budaatum:

You asked a question and got God in response. Deal with it or not unknown.



What "orbs" "doth the sky"?

Sorry. Dot the sky. Stars and planets as in the mythical genii of the stars and planets are the lord, gods,etc

budaatum:

We are discussing what we can both clearly read in a book, unknown. Not what we make up in our heads, but if you want to convince yourself "poison in the fruit that triggered the decay that eventually killed them" 800 or so years after they ate it, so be it for you, but pease know I do not hold that understanding with you.

You act as if you didn’t make up the slave part in your head. Yes, they did eventually die regardless if its 800 or 8000 years. Just like you made them slaves even though the text doesn’t call or imply slavery, I can make up slow acting poison that killed them 800 years later.
Besides, this is not my interpretation of the story. I’m just doing the same thing you do.

budaatum:

It is way more than just an allegory to me, is my own point. And my so called interpretation as you see it, has not yet begun to cover my understanding of it which you have not yet explored, mind.

Your interpretation is we known in this forum.

budaatum:

Now, does that not sound like they got smarter, to you? They even made clothes of fig leaves to cover their ignorance, or rather, unclothedness.

The lord made clothes for them to clarify. But they did get smarter if leaves are better than bare bottoms.

KnownUnknown:


Understanding just means grasping the actual meaning and intents if the authors.

No, Known, it doesn't just "means grasping the actual meaning and intents if the authors", though the two are often conflated.

I read what you write and have an understanding or ask questions, but you know that I can not fully "grasp the actual meaning and intents of the author" you who is before me not to talk of "the actual meaning and intents of the authors" of a book written some 2000 odd years ago, and if I say I do "grasp the actual meaning and intents of the authors" please stone me!

What I am stating is the understanding that I have gotten through my own asking and seeking and knocking for it with my own heart and soul and mind and being, and it would be silly of me to assume everyone has done only the same amount of seeking I did or no more than I have done and have not come to their own understanding, which is why I am here, Unknown, to state my own understanding and to hear your understanding. And trust me. If I find your understanding supersedes my own understanding or increases my understanding, I will abandon my understanding if need be and adopt your understanding or add your understanding to my understanding to booster my own understanding. Except that I am fully aware how much seeking I have done and can easily identify the difference in understandings.

Whilst one can not "grasp the actual meaning and intents of the authors", some grasp the fruit of what they wrote.

KnownUnknown:

You act as if you didn’t make up the slave part in your head.

Of course I made it up in my head! The text does not describe them as slaves after all, I buda did.

If i put you in my garden and say don't acquire knowledge, will I be making you my slave, Unknown?

KnownUnknown:
Yes, they did eventually die regardless if its 800 or 8000 years. Just like you made them slaves even though the text doesn’t call or imply slavery, I can make up slow acting poison that killed them 800 years later.
Besides, this is not my interpretation of the story. I’m just doing the same thing you do.

I do not agree that you are doing the same thing I did, known. I am describing a state I think Adam and Eve were placed in while you are creating imaginary poisons that slowly kill in "800 or 8000 years". But if you think we are doing the same thing I will need to rest till we have reflected on our conversation so far.

KnownUnknown:

Your interpretation is we known in this forum.

I strongly doubt buda's interpretations can be known in this forum, unknown. I wish it could be known though, so maybe one day.

KnownUnknown:
The lord made clothes for them to clarify. But they did get smarter if leaves are better than bare bottoms.

So, making leaves for themselves is not smarter than walking around naked as they were?

budaatum:


No, Known, it doesn't just "means grasping the actual meaning and intents if the authors", though the two are often conflated.

I read what you write and have an understanding or ask questions, but you know that I can not fully "grasp the actual meaning and intents of the author" you who is before me not to talk of "the actual meaning and intents of the authors" of a book written some 2000 odd years ago, and if I say I do "grasp the actual meaning and intents of the authors" please stone me!

What I am stating is the understanding that I have gotten through my own asking and seeking and knocking for it with my own heart and soul and mind and being, and it would be silly of me to assume everyone has done only the same amount of seeking I did or no more than I have done and have not come to their own understanding, which is why I am here, Unknown, to state my own understanding and to hear your understanding. And trust me. If I find your understanding supersedes my own understanding or increases my understanding, I will abandon my understanding if need be and adopt your understanding or add your understanding to my understanding to booster my own understanding. Except that I am fully aware how much seeking I have done and can easily identify the difference in understandings.

Whilst one can not "grasp the actual meaning and intents of the authors", some grasp the fruit of what they wrote.

It “means grasping the actual meaning and intents if the authors” regardless if it’s 2000 or 3000 years. Anything short is just your interpretation.

KnownUnknown:


Sorry. Dot the sky. Stars and planets as in the mythical genii of the stars and planets are the lord, gods,etc

What are "the mythical genii of the stars and planets"?

KnownUnknown:


It “means grasping the actual meaning and intents if the authors” regardless if it’s 2000 or 3000 years. Anything short is just your interpretation.

Well, I can not claim my own understanding is "grasping the actual meaning and intents of the authors”, unknown. I do not have the powers to go read minds of authors who died thousands of years ago and I do no have the hubris to assume my understanding is the "actual meaning and intents of the authors".

Kindly accept my limitations please.

budaatum:


What are "the mythical genii of the stars and planets"?

Personifications of the stars , planets, and the "chaos" they sprung from.

budaatum:


Well, I can not claim my own understanding is "grasping the actual meaning and intents of the authors”, unknown. I do not have the powers to go read minds of authors who died thousands of years ago and I do no have the hubris to assume my understanding is the "actual meaning and intents of the authors".

Kindly accept my limitations please.

You can find if you truly searched with your "heart, ass, liver, soul, and spirit". In all seriousness, it's a matter of making inferences based on sufficient background knowledge. It's not hubris. You can really get to a place where you can have reasonable assurance that you understand what the authors meant. I'm not saying you will understand the whole thing, but once you get their method you can even confirm some things yourself.

KnownUnknown:


Personifications of the stars , planets, and the "chaos" they sprung from.

Personifications, as in like human beings who worshipped "stars planets" like 5000 years ago?

budaatum:


Personifications, as in like human beings who worshipped "stars planets" like 5000 years ago?

Personification as in giving them human/animal characteristics and telling stories about them.

KnownUnknown:

Just like you made them slaves even though the text doesn’t call or imply slavery,

I am not claiming the text implied, unknown. I, buda, inferred, from the text, with my own heart and soul and mind and being.

I have asked you a few times now but you seem to avoid it. If you are placed in the garden of eden and told not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, please tell me the state your being would be in.

budaatum:

I am not claiming the text implied, unknown. I, buda, inferred, from the text, with my own heart and soul and mind and being.

I have asked you a few times now but you seem to avoid it. If you are placed in the garden of eden and told not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, please tell me the state your being would be in.

You can't use you and I as examples because the relationship between us doesn't equate the relationship between the lord and the inhabitants of the garden. Besides the lord said, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” The bolded being a warning about the harm the fruit would cause.

KnownUnknown:


Personification as in giving them human/animal characteristics and telling stories about them.

Interesting.

KnownUnknown:


You can't use you and I as examples because the relationship between us doesn't equate the relationship between the lord and the inhabitants of the garden. Besides the lord said, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” The bolded being a warning about the harm the fruit would cause.

First, let us get one thing clear, "Besides the lord said" nothing! The truth is we read in a book that some people wrote that the Lord said those things.

You mean, the relationship is not that I created you and therefore own you? I fully agree.

Why would they die if they "eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil"? Is it not a lack of knowledge that kills?

What harm did the fruit cause, Unknown?

KnownUnknown:


You can find if you truly searched with your "heart, ass, liver, soul, and spirit". In all seriousness, it's a matter of making inferences based on sufficient background knowledge. It's not hubris. You can really get to a place where you can have reasonable assurance that you understand what the authors meant. I'm not saying you will understand the whole thing, but once you get their method you can even confirm some things yourself.

You are very funny, unknown. I am making "inferences based on sufficient on the little background knowledge that I have found through my searching with all my being but you are claiming my sewing leaves is not an increase of my intelligence, lol.

When you understand those things and have confirmed them they become your tools too, Unknown.

budaatum:


First, let us get one thing clear, "Besides the lord said" nothing! The truth is we read in a book that some people wrote that the Lord said those things.

Of course we read it in a book!!!! Christ! We are just discussing the book....................if I said "Okonkwo said" does that mean I think Okonkwo actually said it?!!!

budaatum:

You mean, the relationship is not that I created you and therefore own you? I fully agree.

But the Lord didn't own them either. He just told them to stay away from the tree of the "knowledge of good and evil" not the "tree of knowledge"

budaatum:

Why would they die if they "eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil"? Is it not a lack of knowledge that kills?

[quote author=budaatum post=110641439] What harm did the fruit cause, Unknown?

They died. Whether immediately or 800 years, they died. So, we can say the fruit did cause harm.
Also, the "knowledge of good and evil" is different from "knowledge". It isn't about "knowledge" but the "knowledge of good and evil".

budaatum:


You are very funny, unknown. I am making "inferences based on sufficient on the little background knowledge that I have found through my searching with all my being but you are claiming my sewing leaves is not an increase of my intelligence, lol.

That's why it's just your interpretation and not understanding. I didn't say anything about your intelligence.

KnownUnknown:


They died. Whether immediately or 800 years, they died. So, we can say the fruit did cause harm.
Also, the "knowledge of good and evil" is different from "knowledge". It wasn't about "knowledge" but the "knowledge of good and evil".

If what happened to Adam and Eve, which is, their eyes opened, they became self employed, they bore children and populated the earth with their offspring and lived another 800 years, is what you call harm, then let me be harmed with enough for me to live just 200 years, I pray in the name of personified luminary orbs!

Allegories a little more perhaps, or a little less, then might you easily make "knowledge of good and evil" become about "knowledge".

sonmvayina:
Watch, it I just 3 minutes...


https://fb.watch/bnp9HjjagM/

God created a perfect world, sin made it imperfect

budaatum:

I pray in the name of personified luminary orbs!

Lol. You're not the only one.

KnownUnknown:


That's why it's just your interpretation and not understanding. I didn't say anything about your intelligence.

Trust me, you are saying a lot about my intelligence. Claiming I can interpret the "actual meaning and intents of the authors”, is saying I am more intelligent and capable than I actually am.

Take the slavery I keep mentioning. Note how I do not claim the authors intended to enslave. Still,

Why is it not my understanding of what I read?

Why must it be an interpretation?

budaatum:
Trust me, you are saying a lot about my intelligence. Claiming I can interpret the "actual meaning and intents of the authors”, is saying I am more intelligent and capable than I actually am.

Why can't you interpret the actual meaning of the authors if you understand their method? You make it sound as if they were more than human beings. Again, I did not say anything about your intellegence.

budaatum:

Take the slavery I keep mentioning. Note how I do not claim the authors intended to enslave. Still,

What if the intention of the authors was to enslave?

budaatum:

Why is it not my understanding of what I read?

Why must it be an interpretation?

Because you don't understand it.

KnownUnknown:

They died. Whether immediately or 800 years, they died. So, we can say the fruit did cause harm.

I can not make such a claim, unknown. Ordinary, a person ate fruit and died a week later I'd be like wtf if you say the fruit killed them, slowly. It's not how my brain works, you see, and I have found no reason nor evidence to convince myself of slow 800 year killing killer.

Same with women giving birth with no male input, incidentally. My mind will disown me if I tempt it with such wuruwuru thinking

budaatum:

Like claiming "surely die" is spiritual death?
I get you.

O Lord God Almighty, please let my spiritual death be as productive as the spiritual death of Adam and Eve, in Jesus Mighty Name, amen.

If I spiritually die and then go on to live for a tenth as long as we read they went on to live, and achieve a billionth of what we read they went on to achieve, I think Nigeria and probably the entire world will make me at least a minor god, though I'd have to insist they don't bow down and worship me but just do greater things than I would have done.

budaatum:


I can not make such a claim, unknown. Ordinary, a person ate fruit and died a week later I'd be like wtf if you say the fruit killed them, slowly. It's not how my brain works, you see, and I have found no reason nor evidence to convince myself of slow 800 year killing killer.

If a person ate a poisoned fruit and died a week later, you wouldn;t be like wtf if you say the fruit killed them. Regardless, you can make any claim you want in the realms of allegory and mythology. We are talking about a story where they have 800 year life spans after all so why not a slow killing fruit with effects that take hold over time?

budaatum:

Same with women giving birth with no male input, incidentally. My mind will disown me if I tempt it with such wuruwuru thinking

The woman in question did not need any male input and she remains a virgin. If you had the background knowledge, you'd understand how the woman can give birth with no male input.

KnownUnknown:


Why can't you interpret the actual meaning of the authors if you understand their method? You make it sound as if they were more than human beings. Again, I did not say anything about your intellegence.

There is no way for me to verify that my interpretation is the meaning of the authors, unknown, and personally, if I claim my own understanding is the interpretation you must please stone buda for lying!

KnownUnknown:
What if the intention of the authors was to enslave?

And this is precisely my point. Some might read it and interpret the intention of the author is to enslave. Some might read it and even enslave themselves. But my own understanding of my own reading shows me how people are enslaved and what I must do to resist being enslaved, which is eat the fruits of knowledge.

Or is it easier to enslave knowledgeable people than those without knowledge, unknown?

KnownUnknown:

Because you don't understand it.

Aha, I get you. You understand it, which is why you know I don't, and you therefore have sufficient knowledge to explain it to me.

Please, go ahead. Explain the Garden of Eden to buda please.

budaatum:


Like claiming "surely die" is spiritual death?
I get you.

Definitely not. That "spiritual death" interpretation is for the religious types.

KnownUnknown:


Definitely not. That "spiritual death" interpretation is for the religious types.

Like yourself, right?

How does "spiritual death" differ to your own "killing fruit with effects that take hold over time"?

KnownUnknown:


If a person ate a poisoned fruit and died a week later, you wouldn;t be like wtf if you say the fruit killed them. Regardless, you can make any claim you want in the realms of allegory and mythology. We are talking about a story where they have 800 year life spans after all so why not a slow killing fruit with effects that take hold over time?

The woman in question did not need any male input and she remains a virgin. If you had the background knowledge, you'd understand how the woman can give birth with no male input.

Are you making any claim you want?

budaatum:

There is no way for me to verify that my interpretation is the meaning of the authors, unknown, and personally, if I claim my own understanding is the interpretation you must please stone buda for lying!

Your interpretation is not understanding.

budaatum:

And this is precisely my point. Some might read it and interpret the intention of the author is to enslave. Some might read it and even enslave themselves. But my own understanding of my own reading shows me how people are enslaved and what I must do to resist being enslaved, which is eat the fruits of knowledge.

Continue eating.

budaatum:

Aha, I get you. You understand it, which is why you know I don't, and you therefore have sufficient knowledge to explain it to me.

Please, go ahead. Explain the Garden of Eden to buda please.

No. It was a rewarding experience finding it and I don't want to rob you of it if you do find it.

Besides, certain ancient Romans had a saying interpreted as "The common people like to be deceived. Deceived, let them be". My sentiments are similar.

KnownUnknown:



No. It was a rewarding experience finding it and I don't want to rob you of it if you do find it.

Besides, certain ancient Romans had a saying interpreted as "The common people like to be deceived. Deceived, let them be". My sentiments are similar.

You will return for more someday, unknown.

budaatum:


You will return for more someday, unknown.

Lol. You will find it one day or maybe not.

Kobojunkie:
Did you even ùnderstand the questions you asked to begin with?

Why did God create an imperfect world?

Answer: because man, one of God's creation has the capacity to do wrong....
Thanks again @Budaatum