Gabrielshow26: It's a modern-ish🤔 re-interpretation based on the biblical use of the word "know". In plain English, a false equivocation!
A prominent protagonist, on nairaland, of this doctrine albeit quite mildly, not to the extent of Satan having sex with Eve, is oridavid. It seems both of you are from the same school of thought.
To me, I believe It's a figurative language to explain man's attainment of enlightenment(knowledge). I liken man to a child, innocent, that needed an external factor to shed this off. It takes a lot of logical leaps to arrive at Satan having sex with Eve.
We all see what we want to see. However, the truth will stand before us some day
budaatum: And I guess you see what you want to see, and when you don't see what you want, you create what you want to see, like your Adam in Genesis 1, though the Image was not named.
You can not offend me. I know your supposed harshness is to cover your eyes so you don't see.
No, it's not obvious. You're seeing that because that's what you want the bible to say. You want to feel like you're better than some people. You want to feel like you've achieved what they can't and that's why you create this distinction in the Bible so you can say you're this while others are that.
But in actual sense these difference don't exist in the Bible. Yes, they're different Adam as the Bible explicitly mentions (1 Corinthians 15:45) but the task given to them was the same. The reward is simply different because one performed the task while the other refused the task. Just as Jesus explained with a parable (Mathew 21:28-31)
If the first Adam had performed the task, there wouldn't have been any need for the second Adam to be created. Just as if the first son had performed the task in the parable mentioned above, there wouldn't have been any need to send the second son.
I think your confusion comes because you see one Adam in Genesis 1 and the other in Genesis 2, so you assumed that the Adam created in Genesis 1 was the first one and further assumed that God had rested before he created the Adam in Genesis 2.
Whereas, the first Adam was the one we see in Genesis 2 and God didn't rest until he created the second Adam which we see in Genesis 1. God would simply have finished his creation in the Adam created from mud if he had performed the task, and we wouldn't have seen another Adam. His refusal gave rise to the creation of another Adam who would perform the task and received the reward reserved for performance. If we too perform the task, we would receive the same reward.
If you go around talking about tree of knowledge of good and evil, talking like it gives some kind of awareness safe sensual, people will see that you understand very little. Because the Second Adam who received the reward did not eat from that tree. He didn't have the sensual awareness that corrupts all.
I hope this helps you, and I'm sorry if I may have spoken harshly, this was why I didn't to engage you initially. I didn't want to offend you but I figured I wasn't helping the discussion if I just kept messing around with you. Thank you for your engagement. God bless you.
budaatum: That is not how this works, and it is rather silly to think it does. Your above is like as if I am asking you to believe what I tell you when the truth is that I am asking you simple questions, which you are avoiding, and is like you covering your eyes so you don't see.
While I may indeed be blind if I do not see you dancing on the sun tomorrow, I can at least ask you to show me how you left the earth today and arrived on the sun which is about 150million miles away at 12pm tomorrow. After all, it's not like I don't know how almost impossible it would be for you to travel that far in such a short time.
Now back to the discussion. Is it not obvious from the evidence that is before you in your own Bible that the job and pay given to the image is different to that given to the mud?
It's a simple question, and you should ask yourself why you refuse to answer it.
"Shown" is the past participle of the verb "to show," meaning something has been displayed, revealed, or made visible.
If you have shown me people living in the sun and I don't see them, then I must be refusing to see what you showed me or I must be blind and incapable of seeing what you showed me. Because, for you to show me people living in the sun, people must be living in the sun, or you wouldn't be able to show me people living in the sun.
Now, let's look at what I showed you.
Is it not obvious to you that “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground”, is not the same as, "The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it"?
And if “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food” as pay for a job, and later say "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", would you not say I cut your pay?
budaatum: Really? Or are you just trying to confuse yourself.
The instructions given to the Image is very clearly stated in Genesis 1 and that to the mud is in Genesis 2, and they very clearly differ, but if you choose to see them as the same, so be it for you.
The duties for the man made in the image of God and the one made from mud was the same - which is, to obey God (Ecclesiastes 12:13)
The man made from mud didn't serve this duty, while the man made in the image of God served that purpose.
The man made in the image of God was Christ while the man made with mud was the first Adam. Both were Adam. The first Adam was of the mud, the last Adam was made through spiritual means [1 Corinthians 15:45]
budaatum: oridavid, I asked you 2 simple questions but you conveniently ignored them. And I've found that is what people who cover their eyes so they don't see do.
Would you like another go?
So tell. Is there any evidence the duties and pay of the image differs to that of the mud or not?
And if those two things differ, were they the same creation?
If I say I have shown you people living in the sun, you just don't see it, does that make my claim true?
budaatum: I have shown you, oridavid, you just don't see it. But that's not unusual. Many don't.
If this were not religion and just an English comprehension test where you had not been told what to believe, and were then asked if Adam was created on day 6, you'd likely say no he wasn't. But because most are told what to believe before they get to read the text themselves, it's hard for them to see beyond what is believed, I've found.
But you keep looking. It's possible to see if you try. And its implications are huge too.
I'm just saying your argument for how you saw that the man created by mud was created after God rested is a bad argument that has no falsifiability. You claim you saw it in the Bible and anyone who doesn't see it is blind....that's a silly argument. It's just like me saying I see people living inside the sun and whoever doesn't see it is blind. Wouldn't you call me a charlatan?
budaatum: Are you denying the image had a different job description and pay to the mud?
This is a bad argument. Any argument that lacks falsifiability is a terrible one.
budaatum: We can show you but we can unfortunately not make you see that Adam was created after God had rested, and was given a job that was less than the images and paid less for it.
So you think the man created from mud was created after the seven days?
budaatum: Call it Christ. Jesus not only fed people fruits of knowledge, he also promised you the fruit of life.
Fact is, my eyes are open and I can read and see that the duty given to the image differs to that given to the mud, and their pays differ too. And I understand the implications of believing one is created in God's image on day six or from mud after day seven, and I know which I'd rather be.
Those who brought you the book do not believe they were created from mud. They eat fruits of knowledge for breakfast lunch and supper and rule and subdue and multiply and are blessed, while some don't eat fruits of knowledge and wail and languish and die.
So, is it Christ who opened your eyes to see that God had rested before he created Adam from mud?
budaatum: The Bible does not "say" anything. You have to read it and see what is written in it. And in order to see what is written in it, it helps if Christ has opened your eyes to see the jobs given to the image differs to that given to the mud, and the pay for the image was more than that of the mud.
The saddest thing is the different ways in which believing one is an image or mud programmes the mind. Those who brought you the book definitely did not tell themselves they were mud when they got on ships to rule and subdue the earth and multiply, and there's very little argument whether they were blessed or not, and if you whom the subdued and ruled were blessed or not.
The good thing though was those who brought you the book were themselves convinced they were mud too, until they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and found knowledge does not kill. And they freed themselves from the gods of Rome who enslaved them just as we will someday overcome our fear of death and eat fruits of knowledge and free ourselves from the ìgnorance that enslaves us. Amen.
That's not what the Bible actually say but you're welcome to say so. I won't laugh at you. This is why I want you to state so for sure if that's what you truly believe.
budaatum: Is that not what is written in your own Bible?
And not only that. Their job descriptions are different, and their pay is different, and that's apart from the Image of God was not and should not have been created from mud.
There are reasons the following verse of Cecil Frances Alexander 1848 hymn is not sung anymore.
Are you saying God already rested before he created Adam?
budaatum: I'm saying the Image was created on day six and was given a different duty and pay to the mud who was created after the God had rested on day seven. And the reason most can't see this is they are afraid to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil least they die even though the text is clear on that issue that their eyes opened and they went on to live very long lifes and populate the entire earth.
There's a popular belief that everyone God created is the image of God. This belief proceeds from ancients times when people could barely read. Even in cultures where God is not central in their belief, people still believe that humans are the same and share the same purpose.
Are these really the case? Are we all the same and do we all have the same purpose?
However, we take a deep dive into scripture to interpret these topics
Gabrielshow24: So can angels be construed as souls? At least based on your assumptions👀.
Need I remind you that the righteous shining has nothing to do with souls🤦🏾♂️. May I ask, when we get to heaven and Jesus makes us shining stars are we then souls because apparently we will be shining? 👀 Perhaps you are conflating spirits with souls👀.
By the way, this has nothing to do with acting funny. You are the one perceiving it as ’acting funny'. I have only asked you simple questions, questions if you had thought deeply would have showed you the flaws in your headtrines🤷. You still didn't answer me, whether or not souls have hearts, brains, eyes and possibly legs? 🤔One thing we do know that they don't have is penis👀 but they can somehow stimulate, presumably, that part of their brain🤔—fantabulous.
Genesis 2 does not go into details of anything that predates human, I had to tell you those things from Genesis 1, but we know that Adam was the first thing God created after he prepared the earth.
Gabrielshow24: is it the same Gen 2 that you have in your bible? 🤔Or did you tear off the first four verses from it, in your own? 🤔
You asked me what i know then I told you. You don't like what I said and so you started to act funny. This is immature.
But for the sake of cordial relationship, I'll still speak to you about it.
Yes, soul shine. It's the same appearance like human being, it's just that it shines. You remember when the Bible said the righteous shall shine like the sun, that's how they shine.
I hope you see one someday, you'll change your perspective when you do.
Gabrielshow24: Really😂. Where did you get this idea from? This is why I said you don't know what you are talking about. It's all speculation from your part. May I ask does the soul have an heart ? A brain? 👀 Perhaps legs? 🤧
How do souls shine like bulbs? 👀Are you sure you have not conflated and imbibed Hollywood's representation of souls😂 into your headtrine🤦🏾♂️?
Also, Why did your god decide to make souls, humans without skins, from clay and somehow they were shining like bulbs? 🤔
When God created the earth, there was water and God pushed back the waters and created the ground. Then God created Man from the ground before anything.
After he created Man, he proceeded to create plant, animals and finally woman
ichuka: So God just created an empty heavens and earth in the beginning, right?
Good to know your belief cannot be scuffled but even if they could, I really wouldn't want to so no qualms.
Gabrielshow24: I laugh in Mandarin😅, you seem to forget that I was an atheist before joining the Lord's flock. It took theophanies to cure me of my delusions. All these you are trying to get through ’head knowledge’, I know what they are. I have proper understanding of all these things. I am just here to help you see flaws in your 'headtrines’—You are far off from the truth but I won't tell you the truth but I can give you hints. The first one being, showing the absurdities in your doctrines.
My belief can't be scuffled because it's the Lord of Heaven and Earth that corrected me, so not you, nor anyone, not even the Devil can scuffle it. So this ’puerile’ doctrine can't scuffle my beliefs🤔. You will have to do better than this, far better, you will have to replicate God's standard which you can't.
And in parting, ensure that next time you substantiate your ideas with proofs. I didn't even use ’much knowledge’ just the physical logos was enough to dismiss your arguments. Bye👋
A soul looks like a human but without the humans skin, so it shines like a bulb.
Gabrielshow24: How does a soul look like? 🤔 You seem to be talking about things you do not even understand. Let's start from this, tell us how your soul looks like?
I have replied the part you provided a critical discussion. The insults and chiding is fine by me. I know they're tactic to get me offended. I don't have a reason to be.
Thank you for your last critical point. I enjoyed replying that part. Throw me some more critical points and I'll answer.
Gabrielshow24: Check the ’Post’ again. I have quoted your 'big ideas' with emphasis on your ’big claims’. Do so well as to substantiate them with proofs😁.
I'll speak to the point where you actually provided critical discussion.
Yes, Adam and Eve touched themselves, touch gives feeling to at the soulish level, we can say they felt themselves. Although the penis was given after sin, there's a connection for the penis into the soul. There's something within the human soul that the penis represents and the penis is simply the cloth for that part of the soul. So, they didn't touch the penis, they touched that part of the soul that the penis represents and felt that Sam feeling you feel when you touch the penis.
I hope that clarifies your point. Sorry I didn't get it earlier and it's a really critical point. I like it.
Gabrielshow24: Everyone claims that, even Mohammed claimed that and we know he's false🤷.
You will have to do better than appeal to emotion🥱. When next you have facts and proofs, post them if not keep such bewildered and puerile ideas to yourself.
Let me bring to your recollection some of these ideas, I look for the whole picture and even your own ideas contradict themselves.
The first conversation I had with you under this moniker was that God made Adam and eve skins, not animal skins for covering, but their literal skins then yet in your next ’big idea’ you said Eve touched herself. Which begs the question, as a soul, she touched herself? 👀 You even opined that they both touched themselves and ’knew’ themselves all while being souls😅 without physical skins👀, according to the reconciliation of your first two big ideas🤔.
Now you have brought another big idea that Adam was made before his base material and he was made first of all things completely contradicting the bible👀. You based your idea on the 'documentary hypothesis'—need I remind you that's it an hypothesis 😅—not a verifiable fact. It's from such hypothesis you got the ridiculous assertion that Gen2 was the first book to be written🥱.
In summary, ensure your headtrines are coherent and not disjointed. When you have facts invite me, let's have a discussion until then, I leave you to your delusions.
This is why I wanted you to point out what idea you wanted proof for. You don't understand what I said because you're struggling to hold on to your own belief.
I respect your belief and I'll like not to even scuffle it. So it's fine. Whatever you conclude is fine by me. I do not wish to counter you. Thanks for your engagement.
Gabrielshow24: That's the implication of the ’big idea’👀. If you accept Gen 2 as the oldest, you get such. You need Gen 1 to be able to say otherwise. So what you have done is a bland reconciliation of Gen 1 and 2, given Gen2 has more higher priority🥱.
So you see? You have your answers. You can keep wrestling with them, my friend. Perhaps, God will minister to you one day.
Gabrielshow24: What about the serpent? 🤔 You also said Lucifer is my imagination, as if it's not biblically grounded👀. You are the one in delusion😅. Oh, I forgot that according to you, the serpent is just a thought or desire for Adam and Eve to touch themselves👀😂😂.
Pls, be grounded next time and stop floating around.
I'm sorry but if you can't point out the idea, then I can't respond to it. I need you to be able to point out the idea so I am sure you understand what you're countering. Many people don't even understand what they're fighting against, they just enjoy fighting. I need to know if you understand the idea you're countering and i'll give you as many verses as are available.
Gabrielshow24: Where am I to read when you didn't post any? 🤷
You just come, make claims, form ’headtrines' then tell people to do ’research’ and read the bible while not providing a single verse to support your claims and even when you provide such verses, they are taken out of context 🤕.
You know the claims you made, which this post addresses, you can continue following this sequential quotes backwards which this post belongs to, to see the claims you must substantiate with biblical verses.
Christianity Etc › Re: Did Satan Actually Have Sex With Eve? by oridavid: 11:34pm On Apr 21
