Christians and Reality
- Thread starter Radrook
- Start date
-
- Tags
- christians reality
Ipecac said:
I'll go ahead and respond to this as well as the "did they know what death was" question.
Yes. They knew what death was. The word has many different meanings - I'm not looking at my concodance right now, but I'm *certain* the word used is "thantos," which can have a variety of meanings, all of which are very bad - but many of which imply SUFFERING more than DEATH.
You're right that it says "in the day that thou eatest thereof" and Adam lives for 900 years! What the F--- you ask!?
Unfortunately, the word used there for "day" can also mean "era" or "age" or any period of time marked by a certain event. Much like we use it now: "In the day of Davy Crockett, the world was a simpler place."
If you want me to back these up, I'll go look them up in my Strong's - or you can have a look yourself and see that I am right.
I still have to question what meaning there is to the concept of "suffering" as a consequence when you do not know "good" from "evil."
But *I* view the story as allegory - and am waiting for Radrook's explanation.
At any rate - and I don't mean this to be rude, I have to agree with Radrook when he says the Atheists here often sound like they work from a stock set of responses they've never bothered to verify.
There's plenty of problems in the Bible that are fun to debate. Debating the Law was (and still is for some!) a popular Jewish pasttime.
Ipecac said:
I came in late - and I'm not going to screw the thread up by responding to everything that was said before. If I see him ignoring a valid contradiction, or saying something that's contrary to the understanding of the Bible I believe to be common, I'll call him on it.
Personally, I'm one of those who finds debating the Bible a joy in and of itself; I don't need any external justification.
Especially when I get a chance to debate it with someone who is a bit more familiar with it than the average bear.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
scribble said:
Or, only once...
Unlike Radrook, who I'm sure reads the Bible everyday, to make sure it still says the same thing...
Ipecac said:
All right, make me dig it out...
Strong's lists some of the following meanings for "yohm" - word #03117. This is the word used both in the declaration they shoul die on the day they ate the fruit, and the days referred to in the creation myth.
It can mean: daytime (as opposed to darkness and night), a 24-hour period (a day), days (a lifetime; and Adam suffered unto the end of his days), a general period of time (this is the interesting useage - much like "In the day of Davy Crockett").
This word is used over 2000 times in the KJV, and has many different connotations. There is nothing in my knowledge that prevents a creation-day from being an era, though.
juryjone
Refusing to be confused by facts
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2002
- Messages
- 879
scribble said:
I reread the first couple of chapters of Genesis, and regardless whether "thantos" means death or suffering, there is no mention of it prior to the warning. Animals, people - there is no indication that there was any suffering or death until Adam and Eve were banished from paradise. So how do you figure they knew what death was?
Ipecac
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2002
- Messages
- 1,846
scribble said:
Thanks for looking that up. That's interesting. So since it can mean so many things, is there any justification for a literal reading of the six days creation story? Literalists interpret the creation story as six days but the A&E death day as an age. Seems to me that the word is inconclusive.
Ipecac said:
I agree - and unfortunately, that's as far as I can go. I'm only familiar up to a certain point (like, just a touch further than my Strong's takes me).
Someone with an actual degree in ancient languages would sure be helpful.
juryjone said:
You're right; Adam and Eve were to never have experienced suffering before that point. My understanding - from the fact that God did warn them - is that they knew it was something He wished them to not do. Whether it makes sense to say that they had a *real* concept of what "thantos" involved is an open question. If I were to try to imagine these events *actually* occured, I'd have a hard time reconciling that as well.
It's like when you are a little child and your mother tells you not to do something. As a child, the chances that you actually understand the reasons it would be wrong to do that thing are slim to none - in some cases you simply do not have the knowledge needed to understand the good and the evil.
But mom still expects you to obey.
If you disobey, mom doesn't punish you and all your offspring, of course -- which is one of the many reasons I view it as allegory.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
scribble said:
Your mom, maybe..
scribble said:
Okay - I was wrong. I shouldn't have been so certain. This is the first time I've humbled myself by being overly certain in a while - and a good reminder.
I happened to be flipping around just now and thought I'd check the word "die" there. It's "muwth" (Strong's 04191) - anyhow... as far as I can tell, it's only used as a literal word for death. Not suffering or seperation from God, like thantos.
I shouldn't have been confused; I believe "thanatos" is a purely NT concept (not to mention greek). I will check that to be sure I'm right; I'm only an amateur here, but I enjoy what I'm doing.
I don't think that changes anything considering the word used for "day" can still represent a long time. I checked in Genesis 4 where Adam dies, and the word used to denote his passing is again the literal "muwth."
So - you can make it fit just fine by using the less literal sense of "yohm" here - and I'm pretty sure it's what's intended.
If anyone who's been following along wants to do their own Strong's lookups - there are several sites which have Strong's online for free. A quick google search has given me:
http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html
http://www.biblestudytools.net/Concordances/StrongsExhaustiveConcordance/
http://www.blueletterbible.org/
http://www.btinternet.com/~markolus/search1.htm
http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html
http://www.biblestudytools.net/Concordances/StrongsExhaustiveConcordance/
http://www.blueletterbible.org/
http://www.btinternet.com/~markolus/search1.htm
scribble said:
Thanks for bringing the thread into proper focus.
Hume claims that nothing can be certain except sense impressions. That we might be generating these. That the exterior world might be an illusion created by our own minds,
or another mind superimposing it on ours.
I have no difficulty in rejecting the exterior world.
In fact, I find it much more reasonable to accept than that there is a real dimensional world out there.
The basis for this is that a real dimensional worlds demands ultimate location in order to avoid infinite regress. Infinite regress cannot exist because it would deny the universe of parameters and noting that lacks parameters to delineate its form can exist. For example, a sphere, a square, a cube, a triangle. All these exist because of having definite perimeters which give them their form. Take away those perimeters and you are left with nothing,
In short, an infinite universe is an impossibility.
Locate the exterior reality within a location and that location demands a location demands a location ad infinitum, So the only logical alternative is to deny dimensionality altogether and assume that dimensionality is a mind generated illusion.
Now, this in no way takes away from the experiences of this mind generated reality. Within it we are born and die. Were created and can cease to exist. Neither does this constitute a deceit by God. It merely shows that it was the only way things could have been done under the exigencies of ultimate location that dimensionality requires.
Radrook said:
hrm - Perhaps you should choose more concrete examples so there cannot be any confusion. The objects you have chosen are mathematical contructs that do not exist in reality in any case.
I fail to see why that must be so. If it were so, I fail to see how the Mind of God escapes the same limitation.
Surely if mind exists in reality, that reality must have a form - as per your own argument.
I continue to be curious about your response to God's wickedness and perhaps your take on the biblical creation-day, as well as Adam and Eve's prior knowledge of Good and Evil.
Animals were not granted eternal life in Eden. Animals were mortal. Therefore they died. Which means that Adam had to have been familiar with dead animals. He probably poked them, and saw that they did not move or respond in any other way. So the word death in relation to such animals meant that if Adam sinned he would also return to the dust from which he had been taken just as the animals returned to it.
Adam also could recall a time where he did not exist. His memory did not go beyond when he came to life in Eden. In short, just like those dead animals, he would have imagined that prior to being made alive he too would have felt nothing if poked with a stick.
Such a concept based on observation would have qualified him to be warned that if he ate of the fruit he would return ti the state of inexistence in which he once had been prior to being created. It is also reasonable to conclude that God communicated much more frequently with Adam than what ha been recorded in Genesis--which is what we need to know, The rest from God's standpoint is irrelevant to our salvation so recording it was of no importance.
Now, as I have previously pointed out, if we assume that God tests creatures not qualified to understand what he is saying, then we accuse God of an injustice that we ourselves would not commit. So since there is no evidence to conclude that God would commit such a crime, he must be presumed innocent as required by law.
Adam also could recall a time where he did not exist. His memory did not go beyond when he came to life in Eden. In short, just like those dead animals, he would have imagined that prior to being made alive he too would have felt nothing if poked with a stick.
Such a concept based on observation would have qualified him to be warned that if he ate of the fruit he would return ti the state of inexistence in which he once had been prior to being created. It is also reasonable to conclude that God communicated much more frequently with Adam than what ha been recorded in Genesis--which is what we need to know, The rest from God's standpoint is irrelevant to our salvation so recording it was of no importance.
Now, as I have previously pointed out, if we assume that God tests creatures not qualified to understand what he is saying, then we accuse God of an injustice that we ourselves would not commit. So since there is no evidence to conclude that God would commit such a crime, he must be presumed innocent as required by law.
scribble said:
The pyramids of Egypt do not exist except mathematically?
You are assuming that the mind of God is dimensional.
I am assuming that it need not be.
My argument is that the dimensional must have a form in order to exist dimensionally. Just recently they have discovered mathematical indications that the universe is really not three dimensional. That our minds creates the hologram we are seen.
Give the search engine the words Holographic Universe and it will provide the article.
We will talk past each other because we disagree on one important factor. You assume Adam wasn't qualified to understand what God was telling him. I assume that God would not give a creature info that the creature could not understand. since that would constitute an injustice.
[/B][/QUOTE]