The accursed tree

[kellie]

O my god! Are you serious? That’s what defines a snake. Yes. It’s true. Some species of snakes still have legs; but these, you cannot call the good snakes. Snakes have always crawled on their bellies. If they didn’t they wouldn’t be snakes.
Guys, the Garden of Eden is a stinking allegory. I know perhaps you did not take any philosophy class. But that is what we call these pictures of words–allegories. And this allegory berates truth so much because it was faithenized–that in the end, God threw truth into the lake of fire and brimstone. Just as he threw everything else. That is how much this story, berates truth.

Ok, I will provide a link then.

*Recent fossil evidence suggests that snakes directly evolved from burrowing lizards, either varanids or some other group. An early fossil snake, Najash rionegrina, was a two-legged burrowing animal with a sacrum, fully terrestrial. One extant analog of these putative ancestors is the earless monitor Lanthanotus of Borneo, although it also is semi-aquatic. As these ancestors became more subterranean, they lost their limbs and became more streamlined for burrowing. *

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

O my god! Are you serious? That’s what defines a snake. Yes. It’s true. Some species of snakes still have legs; but these, you cannot call the good snakes. Snakes have always crawled on their bellies. If they didn’t they wouldn’t be snakes.
Guys, the Garden of Eden is a stinking allegory. I know perhaps you did not take any philosophy class. But that is what we call these pictures of words–allegories. And this allegory berates truth so much because it was faithenized–that in the end, God threw truth into the lake of fire and brimstone. Just as he threw everything else. That is how much this story, berates truth.

I’ve taken both philosophy and English. I doubt that you have, based on your “arguments.”

 

[love4mary]

Godhead, you are NOW where I once WAS in terms believing/not believing in God.

We as Christians could give you, and many here have given, sound reasoning for the belief in God, but faith is a gift from God, and until He gives you that gift, you will continue NOT believing. At least that is what happened with me.

I believe in evolution and it was that belief that finally convinced me to open my heart to God and allow that Free Gift He offers to be accepted.

I will pray for you, I will pray that you will open your heart to the Free Gifts that God is continually offering you.

 

[Godhead]

Actually the story of the Garden of Eden, like Plato’s allegory - TELLS truth, neither “exposing” it (as though at some point it was deliberately hidden by someone?), nor berating it, whatever the heck you mean by that

Genesis tells the truth that God created the world, including humans, that being all-good himself his creation was initially good too. That he gave us free will - uniquely among all the animals - and that we abused this gift and continue to abuse it, and for that we suffered and contine to suffer.

That should be more than enough truth for you or anyone.

That is what an allegory does, is tell the truth about human existence, with a fictional aspect. There really was no snake. Snakes cannot talk. Then you’re going to tell me that this one did. I’m not buying it. Do you see how this story berates (condemns) truth. People actually believe that a serpent, that a snake told eve to eat the piece of stupid fruit. That is a condemnation of truth.

Furthermore, what makes you think that your proclaimed serpent is the same thing as the devil? I thought the devil was an angel. Not a snake. O you’re going to say that the serpent was a form of the devil. Got ya. God cursed the serpent and confined him to crawl on his belly the rest of his days. I thought your devil was an angel; therefore he could have just shrugged off God’s curse and got off his belly, if the snake was really the devil.

Do you see how this berates (condemns) truth? You say the serpent was the devil; but I just messed up things for you because now your devil is crawling on his belly because God cursed him for all his day, all his days. So if the serpent is really the devil then the serpent could have just shrugged off God’s curse and became whatever form he pleased. But now that you see the devil as the serpent–that means your devil has no limbs. O back to the allegory. It’s just an allegory, right?

People don’t see it that way. They believe the serpent is the devil. From fact? No. Guess work. Faith is based on blind-foolish guesswork. It berates truth so much that in the end God threw the truth into the lake of fire and brimstone.

 

[Flying_Bison]

Dear Godhead

You are quite right to question the story of creation, questioning can lead one to truth.

I fear that you are looking at this story in the wrong light. It was never meant to be a science text book, but rather a story about God’s relation to the world.

In fact, there are two stories of creation in Genesis and they at times can be contradictory.

The stories, however, are timeless. They are simlpistic, BUT with so much information about humanity and God. That is the true beauty.

They talk about God as creator, human’s as having a special relationship with God, human disobedience and pride leading to a damaged relationship with God. It shows sin leading one from happiness to disaster, and that humanity is lost without God, thanks to our own free will to choose wrong from right. In fact, the very notion of a tree of knowledge is that humans have free will to choose, but we are not a smart as we think and for man to exalt himself as being the master of the world is arrogant and absurd.

Were Adam and Eve the first people, is the devil a snake? I don’t know and NO Catholic is bound to take a literal interpretaion of the stories of creation.

What we are compelled to learn is the message beyond the story and the fact that an illiterate farmer in 400 BC and a rocket scientist can be told this story and understand the symbolism and the truths contained in it. That truly is a Godly story. On for all of humanity.

 

[Godhead]

Godhead, you are NOW where I once WAS in terms believing/not believing in God.

We as Christians could give you, and many here have given, sound reasoning for the belief in God, but faith is a gift from God, and until He gives you that gift, you will continue NOT believing. At least that is what happened with me.

I believe in evolution and it was that belief that finally convinced me to open my heart to God and allow that Free Gift He offers to be accepted.

I will pray for you, I will pray that you will open your heart to the Free Gifts that God is continually offering you.

Listen, I believe in God, however, I am adamant in my belief that God is a LIAR.

Listen, this whole mess started because someone ate a piece of stupid fruit. It begins with a serpent. Therfore, after the fact, the serpent is the cause of the rest of the scripture. It is, metaphorically speaking, serpent light and I am not mezmorized by it. I’m not buying it God. I’m just not buying it.

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

That is what an allegory does, is tell the truth about human existence, with a fictional aspect. There really was no snake. Snakes cannot talk. Then you’re going to tell me that this one did. I’m not buying it. Do you see how this story berates (condemns) truth. People actually believe that a serpent, that a snake told eve to eat the piece of stupid fruit. That is a condemnation of truth.

Actually, it serves as a condemnation of disobeying God. God is Truth, so how can He condemn Himself?

Furthermore, what makes you think that your proclaimed serpent is the same thing as the devil? I thought the devil was an angel. Not a snake. O you’re going to say that the serpent was a form of the devil. Got ya. God cursed the serpent and confined him to crawl on his belly the rest of his days. I thought your devil was an angel; therefore he could have just shrugged off God’s curse and got off his belly, if the snake was really the devil.

Only in a literal interpretation does this become a problem. In an allegory, it merely means the Devil, who led humans to their first sin, was punished by God. The snake is merely an allegory for that punishment.

Do you see how this berates (condemns) truth? You say the serpent was the devil; but I just messed up things for you because now your devil is crawling on his belly because God cursed him for all his day, all his days. So if the serpent is really the devil then the serpent could have just shrugged off God’s curse and became whatever form he pleased. But now that you see the devil as the serpent–that means your devil has no limbs. O back to the allegory. It’s just an allegory, right?

You have serious issues to deal with when it comes to allegory. Where did you take your English and philosophy courses?

People don’t see it that way. They believe the serpent is the devil. From fact? No. Guess work. Faith is based on blind-foolish guesswork. It berates truth so much that in the end God threw the truth into the lake of fire and brimstone.

Some people don’t see it that way but I don’t think you’ve encountered one of them here. But you seem to want to debate only them and you seem to pretend that we are them so that you can do so.

 

[Godhead]

Dear Godhead

You are quite right to question the story of creation, questioning can lead one to truth.

I fear that you are looking at this story in the wrong light. It was never meant to be a science text book, but rather a story about God’s relation to the world.

In fact, there are two stories of creation in Genesis and they at times can be contradictory.

The stories, however, are timeless. They are simlpistic, BUT with so much information about humanity and God. That is the true beauty.

They talk about God as creator, human’s as having a special relationship with God, human disobedience and pride leading to a damaged relationship with God. It shows sin leading one from happiness to disaster, and that humanity is lost without God, thanks to our own free will to choose wrong from right. In fact, the very notion of a tree of knowledge is that humans have free will to choose, but we are not a smart as we think and for man to exalt himself as being the master of the world is arrogant and absurd.

Were Adam and Eve the first people, is the devil a snake? I don’t know and NO Catholic is bound to take a literal interpretaion of the stories of creation.

What we are compelled to learn is the message beyond the story and the fact that an illiterate farmer in 400 BC and a rocket scientist can be told this story and understand the symbolism and the truths contained in it. That truly is a Godly story. On for all of humanity.

I’m not looking at this in the wrong light. I know that the story of creation, genesis, is an allegory. Allegories use symbolic fictional characters and truth and generalizations to explain existence. I know it is an allegory. But do you, that is the ultimate question?

An allegory that has been faithenized to the point where it occurs in theologic thought as scientific fact–all of which berates truth to the point that no one can escape the serpent of the gardens grasp. The serpent’s light has you mezmorized. When an allegory achieves a faithinization to the point that this one has it becomes a fable. Fables are legends. Allegories are supposed to explain existence, separating fact from the fiction–all done within the human intellect. This allegory has become the fictitious truth that flockherds believe is actual account of events. Do you see how this story berates (condemns) truth?

 

[LilyM]

That is what an allegory does, is tell the truth about human existence, with a fictional aspect. There really was no snake. Snakes cannot talk. Then you’re going to tell me that this one did. I’m not buying it. Do you see how this story berates (condemns) truth. People actually believe that a serpent, that a snake told eve to eat the piece of stupid fruit. That is a condemnation of truth.

Furthermore, what makes you think that your proclaimed serpent is the same thing as the devil? I thought the devil was an angel. Not a snake. O you’re going to say that the serpent was a form of the devil. Got ya. God cursed the serpent and confined him to crawl on his belly the rest of his days. I thought your devil was an angel; therefore he could have just shrugged off God’s curse and got off his belly, if the snake was really the devil.

Do you see how this berates (condemns) truth? You say the serpent was the devil; but I just messed up things for you because now your devil is crawling on his belly because God cursed him for all his day, all his days. So if the serpent is really the devil then the serpent could have just shrugged off God’s curse and became whatever form he pleased. But now that you see the devil as the serpent–that means your devil has no limbs. O back to the allegory. It’s just an allegory, right?

Ummm yeah you’ve messed nothing up for anyone but yourself bud.

Did I mention the devil or the serpent? Of course not. Unlike Adam and Eve, who were too stupid to take responsibility for their own downfall and blamed it on others, I am quite happy to accept that in that particular instance we humans condemned ourselves.

However, the Bible is plain as plain can be - in totally unallegorical and unornamental fashion - in proclaiming that the devil does in fact exist, and works for the damnation of human beings. I believe this to be the case. I don’t know or need to know any more than this much.

People don’t see it that way. They believe the serpent is the devil. From fact? No. Guess work. Faith is based on blind-foolish guesswork. It berates truth so much that in the end God threw the truth into the lake of fire and brimstone.

Yes, and people also literally pick up snakes because the Bible says they will be able to. Just as people charge around Glastonbury in England looking for Camelot and the Holy Grail because they believe in the King Arthur legends of the Middle Ages.

Does the fault lie with the writers of the Bible or the Arthur legends or those who are too stupid to understand the deeper purpose for which those particular lines were written?

 

[Kitty_Chan]

godhead

When one looks at sin, one has to accept that it exists,
then perhaps one may be a participant in it. Most people
would rather think they are a ok person, pay their taxes,
dont harm others and not capable of sin.

A sort of Im fine and dont do anything really wrong. This is the lie satan told adam and eve, that why do they have to listen to God anyway. And also were they just as good as Him as well.

Be honest isnt looking at the possibility of sin uncomfortable? Isnt it easier to say its a silly snake and not have to deal with the question

 

[yessisan]

Listen, it really isn’t a literal account. There was no serpent guys. And the world wasn’t created in seven days. As a matter of fact the world has been around for a long time.

I’m directing these questions at Christians in general.

How can someone base truth upon fables. Saying, that the bible is the word of God. Prophets write fables or at least half truths. Am I calling God a liar. Yes, I am.

How can you come to a Catholic forum and call God a liar? I don’t mean to react in a bad way, but if you want to stay in this forum be careful with your words. A forum administrator might ban you for your words. Remember we are all guests here and we are supposed to respect each other and each other’s beliefs. Unless you didn’t read the rules before you signed up.

Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.

Calling God a liar is offensive not only to us but to Him! If someone speak badly of God, I take it in a bad way, it’s worse than an offense directed at me.

 

[yessisan]

Godhead,

Can you tell me how you can believe in God and call Him a liar? If you believe in God, then you are accepting He created us. If you don’t believe in God, then you don’t accept He created us. It’s as simple and clear as that.

If you belive, you believe. Questioning is good, but every single time someone answers your questions you don’t even care to really see what they are telling you, why don’t you just stop for a minute and really read what they say so you can understand what’s being said to you?

Maybe you cannot since the devil is preventing you from it. Or should I say the snake?

 

[Godhead]

They don’t. They have instinct.

Actually if you want to look at it from a biblical perspective you could say that man has an instinct to commit sin. Isn’t that right? We are all born sinners? Therefore it must be an instinct. Aww! The serpents light has you mezmorized again. It was the serpents fault. Wrong. There never was any serpent–that was just part of the allegory. The truth is the ambition of pleasures and personal gain has always been on the human mind.

 

[Godhead]

I’ve taken both philosophy and English. I doubt that you have, based on your “arguments.”

Actually, based on my arguments? What speaking simple to simpletons? That’s funny because I went to college for philosophy and writing.

Listen, a lite philosophy makes for the best kind of philosophy. Where points are not over-shadowed by deep critical thinking–endless, and useless garbage muddies up the water or the clarity of speech.

 

[water]

Listen, I believe in God

I know you said you believed in God. Could you help us a bit by telling us what religion you are? That way we could see a better idea of what truly you believe.

Thanks!

 

[Godhead]

faithenized?

I actually did take philosophy and English and know an allegory from a bar of soap, and I know that faithenized is probably not even a word and that even ‘stinking’ allegories, as you yourself admitted with Plato, tell truth albeit of an atypical brand and in an atypical fashion.

Yes, allegories tell truth to explain existence. But the true definition of an allegory is a story comprised with fiction and fact. THEY ARE NOT ACTUAL ACCOUNTS OF ACTUAL EVENTS. The Christian account of events, as spoken through Genesis, in saying that the serpent and Adam and Eve were actual, is a lie. Their recollection of events is a lie.

 

[Godhead]

Ok, I will provide a link then.

*Recent fossil evidence suggests that snakes directly evolved from burrowing lizards, either varanids or some other group. An early fossil snake, Najash rionegrina, was a two-legged burrowing animal with a sacrum, fully terrestrial. One extant analog of these putative ancestors is the earless monitor Lanthanotus of Borneo, although it also is semi-aquatic. As these ancestors became more subterranean, they lost their limbs and became more streamlined for burrowing. *

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake

A link to what? Telling me that snakes used to walk on their legs back in evolution? Perhaps, what was before a snake had legs but that does not make it a snake. A snake is a thing in itself. Crawling on their bellies defines the reality of a snake.
O yea, in previous post I said some snakes had legs. I was thinking of one thing but actually meant another. To fix that mistake, actually some lizards have no legs. That is what I meant. It is irrelevant.

 

[Godhead]

Godhead, you are NOW where I once WAS in terms believing/not believing in God.

We as Christians could give you, and many here have given, sound reasoning for the belief in God, but faith is a gift from God, and until He gives you that gift, you will continue NOT believing. At least that is what happened with me.

I believe in evolution and it was that belief that finally convinced me to open my heart to God and allow that Free Gift He offers to be accepted.

I will pray for you, I will pray that you will open your heart to the Free Gifts that God is continually offering you.

Believing that a snake gave someone a piece of fruit is not sound reasoning. It is a fable. I don’t believe in fables. You can sell it to me all you want. But I’m not buying it.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Greetings and peace be with you Godhead;

I think it would be less than honest to say that science has the answer as to how life started from no life.

I think it would be less than honest to claim that science has the proof as to how the very first particles of the universe came into being.

You may have some limited evidence, theories, arguements or beliefs as to how this happened, but you do not have proof.

In the spirit of searching for answers

Eric

 

[Godhead]

Ummm yeah you’ve messed nothing up for anyone but yourself bud.

Did I mention the devil or the serpent? Of course not. Unlike Adam and Eve, who were too stupid to take responsibility for their own downfall and blamed it on others, I am quite happy to accept that in that particular instance we humans condemned ourselves.

However, the Bible is plain as plain can be - in totally unallegorical and unornamental fashion - in proclaiming that the devil does in fact exist, and works for the damnation of human beings. I believe this to be the case. I don’t know or need to know any more than this much.

Yes, and people also literally pick up snakes because the Bible says they will be able to. Just as people charge around Glastonbury in England looking for Camelot and the Holy Grail because they believe in the King Arthur legends of the Middle Ages.

Does the fault lie with the writers of the Bible or the Arthur legends or those who are too stupid to understand the deeper purpose for which those particular lines were written?

A deeper purpose? You think the bible is so depth-taking that you fail to realize that it is your own imaginations that rationalize these depths.