Did sin enter the world through Adam, Satan or Yahweh? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

In a word no. That theory is an old ancient paradigm/Judeo Christian translation issue. Think of sin or evil as intrinsic finitude. Imperfection in the ability to do things correctly; ignorance.

Existentially, imperfection or finitude is another name for temporal-ness, mortality, limits of all knowledge about consciousness, and the universe, so on and so forth. Adam and Even is just a metaphor in Christianity and not meant to be taken literally.

Evil=Ignorance.

Next question. LOL

Why Eve at the end of Genesis 3 has to then be second class to Adam, --- he shall rule over you, --- would seem like Yahweh punishing the wrong party — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Genesis explains why snakes don't have legs. It also explains why childbirth is so traumatic for humans and why women are physically weaker.

Genesis is part cosmology, part history, part politics, and part science. Ancient people didnt divide these fields up the way we do.

Adam and Even is just a metaphor in Christianity and not meant to be taken literally. — 3017amen

Yet the vast majority of Christians have to be literalists, to some extent, to believe their dogma and religion.

Regards
DL

Genesis explains — frank

So you think Yahweh augmented the pain in child birth out of spite?

Do you have anything scientific to show that serpents had legs in the past?

They are also still supposed to be around but I have yet to chat with one. You?

Regards
DL

Is there any import associated with regurgitating the ancient paradigms?

In other words, what are you trying to argue for or against? It seems as though you're struggling to reconcile something... , no?

Did sin enter the world through Adam, Satan or Yahweh? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

God was not known in Genesis as Yahweh, but later in Exodus at 6:3, God reveals his name as having been Yahweh. Despite this claim in Exodus, it's been questioned by biblical scholars whether El-Shaday, which was his name in Genesis, was actually a different, and more ancient God of Egypt named El. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Early_History_of_God.

Your question therefore cannot really be answered without first asking from whom's perspective are you asking it. The Christian tradition provides its analysis to the question but then so does the Jewish tradition, and then there would be a secular response as well, which wouldn't come from a position of faith, but would come from a position of historical and literary analysis. From my own perspective, the secular discussion is the most interesting.

you're struggling to reconcile something... , no? — 3017amen

Yes, that being the answer to why Christians are so conflicted on Eden and cannot seem to decide if we fell or were elevated, yet the myth has been used by Christians to accentuate their homophobia and misogyny and refusal to grant all women and gays full legal status that they deserve.

Regards
DL

From my own perspective, the secular discussion is the most interesting. — Hanover

I agree.

As to perspective, I mentioned the Christian take and the Jewish take.

I did not mention the roots of the Jewish myth as coming out of Egypt and Sumer.

I don't care about the latter as the homophobia and misogyny in Christianity today is from their not understanding Eden and sin.

Regards
DL

Yet the vast majority of Christians have to be literalists, to some extent, to believe their dogma and religion. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

24% of Christians take the bible to be literally true. https://news.gallup.com/poll/210704/record-few-americans-believe-bible-literal-word-god.aspx . The view is most prevalent among evangelicals and fundamentalists.

The word "dogma" has a very specific meaning in the Catholic faith, which isn't really applicable to Protestants, so your claim that literalism is necessary for all Christians so that they can sustain their dogma is unclear because it's not clear what Protestant dogma would be (and it's not clear if you use the term Christian to include all denominations, including Mormons who have a a very distinct theology).

I'd also point out that a claim that the Bible is to be understood by construing it using simplistic literalism is difficult to maintain. It's unclear why anyone, including God, would be limited to speaking in purely stark terms and why the use of metaphor would be off limits

I don't care about the latter as the homophobia and misogyny in Christianity today is from their not understanding Eden and sin. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

There are specific passages forbidding homosexual acts (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13) which are not part of the Eden story of Genesis. That is, the anti-homosexuality laws do not derive from Genesis, but they are explicitly stated in Leviticus

That is, the anti-homosexuality laws do not derive from Genesis, — Hanover

Sigh.

How often have you heard some a hole Christian say, god said Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve?

How often have you heard, he shall rule over you, when Christians are trying to justify their misogyny?

Regards
DL

Yes, that being the answer to why Christians are so conflicted on Eden and cannot seem to decide if we fell or were elevated, yet the myth has been used by Christians to accentuate their homophobia and misogyny and refusal to grant all women and gays full legal status that they deserve. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Ahh, there it is. The hidden agenda/ axe to grind. Well, not sure where to begin other than you seem stuck on misinterpretation. Regarding homophobia, the Christian Bible is not a modern day medical science book. The notion that someone like Jesus would condemn Gay's is indeed an old paradigm/interpretation/translation error. For the most part, people are born that way.

Therefore, as you've claimed above, if it (these things) are indeed a myth, then I urge you to listen to yourself and those who are trying to guide you. Those who are making distinctions between, say; dogma, fundamentalism, literalism, allegory, metaphor, interpretation, human translation error, lost Gospels, early church politics, etc., I would strongly recommend you study same.

I sincerely hope you can get over this angst. After all, in the 21st Century information age, shouldn't you be more sophisticated in your perspective on these things?

I sense an interminable axe to grind here. Be well my friend.

and it's not clear if you use the term Christian to include all denominations, including Mormons who have a a very distinct theology). — Hanover

so your claim that literalism is necessary for all Christians — Hanover

All who believe in Jesus and or the Christ, have to read scriptures literally as that is the only place, basically, where anything is said of a Jesus.

I think that that is the vast majority of Christians. Mind you we have to ignore Jesus' description of believers or those with faith. If I go by his standard, there are no Christians at all.

why the use of metaphor would be off limits — Hanover

Actually, scriptures say that if one wants to perfect ones wisdom, one has to get out of the Christian viewpoint and loo elsewhere for perfection in thought.

As you pointed out, Jesus himself used metaphors for the peasants. He also had a more complicated teaching for the disciples.

Your stat is belied by other surveys that put belief in Jesus at about 70% and in hell which is even higher.

Regards
DL

I would strongly recommend you study same. — 3017amen

Been there and don that a long time ago.

After all, in the 21st Century information age, shouldn't you be more sophisticated in your perspective on these things? — 3017amen

On my axe to grind.

If you are happy with the homophobia and misogyny, then do nothing to fight it.

You not understanding, and trying to discourage the seeking of a better view for gays and women, and just let those continue, you are not much of a man.

Keep your satanic advice as I live by the Golden Rule.

Regards
DL

You not understanding, and trying to discourage the seeking of a better view for gays and women, and just let those continue, you are not much of a man. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

"Therefore, as you've claimed above, if it (these things) are indeed a myth, then I urge you to listen to yourself and those who are trying to guide you. Those who are making distinctions between, say; dogma, fundamentalism, literalism, allegory, metaphor, interpretation, human translation error, lost Gospels, early church politics, etc., I would strongly recommend you study same."

Modern scholarship in Christianity don't even take the Gospels at face value

Could you image the first time someone saw a snake moving? Weird. Or the first time someone reported a homosexual act. "You put what in .. what?"

I would strongly recommend you study same." — 3017amen

Been there and done that.

Regards
DL

You're going to hell.

How often have you heard some a hole Christian say, god said Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve?

How often have you heard, he shall rule over you, when Christians are trying to justify their misogyny? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

This isn't responsive to my claim that the biblical prohibition against homosexuality derives from Leviticus and not Genesis.

Modern scholarship in Christianity don't even take the Gospels at face value — Gregory

Believers are not listening to their hierarchies. Not surprising given the amount of lying the preachers of the supernatural based religions have to do.

Regards
DL

The Adam and Eve story is interesting. In the Bible Eve tells the snake that she is not allowed even to touch the tree, although God had only told Adam not to eat of it. Adam must have told her "don't even go near it or touch it". Shame came upon them after they ate of the fruit but was that the shame of guilt?

Eve may have seen the forked tongue of the snake and thought of the underside of Adam's penis and not wanting to be obedient to him but to possess him through knowledge of the tree, she went and ate.

Were the first humans were truly vegetarians? Their evolutionary ancestors ate meat ("were dirt" as Genesis says) but were Adam and Eve were an evolved identical twin couple? I was thinking about males and females. I think they are inversions of each other with the male simply being more assertive (because of the fall?). Men have penises, women have vaginas, men have balls and women have boobs, females have a clitoris and men have a prostate.

The Bible account presents a difficulty for me though. Why would Adam tell Eve not to touch the tree? At least it seems he did since God told Adam simply not to eat from it but Eve told the snake she wasn't allowed even to touch it. It doesn't sound reasonable to say God gave a different unrecorded command to Eve. But why didn't Adam trust Eve? I don't see how he wouldn't have trusted her at first since God presented her to him. Did they have relations in the garden and after they opened up to each other he became fearful of her femininity?

But since creation was supposedly perfect then she would have been pregnant at the time of the Fall and Adam would have been less likely to let her eat from the forbidden tree ("Adam who was with her"), for the sake of the child.

So the story has a flaw in my opinion

Were the sexual positions allowed by God different before and after the fall?


"Wanting to know more
Always allowed to roam
Will the valley ever tear
For she felt just like home"

This isn't responsive to my claim that the biblical prohibition against homosexuality derives from Leviticus and not Genesis. — Hanover

Yes it was, just not to your satisfaction. I did not know I had to stroke your ego for every little thing you get right.

I usually speak to what I disagree with and not what I agree with. That seems to be how people respond to me.

Regards
DL

All who believe in Jesus and or the Christ, have to read scriptures literally as that is the only place, basically, where anything is said of a Jesus.
— Gnostic Christian Bishop

It does not logically follow that a literal reading of the NT is required just because it is the only source of information about Jesus. I don't follow that line of reasoning at all.

Your stat is belied by other surveys that put belief in Jesus at about 70% and in hell which is even higher. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

That stat is unrelated to my poll which spoke to the percentage of believers who accepted a literal meaning to the bible. Your poll relates to entirely different subject matter.

Bishop You're going to hell. — frank

Only the stupid and brain dead will believe in a literal hell.

The liars must have gotten to you early.

I sympathise and hope you recover.

Regards
DL

I'll pray for your immortal soul.

Shame came upon them after they ate of the fruit but was that the shame of guilt? — Gregory

Not for gaining their education and no longer being blind to their nakedness.

Yopu do not likely walk about in the nude around others and should understand why A & E did not like to do so either.

Eve may have seen the forked tongue of the snake and thought of the underside of Adam's penis and not wanting to be obedient to him but to possess him through knowledge of the tree, she went and ate. — Gregory

No comment as there is nothing in the myth to indicate any sexual content till gen 4 on.

Were the first humans were truly vegetarians? — Gregory

Just close according to naturalists. Our closest relative is 95% vegetarian and 5% meat eater.

Man has to cook his meat or it is too hard for us to chew as we do not have the right teeth.

with the male simply being more assertive (because of the fall?). — Gregory

Try testosterone and not sin as the cause of male aggression.

Did they have relations in the garden and after they opened up to each other he became fearful of her femininity? — Gregory

No. The opposite is indicated. Their eyes were close to sexual notions till after they ate.

So the story has a flaw in my opinion — Gregory

That is because you are not reading it right or accurately. Just read it as is and it becomes more simple and clear.

For your consideration.
God is said to have punished A & E for disobedience. Did you note that A & E were told to reproduce way back in Gen 1, yet they were not punished for that first disobedience.

Quite the glitch. No?

Regards
DL


.

I'll pray for your immortal soul. — frank

Not to your genocidal prick of a god please. He is more satanic than Satan if you could all the bodies and include all the innocent babies and children.

I hope your thinking matures and you put away the things of children. That being your brain killing supernatural beliefs.

If you are going to stupidly read your myth literally, then remember that by Jesus' standard, there are no real Christians as they could do all Jesus did and more.

You are either lazy like Satan, or lying to us about your beliefs.

Regards
DL

You're going to hell. — frank

LOL, now that's a novel idea Frank! Perhaps he will get that reasoning; at least it seems consistent with same!!



I'm praying for your soul, you are condemned to hell brother! Is that what you want to hear?

Hahaha

Your poll relates to entirely different subject matter. — Hanover

My post spoke directly to literalism.

WTF do you think it refers to?

Regards
DL

Satan is going to get you, watch out!!!!!!!

Run and hide, quickly!!!!!!!!!!

LOL