breaking trust

Wow, a person who is old enough to KNOW what man and animals could do in the garden! :laugh: j/k. Uh, though - you do need to know (as I stated) the bible refutes you TWICE where God used animals to speak. We also know that animals communicate vocally with each other (as well as bodily), establishing a mental compasity far beyond your concept but maintians the biblical possibility I presented. You can not prove there was no communcative ability between man and animal. Besides the very name "serpent" implies speach for which it is named.

If you will note God's work concerning creation and His statement concerned THIS world and Gods pleasure with ITS completeness of the physical relm (that is what the 2 chapters were dealing right??). I also did not state that He fell BEFORE creation week but at the very least implied it would have been during the creation week he walked in Eden and fell just becore the creation of man.
We can not give angels just any title or authority we want based on presuppositions. Satan was not the 'gaurdian' or 'covering' angel of Eden. Scripture ONLY states he walked in Eden and nothing more. He was the covering angel in the Holy Mountain of God. Scripture says it and that it that.

I agree! Adam and & Eve were the most intellectual people on the Planet despite the fact they were the ONLY people on the planet at that time.

We who?? Careful speaking on behalf of all christains since you will at least half of the behalf will take their 'half' with them and leave you and you other half to be. :laugh:

True in all. Scripture stated the serpent was the most cunning (not coniving but cautious) of all the beast of the field. This is as important as what the name serpent means. Eve KNEW this creature was KNOWN for being cautious and it spoke with her about the tree of which it was stating there was no reason to be cautious of it.

True.

That is simply and commonly know fact any student of the scriptures or history of which I am both.

Only when you want to read something into the text that is not there (presupposition for your theory) but the scritpures specifically state to the contrary of your opinion. Scripture NEVER calls him the cherub of Eden but establishes the FACT that he was the covering angel on the Holy Mount of God as says the scripture so it was. Your contention via your own verses speak to the contrary of the position you are taking. His position (as I showed before) is correlary to the the Cherubs 'COVERING' the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant and those in Heaven 'COVERING' the throne of God. It is no coincidence that Cherubs are all found around the throne because it is where they ARE.

Most scholars and commentaters are not sure either though most say it is a reference to the alter before the Lord in Heaven. (like the one Isaiah got to be purged by being touch upon his lips with a live coal from it). Now you are presuming something that is not even alluded to in scripture. He ONLY walked in the Garden...that is all scriptures says concerning it and him. Not ever does it insinuate that Lucifer was the bringing of knowledge to man. Man was in fellowship with God and God was there every evening walking with man. If you will NOTE, 'walking' is something (spiritually speaking) that is a euphamism for fellowship and intimacy. Man did not walk with angels nor where they taught by angels...this is something you have brought into the text and and never substantiated vai the scriptures.

God was always the one doing it. He never had to 'take over as you erroniously conclude through conjecture and NOT scripture. You are going so far off course you are scaring me - in light of your usually thoughtful insights and discussions. Nothing in scripture warrents your view point other than a trust was broken. Beyond that you, you have been adding things that are not corrolary and contextual to the passages of scripture you cite for your presuppositions.

Again, this is purely imagination working. You have no biblical evedence to state she EVER communed with Lucifer much less with him in differing 'forms'??
You have gone beyond reaching to stumbling carelessly.

Yes, Eve trusted the serpent and was betrayed.

This is why we need to place everything when bring into our thought life under the scrutiny of Gods word via context and consistancy throughout scripture. There was NO 'gaining of trust' at some point, with the intent to break that trust at another. There was always trust for there was no reason not to trust.

Yes, but it is where you thought derived from and is why it is going all over creation and back.

That is misinformation. Animals do this all the time. Dogs, snakes, horses and exotic animals as well if not more so (tiger, bears, ext...). The trust they will not harm you or endanger you. There are differing reasons they DO break that trust but the excuse does not dismiss the fact they broke the trust. I can tell you I would not raise my children with a Rednosed Pit (I raised them and know they turn on you at a moments notice) Animals even betray each other. Just watch animal planet. :laugh: But suffice to say, if animals do not betray trust then why is animal (the serpent) judged by God??

Agreed. Our capacity goes beyond anything found in the corruptness of nature because we were created to subdue Gods creation and therefore our capacity MUST be greater that its.
I do agree that those people who do this in a willful manner just as all people who are lost in their sins are simply following satan their father - at least till the adoption from one family to another.

 

Well put and well said.

 

Helen

I don't know if this helps but...

I've heard that the serpent appeared to Eve as a shining being -- that like Adam and Eve, Satan had the appearance of having come from the presence of God. Recall, Adam and Eve did not know they were maked on account of they shone too -- like Jesus, Moses, and Elijah on the Mt of transfiguration, remember?

Anyway, Eve was bound to "hear out" another "shining" creature but she was not equipped (I don't think Adam told her enough about the rules) to discern the lie. Go back and look at it -- Adam was told about the forbidden fruit before Eve was created.

And, of course, this is what happens among mankind now, isn't it? We don't get the whole truth, do we? We MUST go to the source -- scripture -- as test whatever we hear. Which resolves your other problem, I hope.

skypair

 

See, now I can agree with that! :laugh: I did like however you illuminating the "trust" aspect.