Paul's Letter to the Galatians and the Struggle for Doctrinal Purity

[BTK59]

4 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

And since we’re speaking of eating here, and I’m not following closely enough to make a contribution, but wish to make a contribution nonetheless,

It's a fascinating question, Tom. Although it may seem challenging at first, it is not impossible to answer. The prevailing speculation suggests that God provided Adam and Eve with skins while they were still inside the Garden, as Genesis 3:21 indicates. I'm not disputing scripture here but the interpretation of scripture by others. However, it is important to consider that this wording may not necessarily be meant to be taken literally. Other sources suggest that God clothed them when they were already outside the garden. So, the real question for all of you should be: Why did God feel the need to clothe them twice? Once inside the garden, where Adam and Eve were already covered, and a second time when they were already outside the garden.

If I was to say I'm wrong, I would first need to disregard the fact that scripture mentions Adam and Eve were already covered when God spoke to them. Meaning I would need to refute scripture just to satisfy the viewpoint. Then I would have to deny the fact skins of an animal don't come off by themselves. If we think otherwise, we would have to say, God "did" sacrifice animals inside the garden to clothe Adam and Eve. How would that act been seen from heaven given the "fact" God considered all of his creation precious. 

If we consider that God did not have to take the lives of animals to provide clothing for Adam and Eve in the garden, we may still wonder about the origin of the "skins." Could they have been crafted artificially, resembling garments made of tunics or linen but with a texture like feel of an animal skin? This would still mean the garment was made of linen or artificial with an animal skin look.

Then I would have to deny other writings in order for me to say I'm wrong.

"Then came the Word of God and said to him, "O Adam, take Eve and come to the seashore where you fasted before. There you will find skins of sheep that were left after lions ate the carcasses. Take them and make garments for yourselves, and clothe yourselves with them."

I'm sure this hasn't been overlooked nor should it be. I'll leave you people to rationalize it.

[Many Miles]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Trolls-R-Us: @BTK59 @BillyTheKid-55 @George88 @Allen Smith @AllenSmith35 @Alphonse and many more.

What would this forum be like without them?

Wait. What? BTK59 is a troll? I've been engaging with a troll for a few days? Guess I don't get out enough.

[TrueTomHarley]

38 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

Wait. What? BTK59 is a troll? I've been engaging with a troll for a few days? Guess I don't get out enough.

“Iceberg! Dead ahead, captain! A six-pointer!”

“Not a problem, mate. Full speed ahead. I’m sure there’s nothing more below.”

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Many Miles said:

Wait. What? BTK59 is a troll? I've been engaging with a troll for a few days? Guess I don't get out enough.

LOL. I've avoided outing him directly for a couple of years, although I drop a hint now and then for newcomers to the forum like yourself.

It's part of this forum's history now over the last 10 years to have had at least 40+ names show up that were really all the same person. He has rarely been able to juggle more than 3 or 4 to be active at the same time. You have already blocked his G88 persona, but he always keeps a couple of other accounts active as backups, as sock puppets, and as proxies to upvote himself and downvote others. Fortunately, he tries pretty hard to remain serious for a while, but typically devolves into a lot of dissention and insults before too long. For those of us who have participated for several years, it's unbelievably easy to spot his doppelgangers by repeated vocabulary, repeated attacks, repeated ideas, and repeated non-ideas. He is apparently not aware how easily he gives himself away through some other factors I'll keep to myself for now, even though several others here have already mentioned those factors elsewhere. If no one takes themselves too seriously, it can be terribly entertaining, in a unique sort of way. 

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, BTK59 said:

"Then came the Word of God and said to him, "O Adam, take Eve and come to the seashore where you fasted before. There you will find skins of sheep that were left after lions ate the carcasses. Take them and make garments for yourselves, and clothe yourselves with them."

A couple of interesting resources on the above:

Priestly Clothing in Bible Times

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=24&article=1075&context=mi&type=additional

The title looks boring, and it's a long PDF but definitely worth the read. It refers to several different apocryphal writings, and other pseudepigrapha that refer to the skins and variations of beliefs about them. Even the Leviathan gets honorable mention as a source for the garments, as do sheep, as does that original serpent himself. It also gets into the traditions about "garments of glory" or "garments of light." 

That's mostly discussed in the next article.

Vested with Adam's Glory: Moses as the Luminous Counterpart of Adam in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Macarian Homilies

https://www.marquette.edu/maqom/moses1.html

[Many Miles]

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

... it's unbelievably easy to spot his doppelgangers ...

Thanks for making me feel my own idiocy with even more intensity!

I've been idling in the background for too long, and apparently it's showing. But I like idle!

[Srecko Sostar]

21 minutes ago, George88 said:

I would say it's a close call. The other passage you speak of has a description of how God's angels helped Adam and Eve make their garments of skin. They had already been expelled living in a cave if I remember correctly. I think this is similar in substance to the argument you are making. When is it necessary to accept a literal form of translation and when to view it as symbolic? It's best to leave it to the reader unless scripture is seriously being distorted. Then it should be challenged in good conscience.

http://www.brunson20.com/2013/05/adams-coat-of-skins.html

 

[JW Insider]

56 minutes ago, Many Miles said:

Thanks for making me feel my own idiocy with even more intensity!

I only meant that for those of us who have watched this phenomenon for years, we can easily spot it. 

Then again, when someone needs you to explain something a dozen times over the course of several months, and several threads (like your use of the term "carrion") but they still come back with the exact same retort . . . well sometimes you can just 'smell' it:

10 hours ago, BTK59 said:

spoiled meat

On 2/21/2024 at 11:01 AM, BTK59 said:

rotten meat

On 11/1/2023 at 8:57 PM, George88 said:

spoiled meat

On 11/15/2023 at 3:54 PM, George88 said:

rotten meat

[Pudgy]

…..

[Srecko Sostar]

1 hour ago, George88 said:

I apologize, but I am unable to comprehend your post, Srecko. It seems that there may be an issue with the link you provided, or I may be unable to access it myself. Could you please provide a brief summary of the idea you were attempting to convey?

Geoffrey Jackson as one of top leader and as one "guided by HS" openly say, "We just don't know", when speaking about some doctrine in JWs theology. But as they already prove many times, they don't know many things.

If He don't know, how you or me will know? lol

 

[Srecko Sostar]

55 minutes ago, George88 said:

@Srecko Sostar

Srecko, the link is working. The observation about the people of Sodom and Gomorra is uncertain. Will those individuals be resurrected? The GB has indeed made an accurate assessment. However, can we anticipate the inclusion of individuals who have shown nothing but contempt for God's laws? I understand how someone who was misled by circumstances might be judged for their actions. In such cases, we must follow the pattern set for "repentance." Is it possible that someone there might have had a last-minute change of heart? Unfortunately, we do not have that information.

Now, can we say the same thing about people pre-flood?

If we consider the phrase "we just don't know" regarding the argument about Adam and Eve's clothing, we should focus on how soon after their expulsion from the garden God clothed them. If they were clothed as they were forced to leave, it might be argued that they were not technically inside the garden at that moment. This suggests that God's angel may have been clothing them as they were escorted out the gate. So, should we make an issue out of something difficult to determine?

"Technically speaking", we can still use Satan as a fashion designer, because he is a "murderer from the beginning", so what would be a problem for him to kill an animal for its skin? 

Figuratively, wearing leather clothing would mean that it was a specific "sign of Satan" characteristic for all those who rebel against God. lol

....,  but "we don't know". lol 

[Pudgy]

…