, from Peter preaching from the Upper Room, to the Word preached this very day... it may be a load of bull! I mean, those Scriptures...they could ALSO mean...

 

And what's more, I don't have a Strong's Concordance. Now how in the hell am I supposed to even know what Strong said they meant?

 

Damn! I'm a goner. There's no way I can get to the original languages, let alone the original documents. I never stood a chance.

 

All I ever had was this one dog-eared Bible.