great question!! Now seeing as we have no biblical information on why, we can only guess. I would say, as a guess, that it was a maturation step and when they were ready they would be able to eat of that tree.CndxBlvr said:
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
great question!! Now seeing as we have no biblical information on why, we can only guess. I would say, as a guess, that it was a maturation step and when they were ready they would be able to eat of that tree.CndxBlvr said:What I want to know is why God put it there in the first place...
Not quite a pefect scenario. Put people who are capable of disobeying in a garden with a tree with fruit that looks good to eat, and tell the people not to eat it? What was the point of that? If God intended man to remain in the garden, in the midst of his "perfect" creation, surely he knew that mans natural curiousity would get the best of him, sooner or later?
I thought conservative Christians didn't guess at or add things to Scripture that aren't there?Outspoken said:great question!! Now seeing as we have no biblical information on why, we can only guess. I would say, as a guess, that it was a maturation step and when they were ready they would be able to eat of that tree.
Then you are in error. You have to take the truth and make it applicable to different situations: Example: the bible never mentions nuclear war, but that doesn't mean it doesn't say anything about it.CndxBlvr said:I thought conservative Christians didn't guess at or add things to Scripture that aren't there?
Seriously, what leads you to believe that? I've never heard that explanation before and at first glance it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. God said man was created in his image and the idea that they needed to mature flies in the face of the idea that Gods creation was perfect until Adam and Eve disobeyed. That kind of blows out the whole concept of man being responsible for sin in the first place.
Hey me again.CndxBlvr said:What I want to know is why God put it there in the first place...
Not quite a pefect scenario. Put people who are capable of disobeying in a garden with a tree with fruit that looks good to eat, and tell the people not to eat it? What was the point of that? If God intended man to remain in the garden, in the midst of his "perfect" creation, surely he knew that mans natural curiousity would get the best of him, sooner or later?
Yeah, I know, anyone who doesn't interpret Scripture exactly the way you do is in error. I get that.Outspoken said:Then you are in error. You have to take the truth and make it applicable to different situations: Example: the bible never mentions nuclear war, but that doesn't mean it doesn't say anything about it.
As for your idea of immaturity means inperfection, i don't see that. If you want to show how you get to this, go for it. I'll listen. As for them being responible, no it doesn't blow it out or else I would say age of accountablity would be biblical. So try again
"As for your example of nuclear war, it's not a valid comparison in this context."CndxBlvr said:Yeah, I know, anyone who doesn't interpret Scripture exactly the way you do is in error. I get that.
As for your example of nuclear war, it's not a valid comparison in this context. As for the statement "You have to take the truth and make it applicable to different situations", this means anyone (including yourself) can apply "truth" to anything and make it mean whatever they want. By your logic, truth is anything you perceive it to be.
While the definition of immaturity doesn't necessarily mean imperfect, it implies it. Someone who is immature is prone to make mistakes because of their inexperience or lack of teaching. If Adam and Eve were perfect, they wouldn't be immature or prone to make mistakes.
(To use your own words) Then you are in error. Something that needs maturing is obviously incomplete, therefore it is imperfect.Outspoken said:"
"While the definition of immaturity doesn't necessarily mean imperfect, it implies it"
I don't see that implication at all. No, inexperienced doesn't equal immaturity.
Actually, it isn't. You are comparing something we know to exist because it (or the possibility of it) exists today, to an unmentioned detail of a past event that you are assuming to be true, but cannot be proven one way or another because it neither exists today nor was documented. You are comparing two completely different things.*chuckles* sure it is. Its an application of a truth to a different set of circumstances not talking about specificlly in the bible. As you have shown your bias in your first sentence, do you have a good reason why I should continue this dialouge since no matter what I say to you it doesn't matter because you have your mind made up?
Noo, you have not proven being incomplete means imperfect. Humans were created incomplete and perfectly. We need God (incomplete) but Adam and eve were created sinless. So please prove your assertion as there is evidience against it.CndxBlvr said:(To use your own words) Then you are in error. Something that needs maturing is obviously incomplete, therefore it is imperfect.
Actually, it isn't. You are comparing something we know to exist because it (or the possibility of it) exists today, to an unmentioned detail of a past event that you are assuming to be true, but cannot be proven one way or another because it neither exists today nor was documented. You are comparing two completely different things.
You are grasping at straws! If I set about to design a car (for the sake of argument let's say it's the or a perfect car), but haven't finished designing the motor or the transmission, is it a perfect car? It sure wouldn't be driveable. I would have to complete the development of the car before I could declare it to be the perfect car.Outspoken said:Noo, you have not proven being incomplete means imperfect. Humans were created incomplete and perfectly. We need God (incomplete) but Adam and eve were created sinless. So please prove your assertion as there is evidience against it.
Your analogy is not correct since a car is not designed specifically NOT to have a transmittion. We were designed SPECIFICALLY to be incomplete without God. Thus your analogy is incorrect. Sorry, incomplete nor immature does not mean imperfect. Care to try again?CndxBlvr said:You are grasping at straws! If I set about to design a car (for the sake of argument let's say it's the or a perfect car), but haven't finished designing the motor or the transmission, is it a perfect car? It sure wouldn't be driveable. I would have to complete the development of the car before I could declare it to be the perfect car.
By your logic, if you can assume that Adam and Eve were incomplete, I can assume that they were imperfect.
I see nothing, again nothing in Scripture to even suggest that Adam and Eve needed to mature. You are totally and completely reading something that simply isn't there. The burden of proof is on you.
Your argument is that Adam and Eve needed to mature before they would be allowed to eat the fruit. The idea that Adam and Eve were incomplete apart from God doesn't support this argument, so the burden of proof is still on you.Outspoken said:Your analogy is not correct since a car is not designed specifically NOT to have a transmittion. We were designed SPECIFICALLY to be incomplete without God. Thus your analogy is incorrect. Sorry, incomplete nor immature does not mean imperfect. Care to try again?
LOL man you sure aren't reading my posts. Go back and read what I said when I first introduced this idea.CndxBlvr said:Your argument is that Adam and Eve needed to mature before they would be allowed to eat the fruit. The idea that Adam and Eve were incomplete apart from God doesn't support this argument, so the burden of proof is still on you.
The only thing I see is you professing yourself to be wise, telling someone else they don't know what hermeneutics is all about when you can't even spell it correctly, and then stating to me "I would say, as a guess, that it was a maturation step and when they were ready they would be able to eat of that tree."Outspoken said:LOL man you sure aren't reading my posts. Go back and read what I said when I first introduced this idea.
*sigh* I'm sorry if my tone of being logical about something seems condesending, I'm just responding to your post. Its your perception that's incorrect. As for guessing, I never said I was correct, only that it was a guess because biblically we have no evidience, thus the question cannot be answered. You have ever make claims and never support them, I have in fact, gone so far as to DISPROVE your claim, thus rendering it invalid.CndxBlvr said:So I can only conclude that you believe that something you admit is "only a guess" is actually truth. And that you're rude and condescending. Other than that, what is there for me to read?
I'm not dodging anything.Outspoken said:You can make all the opinion statements you want, I have yet to see you prove your assertion, now your trying to dodge the issue. I made no assurtion, you have yet you have not proven yours. I guess you just like to dance around it and not answer questions?or do you have some proof that immature means imperfect, you do you admit you're wrong there?
Yes, and I rebuffed your idea because its clear that immature does not mean imperfect (your assurtion). You have yet to prove that assurtion thus taking away your objection.CndxBlvr said:I'm not dodging anything.
You are the one who made the statement "Now seeing as we have no biblical information on why, we can only guess. I would say, as a guess, that it was a maturation step and when they were ready they would be able to eat of that tree."
In response to that, to point out that this was a flawed argument, I made the following statement:
"God said man was created in his image and the idea that they needed to mature flies in the face of the idea that Gods creation was perfect until Adam and Eve disobeyed. That kind of blows out the whole concept of man being responsible for sin in the first place."
The question here is not whether immature means imperfect, as it was a side issue that you expounded on to try to get away from the real issue, which is that you are basing an entire doctrine on a fabrication (assumption, guess) that you even admit is such.
Hi CB, Did you read my post. My answer of your question was based on prayer and the Holy Spirit's leading.....Not all written out in the bible....but based on what I know of the bible as a whole and God's character. I also have an inner witness. Sometimes my inner witness is stronger than any knowledge I have, but usaully later understanding will come.CndxBlvr said:I'm not dodging anything.
You are the one who made the statement "Now seeing as we have no biblical information on why, we can only guess. I would say, as a guess, that it was a maturation step and when they were ready they would be able to eat of that tree."
In response to that, to point out that this was a flawed argument, I made the following statement:
"God said man was created in his image and the idea that they needed to mature flies in the face of the idea that Gods creation was perfect until Adam and Eve disobeyed. That kind of blows out the whole concept of man being responsible for sin in the first place."
The question here is not whether immature means imperfect, as it was a side issue that you expounded on to try to get away from the real issue, which is that you are basing an entire doctrine on a fabrication (assumption, guess) that you even admit is such.
If it's not part of your doctrine, then why do you have the need to state it? If it's not part of your beliefs, then there was no point in your stating it in the first place.Outspoken said:Yes, and I rebuffed your idea because its clear that immature does not mean imperfect (your assurtion). You have yet to prove that assurtion thus taking away your objection.
"an entire doctrine on a fabrication "
LOL, again you're not reading my posts. Please show me where I said it was docterine.
I read it, and thanks. I don't doubt God's goodness, but you made some interesting points.Angelajt said:Hi CB, Did you read my post. My answer of your question was based on prayer and the Holy Spirit's leading.....Not all written out in the bible....but based on what I know of the bible as a whole and God's character. I also have an inner witness. Sometimes my inner witness is stronger than any knowledge I have, but usaully later understanding will come.
I see you are very logical as I can be....so for the conflict going on let me just say that alot of christian's sometimes are more emotional about their beliefs. I am like you and questioned God's goodness at one time.....
Just keep on keeping on...I think you will find your answers
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?