Let’s go back to the text (here from the NIV, but there are no great differences in other translations):
22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.
God’s concern is that he not eat from the tree of life and thus live forever. And so he’s banished. Therefore unless he ate from the tree he would not live forever, and of course he didn’t. A person who doesn’t live forever is mortal. Therefore Adam was mortal before his expulsion from the garden.
Good stuff, John. Some nuance I’ve seen from scholars is this: The garden in Eden was the place where heaven and earth met, and we see God dwelling with humans there. The Tree of Life symbolizes the immortality that is the result of fellowship with God and receiving of his life in that overlap between heaven and earth. So mortal humanity (a study on the use of “dust” in the Hebrew bible is a good one for this topic) loses access to eternal life as the natural consequence of breaking fellowship with eternal God.
Also, there is a lot to say about how this relates to humanity’s vocation to image God and partner with him as stewards of creation, but that takes us off topic, so I’ll leave it for another time.
I’m not refuting what you offer. It’s a straightforward reading that deals with the question of the mortality of humanity. I think you’re presenting those verses accurately.
However, what I presented is not just a “choice to read it as symbolic.” Scholars would argue that it is the Hebrew Bible itself that suggests this kind of meaning through themes that get developed by the different scrolls or books interacting with one another. And I present it because this topic of humanity’s mortality is connected to the entire story. A misunderstanding of humanity’s mortality and how this offer of eternal life works impacts understanding of the entire story.
I get your criticism of this. To me, there’s only ambiguity in the sense that all good literature has - it leaves you thinking, sometimes when you read you notice things that weren’t there before.
Yeah, obviously not in Christianity. I just look in on the outside in at atheism and other religions and wonder how people rationalize them.
I was born into a Christian family. I’ve considered explanations for other religions more as an adult and I’ve read books and watched YouTube videos of converts to Christianity explain why they choose it and I’ve listened to the reasons why people have left. I’ve learned about Islam the most. More about Judaism recently. I’ve tried to read some about Hinduism and other eastern religions but I can’t make any sense out of what I’ve read. As I said, I’ve listened to atheist skeptics on YouTube.
Yes. Take the fact that Christianity evolved from Judaism, and Islam evolved from Christianity. Not only do previous religions give rise to new religions, religions also change and adapt to different situations. Christianity alone has thousands of different denominations with different emphases, traditions, and (some small, some larger) differences in beliefs. Practices within certain religions also change and adapt to the cultures they move into. How did all this business with Santa Clause, leprechauns, and dancing around overly decorated conifer pine trees get part of the Christmas celebration anyway? In Denmark (and most other parts of Scandinavia and north/north-eastern Europe) Christmas is still called “Jule-tid”(Yule - Wikipedia).
It’s like you can even make religio-geographical maps like you can with the relatedness of species and biogeography. Certain religions and denominations more closely related are most often found in close geographical proximity (Eastern Orthodoxy is mostly found in the east). It’s uncanny.
Our former neighbors are very Mormon. When missionaries came knocking at our door we’d ask, “Oh, do you know Bishop H lives right across the street?”, and send them over.
Ironically, I actually think there’s some basic similarities between LDS and Islam.
It is a strength of Christianity that it can adapt to different cultures. AFAIK Jews generally don’t try to proselytize and Islam isn’t very good at adapting because of its politics. Also Islam is bipolar when it comes to whether it embraces Christianity or despises it. I find it to be totally different than Christianity coming out of Judaism as the NT justifies the new covenant and embraces previous scriptures. There aren’t many messianic jews, but I do not think there could be any if it didn’t do so. There isn’t such a thing as Islamic Christians as far as I know They’ll say the Bible is corrupted.
Instead I look at the fact that there are Christians all over the world, which is prophesied in the Bible. And the facts above about other religions as evidence in favor of Christianity.
I totally agree with that. Both were essentially spawned by a single man borrowing a lot of material, and then either just making up more stuff to add, or having “visions”(aka common halluscinations of a religious/spiritual nature) during epileptic seizures. Heck, it’s uncannily also like Saul of Tarsus did before he became Paul. What an irony.
I think so too, Christianity is a very plastic and adaptive religion.
Which supports my statement that religions evolve by having the properties that cause humans to propagate them. Christianity has itself evolved to it’s current position in this way, and that is also what makes it possibly to spawn both new offspring religions, pseudo-Christian cults, and sub-denominations.
It has just enough ambiguity and contradiction that one can find something to fit almost any imaginable situation. And it “predicts” or “prophesizes” unavoidable and expected banalities, such as it’s followers “will be mocked”, or that it will one day get to rule it all (is there a religion that doesn’t prophesize this?). And the religion’s followers always try to make the “prophecy” come true, making it a classic self-fulfilling prophecy.
Among religions, one is bound to be more adaptive than the others, stipulating that Christianity is the most fit extant religion (hard to really objectively determine). But in any case, it would be very unlikely for all religions to be exactly equally able to spread and evolve.
I suppose so, but Paul didn’t write a gospel, and his letters were of practical nature rather than supposedly given during visions So that’s where I see a difference.
I laughed.
Jesus has universal appeal.
Not in the same way, because there are differences in how they were propagated over time. As far as I can see, there are Christians in majority Islamic countries in spite of difficulty and lack of rights, and Muslims in majority Christian countries because they lacked safety in Muslim countries.
So does Muhammad obviously, since there are Muslims all over the world as well.
Christianity was spread through peaceful and forceful means, so was Islam. No difference as far as I can tell.
I am guessing by “Christian countries”, you are referring to places like the US, and Western Europe, but AFAIK these are secular countries not Christian ones (since Christianity is not their official religion). More importantly, people go to these countries because their laws (as it appears to us foreigners) uphold the rights of individuals not some religion. In places like the US, individuals are a lot safer if they come out as queer because the secular laws keep such people from harm. Try it in my country and you might be just be lynched by some Christian or Muslim who disregards your right to be intimate with anyone of your choosing. A lot of Nigerians (especially conservative Christians and Muslims) believe Biden is an agent of Satan for promoting gay rights. If my memory serves me right, that’s the same thinking in the US evangelical community generally.
I don’t see any real difference in the way conservative Christians and Muslims treat people who don’t follow their religious beliefs.
You listed some features of Christianity that appeared marked to you and concluded they collectively served as “evidence in favor of Christianity”. I want you to clarify what you meant by that.
Why do you prefer such a low-density source of information?
It’s not binary. Look at India. It’s a majority Hindu country whose current government is doing a good job of treating both Muslims and Christians badly.
You can try to brush India off as some minor anomaly, but it’s 18% of the world’s population!
You might want to learn some southern Spanish Jewish history, particularly the dramatic difference in the treatment of Jews between the Spanish Inquisition and the Muslim rule that preceded it.
Uh… because I’m a busy mom and when I go to the library I’m focused on finding books for my kids. YouTube is seconds away and analyzing people amuses me.
They’ll say the Bible is corrupted.
YouTube is seconds away and analyzing people amuses me.