> General Discussions
Did Jesus have to learn what evil was to know good?
enigmoxical:
Jesus already knew the difference between good and evil before He arrived on planet earth:
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)
After all, He Himself created it, not for His own benefit, but for ours:
"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is becoming as one of us, to know good and evil." (Genesis 3:22)
We are the ones who need to learn of these things, not He. Which is why we all MUST partake of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (a symbol for the world).
Peace
enigmoxical:
What is the purpose for this life? To learn of good and evil. When we read the morning paper, we learn of good and evil. When we watch the evening news, we learn of good and evil. All throughout the course of our lives in this WORLD, we learn of good and evil. We don't learn of good and evil by eating a piece of fruit from a tree in a garden. And neither did Adam and Eve. The Genesis 3 story is a PARABLE, not literal history. Even Ray teaches that Scripture is a parable. And I am quite certain that he would agree with me here.
Peace
enigmoxical:
That's right, Rodger. Everything this world has to offer - the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life - IS the fruit of this WORLD (which IS the tree of the knowledge of good and evil):
"It is an experience of evil Elohim has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it." (Ecc. 1:13; Concordant Literal Version)
But Christianity errs by teaching that the Genesis 3 story is a literal, historic event, when in fact it IS nothing but a parable. And parables are FICTITIOUS stories (see Strong's Concordance).
So Rodger, how have I (in your own words) made this parable "carnal?"
Peace
Chris R:
Hello Folks,
What is meant when we speak of parables?, take a look at this words definition
par·a·ble: a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like. nowere in this part of the definition does it state the story is either fiction, or non fiction.
Ray has stated that the Bible is "LIKE" a parable... in that some of the stories written are true factual stories, yet have a much higher spiritual meaning. Was there really a Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego? Did they get thrown into a firey furnace literally?.. Scipture indicates yes..this is a factual true story....but is it a parable of Rev 2:11, which in itself is another parable.....
And some of the stories written are referenced as a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, but are based on a fictional story, such as the prodigal son.
Both are parables, one based on a literal story, the other on a fictional story. Either way. both stories convey a meaning indirectly by use of comparison.
Peace
Chris R
enigmoxical:
--- Quote from: Chris R on October 10, 2008, 09:59:43 PM ---Hello Folks,
What is meant when we speak of parables?, take a look at this words definition
par·a·ble: a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like. nowere in this part of the definition does it state the story is either fiction, or non fiction.
--- End quote ---
Here's how Strong's Concordance defines it (G3850): a similitude ("parable"), i.e. (symbol.) fictitious narrative (of common life conveying a mor.), apothegm or adage:-comparison, figure, parable, proverb.
No theologian I know of will argue that the Tree of Life is a symbol for Jesus Christ. And yet, these same theologians will argue that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was not a symbol, but a literal tree, and its fruit was not symbolic, but real literal fruit that Adam and Eve weren't supposed to eat. Hence comes their false doctrine of "original sin," that Adam and Eve really DID do something contrary to God's will. Is there a problem with this?
"For who hath resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19)
"For it is God who works in you both to WILL and to DO of His good pleasure." (Php. 2:13)
To say that Adam and Eve resisted God's will is to call Paul a liar. So although literal stories CAN be used to convey deeper moral or spiritual truths, it is clear that the Genesis 3 story CANNOT be literal, it MUST be a parable; otherwise the scriptures contradict.
Peace
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version