Paradise Lost

[Rían]

almost done - I still love it!

[Beren3000]

I would like to hear people's opinions about this theme in Paradise Lost:
Milton depicts Adam and Eve in a blissful state of ignorance or rather innocence in Heaven. They fell because they seeked too much knowledge. This is a Christian theme, too, but I got the impression that Milton put a lot of emphasis on it. So what do you people think of this? Is knowledge a bad and evil thing? Should it be pursued with moderation, or without any limits at all?

[Rían]

I respectfully but strongly disagree with this opinion - "They fell because they seeked too much knowledge."

Can't elaborate now, but will later

[Jabberwock]

I have to agree. Paradise Lost is an amazing piece of literature. It is, however, a daunting subject for a second year university course, which I didn't do so well in. I didn't realize when I signed up for 17th C. Lit, that the whole first simester was Paradise Lost. Hehe. I have to correct on poster here, about Milton's blindness and the secretary. He didn't trust anyone but his daughters to do the secretarial work, so, since he wrote a lot in latin, he taught them enough to copy for him, and basically forced them to remain in his house and be secretaries for him until he finished his writing, which took forever (several years). At least this is what they taught us in university. So, Mr Milton was a great poet, but he was a real jerk when it came to the treatment of his daughters. I mean, he didn't even take the time to actually teach them to speak or read latin, he just taught them enough that they could write it for him. Of course, Im guessing that they inherited something good after he kicked the bucket.

[Beren3000]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I respectfully but strongly disagree with this opinion - "They fell because they seeked too much knowledge."

Can't elaborate now, but will later

I see what you're saying (or trying to say ); their sin was disobedience of God's orders. But what were these orders? To avoid eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God forbade them access to knowledge, so my question is: how would you view this, does this mean we have to stop all pursuit of knowledge and live our lives just like that? I have my own thoughts on the matter, but I'd rather hear other people's opinions first.

[Rían]

Beren, does your version have reference numbers? If so, read book III:92-134; IV:220-222, and IV:411-439. I think that sheds some light on the question.

I don't think God forbade them access to knowledge at all. And the word "know" is not just head knowledge; it's more like "know from personal experience". I "know" (have a head knowledge) what rape is; however I pray to God I'll never "know from personal experience" what rape is. Do you see what I mean?

And IMO, the "seeking knowledge" thing was only an excuse; I think their real motive was the same as Satan's - to be God - and this is impossible. Look at the details of how Satan tempted Eve. And then look at VIII:412-416. It's impossible for anyone to be God, except God. What Satan is saying (and remember his MOTIVE - to kill and destroy) is throw away what God made you as, and what He gave you - Paradise! - for something that is impossible to attain, and the attempt causes only grief.

This is a great topic, but unfortunately I usually can't post on weekends, and we're leaving for a camping trip to the beach on Wednesday. I'd love to discuss it - I'll check in as often as possible until Wed., then get my thoughts lined up for next week, when I"m back

BTW, I see you live in UAE; is English your second language, or first, or what? In a discussion like this, words are very important, and it will help me to know if English is your native language or not. If it ISN'T your native language, you sure speak it well!

Again, I wish I could write more now, but I have to go shopping to get food for the trip! But anyway, it's a start.

[Beren3000]

I meant "knowledge" as in science. Knowledge derived from rational thought; or, as you put it, "head knowledge". Well, Ok. Maybe their real aim was becoming God, but there's always the question: why did God forbid them the Tree's fruit in the first place? To test their obedience you would say. But why not any other tree? why specifically the tree of knowledge?
Do you know the story of Icarus? the man who made wings for him and his son to fly on and fixed them with wax. The plan worked and he flew up with his son. But his son tried to reach the Sun; coming near it, however, the wax on his wings melted and he fell. The moral of this story is that too much knowledge turns out against you. I think this is the same kind of thing here. Before the Fall, Adam and Eve were in an idyllic state of ignorance and innocence ("ignorance is bliss"). After the Fall, as the Scripture says "their eyes were opened". It was then that they recognized their nakedness. Then that they knew of their misery. So what is the message here? is knowledge really that bad?

P.S. English is not my native language, and thanks for the compliment chalk it up to lots of reading!

[Rían]

by Beren
Before the Fall, Adam and Eve were in an idyllic state of ignorance and innocence ("ignorance is bliss").

I don't think ignorance, in the commonly used sense of the word, is bliss. However, I think it is better to NOT have experiential knowledge of evil, as in my rape example. I never see ignorance held up as a virtue in the Bible; in fact, I see the opposite. In one case, we're actually encouraged to be "as shrewd as serpents [i.e., for good purposes], and innocent as doves." (Matthew 10:16). And the entire book of Proverbs is devoted to Godly wisdom, and Proverbs 4:5 says "acquire wisdom! Acquire understanding!" However, there is a sharp distinction drawn between the type of wisdom/knowledge that is for the sake of vanity or evil, and wisdom/knowledge that is for good.

The book of Proverbs opens with:

Proverbs 1:1-7
The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel:
To know wisdom and instruction,
To discern the sayings of understanding,
To receive instruction in wise behavior,
Righteousness, justice and equity;
To give prudence to the naive,
To the youth, knowledge and discretion,
A wise man will hear and increase in learning,
And a man of understanding will acquire wise counsel,
To understand a proverb and a figure,
The words of the wise and their riddles.
The fear [i.e., right reverence] of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge;
Fools despise wisdom and instruction.

And a bit further on -

Proverbs 2:6
For the Lord gives wisdom;
From His mouth come knowledge and understanding.

and again,

Proverbs 8:11
For wisdom is better than jewels;
And all desirable things cannot compare with her.

Now note that the word used here is usually "wisdom", not "knowledge". Wisdom implies knowledge that is ACTED on for good purposes, not just head knowledge that does no one any good, or worse, does intentional harm.

So there is something more excellent than knowledge - wisdom - and something more excellent than that - love. Paul wishes for us to: "know the love of Christ, which surpasses knowledge" (Ephesians 3:19), mainly because "Knowledge makes arrogant, but love edifies (1st Corinthians 8:1).

Why was the Bible written? I truly believe it is to accomplish God's stated desire of reconciliation of people to Himself because of His great, great love for them. Adam and Eve were tempted AWAY from relationship with God (which was what they were created for and the ONE thing that will truly fulfill them and give them joy) by temptation to acquire more knowledge independent of God, so that they will be like God. Yet that is impossible - Satan lies - even he, the most powerful angel created, cannot be like God. The issue is their HEART, not knowledge.

That's a good question of yours - "why specifically the tree of knowledge?" What do YOU think? I think it's very important that the tree is NAMED - there must be a very good reason for it. I think it's because God created human beings as amazingly powerful, beautiful beings, and He knew that they would be tempted in that area, and must find out, firsthand, that knowledge without God brings only misery. All other knowledge, if God is at the center of a person's heart, is wisdom, and is GOOD - GOOD!

We all would agree, I think, that people like Hitler and Stalin were fairly intelligent - they had knowledge. But their heart was wrong ...

Knowledge IN ITSELF is NOT good or bad; it's neutral. In the hands of an evil man, it is powerfully dangerous. But in the hands of a godly person, it is powerful - for GOOD.

I'm afraid this post isn't terribly cohesive - I'm just throwing out some thoughts. I really need to go get ready for camping! But you're throwing out SUCH good questions and thoughts!! and I want to address them, at least a little.

[Beren3000]

Wow, I never considered that distinction between knowledge and wisdom before. However, the name of the Tree is: the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. So doesn't that mean more like experience or total knowledge. Not knowledge wholly independent of God, but knowledge of things He would rather we didn't learn of for our own good?
Let me give you an example of how increasing knowledge is harmful. In the Middle ages, atheism was relatively rare, if present. That is because people needed a higher presence and a stronger power to depend on as the living conditions were harsh. As mankind develops, so does luxury. Therefore the need for something to fall back on becomes less pressing. Enter atheism. But it's still not that much of a phenomenon yet (in fact in the 1800's a French writer said: "if God didn't exist people would've had to invent Him"). But at our present time, atheism is unfortunately thriving; the reason? Now there's science. Whatever your problems, a scientist's got the solution. Why then would you need a higher being looking after you when everything you need is there? This even resulted in the famous debate: God or science. Which to believe in. And after all that, people still seek to advance technologically, making mankind's godhead grow bigger.
So you see, in that case, knowledge and the pursuit of it, caused great harm to mankind in general. My opinion is, God encourages us to seek knowledge while on Earth because it is supposed to bring us closer to Him, strenghten our faith not abolish it. But He forbade it to Adam and Eve, lest they fall into the same mistake as we're doing today and try becoming indpendent of God as you said. So to sum up, knowledge in itself is a good thing, provided that it's pursued as a means for getting closer to God and understanding more of Him. If one strays from that purpose, it gets really ugly...

P.S. enjoy your weekend

[Rían]

*takes a peek at the Moot while packing*

That's really an interesting and thought-provoking post, Beren! It's hard to not respond! But camping calls ... thanks for your weekend wishes, and I'll enjoy talking when I get back. I'm taking the book with me to discuss with my family while gazing on God's amazing creation - the ocean is just awesomely beautiful and powerful and majestic! It'll be a reminder of Paradise - and things to come ...

[Beren3000]

Well it seems you're back, RÃ*an. Welcome back. How was the weekend?
Care to continue the discussion?

[Rían]

Yes, I'm back, and if you saw the Vent thread, you'll see why I"m back early! *sigh*

Anyway, yes, I'd love to continue, but not until Monday Have a nice rest-of-the-weekend!

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

Wow, I never considered that distinction between knowledge and wisdom before. However, the name of the Tree is: the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. So doesn't that mean more like experience or total knowledge. Not knowledge wholly independent of God, but knowledge of things He would rather we didn't learn of for our own good?

I'm sure my husband would wish that I would never learn what rape is first-hand; do you think my husband is bad or wrong for wishing that?

It seems like you're implying that God is somehow doing something WRONG or HURTFUL to us by not wanting us to have certain knowledge; is this right, or am I misreading you?

Originally Posted by Beren3000, bolding added by me

Let me give you an example of how increasing knowledge is harmful. In the Middle ages, atheism was relatively rare, if present. That is because people needed a higher presence and a stronger power to depend on as the living conditions were harsh.

Whoa, whoa, I think you're buying into a line without examining it first. WHY should people need "a higher presence and a stronger power to depend on as the living conditions were harsh"? How would they KNOW their living conditions were harsh if they weren't even aware that microwaves and reclining chairs would be invented? Will people look back at US in 500 years and say "those poor stupid people, they lived in such harsh conditions and knew so little, therefore anything they reasoned out must be wrong!"

I think that's a line that is commonly said (at first by atheists, but now by many) as if it's true, but it contains flawed reasoning, IMO. It typically leads into the argument that those poor stupid Middle-agers only believed in God because they were dumb; but we, who are smart, know better. The people that make this argument wrongly equate accumulation of knowledge, or familiarity with technology, with intelligence. If you handed Euclid or Galileo a cell phone, they wouldn't know what to do with it. Yet my son knows how to use it. Is Euclid, therefore, stupid? Is my son smarter than Galileo?

No one can "prove" that God exists, or doesn't exist, in a "scientific" manner. There are MANY things that cannot be proved in a scientific manner, since the scientific method requires repeatable, observable, measureable tests on an available object. Science has a narrow scope: WITHIN that scope, it's very useful and has given us many useful things, but it's silly to think it applies to every part of life. It CAN'T; it only applies to things that can be measured.

I think it's helpful to look at things from 2 POV's - First, IF God as described in the Bible exists, and second, IF there is no God. Take your statement about harsh conditions and examine it in the light of these 2 premises, and see what you come up with. Personally, I think that if the second premise was true, then people in harsh conditions would NOT invent God; they would just try to get whatever they could by whatever means they could.

Anyway, just some thoughts ... I usually react when I see that line without any type of supporting evidence.

More in next post ...

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

As mankind develops, so does luxury. Therefore the need for something to fall back on becomes less pressing. Enter atheism.

I see what you're saying, but I would turn it around the other way. BECAUSE people, in general, are moving away from God, luxury develops. Do you see the distinction?

There is nothing INHERENTLY wrong with soft sofas; wrongness is in the heart. If people developed soft sofas to ease the sick, or to enjoy relaxing with a thankful heart to God for His blessings after a good day of loving God and others, then that's fine. But it seems that luxurious things are typically developed for purely selfish and prideful motives.

But it's still not that much of a phenomenon yet (in fact in the 1800's a French writer said: "if God didn't exist people would've had to invent Him").

Now please examine this statement in the light of the 2 premises I mentioned earlier. It's a pretty interesting statement, IMO.

But at our present time, atheism is unfortunately thriving; the reason? Now there's science.

I would say one of the main reasons is in John 3:19, and "science" is only a feeble attempt at an excuse.

Whatever your problems, a scientist's got the solution.

Whew, is THAT a lie! Tell me how science helps my sister-in-law whose daughter died (Christianity has a reason and a solution). Tell me how science solves the grief that we have that my middle son can't run due to his handicaps (Christianity has a reason and a solution). Tell me how science helps some of the Mooters here who have tried suicide (Christianity has a reason and a solution). Tell me how science can answer the question "why did my friend's father abuse her?" (Christianity has a reason and a solution).

Tell me how science can answer "Does my life have meaning?" (and I'll tell you how science DOES answer that one - the answer is a resounding "NO!", since acc'd to the false "science" of evolution, people are just accidental results of random chance and mutations, NOT fabulous beings wonderfully designed by an awesome God who loves them so much He died for their redemption.) (and I call evolution "false science" because the majority of it is NOT science, but educated conjecture, because it is about things that cannot be evaluated by the scientific method. However, it's presented as being more scientific than it actually is.)

I assume you, personally, don't buy into that line about science having all the answers- at least, I hope you don't!

And BTW, what about the non-problems: tell me why my heart soars when I see the night sky full of stars (Christianity has a reason, science doesn't). Tell me why tears come to my eyes and my heart aches with joy when I read about Sam carrying Frodo those last few steps to Mt. Doom (Christianity has a reason, science doesn't). Tell me why I read your posts with pleasure and look forward to your answers (Christianity has a reason, science doesn't).

(more in next post...)

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

Why then would you need a higher being looking after you when everything you need is there? This even resulted in the famous debate: God or science. Which to believe in.

Why "which"? That there even SHOULD be a "which" is one of the biggest lies around, IMO. When you hear that line next, ask the person to logically support why one should have to choose between God or science. There's no valid reason that I've ever heard. Let me know if you hear one (and I'll debunk it for you! )

I believe in God, and I believe that true science (i.e., that which uses the scientific method) is often right, and is more and more right as methodologies improve.

Science cannot disprove God, nor can it prove His existence. Personally, I think that the information gained by science, to date, tends to support the idea that God created things as stated in the Bible, more than it supports the theory of evolution, but that's another thread.

And after all that, people still seek to advance technologically, making mankind's godhead grow bigger.

For scientists who are Christian, their increased knowledge only adds (rightly, for God's creation is incredible!) to their love and awe of God. Those that are anti-Christian tend to skew the results, IMO, whenever possible, to try to support their previously-held opinion/wish that God does NOT exist (and make "mankind's godhead grow bigger" - good phrase!). Those that are pretty neutral tend to go with the pretty vocal and politically popular anti-Christian crowd, IMO, in areas that are within the evolutionary arena.

So you see, in that case, knowledge and the pursuit of it, caused great harm to mankind in general.

But only because the majority of hearts behind it were hateful to God.

My opinion is, God encourages us to seek knowledge while on Earth because it is supposed to bring us closer to Him, strenghten our faith not abolish it.

I agree.

But He forbade it to Adam and Eve, lest they fall into the same mistake as we're doing today and try becoming indpendent of God as you said.

I don't think He forbade knowledge in general; just the one tree of the knowledge of good and EVIL. As Paradise Lost says so well, there must be something to obey ABOUT, or there is no proof of love.

So to sum up, knowledge in itself is a good thing, provided that it's pursued as a means for getting closer to God and understanding more of Him. If one strays from that purpose, it gets really ugly...

I agree.

P.S. enjoy your weekend

Thanks, I did! (altho God had other plans for us than the ones we had! Yet His plans are always for our good, because of who He is; IOW, His character.)

[Beren3000]

How you misunderstand me!

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

It seems like you're implying that God is somehow doing something WRONG or HURTFUL to us by not wanting us to have certain knowledge; is this right, or am I misreading you?

Of course I'm not implying that! I completely trust in God's wisdom. I'm just trying to reason out why he forbade the Tree to Adam and Eve. (by the way, I have a new notion about the Tree, please remind me to bring it up later).

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Whew, is THAT a lie! Tell me how science helps my sister-in-law whose daughter died (Christianity has a reason and a solution). Tell me how science solves the grief that we have that my middle son can't run due to his handicaps (Christianity has a reason and a solution). Tell me how science helps some of the Mooters here who have tried suicide (Christianity has a reason and a solution). Tell me how science can answer the question "why did my friend's father abuse her?" (Christianity has a reason and a solution).

I assume you, personally, don't buy into that line about science having all the answers- at least, I hope you don't!

This is not my line, I'm just trying to express the atheists' point of view.
__________________________________________________ _________
If I truly believed in an omnipotent science, why would I believe in God anymore? All my needs would be right here on earth in a manifest and tangible form which is much easier for the average person to percieve and understand. (The use of the first person doesn't in any way imply that this statment is my opinion )
__________________________________________________ _________

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

WHY should people need "a higher presence and a stronger power to depend on as the living conditions were harsh"? How would they KNOW their living conditions were harsh if they weren't even aware that microwaves and reclining chairs would be invented?

I'm not saying "harsh" as in "lacking luxury", I'm saying "harsh" as in a continuous struggle for survival. For example, in the Middle Ages, an average person's life span was much lower than ours today. In prehistory, people faced dinosaurs and lack of shelter. And of course, the mother of all disasters, the bubonic plague ravaged Europe in the Middle Ages. People living through these conditions, IMO, often feel tired of this continuous struggle; they eventually need to believe in something bigger than themselves or the world they live in, they need to believe that death is not the end, but rather "another path" as Ian McKellen says on Gandalf's tongue.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Personally, I think that if the second premise was true, then people in harsh conditions would NOT invent God; they would just try to get whatever they could by whatever means they could.

I disagree very strongly! If that were true, can you tell me why you find deities of different shapes and kinds in all ancient cultures?
Before the age of Christianity, Pharaohs (sp?) believed in the Sun and worshipped it in its different states. Before we came to know Jehovah, an Egyptian pharaoh preached the theory of a unique God, that of the midday Sun. Greeks prayed to the Gods and swore by Zeus and drank wine in honor of Bacchus. Even the Zulu tribes have their own deities and religious belief systems. I'd even go as far as saying that ancestor worship in China and Japan is very similar to the concept of Religion: you need to believe in a higher, more powerful being caring for you, so that when you can't take it anymore, you know you'd have someone to look after you. (BTW, I once read that Freud theorized Religion as resulting of filial feeling. When one's a kid, they need parents to look after them. When one grows up, they become less dependent on their parents and therefore, their religious feelings start to surface and they need a God to worship)

Hope I made sense in all that chatter
(more thoughts later...)

P.S. an off-the topic question. It's an English language question: what is the difference between Christianity and Christianism I've always wondered at that!

[Rían]

I'll have to get to this tomorrow, but I see I misunderstood you I knew I should have asked for clarification before I answered your post! I couldn't tell if you were stating YOUR opinions, or if you were "just trying to express the atheists' point of view." Thanks for clearing that up, and I'll look forward to discussing your post tomorrow

Originally Posted by Beren3000

P.S. an off-the topic question. It's an English language question: what is the difference between Christianity and Christianism I've always wondered at that!

I've never heard the term "Christianism"; has anyone else? Usually, "ism" is used as a word ending to describe a philosophy, as in "feminism" (and btw, one can be female and not adhere to feminism!)

I deliberately attach the "ism" suffix to "evolution" and call it "evolutionism" when I compare/contrast it with "creationism", because to me, they're on the same level - many people think the THEORY of evolution is somehow scientifically proven, when actually the most important parts are scientifically UNPROVEABLE and are merely educated guesses, which makes them a belief system.

Anyway, I hope to post more clearly tomorrow; I was up last night with a sick stomach and am tired and I'm not communicating very clearly today.

[Beren3000]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Anyway, I hope to post more clearly tomorrow; I was up last night with a sick stomach and am tired and I'm not communicating very clearly today.

Hope you're feeling better now . And if the term Christianism doesn't exist, then maybe I imagined hearing it.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

How you misunderstand me!

Whoops, sorry! (but I'm glad I misunderstood you, and that you don't think that way! )

Of course I'm not implying that! I completely trust in God's wisdom. I'm just trying to reason out why he forbade the Tree to Adam and Eve. (by the way, I have a new notion about the Tree, please remind me to bring it up later).

Yes, bring it up - I'd like to hear it.

I'm not saying "harsh" as in "lacking luxury", I'm saying "harsh" as in a continuous struggle for survival. For example, in the Middle Ages, an average person's life span was much lower than ours today. In prehistory, people faced dinosaurs and lack of shelter. And of course, the mother of all disasters, the bubonic plague ravaged Europe in the Middle Ages. People living through these conditions, IMO, often feel tired of this continuous struggle; they eventually need to believe in something bigger than themselves or the world they live in, they need to believe that death is not the end, but rather "another path" as Ian McKellen says on Gandalf's tongue.

I see what you're saying, yet I still think there's more to it than "life is really rough, and it's encouraging to think there might be a nice life after death, THEREFORE I will think that way." It's the "therefore" (which seems to be implied in your statement) that I disagree with. I think that people think there is a heaven BECAUSE God set the idea in their hearts, as it says in Ecclesiastes. I think it is NOT a logical conclusion reached while thinking about the state of things, just like morals are NOT a logical conclusion reached while thinking about things. Morals, according to the book of Romans, are SET in people's hearts by God. That's why they're so amazingly similar all over the world, BTW, and why many of them are difficult; who would "come up with" a moral ideal like being unselfish if they were designing morals?

I think that luxury can "dull" these things that are set in people's hearts by God, as you pointed out, and that harsh conditions bring them to the forefront, but I do NOT think that the idea of heaven and eternity and God were natural, logical CONCLUSIONS reached by people sitting around and talking about how harsh things are. Do you see the difference? What do you think?

I disagree very strongly! If that were true, can you tell me why you find deities of different shapes and kinds in all ancient cultures?

Yes - BECAUSE God has set a rudimentary knowledge of Himself into every person's heart, as it says in Romans. People have a heart feeling that there might be a God, BECAUSE it's true, and BECAUSE their Creator set this feeling in their hearts so that they might search for Him and find Him and find fullness of joy.

If you take up the (false) premise that there is NO God, for the sake of analysis, then finding "deities of different shapes and kinds in all ancient cultures" does NOT make sense at ALL, IMO. And this is one of the strongest indications that the idea that there is no God is false, IMO.

That's what I mean by analyzing the two statements (there IS a God, there is NOT a God) by assuming them to be true and looking at and evaluating what is actually seen around us. The first one meshes amazingly with what can be observed around us; the second one doesn't. That would lead one to conclude that the first premise is the more likely one, except if one really doesn't want it to be true, in which case they'll start deluding themselves (perhaps even unconsciously).

Before the age of Christianity, Pharaohs (sp?) believed in the Sun and worshipped it in its different states. Before we came to know Jehovah, an Egyptian pharaoh preached the theory of a unique God, that of the midday Sun. Greeks prayed to the Gods and swore by Zeus and drank wine in honor of Bacchus. Even the Zulu tribes have their own deities and religious belief systems. I'd even go as far as saying that ancestor worship in China and Japan is very similar to the concept of Religion: you need to believe in a higher, more powerful being caring for you,

I agree so far ...

so that when you can't take it anymore, you know you'd have someone to look after you.

Again, here's where I disagree. IMO, "you need to believe in a higher, more powerful being caring for you" BECAUSE it's true and God has set it in your heart. I don't see any logical reason that can be derived from analysis of the things around you to come up with the conclusion that a powerful, moral God exists.

(BTW, I once read that Freud theorized Religion as resulting of filial feeling. When one's a kid, they need parents to look after them. When one grows up, they become less dependent on their parents and therefore, their religious feelings start to surface and they need a God to worship)

But why would they "come up with" the gods that people typically come up with? Personally, I'd "come up with" a god that only wants to make me happy, and overlooks when I do wrong, and isn't giving me everything I want right now because he's not all-powerful, but he will do it someday.

Hope I made sense in all that chatter
(more thoughts later...)

Yes, I'm enjoying discussing these issues! I hope I'm making sense - I'm feeling better, but still not well. Let me know if I need to clarify anything.

[brownjenkins]

interesting read you two... not quite the way i would interpret things, but very thoughtful none-the-less... within the realm of the story, sometimes i wonder if the fall of adam and eve may have actually been intended as a way for god's creation to grow... not necessarily without a god, but to be more independent from one

i've read paradise lost also, unfortunately too long ago to remember the details all that well... carry on