by BlogSpotThinker
October 10, 2011 09:09am
(Revised October 14, 2011)
Humanity's Quest for Growth
I humbly and respectfully submit an apparently reasonable complementary and/or supplementary theory regarding humanity's quest for knowledge, growth and prosperity. The Bible appears to suggest that human desire is a gift from God. The Bible appears to suggest that God, after creating humanity, extends the invitation to enjoy the earth and to realize and maximize humanity’s human potential (Genesis 1).
However, the Bible also appears to suggest that this same human desire constitutes human vulnerability to downfall. The key appears to be relationship with God. The Bible appears to describe God as suggesting repeatedly that, as long as God’s sovereignty is acknowledged, all is well. The Bible also appears to describe God as also clearly delineating the results of rejection of God’s sovereignty.
The effect of eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil appears to be reasonably interpreted to have been oversold by the serpent. The serpent’s description of that effect appears reasonably interpreted as suggest that eating the fruit from the tree would reveal hidden information. Apparently, this new information would make Adam and Eve’s knowledgebase, and as an apparent result, them, equal to God. However, the Bible appears to describe the effect as solely adding new distortion to their perspective. To wit: apparently, after they ate the fruit, their clothing-free wardrobe suddenly became shameful.
Apparently, rather than new useful information having been added to their knowledgebase, their previous pure perspective had simply been poisoned with “the knowledge of evil”.
Contradiction of God's Prediction
Concerns appears to have been expressed that suggest a contradiction between (a) the apparently Biblically-suggested prediction by God of the result of eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and (b) the apparently Biblically-suggested outcome of Adam and Eve eating the fruit. These concerns appear to suggest that the relevant Biblical text suggests that God predicted that Adam and Eve would lose their lives within the same 24-hour day in which they ate the fruit or, at least, within 24 hours of eating the fruit. These concerns appear to suggest that the relevant Biblical text suggests that Adam and Eve did not lose their lives by the end of the day or within 24 hours of eating the fruit and that their lack of lost life contradicts the apparently reported prediction of God.
I humbly and respectfully submit that several points of logic and reason appear to reasonably suggest that the Biblical account, as it appears to be represented, appears to be reasonably considered to not represent a contradiction between the above-referenced apparently Biblical reports of God’s prediction and the actual outcome. These points of logic and reason appear to be summarized as follows:
(a) The term “die”, as used in the account, appears to reasonably be considered to refer to the death of Adam and Eve’s purity of intellect and innocence of perspective. Said purity and innocence appears to be reported to have undergone a negative transformation from lack of shame to shame regarding Adam and Eve’s nakedness immediately after the eating of the fruit appears to be reported.
This apparently significant nature of this interpretation of “death” appears to be reasonably considered to be supported by a supplementary, apparently reasonable theory regarding life and death in the context of Adam and Eve’s experience. An apparently reasonable theory appears to be that the potential for death might have been initially introduced to Adam and Eve’s experience not via their eating of the fruit, but via Adam and Eve’s design. This suggestion appears to be supported by the apparently Biblical reporting of the tree of life in addition to food trees in the garden of Eden. The Bible appears to report that Adam and Eve were banned from accessing the tree of life so that their newly corrupt existence would not immortally and, therefore, eternally, negatively impact reality. Perhaps, Adam and Eve ate both (a) from the tree of life to sustain life and (b) from food trees for energy and other body-maintenance-related purposes. Perhaps, without eating from the tree of life, regardless of whether they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve would die.
(b) In addition, the term “in the day” (King James Version), apparently interpreted to read “by the end of the day”, appears to also be potentially used in the “older English” to refer to a broad time period. For example, “In the day in which the dinosaurs roamed…” appears to be reasonably suggested to refer to the entire time period in which dinosaurs are considered to have existed. The New International Version appears to interpret the phrase “in the day” as “when”, which appears to be consistent with this lexicological theory. Therefore, God’s barring of Adam and Eve’s access to the tree of life as a result of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil appears to be reasonably considered to begin the time period of Adam and Eve’s process of gradual, rather than immediate death.
Consequently, in summary, the apparently Biblical account appears to be reasonably considered to suggest that God’s prediction might not have been intended to suggest that Adam and Eve would lose all sign of either immortal or mortal physical life by the end of the day in which they ate the fruit or within 24 hours of eating the fruit. Rather, if any inference to a specific 24-hour day is intended, these reports appear to be reasonably considered to suggest that God’s prediction was intended, perhaps, to suggest Adam and Eve’s loss of purity and innocence of perspective as well as their God-granted invitation and access to immortality via the tree of life.
Adam and Eve Punished or Rewarded?
Perspectives also appear to suggest that the Biblical account suggests that God predicted that punishment -- death -- would result from Adam and Eve’s eating from the tree but that, instead, God rewarded Adam and Eve by giving them new life-initiating roles. The suggestion appears to be that Adam was newly made a gardener and that Eve was newly made a mother, both as a result of eating the fruit.
Without intending to either accept or deny the validity of this apparent suggestion, I humbly and respectfully submit that the Biblical account appears to be reasonably interpreted to suggest otherwise. The apparent Biblical account of God’s pronouncements regarding soil-based farming and childbirth related to Adam and Eve’s eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil appears to be recorded in Genesis 3:16-19. The Bible appears to be reasonably interpreted to suggest that God’s initial delegation to Adam of soil-based farming duties appears to be recorded in Genesis 2:15, apparently chronologically prior to God’s Genesis 3:17-19 pronouncement. The Bible also appears to be reasonably interpreted to suggest that God assigned procreative privileges to humanity in general immediately after creating humanity in general in Genesis 1:28. Both of the roles apparently suggested to have been initiated after Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil appear to be Biblically suggested to have been initiated earlier.
In summary, therefore, God’s apparent pronouncements related to the eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil appear to be reasonably interpreted to represent punishment -- increased difficulty in the previously established roles of soil-based farming labor and child-birth labor -- rather than reward of initiating new life-giving roles.
Eve’s Deception
Concerns appear to inquire regarding whether or not the serpent deceived Eve as the Bible appears to suggest that Eve claimed when confronted by God in Genesis 3:13. I humbly and respectfully submit that the serpent offered to Eve multiple false and/or deceptive characterizations.
Firstly, the Bible appears to suggest that the serpent suggested to Eve that eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil would achieve for Adam and Eve as a harmless benefit.
Secondly, the Bible appears to suggest that the serpent mischaracterized God as maliciously withholding from humanity such a harmless benefit.
Thirdly, the Bible appears to suggest that the serpent suggested to Eve that Adam and Eve would not die. The apparently Biblical text appears to suggest that HuffPostThinker and BlogSpotThinker comments appear to suggest that (a) apparently viable interpretations of the terms “in the day” and “die”, (b) the deteriorative effect on Adam and Eve’s purity and innocence, (c) God’s revocation of Adam and Eve’s access to the tree of life, as well as (d) the relationship of (a) through (c) to Adam and Eve’s apparently Biblically-suggested eventual loss of life appear to be reasonably interpreted as suggesting that God’s prediction regarding Adam and Eve’s death appear to be reasonably considered to have been fulfilled.
No comments:
Post a Comment