The fruit of good & evil

Nancy said:

God knows and I only care what He thinks of me any how ♥

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

He hears and answers EVERY prayer...and my prayer for this personal situation is ONLY for His will therefore, I already know it is answered.

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

If she were even to ask, I would have let her have them

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

Still...there is more to this story as to what else that was taken...

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

Yep! But, He brings us there when we have a willing heart ♥

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

he learned from the best i guess
gee, surprise.

"Codependent No More" is the name of the book, ok, or go get a doormat and have "Nancy" put on it, sweetheart. You have a heart of gold, ok, that's obvious, and it is just 1949 at Sutter's Mill with you, ok? See she is one of your "projects," someone you are "helping," and i know this is hard to hear, because i had to too, but those ppl know to look for ppl like us who um haven't sold their robes yet, ok. Do yourself a solid and read that book imo

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

1 John 2:2 Lexicon: and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
and
Who told you that you were naked?
(It was not I
AM accusing you, nopenopenope)

See, forgiveness does not save one from wanting to hide from the light, and if you doubt this then loan twenty bucks to a flake and forget all about it, cause you're never getting it back anyway right, and watch what they do around you after that lol. Of course the minute you ask for it back or get POed, you lose, but never mind that for a sec
(and then you got POed all over agin, ahem)

and ps she is doing great i guess, she is working it lol, she prolly even has an apartment she can't afford or something

and she is riding you like a pony, right now, feel the spurs yet?
Bam get POed ok. At her even if you want. Every time you get mad about it, that is her getting over, renting space in your head, and ill even tell you what is gonna happen when she loses that apt ok, that's when she shows up crying "confession" wolf tears, and round #whatever begins. What round would that be, btw?

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

asking would be acknowledging your superiority though, see, and she has her own robe to maintain

um, disregard which generation you are in there then, above?

'member that when that book gets hard to read, k
many women that read it for some reason cannot take it to heart, can only talk the talk. We are talking about your Modus Operendi herenow, prolly taught to you by your parents, the best coping method you could find. Coda or even Al-anon meetings (for family members of alcoholics) will be great support, i need to find one myself actually.

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

God is Love, and you are both His children, right? What would you think if one of your kids was able to work one of your other kids, would you get POed at the first kid? Maybe, ya. Would you get POed at him after the 4th generation of the same scenario? Hmm.
faith is an action verb after all, imo anyway.

Click to expand...

oldhermit said:

Genesis 3 is the example you are looking for.
How do these two trees help us to understand the triadic nature of reality and the source of a moral standard?

As we move from creation to the garden, there develops an emerging discontinuity between man and his association with forbidden things. When man is unconstrained by revelation, he quite naturally draws conclusions based upon how he relates to the world around him. Man allows what he experiences to influence how he defines what is relevant. Once man learns to link the natural to the eternal, he learns to represent human events in quite a different way. One cannot build a triadic picture of reality based upon experiential logic. Human rationalization, operating on its own, cannot properly context the relationship of man to the natural world. Building a triadic picture of reality is only possible when one learns to represent human experience in the light of revelation. To do this, one must allow revelation to transcend experiential logic.

There is an example of triadic structure that demonstrates how the natural world and the supernatural world relate to one another in the eternal continuum. At the beginning of man’s history in the garden, the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil were mentioned in the context of man’s relationship both to God and to the natural world. The text never seems to indicate that in the beginning there was any prohibition to the tree of life but, that man was only denied access to the tree of knowledge. It was not until after the fall of man that God placed an angel with a flaming sword at the east of the garden to prohibit man’s access to the tree of life.

The way in which Adam chose to represent these trees would reflect his understanding of his association with both God and the natural world. As the narrative unfolds, it becomes clear that access to the tree of life was predicated upon man’s observance of the divine prohibition of the other. Man was to have absolutely no contact with the tree of knowledge. God had provided every tree of the garden for man’s use and pleasure, but this tree was to be left strictly alone. These two trees stand as symbols of a world beyond man’s sensory existence. The tree of forbidden knowledge represents the holiness, the superiority, and the sovereignty of God. It suggests that God always reserves unto Himself the things that belong exclusively to him. It is not merely the tree that has exclusivity, but what that tree represents. As a whole, man is never content to abide by prohibitions. Here, he desires the one thing he is denied. How characteristic this has proven to be of human nature!

Although man was given the highest place of honor as the crowning creation of God, and given dominion over all creation, this tree was a reminder that even man is not God. Man must stand in the index position of this triad and link the tree of knowledge that he can see to the will of God whom he cannot see. He must also link this tree to revealed consequences that he cannot see and has never before experienced. For man to properly relate to both worlds, he must learn to link the eternal world to his world by bringing God’s warning to bear upon his relationship to this tree. He must learn how to define the nature of his relationship to this tree based on what God had told him about it. Now, this epistemology did not just apply to this tree, it extended to everything in man’s dominion. He must understand his relationship to all of his domain based upon this triadic epistemology. God had already defined man’s function in creation and man must relate to his world according to the words of the Lord.

From the beginning, man was confronted with a decision in his association with this icon of good and evil. This tree was a symbol of an unseen reality. There is a particular type of knowledge that man was not equipped to handle and should not seek to obtain. The accessibility of the tree shows that man was given the ability to obtain this knowledge. The prohibition laid down by God says that this knowledge is destructive to man. This reinforces man’s position as a subordinate creature to what is unseen. God had said, “From this tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shalt not eat of it; for in the day that you eat from it, you shall surely die.” Here is a divine standard given to instruct man on how to think when he considers this tree. Since God has decreed that punishment will follow disobedience, the validity of God’s word is upheld. Divine judgment preserves divine justice because it is through the exercise of justice that God protects his holiness. Observance of this revelation becomes a matter of life and death. The ethics were simple; God said, “Don’t touch it.” This did not require a human analysis of ethics to decide what might be the right thing to do. Contact with the tree was evil both because God said it was evil, and because of what man would suffer as a result.

We know, because of how this tree is interpreted by the physical senses in the text, that man, left on his own, could not arrive at this conclusion. Adam could not see what the tree represented from mere empirical observation. He could only see the physical dynamics of the tree. For the rest, he must rely upon what God had told him about the tree. Man requires instruction from God to protect him from that which he has no point of reference to understand. As the Creator, God understood things about the nature of man and his relationship to his environment that man did not know and was not created to know. Man was not endowed with the capacity to distinguish between good knowledge and evil knowledge. This truth has not changed. The knowledge provided by this tree was not a necessary component for man to fulfill his role within his assigned environment.

The environment of the garden supplied every conceivable human need. He was even given access to the tree of life. The garden was a secure environment where man had no experience with fear, shame, and disgrace. These were yet unknown elements. It was an aesthetic environment where God controlled access to knowledge. There were certain things that man knew by design, but the prohibition of the tree says that there were those things which man should never want to know or seek to know.

In the garden, man enjoyed the presence of God and the full awareness of God. God knew that through disobedience man would be exiled from this controlled and protected environment and from his fellowship with God. By violating God’s prohibition, man challenged the sovereignty of God. Man does not have the authority to mandate a standard of moral conduct. The text of Genesis shows us that this level of knowledge belongs exclusively to God. Because man chose to behave sinfully, he is now confronted with a new reality. Adam is now aware of a particular type of knowledge that will forever change the way mankind represents the relationship he has with the natural world and with his God. It also laid a foundation by which humanity would forever be forced to choose between these two epistemologies. Should we represent reality based on revelation from God or should we rely on those things learned from pragmatic experiences? Which one will we depend upon to tell us the truth about what is relevant?

Now, man has access to the knowledge of good and evil. This presents two problems: First, man does not know the difference between good and evil and secondly, history shows us that when man is left to his own, he will more often than not choose the evil to his own destruction, even when revelation is present. In Genesis 6:5, we see that by the time Noah comes on the scene, “every imagination of the thoughts of the heart is only evil continually,” (RSV). The fact that revelation was available to that generation is evident in the character of Noah. God regarded Noah as “righteous in his generation.” Righteousness is the result of submitting one’s self to revealed constraints. This deterioration of a divinely established ethic shows a complete reversal of a revealed epistemology. This is what happens when the mind of man becomes isolated from the revelation of God. This isolation was willful, deliberate, and fatal. When man is left to himself without a desire for revealed knowledge, he is characteristically self-destructive. If man is to survive spiritually in a cursed environment, it will require a standard that will enable him to represent properly his assigned place within creation.

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

Why do you think I have some M.O.??

Click to expand...

1. a particular way or method of doing something, especially one that is characteristic or well-established.
   "the volunteers were instructed to buy specific systems using our usual modus operandi—anonymously and with cash"
   synonyms: method of working, method, way, MO, manner, technique, style, procedure, approach, course of action, plan of action, methodology, mode, fashion, process, means, strategy, plan, formula, recipe, practice;
   rarepraxis
   • the way in which something operates or works.
     
     and manana for the rest, k, dying here, g'night love

bbyrd009 said:

Ah well everyone has an MO Nancy,
mo·dus op·e·ran·di
/ˌmōdəs ˌäpəˈrandē,ˌmōdəs ˌäpəˈrandī/
noun

1. a particular way or method of doing something, especially one that is characteristic or well-established.
   "the volunteers were instructed to buy specific systems using our usual modus operandi—anonymously and with cash"
   synonyms: method of working, method, way, MO, manner, technique, style, procedure, approach, course of action, plan of action, methodology, mode, fashion, process, means, strategy, plan, formula, recipe, practice;
   rarepraxis
   • the way in which something operates or works.
     
     and manana for the rest, k, dying here, g'night love

Click to expand...

oldhermit said:

Human logic and rationalization are not valid determinants for deciding what is right or wrong. God said, “Don’t touch it.” This alone determines what is right or wrong.

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

Okay, how do you know if a professing Christian is truly sincere about the faith?

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

"controlling" ANYBODY is and has NEVER been something I would ever even want to do!

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

Funny thing, up until I bought this house, I lived alone for a good 99% of my adult life. I also tend to introvert ...and that, since High School! I actually love living alone! Just me and my pets ♥
My peace is restored in my home and, I am soooo grateful for that! ♥

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

I have I know that book does not apply here as...

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

Ah ok i know better than to come here after a certain time ok, but my routine is not, because habits, right so i was prolly way out of line, answers i'm not so good ok, i seriously come here to ask questions and learn if i can
what is it?
So, i'm just um the guy living upstairs now awright, the um how did you put it virtual Stranger, trying to get from pity to sympathy myself, and a raging hypocrite to boot ok.
So i'm just with that said going to resist the strong temptation to anser your Q with a Q here, and say that i know that because Professing Christian and Sincere about "the faith" present as an oxymoron
Mark 2:17 Lexicon: And hearing this

bbyrd009 said:

Ah ok i know better than to come here after a certain time ok, but my routine is not, because habits, right so i was prolly way out of line, answers i'm not so good ok, i seriously come here to ask questions and learn if i can
what is it?
So, i'm just um the guy living upstairs now awright, the um how did you put it virtual Stranger, trying to get from pity to sympathy myself, and a raging hypocrite to boot ok.
So i'm just with that said going to resist the strong temptation to anser your Q with a Q here, and say that i know that because Professing Christian and Sincere about "the faith" present as an oxymoron
[URL='https://biblehub.com/lexicon/mark/2-17.htm']Mark 2:17 Lexicon: And hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

Matthew 11:7 Lexicon: As these men were going away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?
tho that might be the wrong one here, downstairs ppl are divining my um habits already dangit, getting queued already lol, so maybe this one,
Luke 7:24 After John's messengers had left, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed swaying in the wind?
with the caveat that wilderness meant more like "desert" i think then
yes, i was prolly wrong
me to a T, contemplate how money gives you power, maybe

"just me and my pets" though...priceless!
you ever watch Boondocks, Nancy? Most socially relevant show i ever saw for US, xcelled pretty quick of course. Anyway Melody Beattie is black too, is why that comes to mind i guess. IF YOU DONT oops ever watch it, watch 1/1 imo,

k gottsa fly dangit bye
what you have is what you have, and what you had is what she has!

Click to expand...

, Jesus said to them, "It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."[/URL]
Matthew 11:7 Lexicon: As these men were going away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?
tho that might be the wrong one here, downstairs ppl are divining my um habits already dangit, getting queued already lol, so maybe this one,
Luke 7:24 After John's messengers had left, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed swaying in the wind?
with the caveat that wilderness meant more like "desert" i think then
yes, i was prolly wrong
me to a T, contemplate how money gives you power, maybe

"just me and my pets" though...priceless!
you ever watch Boondocks, Nancy? Most socially relevant show i ever saw for US, xcelled pretty quick of course. Anyway Melody Beattie is black too, is why that comes to mind i guess. IF YOU DONT oops ever watch it, watch 1/1 imo,

k gottsa fly dangit bye
what you have is what you have, and what you had is what she has!

Click to expand...

I'm white and love all cheeses
"what you have is what you have, and what you had is what she has! <--- Phuneeeee
"if he's a Jahovas witness Im gonna kick his a**" Lol.
That rich guy looks like Ed Asner.
"I agree, all marriage is wrong", Ahahahaha!
Yes, "why can't I be me"...? I'd say because "me" does not always line up with Him.
Hahaha...he gave himself away by his ka-ka bomb! Oh sheesh!
"I think the "N" word is okay if they say it" LOL...this can also apply to if a gay woman calls another gay woman a "dyke"...it's okay, same with the word "fag" for men...but if said by a hetro, usually in a derogatory way, it is NOT so okay.
There is "language" in the Boondocks that would not be how like, you or I would speak (have had my moments tho ) ...and, it is very much like real life with the lost. I've known countless lost people who think/speak this way. Those still of this world.
"Ah ok i know better than to come here after a certain time ok, but my routine is not, because habits, right so i was prolly way out of line, answers i'm not so good ok, i seriously come here to ask questions and learn if i can"
I too come here to learn and fellowship too. I don't think you were out of line at all Mark.
Later Bro ♥

Nancy said:

"I agree, all marriage is wrong", Ahahahaha!

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

it is very much like real life with the lost. I've known countless lost people who think/speak this way. Those still of this world.

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

I don't think you were out of line at all Mark.

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

dunno, no one much ansers my Qs!
manana!

"pets" though, narf

goin' in th' book that one is i tell you what lol

Click to expand...

Hm, could be because in "which are some things hard to be understood" ?

My dogs are VEERY codependent
Cannot find NARF on Google...
And, isn't manana "tomorrow" in Spanish?
♥

oldhermit said:

Genesis 3 is the example you are looking for.
How do these two trees help us to understand the triadic nature of reality and the source of a moral standard?

As we move from creation to the garden, there develops an emerging discontinuity between man and his association with forbidden things. When man is unconstrained by revelation, he quite naturally draws conclusions based upon how he relates to the world around him. Man allows what he experiences to influence how he defines what is relevant. Once man learns to link the natural to the eternal, he learns to represent human events in quite a different way. One cannot build a triadic picture of reality based upon experiential logic. Human rationalization, operating on its own, cannot properly context the relationship of man to the natural world. Building a triadic picture of reality is only possible when one learns to represent human experience in the light of revelation. To do this, one must allow revelation to transcend experiential logic.

There is an example of triadic structure that demonstrates how the natural world and the supernatural world relate to one another in the eternal continuum. At the beginning of man’s history in the garden, the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil were mentioned in the context of man’s relationship both to God and to the natural world. The text never seems to indicate that in the beginning there was any prohibition to the tree of life but, that man was only denied access to the tree of knowledge. It was not until after the fall of man that God placed an angel with a flaming sword at the east of the garden to prohibit man’s access to the tree of life.

The way in which Adam chose to represent these trees would reflect his understanding of his association with both God and the natural world. As the narrative unfolds, it becomes clear that access to the tree of life was predicated upon man’s observance of the divine prohibition of the other. Man was to have absolutely no contact with the tree of knowledge. God had provided every tree of the garden for man’s use and pleasure, but this tree was to be left strictly alone. These two trees stand as symbols of a world beyond man’s sensory existence. The tree of forbidden knowledge represents the holiness, the superiority, and the sovereignty of God. It suggests that God always reserves unto Himself the things that belong exclusively to him. It is not merely the tree that has exclusivity, but what that tree represents. As a whole, man is never content to abide by prohibitions. Here, he desires the one thing he is denied. How characteristic this has proven to be of human nature!

Although man was given the highest place of honor as the crowning creation of God, and given dominion over all creation, this tree was a reminder that even man is not God. Man must stand in the index position of this triad and link the tree of knowledge that he can see to the will of God whom he cannot see. He must also link this tree to revealed consequences that he cannot see and has never before experienced. For man to properly relate to both worlds, he must learn to link the eternal world to his world by bringing God’s warning to bear upon his relationship to this tree. He must learn how to define the nature of his relationship to this tree based on what God had told him about it. Now, this epistemology did not just apply to this tree, it extended to everything in man’s dominion. He must understand his relationship to all of his domain based upon this triadic epistemology. God had already defined man’s function in creation and man must relate to his world according to the words of the Lord.

From the beginning, man was confronted with a decision in his association with this icon of good and evil. This tree was a symbol of an unseen reality. There is a particular type of knowledge that man was not equipped to handle and should not seek to obtain. The accessibility of the tree shows that man was given the ability to obtain this knowledge. The prohibition laid down by God says that this knowledge is destructive to man. This reinforces man’s position as a subordinate creature to what is unseen. God had said, “From this tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shalt not eat of it; for in the day that you eat from it, you shall surely die.” Here is a divine standard given to instruct man on how to think when he considers this tree. Since God has decreed that punishment will follow disobedience, the validity of God’s word is upheld. Divine judgment preserves divine justice because it is through the exercise of justice that God protects his holiness. Observance of this revelation becomes a matter of life and death. The ethics were simple; God said, “Don’t touch it.” This did not require a human analysis of ethics to decide what might be the right thing to do. Contact with the tree was evil both because God said it was evil, and because of what man would suffer as a result.

We know, because of how this tree is interpreted by the physical senses in the text, that man, left on his own, could not arrive at this conclusion. Adam could not see what the tree represented from mere empirical observation. He could only see the physical dynamics of the tree. For the rest, he must rely upon what God had told him about the tree. Man requires instruction from God to protect him from that which he has no point of reference to understand. As the Creator, God understood things about the nature of man and his relationship to his environment that man did not know and was not created to know. Man was not endowed with the capacity to distinguish between good knowledge and evil knowledge. This truth has not changed. The knowledge provided by this tree was not a necessary component for man to fulfill his role within his assigned environment.

The environment of the garden supplied every conceivable human need. He was even given access to the tree of life. The garden was a secure environment where man had no experience with fear, shame, and disgrace. These were yet unknown elements. It was an aesthetic environment where God controlled access to knowledge. There were certain things that man knew by design, but the prohibition of the tree says that there were those things which man should never want to know or seek to know.

In the garden, man enjoyed the presence of God and the full awareness of God. God knew that through disobedience man would be exiled from this controlled and protected environment and from his fellowship with God. By violating God’s prohibition, man challenged the sovereignty of God. Man does not have the authority to mandate a standard of moral conduct. The text of Genesis shows us that this level of knowledge belongs exclusively to God. Because man chose to behave sinfully, he is now confronted with a new reality. Adam is now aware of a particular type of knowledge that will forever change the way mankind represents the relationship he has with the natural world and with his God. It also laid a foundation by which humanity would forever be forced to choose between these two epistemologies. Should we represent reality based on revelation from God or should we rely on those things learned from pragmatic experiences? Which one will we depend upon to tell us the truth about what is relevant?

Now, man has access to the knowledge of good and evil. This presents two problems: First, man does not know the difference between good and evil and secondly, history shows us that when man is left to his own, he will more often than not choose the evil to his own destruction, even when revelation is present. In Genesis 6:5, we see that by the time Noah comes on the scene, “every imagination of the thoughts of the heart is only evil continually,” (RSV). The fact that revelation was available to that generation is evident in the character of Noah. God regarded Noah as “righteous in his generation.” Righteousness is the result of submitting one’s self to revealed constraints. This deterioration of a divinely established ethic shows a complete reversal of a revealed epistemology. This is what happens when the mind of man becomes isolated from the revelation of God. This isolation was willful, deliberate, and fatal. When man is left to himself without a desire for revealed knowledge, he is characteristically self-destructive. If man is to survive spiritually in a cursed environment, it will require a standard that will enable him to represent properly his assigned place within creation.

Click to expand...

oldhermit said:

When Satan approached Eve in the garden, he confronts her about the tree of knowledge. ….(rest deleted per space requirements)... Human logic and rationalization are not valid determinants for deciding what is right or wrong. God said, “Don’t touch it.” This alone determines what is right or wrong.​

Click to expand...

Nancy said:

"dunno, no one much ansers my Qs!
manana!"
Hm, could be because in "which are some things hard to be understood" ?

"goin' in th' book that one is i tell you what lol"
My dogs are VEERY codependent
Cannot find NARF on Google...
And, isn't manana "tomorrow" in Spanish?
♥

Click to expand...

brakelite said:

Love the above. Might I dare suggest that it is our rationalisation working against revelation that prompts us to set aside the weekly Sabbath each 7th day in favour of the 1st day, or "any day", or spiritualising the rest we may find in Christ a step too far?

Click to expand...

bbyrd009 said:

So then you think you are your brother's keeper?

Click to expand...