Judges Part I: Just a Few Questions

Pick Your Poison

There are many translations of the Holy Bible and even more interpretations of the words translated. Consider that some of the interpretations are quite harmful to both the individual and the congregation, even to humanity as a whole.

Would you agree that any philosophy or line of reasoning or heartfelt belief that destroys instead of builds up is poisonous to the individual(s) in some form or other?

Which practices and beliefs and faiths connected to the Holy Bible are poisonous and which ones are not poisonous?

If you are a believer, what do YOU believe?

Which poison did you pick?

1. Judges 1:1-2

1 After the death of Joshua, the people of Israel inquired of the LORD, “Who shall go up first for us against the Canaanites, to fight against them?”

2 The LORD said, “Judah shall go up; behold, I have given the land into his hand.”

Questions
     1) Why in the world would the people of Israel ask such a strange question of God/the LORD?

     2) If the LORD was all about protecting His people and leading them through the promised land, and if the people knew of and felt this amazing protection, and if God/the LORD was SO clear in His expression of love and protection for His people, WHY do His people feel this apparent lack of protection, a lack of someone fighting for them, the NEED to ask WHO is going to help them?

     3) Doesn't Deuteronomy 11:25 quote the LORD as saying that when His people get to the promised land that no one will be able to stand against them? If God/the LORD follows through on all of His promises of this apparent lack of resistance of the inhabitants of the land that the people of Israel are taking control of why are they worried about someone fighting for them?

2. Judges 1:5-6

5 They found Adoni-bezek at Bezek and fought against him and defeated the Canaanites and the Perizzites.

6 Adoni-bezek fled, but they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and his big toes.

Questions
     1) Okay, this is really interesting, right? Did you know the Hebrew word 'Adoni' is not just another way to refer to YHVH (Yahweh), but also refers to men and angels as well as the LORD God of Israel?

     2) With such diverse interpretations available for the word 'Adoni' in the Bible, how sure are scholars that the meaning assigned to a verse containing this word is the correct, absolutely correct, application?

     3) Considering the many interpretations and translations of the Bible throughout history has there ever been an instance where the translators misinterpreted the intended application/meaning of the word 'Adoni'?

3. Judges 1:8

8 And the men of Judah fought against Jerusalem and captured it and struck it with the edge of the sword and set the city on fire.

Questions
     1) Sooo...does this verse mean that when the people of Israel arrived in the promised land that the city of Jerusalem was already there?

     2) Does this verse also mean that like many men have done in regards to Jerusalem the people of Israel SACKED this 'holy' city, killed the inhabitants, and then set it on fire?

     3) Since the Jebusites and others were in Jerusalem FAR EARLIER than the people of Israel, and since the people of Israel were the very first amongst those who would sack the city in an effort to wrest it away from the rightful inhabitants, don't you find it a TAD strange that some Christians believe Jerusalem to belong to the people of Israel going all the way back to Bible times? 

     4) The people of Israel did not found Jerusalem, the Jebusites did or at the very least people other than the people of Israel, right?

     5) Why does so much Bible prophecy center around Jerusalem as THE holy city of God and His people when it is clear it was not even theirs to begin with?

     6) Why do some Christians cite the many sackings of Jerusalem throughout history, the many wars and conflicts surrounding Jerusalem as proof of Satan's workings and efforts against God and God's people, as proof of Satan and everything that is evil trying desperately to destroy what is holy and good when from the very beginning it was God's own people who ushered in Jerusalem's violent history?

     7) Isn't it possible that some of the efforts to attack Jerusalem after the people of Israel came to possess it were not so much about attacking God's people so much as trying to regain possession of a place that the people of Israel had no true right to to begin with?

     8) Is God's reckless promise to His people that the promised land was THEIRS (and damn the folks who already lived there) the 'golden ticket' to absolve the people of Israel of any wrongdoing in regards to taking Jerusalem?

4. Judges 1:9-11

9 And afterward the men of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites who lived in the hill country, in the Negeb, and in the lowland.

10 And Judah went against the Canaanites who lived in Hebron (now the name of Hebron was formerly Kiriath-arba), and they defeated Sheshai and Ahiman and Talmai.

11 From there they went against the inhabitants of Debir. The name of Debir was formerly Kiriath-sepher.

Questions
     1) Sooo...when the LORD said that He would deliver the inhabitants of the promised land to His people was what this really meant that they (God's people) would have to go in and either drive the inhabitants out or simply slaughter them all so that actual possession of the land could be taken?

5. Judges 1:12-13

12 And Caleb said, “He who attacks Kiriath-sepher and captures it, I will give him Achsah my daughter for a wife.”

13 And Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb’s younger brother, captured it. And he gave him Achsah his daughter for a wife.

Questions
     1) Caleb promises away his daughter. Since when should a man offer a human being, much less his own daughter, as some type of prize or possession or trophy? Is Caleb's daughter one of the first trophy wives in history?

     2) Does God approve of this behavior?

     3) Does Caleb's daughter agree to this or have any say? If she has no say is this in accordance with how God/the LORD views women and how they should be treated? Isn't Caleb's daughter being treated as a means to an end here?

     4) Throughout human history men have promised their daughters to the 'victors' of many wars, correct? Does God approve of this? Is it appropriate behavior ONLY for the people of Israel, or does God approve of such behavior when other cultures do this same thing?

     5) Who is a person to pledge away the life and the existence of another person? By what universal right does ANY person do this? It DOES have to be a universal right, correct? I mean, God is universal so wouldn't it follow that if He approves of this His approval is in totality and thus universal?

6. Judges 1:19

19 And the LORD was with Judah, and he took possession of the hill country, but he could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain because they had chariots of iron.

Questions
     1) Sooo...what happened to God's promise in Deuteronomy 11:25 that states that when the people of Israel go into the promised land to take possession that no one will stand against them?

     2) If Deuteronomy 11:25 is correct how can it be that the people of Israel are unsuccessful in driving out or killing ALL of the inhabitants? 

     3) Did God intend His Deuteronomy 11:25 promise to mean something OTHER THAN that the people of Israel would face no resistance from the indigenous peoples of the promised land?

7. Judges 1:21

21 But the people of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites who lived in Jerusalem, so the Jebusites have lived with the people of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day.

Questions
     1) Again, what happened to the promise in Deuteronomy 11:25, never mind all of the other promises in regard to the promised land?

     2) Sooo...if the original inhabitants of the promised land were not driven out what impact does that have on God's promise that when His people made the move to take possession of the land the inhabitants would NOT be able to stand against the people of Israel?

     3) If God's words did not come true in totality, and if, being all-knowing, God KNEW that there would indeed be people that could and did make a stand against the people of Israel, doesn't this make God's claim in Deuteronomy 11:25 bullshit?

     4) Does bullshit equate with what constitutes a lie?

     5) Is God lying?

8. Judges 1:24-25

24 And the spies saw a man coming out of the city, and they said to him, “Please show us the way into the city, and we will deal kindly with you.”

25 And he showed them the way into the city. And they struck the city with the edge of the sword, but they let the man and all his family go.

Questions
     1) Well, aren't these verses a slice of heaven?

     2) Aren't these verses the very same as saying, "Tell us what we want to know, or we will kill you," or at the very least something quite similar?

     3) Do you think that the reason the man did show them where everyone was resulted from the spies threatening the man's family and the man's apparent fear in response to that threat?

     4) Would you have done the same thing if faced with such a situation?

     5) Sooo...when the spies took this approach with the man did God/the LORD approve of this?

     6) If the answer to the above question is in the affirmative would such translate to God's approval of threatening women and children in order to get whatever is being demanded?

     7) Isn't a threat of physical harm along with the present ability of the one doing the threatening to actually do it the definition of assault?

     8) Isn't assault a crime?

     9) If the answer to the question directly above is in the affirmative, doesn't that mean the spies are committing a crime?

     10) If God allows/approves of this criminal behavior doesn't that make Him an accessory to a crime?

     11) Is God/the LORD criminal?

9. Judges 1:27-28

27 Manasseh did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shean and its villages, or Taanach and its villages, or the inhabitants of Dor and its villages, or the inhabitants of Ibleam and its villages, or the inhabitants of Megiddo and its villages, for the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land.

28 When Israel grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but did not drive them out completely.

Questions
     1) Doesn't Numbers 21:3 say that the people of Israel destroyed the Canaanites AND their cities?

     2) If Numbers 21:3 true/correct then how in the freaky-doo are there STILL Canaanites that have not been destroyed?

10. Judges 1:29-30

29 And Ephraim did not drive out the Canaanites who lived in Gezer, so the Canaanites lived in Gezer among them.

30 Zebulun did not drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, or the inhabitants of Nahalol, so the Canaanites lived among them, but became subject to forced labor.

Questions
     1) What happened to the promise in Deuteronomy 11:25?

11. Judges 1:31

31 Asher did not drive out the inhabitants of Acco, or the inhabitants of Sidon or of Ahlab or of Achzib or of Helbah or of Aphik or of Rehob,

Questions
     1) What happened to the promise in Deuteronomy 11:25?

12. Judges 1:33

33 Naphtali did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh, or the inhabitants of Beth-anath, so they lived among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land. Nevertheless, the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and of Beth-anath became subject to forced labor for them.

Questions
     1) What happened to the promise in Deuteronomy 11:25?

13. Judges 1:34

34 The Amorites pressed the people of Dan back into the hill country, for they did not allow them to come down to the plain.

Questions
     1) What happened to the promise in Deuteronomy 11:25?

14. Judges 1:35

35 The Amorites persisted in dwelling in Mount Heres, in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim, but the hand of the house of Joseph rested heavily on them, and they became subject to forced labor.

Questions
     1) What happened to Deuteronomy 11:25?

15. Judges 2:1-2

1 Now the angel of the LORD went up from Gilgal to Bochim. And he said, “I brought you up from Egypt and brought you into the land that I swore to give to your fathers. I said, ‘I will never break my covenant with you,

2 and you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall break down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed my voice. What is this you have done?

Questions
     1) Is it possible that the people of Israel are NOT obeying the LORD in an effort to relay to Him that if He is not going to follow through will all of His promises it makes no sense whatsoever for them to fulfill their part of the bargain?

     2) Didn't God say the inhabitants of the promised land would NOT be able to stand against the people of Israel, yet a stand against Israel is exactly what happened?

     3) Does God instill confidence in people by failing to deliver His promises?

     4) Does God really expect obedience when He does not follow through?

     5) Why does God bother to ask what the people of Israel have done if, being all-knowing, He already friggin' knows what the hell they did?

16. Judges 2:4-5

4 As soon as the angel of the LORD spoke these words to all the people of Israel, the people lifted up their voices and wept.

5 And they called the name of that place Bochim. And they sacrificed there to the LORD.

Questions
     1) Sooo...the people of Israel are SO distraught at realizing they have pissed God off that they decide to say "I'm Sorry" by killing/sacrificing something? Did God accept their murderous apology?

17. Judges 2:6-7

6 When Joshua dismissed the people, the people of Israel went each to his inheritance to take possession of the land.

7 And the people served the LORD all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua, who had seen all the great work that the LORD had done for Israel.

Questions
     1) Which part of what the people of Israel and what the people of the cities that are being killed by God's people go through qualifies as 'great work'?

18. Judges 2:14-15

14 So the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he gave them over to plunderers, who plundered them. And he sold them into the hand of their surrounding enemies, so that they could no longer withstand their enemies.

15 Whenever they marched out, the hand of the LORD was against them for harm, as the LORD had warned, and as the LORD had sworn to them. And they were in terrible distress.

Questions
     1) When bad things happen to the people of Israel why is it always directly attributable to God/the LORD responding to some kind of wrong with complete, utter and total anger?

19. Judges 2:16-19

16 Then the LORD raised up judges, who saved them out of the hand of those who plundered them.

17 Yet they did not listen to their judges, for they whored after other gods and bowed down to them. They soon turned aside from the way in which their fathers had walked, who had obeyed the commandments of the LORD, and they did not do so.

18 Whenever the LORD raised up judges for them, the LORD was with the judge, and he saved them from the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge. For the LORD was moved to pity by their groaning because of those who afflicted and oppressed them.

19 But whenever the judge died, they turned back and were more corrupt than their fathers, going after other gods, serving them and bowing down to them. They did not drop any of their practices or their stubborn ways.

Questions
     1) If the people of Israel did not listen to their judges how in the hell could they ever have been saved from plunderers? Wouldn't such require cooperation? If the people are not cooperating they cannot be saved, right?

     2) Why does verse sixteen say the people were saved but the very next verse says the people did not listen? How does this work? What am I missing?

20. Judges 2:20-23

20 So the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he said, “Because this people has transgressed my covenant that I commanded their fathers and have not obeyed my voice,

21 I will no longer drive out before them any of the nations that Joshua left when he died,

22 in order to test Israel by them, whether they will take care to walk in the way of the LORD as their fathers did, or not.”

23 So the LORD left those nations, not driving them out quickly, and he did not give them into the hand of Joshua.

Questions
     1) How can God/the LORD sit there and say He will no longer drive out the inhabitants when, although He did promise to do so, He never followed through with such?

     2) Since God/the LORD never followed through with His promise isn't He breaking His own covenant?

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.zazzle.com/biblical_myth_periodic_table_of_elements_posters-228084324809883766

http://www.zazzle.com/dino_poster_1_impending_comet-228975587129991301

http://www.zazzle.com/dino_poster_2_flu_shot-228924456252191135

http://www.zazzle.com/funny_quotes_poster_1-228598465831373233

http://www.zazzle.com/theopoly_game_of_the_divine_poster-228221851132138911

http://www.zazzle.com/crazy_laws_poster-228138944115389818

http://www.zazzle.com/rapture_predictions_print-228929651513887296

http://www.zazzle.com/murphys_law_periodic_table_of_elements_posters-228360137271391540

Just a Few Questions: Part II Genesis

With ALL of these questions posed in regards to the Bible wouldn't it be nice to be able to access the questions in one place instead of flipping between blog postings? Now you can! The questions for the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch are now in one compilation, and there is no need whatsoever to flip-flop between various posts! Go here for your copy:
http://www.amazon.com/Turkey-Broth-Spirit-Questions-Pentateuch-ebook/dp/B00GVLQ0CY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385651545&sr=8-1&keywords=ester+lighthorse


Inquiring Minds Want to Know

Please add any answer you may have to any question in the comment link at the end of the post. Be sure to include the passage location if you choose to use Bible verses as references. Thank you.

So, here we are again. Glad to have you back! Now, let me pick up from where I left off in part one of this series of posts discussing questions I have about the Bible. Remember, I want to know your answers. Furthermore, responses of "because I said so" or any response reminiscent of the same will be deemed unacceptable. I do NOT want you to give me the answers you think I want to hear from you. Give me YOUR answers. Give me strong reasoning as to why you think the Bible is truth. Give me a reason to believe.

Part II continues where Part I left off in the Old Testament book of Genesis.

1. Genesis 2:18-20

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Questions

     1) Which way should these verses be taken to mean? These are some of the verses that are very clever in their semantics. The creation story in chapter one of Genesis clearly states that man was the LAST thing God created, all of the animals and living creatures being created prior. 

Here it can be argued that, because of the language structure of these verses the Lord God formed animals from the dust of the ground and THEN, as each animal was created, brought them to the man, Adam, to name. It can also be argued that the language structure of these verses convey the idea that AFTER the animals and Adam were created in the order Genesis chapter one says that God created them, God then brought each animal before Adam to name. So...button, button, who's got the button? Which interpretation shall we go with?

     2) Why in the first chapter of Genesis when God is creating the animals does the semantics of the verses make it sound like God simply poofed every animal into existence from absolutely nothing, but here in this verse it says that God formed the animals out of the dust of the ground?

     3) If both Adam and all of the animals were formed from the dust of the ground, if both are formed from the very same substance, is it so far fetched for science to search for and study man's genetic links to animals such as the apes?

     4) If the animals were created before man and existed within their environments BEFORE man was created how was Adam able to name the animals that lived in the bottom of the sea, in the arctic regions, in the jungles of Mexico, in Australia, in the Black Hills, in the Yukon, in the Gobi Desert, in the Great Basin, in the highest of mountain ranges and the lowest of valleys...the list goes on and on? 

     5) If the verse is intended to be interpreted as God literally took these animals from their environments, put them before Adam who then named them, and then put the animals back into their natural environments HOW did God do this without killing the animals? For example, there are species of fish at the bottom of the ocean that have a special physiology that allows them to live at great depths and pressures in the ocean, but these same fish would not survive very long (if at all) on the surface. 

So, how did God do this? And I know this sounds trite, but is it supposed to be because of His greatness and since He is God He can do whatever He wants to do whenever He wants to do it however He wants to do it? Seriously, if this is your answer tell me. I know I previously stated that I would not accept any answers reminiscent of "because God said so" crap, but this is my one exception to my own rule. Please answer.

     6) Is there a reason why Adam may NOT have named ALL of the animals of the earth? Is such a thing possible? It can be argued that in this verse it clearly says that God brought the beasts of the field and the fowl of the air before Adam to name. It does not say God brought forth the fish at the bottom of the sea or the creatures of the arctic or of the jungles. It doesn't even say that God brought before Adam ALL of the animals of the earth to be named. When I was a kid I was taught Adam named ALL of the animals. The verse only mentions the beasts of the field and the fowl of the air. So, how should this verse be taken?

     7) According to what the Bible says it can be surmised from the mention of the Euphrates River that the Garden of Eden was somewhere in the Middle East. If, for the sake of argument, Adam only named the beasts of the field and the fowl of the air how did Adam name the birds that exist ONLY in areas of the world far, far away from where the Garden of Eden supposedly was? 

     8) Have you ever heard the argument that it would be impossible for Adam to name all of the animals of the earth, and I do mean all, and because of that the Bible is proved false? Sometimes the response to this is a directive to read the verse literally. Since this verse only says "fowl of the air" in regards to birds this means Adam did not name the penguin since it is NOT a fowl of the air. What about other flightless birds like the dodo, ostrich, emu, kakapo, or flightless cormorant? If this verse is taken literally, WHO named all of the other animals on the earth, animals both seen and unseen?

     9) This verse says that God put the beasts of the field before Adam to be named. Does this mean that God only put before Adam only the animals that literally inhabited fields? If so, what about the polar bear, mountain goat, cliff-dwelling creatures, salamanders, amphibians, insects, tigers (which generally live in swamps, grasslands, and rain forests), platypus, sea otter, desert fox, and pretty much every creature you can think of that does not spend its existence in a 'field' habitat?

     10) So, for the sake of argument let us say that Adam did name all of the beasts of the field. Snakes can be included in the 'beasts of the field' category since there are some species of snakes that live in fields. The Northern Copperhead, one of some 27 species of snake that reside in Maryland, USA, can often be found in fields. How did Adam name this snake? Does the verse pertaining to this question mean that Adam simply said what kind of creature it was (a SNAKE) and the verse was not intended to be interpreted as meaning Adam gave the field animals specific species names (another example would be Western Diamondback Rattlesnake or a Corn Snake)?

     11) If these verses are intended to be interpreted as meaning that Adam more or less did the equivalent of looking at an animal and saying, "Ah, that's a cow, that's a horse, that's a donkey," in essence meaning that Adam was very generalized in his animal naming, why does verse 20 say that Adam named all of the cattle? If Adam is naming the cattle he is doing far more than just pointing at the animal and calling it a cow, right? Wouldn't that mean Adam is going a step further and naming the type of cow? So, again I ask you how did Adam name all the cattle of the earth?

2. Genesis 1:14

14 And God said let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years.

Questions
     1) Where is the firmament? I am not asking about heaven. The verse clearly conveys the firmament and heaven are two different things. Again I ask you, WHERE is the firmament?

     2) Okay, this verse says that the lights are placed in the firmament of heaven, right? Even if you go by the oft mentioned claim that the firmament is another name for earth's atmosphere you are still screwed when it comes to this verse because the sun and the moon ARE NOT IN earth's atmosphere. So, how is this verse explained?

     3) When I was a kid I asked why this planet has bouts of terrible weather where conditions are so extreme people often die? Why did God create a planet with so many variations of hostile environments? I was informed that it was because of the fall of man, that the reason the entire planet is not one big giant lush garden as intended by God was directly due to the disobedience of man. The moment man ate of the wrong fruit was the very same moment dangerous weather/environmental conditions staked a claim on this planet, never to leave. In essence, I was informed that there was absolute, one hundred percent perfect weather on the earth at all times BEFORE man fell.

If this is indeed the case why does this verse say the lights in the firmament are for signs and seasons and days and years? Doesn't the word 'seasons' infer that the entire planet is NOT one big lush garden but did in fact possess difference in seasons BEFORE the fall of man? Thus, wouldn't there be, in addition to the environment of the Garden of Eden, jungles, deserts, extremely hot, and extremely cold regions on the planet?

     4) So, for the sake of a very delusional argument let us say that there really WAS perfect weather everywhere on the planet BEFORE man fell. Did God create all the animals on this entire planet? For this question I do not care whether or not Adam named the animal, I just want you to answer whether or not God made ALL of the animals? 

Now I want you to consider did God make the polar bear, emperor penguin, seal, snowy owl, snow leopard, the Japanese Macaque (which, by the way, live in the coldest climate environment of any nonhuman primate), Arctic fox, Musk Ox, Arctic hare, Caribou...would you say that God made these animals? Did God make these animals during CREATION as described in Genesis chapter one? If God did make these animals...the amazing and unusual extreme-temperature fitted creatures that they are... HOW in the freaky-deaky world could the entire planet have been one big lush garden before the frigging fall of man?

3. Genesis 2:16-17

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Questions
     1) God never explained good and evil to Adam and Eve, so how in the hell would they even have the slightest clue as to what good and evil are? For Pete's sake, the verse itself fucks up what it is trying to say because right there in black and white it says it is the tree of knowledge of good and evil and if they eat of it they will die. This means they HAVE NOT YET eaten of the bad fruit and thus have no FUCKING idea whatsoever as to what God is talking about. How can these verses be a valid directive from God to man when man has ZERO knowledge of what good and evil are? 

     2) If the above question is not specific enough for you or you are having issues wrapping your mind around my question here, let me present it in a different way, okay? Let us take a look at Genesis 3:5, which says, 

     "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

In interpreting this verse we may justifiably conclude that Adam and Eve do not know what good and evil are UNTIL they eat the bad fruit, thus God can tell them all He wants, until He is blue in the face, that if they eat of the bad tree they will die...and this directive will mean dick.

Would you agree that disobedience can be considered evil, bad, the opposite of good...in other words, SIN? Sure, BUT...if Adam and Eve do not know about good and evil (which is actually necessary in order to understand consequences and thus act on an informed decision/voluntary action) they will not know that NOT listening/not doing what God said is wrong. They have ZERO concept of this. To disobey is wrong/evil, but remember we have already established that Adam and Eve do not know what good and evil are. 

So, WHERE is the watershed moment BEFORE the eating of the bad /forbidden fruit where Adam and Eve became aware of what good and evil are supposed to be?

     3) Adam and Eve were supposedly created by God and placed in this voon-der-bar garden where there is a bad tree whose fruit carries the power to kill/cause death by virtue of the knowledge of good and evil, right? How can these verses be a valid directive from God when Adam and Eve have ZERO concept of death? They have not seen death or 'tasted' death as everything around them is in a very fresh state of perfection. Everything simply IS.

When Adam and Eve come into the scene EVERYTHING in the universe is already in existence. Adam and Eve had never experienced (either by personal experience or direct observation) being without. They have ZERO experience of 'having' something or someone and then 'losing' that same someone or something. They do not know loss, and what is death itself but LOSS? 

All that Adam and Eve know FOR SURE is that they exist, the garden exists, and God exists; they likely would not have even been able to even fully understand and appreciate and articulate what existence is. They do not know of or suspect the possibility of another state of existence OTHER THAN the one they experienced prior to eating the wrong fruit.

Adam and Eve know not loss and thus know not death or anything remotely similar. Considering these things how can it be justified that God's directive was understood, valid, and binding?

4. Genesis 2:25

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Question
     1) Look, human beings are born into this world fully naked. Sure, we have decency laws that demand we cover ourselves but think about the possibilities as to why such laws came into being in the first damn place, right? For whatever reason some people just cannot control themselves or their urges when viewing another person naked. Then of course you have people covering themselves to various degrees in accordance and response to their environment.

Nakedness in and of itself is not wicked or bad or evil, no. What IS wicked and bad and evil is the aberrant behavior. Thus, as it became painfully obvious that there are morons in this world who cannot handle nakedness and respond to such violently, cultures and societies responded and the manner in which they did and the degree of which they did can be found within human history. 

But Adam and Eve had never experienced any of this because they were supposedly the only people on the entire earth, and thus far I have not found one verse in the entire Bible that so much as insinuates ANY kind of situation between Adam and Eve that would justify a shame of nakedness.

Now, the use of the word 'ashamed' in this particular verse is interesting. This verse implies that Adam and Eve were aware of the possibility of shame, the emotion of shame. But this verse is misleading, because as stated above Adam and Eve have no concept of good and evil, and isn't it justified to place the emotion of shame into the category of the knowledge of good and evil? 

5. Genesis 3:1

1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Question
     1) 'Subtle' has a good number of synonyms one of them being the word 'crafty.' Obviously, here 'crafty' does not mean crafty in the constructive/creative sense, but in the willfully destructive, subversive sense. Why, why, WHY...didn't God inform/warn Adam and Eve about the serpent? How were Adam and Eve supposed to know the serpent was subtle/crafty if they have no concept of good and evil either by instruction or experience?

6. Genesis 3:5-7

5 For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

Questions
     1) Now, God created man in His image and after His likeness, correct? If this is the case there is a serious problem. God knows everything there is to know. God knows everything about good and evil. God is the purpose of everything. 

While it would stand to reason that God would not create man in His own image and after His own likeness to the extent that man possesses ALL of the same powers and attributes of God, it also stands to reason that the likeness in which God supposedly created man includes at least a working knowledge, a basic understanding as to what good and evil are.

So, which part of the man that God created is in the likeness and image of God? Would the man God created in His own image be so ignorant, so misunderstanding, so trusting of the crafty serpent and his sack of shit lies? 

     2) Is there a possible defense for Adam and Eve and their actions that would exonerate them of the crime God tossed them out of the garden for? Were Adam and Eve warned and informed enough so that when they chose to eat of the fruit of wrong tree it could be a justified claim to assert that they assumed the risk of their actions in relation to the danger?

Boy, I tell you there were a b-zillion times when I was a child in Sunday School where we were taught that Adam and Eve KNEW they were being disobedient when they took and ate of the wrong tree. Since they acted on purpose and in willful defiance of God's instruction they deserved the harshest punishment.

Of course, this is pure bullshit. Consider that God never mentioned ANYTHING about what right and wrong are, what good and evil are, what shame is, who the serpent is, and what death is. God NEVER tells or explains anything to Adam and Eve. How, HOW can Adam and Eve be held accountable for assumption of the risk when God failed to provide them with necessary information? 

Because God NEVER said anything to them and because they do not know the depth of the risk let alone that there is even a risk to begin with, Adam and Eve cannot be guilty by virtue of assumption of the risk because...THERE WAS NO INFORMED CONSENT. 

So, WHERE is the justification for God not only kicking man out of the garden, but also for God immediately slapping those He created as well as all of their descendants with loathsome curse after loathsome curse?

http://www.amazon.com/Turkey-Broth-Spirit-Theologians-ebook/dp/B004LX0IOK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-1&keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.amazon.com/The-Tenement-Gospel-ebook/dp/B004W0ITIY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-2&keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.amazon.com/Turkey-Broth-Spirit-Confessions-ebook/dp/B008FWBYY6/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-3&keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.amazon.com/The-Autopsy-Christianity-Stoops-ebook/dp/B005ES6WRS/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-4&keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.amazon.com/Tales-From-West-Collection-ebook/dp/B0070Z67SM/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-5&keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.amazon.com/Turkey-Broth-Spirit-Said-ebook/dp/B0090NKCJW/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-6&keywords=ester+lighthorse

http://www.amazon.com/All-Fish-Sea-ebook/dp/B004MYFVEA/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1379316003&sr=8-7&keywords=ester+lighthorse