Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Some Questions Concerning the Eden Texts, etc.
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 1 of 23 (512748)
06-20-2009 2:35 PM


Thank you for the discussion.
Hope all is well EvC ...
In light of BobAliceEve's request per Message 120 within the thread YEC without the bible, possible?.
BobAliceEve writes:
I am not, for this discussion, concerned about scientific support, however ...
I am curious as to what the prevailing thinking is here (i.e, established scriptural support) on the following ...
quote:
1) Did Adam and Eve evolve or were they created?
2) When God took them into the garden were they a basic family?
3) If created, were they subject to physical death?
4) Was the tree of life not mentioned as a concern along with the tree of knowledge of good and evil because it was not a concern because they were already immortal?
5) Is the tree of life the antidote to either the physical or spiritual death?
6) If they were a basic family and not subject to death would they live forever as a family?
7) Is the Messiah's mission to restore to it's original state what God created or to change things?
8) When Isaiah says that the lion will eat hay like the ox will that be a restoration of what was before the fall or will that be a change?
9) Is this knowledge valuable to a discussion regarding how the age of the earth is thought of?
10) ...?
A few more answers may pop up but this would be my starting point.
Respondents are encouraged to address each question (1-9, etc.) specifically ...
Admin, please, admonish in what ways this topic may gain promotion.
If promoted as is ... Bible Study please.
One Love
Edited by Bailey, : sp.
Edited by Bailey, : sp.
Edited by Bailey, : sp.
Edited by Bailey, : sp.
Edited by Bailey, : They weren't all spelling errors ... it's just easier to write 'sp.' in the op.
Edited by Bailey, : simplify

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe ...
Tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
Why trust what I say when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Bailey, posted 06-27-2009 12:46 PM Bailey has not replied
 Message 7 by ochaye, posted 07-27-2009 1:19 PM Bailey has not replied
 Message 10 by bluescat48, posted 07-31-2009 11:46 AM Bailey has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 23 (512797)
06-21-2009 5:37 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 3 of 23 (512872)
06-21-2009 10:39 PM


Some basic gardening tips ...
Thank you for the exchange.
Hope things are well ...
It is very common for people to suggest a wide variety of inferences from the Eden narrative are readily available. Often times, as we exercise our imaginations concerning these texts, as is so frequently the case, the intentions are harmless, and at others, the outcome is as well. However, as long as these texts have been circulating, it seems as though they are not often understood within the context that they were written or, perhaps, intended.
Honestly, even translators themselves have historically taken to unsound liberties in translating the ancient Hebrew writings due to the great chasm between Old Hebrew and English. There is modern inductive linguistics research suggesting that the term 'Adam' refers to humanity in general, and so, this interpretation is diametrically opposed to the traditional accepted meaning of the term referencing a specific male individual at a specific place in time.
At this point, it should come as little surprise that a good portion of forum members here at EvC agree, while some obviously do not, that the Eden text is often blatantly misinterpreted in order to allow for the seemingly endless inferences that tend to be applied through the variety of doctrines and dogmas which are associated with the multitude of traditions attempting to take root in the Garden. Some fertile soil for story telling perhaps ...
On a basic level, one may note that the story was first delivered to an original audience and spoke to their culture and surroundings. Within Message 161 of the thread entitled 'If the Bible is metaphorical then perhaps so is the God of the Bible', purpledawn shares that 'The plain text provides a simple story. Man obtains the knowledge of good and bad, which would have been consistent with the knowledge of the culture of the audience.'
Along those lines, later in that thread, it was stated that the authors of the narrative were describing, in poetic, proverbial, and metaphorical form, the creation of the human species that is fully endowed with the mental faculty of reason (the knowledge of good and bad), as well as the mental faculty of creative intellect (the imagination). These two mental faculties enable humans to manipulate their God-given natural environment.
Now, in doing so, human society becomes agrarian and urbanized - humans till the ground from which they were taken (Gen. 3:23), and the first 'tent-village' becomes the mother of all inhabitants (Gen. 3:20). These advancements in the civilization of mankind, however, come with a price. First, humans begin judging their Creator and the creations, thus causing them to believe they are separate from Him. Eventually they begin judging one another.
As a consequence of implementing the 'Knowledge of Good and Evil', the human species must begin exploring outside the Garden In Eden, at the risk of leaving behind almost all hope of reaching the 'Tree of the Life'; which the species has been told 'guards' the way back to it's Father's garden. Thus, mortal human existence begins spreading across the earth and eventually subdues it. A hint may begin to describe the way back to the Garden.
The 'cherubim' and the 'flame of the sword', which turns every way, both 'keep' as well as 'preserve' the way to the 'Tree of the Life'.
Of course, this is only one basic interpretation, but it may begin to suggest what types of information may, perhaps, be safely gathered from the Eden texts without over indulging ourselves. Yet, even this simple interpretation will be dissuaded by various orthodox traditionalists, as well as others, for employing a modern approach provided for by recent determinations in linguistics which identify 'Adam' as 'mankind' and 'Eve' as the first 'tent village.'
That said, perhaps we can explore some questions ...
1) Did Adam and Eve evolve or were they created?
Within ToRaH, the Hebrew word bara' is translated as 'create' and, of course, it's most prolific use is first identified in Gen 1:1. In a theological sense, this verb is often taught to mean 'something brought out of nothing' or 'something brought into existence', which, assumedly, was not in existence previously. Now, you see, the thing is, this interpretation is based upon our familiar friend who, although not completely reliable, we have all come to know and love:
Stoneage human intellect.
Yet, quite frankly, the inference does not hold in all technicality, unless, that is, we suppose that all things did not spring forth from the Word of God which IS God. The idea that something or anything came from nothing may contradict the nature of the Father and most, if not all, laws of science (not theories). As such, the science o' religion has, for centuries, been faced with two bottom lines. Either something came from nothing, or something always was.
I go for the latter, however, for all intents and purposes, the scriptures are written to mankind and for mankind, and so, from the very first verse the Father called the heaven and earth, along with the materials for all things visible and invisible, into existence in the beginning. Another literal meaning of the word bara' is to 'open up' or to 'bring into tangible existence' and, from our point of view, it seems the heavens and the earth had a beginning.
So, while this may seem to indicate that, a time once was, when there were no Lovebirds to disrupt the Garden In Eden, does it necessarily mean that they were brought forth from nothing? Again, perhaps, from our point of view one may say yes. Yet, what were they before they were 'opened up'? Perhaps no one knows, but the creation came from One who always was. This isn't to imply that all things had spiritual existence before they had physical existence ...
More simply, I'm suggesting all things come from the Word of the Father which has always been.
lol - hope that helps!
One Love

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 4 of 23 (512901)
06-22-2009 7:35 AM


Hi, these answers are short and sweet, hope they help.
1) Did Adam and Eve evolve or were they created?
Adam was specifically created according to :
Gen 2:7 'he created man from the clay and blew into his nostrils the breath of life so the man came to be a living soul'
____________________________________________________
2) When God took them into the garden were they a basic family?
Gen2:22-24 gives the account of God creating a woman for the man and bought them together. Jesus later used this account to teach people about the wrongfulness of divorce so it is evident that the man and woman became a married couple in Eden. IOW a basic family unit.
__________________________________________________
3) If created, were they subject to physical death?
the command given at Gen 2:15 says "as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die"
I can give you my opinion of this, but in your opinion, if Adam was told that he would die only if the ate from the tree, what do you think should have been the result if he had NOT eaten from it?
___________________________________________________
4) Was the tree of life not mentioned as a concern along with the
tree of knowledge of good and evil because it was not a concern because they were already immortal?
the Bible does not say that the tree of life in itself had life-giving qualities. Rather, that tree 'represented' God's guarantee of everlasting life to the one who would be allowed to eat its fruit. I say this because the tree of life is mentioned again in the bible at Rev 2:7. There it says that whoever is found approved by God and judged righteous, will be permitted to eat from the tree of life. Therefore the tree symbolizes Gods ability to grant everlasting life to whomever he chooses. (immortality and everlasting life are two different things)
_______________________________________________
5) Is the tree of life the antidote to either the physical or spiritual death?
No...The antidote for physical or spiritual death is God. God granted Jesus immoratal life in heaven, there was no physical tree of life that Jesus had to eat from to get it. God can grant it to someone if he chooses.
_______________________________________________________
6) If they were a basic family and not subject to death would they live forever as a family?
Yes.
_______________________________________________________
7) Is the Messiah's mission to restore to it's original state what God created or to change things?
Restore what God had created which was a paradise with perfect humans to cultivate it. Rev 21:4 "And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away."
Luke 23:42 "Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise."
__________________________________________________________
8) When Isaiah says that the lion will eat hay like the ox will that be a restoration of what was before the fall or will that be a change?
Most of the Scriptural references to the lion is figurative, or illustrative. The nation of Israel were compared to lions as was the power of enemy nations and their ferocious attacks.
However when the Jews were being protected by God, these attacks by the enemy did not happen. Therefore, from their standpoint the 'lion' was, in effect, eating straw like a bull, or in other words doing no harm.
There is a greater fulfillment of these words in the future under Christs rule. Some people may at one time have had a lion-like disposition but thru christ have learned 'peace' and will no longer cause harm to others. I dont believe lions will literally be eating straw ...but surely, just as in the days of the Isrealites, lions will not cause harm to humans or their domestic animals.
In the wild, im sure lions will continue to eat meat.
___________________________________________________
) Is this knowledge valuable to a discussion regarding how the age of the earth is thought of?
I think its important to be able to differentiate between the 'earth' and 'man'.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by jaywill, posted 06-22-2009 11:34 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-31-2009 1:27 PM Peg has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 5 of 23 (512926)
06-22-2009 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Peg
06-22-2009 7:35 AM


the command given at Gen 2:15 says "as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die"
I can give you my opinion of this, but in your opinion, if Adam was told that he would die only if the ate from the tree, what do you think should have been the result if he had NOT eaten from it?
That is like my understanding. They were created with an everlasting life that God could maintain forever. I see no other warning that something would bring death.
Therefore if they had an everlasting life yet were placed before a tree of life, eternal life, this tree must represent something more than just an everlasting and good human life.
There it says that whoever is found approved by God and judged righteous, will be permitted to eat from the tree of life. Therefore the tree symbolizes Gods ability to grant everlasting life to whomever he chooses. (immortality and everlasting life are two different things)
God Himself is the Uncreated Life. For He preceeded the creation of all things.
The tree of life represents the Uncreated Life of God Himself. This tree of life means God's plan to dispense Himself into man so that man and God could be mingled to be one entity. God has certain attributes which are not communicable. But on the other hand He has as life which He can impart into man that God and man may unite.
This union looks like Jesus Christ Who is God and Man united. The tree of life was the means of God mass producing sons of God who live in God and God lives in them. The tree of life signifies God's desire to live in organic union with man.
Mary E. McDonough writes:
THE TREE OF LIFE - It is not probable that the same LORD God who gave to Moses the plan of that wonderful tabernacle in the wilderness, every appointment of which was a symbol of Eternal Truth, and who instituted that elaborate system of sacrificial offerings, every detail of which spoke of Him in connection with His redeeming work at Calvary, hould een here at the very beginning of human history teach by symbol the truths which He wished them to know?
Can we not believe that He, who should latter break bread prepared by human hands and use the same to symbolize His broken body, and who should take wine pressed from grapes by human feet to symbolize His shed blood, should here in the Garden of Eden, before His incarnation, select the tree in the midst of the garden as a symbol of God's Uncreated Life stored in Himself for human beings? And could not our first parents with their wonderful powers of spirit and mind - powers fresh from the creative hand of God - have understood this symbol sufficiently to penetrate the same and choose the Lofe which was actually manifested in the glorious One who talked with them in the garden? Who can doubt it? Yet we plainly see that as yet they had not partaken of this tree. In other words, they had not made their choice in reference to Uncreated Life, or Eternal Life as it is more frequently termed; for had they eaten of the tree of life, then they would have received the Life of God which was for them in the Eternal Son, through simple faith. Thus immediately they would have become children of God, and tthrough the continual approproation of the provision for their transformation, eventually they would have become "conformed to the image of the Eternal Son."
[God's Plan of Redemption, Mary E. McDonough, Living Stream Ministry, pg. 20]
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Peg, posted 06-22-2009 7:35 AM Peg has not replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 6 of 23 (513302)
06-27-2009 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bailey
06-20-2009 2:35 PM


mortal brute breath breathing animals
Thank you for the exchange.
Hope things are well ...
3) If created, were they subject to physical death?
4) Was the tree of life not mentioned as a concern along with the tree of knowledge of good and evil because it was not a concern because they were already immortal?
Any lack of disclosure regarding the Tree of the Life does not seem to revolve around a premise of innate immortality.
The Hebrew word for 'dust' of the ground (Heb. עפר , Gk. χοος choos: dry loose earth) is employed in Gen. 2:7, which may enlighten the reader/hearer to the idea that The Eden narrative is proverbial. The material that mankind is formed from within the narrative also seems to indicate that the Deity (יהוה אלהים) needn't be anthropomorphized into an anthrōpos (Gk. ανθρωπος : a human being). One may also note that 'dust' is a substance of the ground which would not exist after the whole surface of the ground is 'irrigated', as happens to be the case in Gen. 2:6, and it is, as well, a substance of the ground that typically defies being 'formed', as it is in Gen. 2:7. lol - golems are supposedly conjured from mud, not dust ...
Now, in the same way that the entire human species, male and female, are addressed collectively in Gen 1:27 (את־האדם), the continued employment of the Hebrew term throughout Gen. 2:7, 8, 15 & 3:24 (את־האדם) logically denotes the entire human species as well. So, when 'the archetype of the human species' (האדם) receives the 'breath of mortal life' (נשׁמת חיים) in Genesis 2:7, it receives nothing more or less than every other 'breathing brute animal species' (נפשׁ חיה). Such an interpretation is in clear accordance with the BDB Lexicon of the Old Testament (pg. 659), as well as in Genesis 7:22 - all creatures that inhabit the dry land are endowed with the Father's 'breath-spirit of mortal life' (נשׁמת־רוח חיים).
Therefore, 'the archetype of the human species' (האדם) is indeed, from the very moment of its initial inception ...
A mortal brute animal that is subject to physical death.
Indeed, 'original sin' need not apply.
One Love
Edited by Bailey, : sp.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bailey, posted 06-20-2009 2:35 PM Bailey has not replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5238 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 7 of 23 (516780)
07-27-2009 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bailey
06-20-2009 2:35 PM


Did Adam and Eve evolve or were they created?
Why should they not be both evolved and created?
The word 'adam' means 'man' and 'mankind' as well as a man's name, and that makes each of us either Adam or Eve. Do as all scholars outside the Dark Continent do, treat early Genesis as allegory, and the problems disappear.
Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bailey, posted 06-20-2009 2:35 PM Bailey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2009 6:53 AM ochaye has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 8 of 23 (517324)
07-31-2009 6:53 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by ochaye
07-27-2009 1:19 PM


The word 'adam' means 'man' and 'mankind' as well as a man's name, and that makes each of us either Adam or Eve. Do as all scholars outside the Dark Continent do, treat early Genesis as allegory, and the problems disappear.
I think "the problem" is that after I have read the Bible, have I touched God.
If I have not come away with having touched God, it doesn't matter that much how I have interpreted things. If you have touched God's presence by counting that there was no actual talking serpent, I am certainly glad about that.
I would prefer that to you understanding a talking serpent and come away from your reading not having tasted the Spirit of God deep in your heart.
I am for feeding on God's presence in the Word. I am not for talking snakes just for the sake of talking snakes.
Every word of the Bible should bring us into the presence of God nourishing and feeding a spiritual hunger in our hearts.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ochaye, posted 07-27-2009 1:19 PM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by ochaye, posted 07-31-2009 10:10 AM jaywill has not replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5238 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 9 of 23 (517352)
07-31-2009 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by jaywill
07-31-2009 6:53 AM


It seems that there is confusion about threads.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2009 6:53 AM jaywill has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 10 of 23 (517369)
07-31-2009 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bailey
06-20-2009 2:35 PM


1) Did Adam and Eve evolve or were they created?
The story is allegorical
2) When God took them into the garden were they a basic family?
Ditto
3) If created, were they subject to physical death?
if they lived at all they were subject to death.
4) Was the tree of life not mentioned as a concern along with the tree of knowledge of good and evil because it was not a concern because they were already immortal?
again allegorical
5) Is the tree of life the antidote to either the physical or spiritual death?
Same
6) If they were a basic family and not subject to death would they live forever as a family?
no they would be subject to physical death.
7) Is the Messiah's mission to restore to it's original state what God created or to change things?
more allegory
8) When Isaiah says that the lion will eat hay like the ox will that be a restoration of what was before the fall or will that be a change?
allegorical comparison.
9) Is this knowledge valuable to a discussion regarding how the age of the earth is thought of?
No, it has no bearing. The whole Bible is a combination of allegory, historical fiction & myth.
Edited by bluescat48, : punct & clarity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bailey, posted 06-20-2009 2:35 PM Bailey has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 23 (517392)
07-31-2009 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Peg
06-22-2009 7:35 AM


Interpretation
Adam was specifically created according to :
Gen 2:7 'he created man from the clay and blew into his nostrils the breath of life so the man came to be a living soul'
Do you think this passage is poetic and symbolic or do you think that God literally formed Adam from clay and literally has lungs and breathed into Adam's nostrils to give him his soul?

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Peg, posted 06-22-2009 7:35 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2009 3:48 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 14 by Peg, posted 08-01-2009 4:04 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 12 of 23 (517418)
07-31-2009 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Hyroglyphx
07-31-2009 1:27 PM


Re: Interpretation
tb
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-31-2009 1:27 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-01-2009 12:54 AM jaywill has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 23 (517454)
08-01-2009 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by jaywill
07-31-2009 3:48 PM


Re: Interpretation
What is the cryptic message supposed to mean?

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2009 3:48 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 14 of 23 (517470)
08-01-2009 4:04 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Hyroglyphx
07-31-2009 1:27 PM


Re: Interpretation
Hyroglyphx writes:
Do you think this passage is poetic and symbolic or do you think that God literally formed Adam from clay and literally has lungs and breathed into Adam's nostrils to give him his soul?
i believe he literally formed the man from the dust.
he created the body for Adam then put life into it. From that point on the body of Adam became a soul/nephesh which literally means 'breathing creature' in hebrew. Animals are also called 'souls' in the genesis account.
So rather then a soul being put into Adam, the man became a breathing creature or a soul according to the original hebrew word (Nephesh)
What is the 'soul' by your understanding and why?
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-31-2009 1:27 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by ochaye, posted 08-01-2009 6:33 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 16 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-01-2009 8:17 AM Peg has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5238 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 15 of 23 (517493)
08-01-2009 6:33 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Peg
08-01-2009 4:04 AM


Re: Interpretation
'i believe he literally formed the man from the dust.'
Because?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Peg, posted 08-01-2009 4:04 AM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by jaywill, posted 09-25-2009 12:52 PM ochaye has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024