Well we can, but the point is you don't accept the Traditional Christian metaphysic nor the Traditional Christian idea of 'the mystical', nor do you allow it, so really we're at Aquinas' impasse: "(one) can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, (one) can have no dispute with him, though (one) can answer his objections." (ST I-I, Q1 a8).
? really? and where do you get that. I'm not saying it is accurate or not, nor am I making a case for what I said, just never heard a claim that Satan had an argument. a disagreement maybe. I can agree it is meerly speculation, and given that it is not expressly stated all anyone can do is guess. The lessons of it are numerous. trying to sum it down to 1 lesson is like describing a person with 1 word. Impossible. There are clear ones (ie. don't disobey God's Commands, God will punish you for your transgressions if you transgress his limits. Past that I think you would be hard pressed to prove that the story of Adam and Eve was not recorded to inform people of their weakness, naivness, or
no offense meant but can you point me to 10 people who agree 100% on doctrine of Christianity?I rather think the holes are in not understanding the doctrine.
just to prove you wrong and be the "devil's advocate" of the situation... I'm pretty sure I can point to 10 people without trying and point ot 10 people who agree 100% that murdering an innocent child is wrong.
wait... did we just agree somewhat? argh... what is this world coming to
I think you'll find that every theist tradition has its solution to the paradox.
Could I ask you to refresh your memory and re-read Genesis 2 and 3?
LOL, I could point to hundreds! Don't let the noise of those who think they know better tell you otherwise.
I'm sorry DA, but this is simply reading stuff into the text.
Surely the word of God is enough to counter any argument? The background idea about the JudeoChristian God is that God could make himself understood, and that man was adequately informed to make the right choice. I think we're getting carried away and being a bit too literal here, in trying to find ways to get A&E off the hook and missing the point.
If this is the line of what your are talking about, I think me and you got very much differing information out of it. Unlike what I stated, Satan influenced Eve with the aspiration of being equal to God. Whereas I simply said there was a lesson in this situation that they had to learn. Not that the fruit gave them this knowledge, but rather that they learned to fear Satan's influence.
I'm not sure what it is, but I get them all the time... sometimes even on the main screen...
Quite possibly. The way I read it is that Eve knew enough to know that either God or the serpent was lying.
OK. But I disagree. Eve knew to fear, but she also knew the allure of the fruit ...
Again, I think we're being too literal here.
But then, I don't think Theosophy has any evidence to that end, has it? Nor, I presume, any idea of what the supposed 'original version' might have said?
I agree 100% as I don't believe the scribe meant to decieve or make it incorrect. He was working with his own knowledge of an account. So what is your measure. I used to try just thinking what could it possibly mean and picking the one who fit what I was taught best. But this is relying on someone elses interpretaion. Now I look to the Quran. When I read the Bible, I can relate all the lessons taught into clear examples of those teachings. For me the Quran confirms most of the Bible, and corrects other parts into a singular clear statement. Hopefully I don't need to say this but I will, I am not expecting anyone to attempt to see it my way, just giving my opinion.