Bible Study Genesis 2-3

[jaybo]

Matthew13:10 kjv
10. And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11. He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

I am trying to help you understand. A presage is hidden in a parable. Jesus revealed the meaning to the disciples.

eddif

And thereby revealed the meaning to us in the Bible. I don't need your help to understand what Jesus plainly said.

You are misusing the word "presage". Here is the dictionary definition: something that portends or foreshadows a future event; an omen, prognostic, or warning indication.

 

[for_his_glory]

Glory, I don't understand your meaning of the portion which I put in bold print. Would you please rephrase "one in God's Spirit." Thanks.

One in God's Spirit that was breathed into both of them that made them/we a living soul.

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Here dust + breath/spirit from God = a living soul. When the flesh dies physically it returns back to the dust of the ground and our spirit is preserved with God for final judgment.


​

 

[for_his_glory]

Or both literal and figurative. I don't think it has to be an either/or.

It doesn't have to be either/or. When I study I always look at the literal and try to see the Spiritual within the meaning. That's how I roll

 

[for_his_glory]

Jaybo, since this statement is in reference to how God/Jesus created Eve from Adam's rib, which you believe was not literal, then claim you believe the Bible to be the word of God, leaves me to believe, that you like to cherry pick what you believe as long as it goes along the your reasoning. This is evidence of one having little faith.

If you were to believe more of what the bible teaches, your faith in God will grow as well.

It has nothing to do with one having little faith and we can not assume things about others as we all have to come into our own understandings as the Holy Spirit gives us wisdom and understanding. Do we always get it right, no, but we are all continuously learning.

 

[for_his_glory]

I have no idea what you're trying to say. I read the Bible carefully every day and also pray to God several times a day. He sends me answers that I understand. Why the mindless babbling?

Examples...

"Matthew 13 and Mark 4. Study these to understand why parables." Why parables what?
"Just cry out to God and He will send an answer you can understand." Why cry out? Is that necessary to get an understandable answer?
"To put a peach seed in the ground you get a peach tree." No kidding!

jaybo not everyone gets eddif but at times he makes great sense if you just take your time in trying to understand his comments. If you do not understand then ask him to make it clearer.

 

[for_his_glory]

And thereby revealed the meaning to us in the Bible. I don't need your help to understand what Jesus plainly said.

You are misusing the word "presage". Here is the dictionary definition: something that portends or foreshadows a future event; an omen, prognostic, or warning indication.

I do believe eddif is using the word presage in the proper definition of the word as some of the parables of Jesus were given with signs, warnings and indications at times.

 

[Goldwing]

God's command was that Adam was not to eat from the tree of good and evil. When God told Adam he would surely die if he ate from that tree, God did not mean Adam would physically die that day, but would lose that Spiritual fellowship he had with God.

Whether it was a real fruit tree or symbolic the lesson is they disobeyed God's command

glory, why are you uncertain as to whether the "tree of good and evil" was literal or symbolic?

In post one you state, it is literal, and for obvious reasons, one could not eat fruit from a symbolic tree. However, in post #8 you state it could be symbolic as well. Confusing.

Confusing too, is what you state in post #1, of which I put in bold highlight. You are sailing in the same boat as most Christians. By not understand God's original plans, as they are explained in the bible, but twisting their meaning to explain His alternate plan (plan B), when His created fail to live up to the original plan.

Many bible translation state Gen. 2:17, as, "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shall surely die." You certainly are aware of it, you and others believe God didn't mean they would die that very day. You add a new twist for me in that you state, "but [Adam] would lose that Spiritual fellowship he had with God". Are you stating that from the day Adam fell into sin till his death centuries latter, Adam had no spiritual connection with God?

The confusion is caused because most people to not understand, "God's sudden death law". It was explained to Adam and Eve there in Gen. 2:17. Since God's plan was to create mankind with a freedom of choice, that made it possible for His creation to either live in harmony with, or live in disobedience to His laws, which would ensure, joy, peace and happiness. The sudden death law was put in place by the Father, since He only know the beginning from the end, to prevent the spread of sin within God's perfect creation.

However, that law is temporarily suspended, because on the day that Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree, Jesus went to the Father and asked for a way to stay their execution. It was on that same day that the Father explained to Jesus the plan of salvation and all that it would require of Jesus to save fallen mankind. Jesus in love for His creation said yes to all the Father required, and since that day Jesus has been interceding for fallen man, even paying the price that the sudden death law required.

The plan of salvation was offered, instead of sudden death, because Adam and Eve, and the unfallen angels at this time knew nothing of the terrible effects that disobedience would have on God's perfect creation.

The sudden death law will be reimposed when God establishes His earthly kingdom because
God's created beings will still have a free will, to chose obedience or disobedience. However, heaven will have millions of witness who can testify to the effects of sin, and should any of His created from that time forward choose to sin, God will impose His sudden death law, that very day to prevent the cancerous growth of sin, from destroying His perfect creation the second time. And even those who thought I was nuts, as I first mentioned the sudden death law, now might agree, (having a broader view of God's plans) You oh God are righteous in all your ways.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I don't understand Genesis 2-3 (or more properly 1-3) to be literal truth. I believe they were written to teach us certain basic principles of God, at least in the way the ancient Hebrews understood them.

Take for example, Eve being created from Adam's rib (or side). I don't believe that this literally happened, but was written to teach that a husband and wife are of one essence. Genesis 2:18, "Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.’ " Then 23-24, "Then the man said,

‘This at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
this one shall be called Woman,
for out of Man this one was taken.’

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh." NRSV

There is no better way to define the relationship between husband and wife than these verses.

Likewise, Genesis 3:5, "... for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ " The two trees represent pure faith in God -- the tree of life -- versus humans discerning "truth" on their own -- knowing good and evil. I don't believe there was a literal orchard.

This does not mean that I don't believe the Bible or that it is not God's word, but that there are lessons to be taught. That isn't the case with Exodus through Jude, but I believe that Genesis 1-4 and Revelation are meant to be interpreted rather than taken literally.

You do have a problem that Jesus took them literally. So your position does not match his position. How do I know that Jesus took them to be literal people? He mentioned their son, Abel, by name and he referred to "since the beginning" marriage was to be honored and divorce not in the mind of God. My personal view is viewing them as literal people teaches more than deciding they were not literal people which reduces the value of the learning material to the level of a fairy tale. If some events never happened, they never will happen and they teach us nothing of value at all. That is my view.

The physical and spiritual are parallel in meaning and not opposite.
Different context, but similar meaning.
Pay a good preacher
Let an oxen eat if it treads out the corn
A plowman plows in hope of a share in the harvest
A thresher works and deserves pay
A workman should get paid


Matthew 13 and Mark 4. Study these to understand why parables.’


To put a peach seed in the ground you get a peach tree.

To plant the word of God in a good ground heart yo get a crop.
Plant the Word in a stony ground heart and a plant comes up but withers away.

Just cry out to God and He will send an answer you can understand.

eddif

It would be better if you stopped telling others to "just cry out to God and He will send an answer" because there is no such promise that God gives understanding to everyone who does this and this is for good reasons. If it were true, then Christians would agree a lot more on a lot more matters because it is easy to simply "cry out to God" for understanding. I have also looked at what you write and I do not see evidence that everything you say is understanding given by God. By the way, whenever anyone says God has shown them something, we are Biblically obligated to judge whether this is so. If not, then they are deceived, fairly serious charge not given to an opinion we disagree with.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Jaybo, since this statement is in reference to how God/Jesus created Eve from Adam's rib, which you believe was not literal, then claim you believe the Bible to be the word of God, leaves me to believe, that you like to cherry pick what you believe as long as it goes along the your reasoning. This is evidence of one having little faith.

If you were to believe more of what the bible teaches, your faith in God will grow as well.

Hi Gold,

In Jay's defense, a lot of Christians cherry pick out of the Bible what they like. Lots and lots. It does not mean little faith. It is more like a self-designed faith that appeals to them. You will find this in those who pull out individual passages sans the surrounding passages, especially those who just list a lot of verses and refuse to quote any of them.

We live in a democratic society where everyone, up until recently, had the right to their own opinion. This has translated to many Christians thinking that they have the right to believe about God what they like and everything everyone believes is equally valid. No one is wrong about what they believe because we are, after all, a democracy. So few search the scriptures for the truth. Most of them find a theology they like and search for verses that validate that chosen theology. But as I said, they are most often isolated verses. There is a thread about the Bride in the Bible but when I did a search, that word is used exactly once in the NT and it is only "like a bride" not talking about a bride. And yet a whole theology is built on one verse. That is an example of what I mean.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Or both literal and figurative. I don't think it has to be an either/or.

There are some matters that do not need to be literal or particular. The parables describe real life events and no one needs any names or times for when it happened as these things happened normally at that time. However, this is not true of events described that either had to have happened in space and time to real people or they teach nothing. The account of the beginning of human beings (man) and the reason why we tend to evil either happened to real people or the Genesis account teaches us nothing.

In real life, when I have looked at those who rejected the literal creation account, I see a weaker faith and a dulled understanding sometimes with moral failure that follows. As one extracts one stone after another deciding they are not real literal accounts, the faith is weakened. This is logical. If God really did not do as the Bible says He did, why should we believe He will do things for us? Where do we stop at saying "that never really happened to real people, it is just a story to teach us something" and think there is no impact on believing God will do what he never did anyway. It is akin to saying that the story of Cinderella teaches young girls that if they treat their siblings right, a prince will come and give them a good life. No parent uses cinderella to each their girls how to behave because that story never happened to real people we do not even pretend it did. It is foolish to make the accounts in the Bible on that level.

 

[T. E. Smith]

In real life, when I have looked at those who rejected the literal creation account, I see a weaker faith and a dulled understanding sometimes with moral failure that follows.

I'd like to know what you mean by "rejecting the literal creation account." Saint Augustine viewed it as a metaphor since he thought God created everything instantly, not over seven days. C.S. Lewis believed in theistic evolution and applied that to the creation account, most importantly to the creation of humanity. Would you consider these two people to have rejected the literal creation account?

(My point is, of course, that neither Augustine nor Lewis could rightly be said to have a "weaker faith" and "moral failure.")

 

[T. E. Smith]

It is akin to saying that the story of Cinderella teaches young girls that if they treat their siblings right, a prince will come and give them a good life.

Actually, Cinderella is indeed something like an allegory/metaphor/parable intended to teach the lesson that good things will happen to good people. (Nothing as specific as that a prince will come, etc., but the general lesson is still there: good things happen to good people.) So actually Cinderella can be used as a story to teach children how to behave.

And anyways, Cinderella did not do what she did so that good things would happen to her. That was a secondary benefit. Accordingly, the story teaches people to do what is right in the face of difficulty from even family members, and to do what is right even without expectation of any reward.

A good lesson indeed.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I'd like to know what you mean by "rejecting the literal creation account." Saint Augustine viewed it as a metaphor since he thought God created everything instantly, not over seven days. C.S. Lewis believed in theistic evolution and applied that to the creation account, most importantly to the creation of humanity. Would you consider these two people to have rejected the literal creation account?

(My point is, of course, that neither Augustine nor Lewis could rightly be said to have a "weaker faith" and "moral failure.")

I was referring to living people.

 

[jaybo]

Jaybo, since this statement is in reference to how God/Jesus created Eve from Adam's rib, which you believe was not literal, then claim you believe the Bible to be the word of God, leaves me to believe, that you like to cherry pick what you believe as long as it goes along the your reasoning. This is evidence of one having little faith.

If you were to believe more of what the bible teaches, your faith in God will grow as well.

I can't help what you believe about me. I know what I believe, based on Scripture and the teaching of the Holy Spirit.

Do you understand the principle of reductio ad absurdum?

 

[for_his_glory]

glory, why are you uncertain as to whether the "tree of good and evil" was literal or symbolic?

In post one you state, it is literal, and for obvious reasons, one could not eat fruit from a symbolic tree. However, in post #8 you state it could be symbolic as well. Confusing.

Confusing too, is what you state in post #1, of which I put in bold highlight. You are sailing in the same boat as most Christians. By not understand God's original plans, as they are explained in the bible, but twisting their meaning to explain His alternate plan (plan B), when His created fail to live up to the original plan.

Many bible translation state Gen. 2:17, as, "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shall surely die." You certainly are aware of it, you and others believe God didn't mean they would die that very day. You add a new twist for me in that you state, "but [Adam] would lose that Spiritual fellowship he had with God". Are you stating that from the day Adam fell into sin till his death centuries latter, Adam had no spiritual connection with God?

The confusion is caused because most people to not understand, "God's sudden death law". It was explained to Adam and Eve there in Gen. 2:17. Since God's plan was to create mankind with a freedom of choice, that made it possible for His creation to either live in harmony with, or live in disobedience to His laws, which would ensure, joy, peace and happiness. The sudden death law was put in place by the Father, since He only know the beginning from the end, to prevent the spread of sin within God's perfect creation.

However, that law is temporarily suspended, because on the day that Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree, Jesus went to the Father and asked for a way to stay their execution. It was on that same day that the Father explained to Jesus the plan of salvation and all that it would require of Jesus to save fallen mankind. Jesus in love for His creation said yes to all the Father required, and since that day Jesus has been interceding for fallen man, even paying the price that the sudden death law required.

The plan of salvation was offered, instead of sudden death, because Adam and Eve, and the unfallen angels at this time knew nothing of the terrible effects that disobedience would have on God's perfect creation.

The sudden death law will be reimposed when God establishes His earthly kingdom because
God's created beings will still have a free will, to chose obedience or disobedience. However, heaven will have millions of witness who can testify to the effects of sin, and should any of His created from that time forward choose to sin, God will impose His sudden death law, that very day to prevent the cancerous growth of sin, from destroying His perfect creation the second time. And even those who thought I was nuts, as I first mentioned the sudden death law, now might agree, (having a broader view of God's plans) You oh God are righteous in all your ways.

I never said I was uncertain, but that I can see it being literal and symbolic as in the teaching of being obedient to God's command.

Maybe you need to explain what you mean by God's orignal plans.

I am not saying that Adam lost that spiritual connection forever, but that because of his disobedience it was temporarily displaced, which caused God to drive him and Eve out of the garden of Eden and God cursed the ground that in sorrow Adam would have to till the ground and would have to eat of it all the days of his life.

Never heard of anyone teaching something that is called "God's death law". I know God created man to live forever as He created man perfect, but yet with freewill. Adam lost that perfection and from that time on man was appointed to physically die and after that the judgement comes, Hebrews 9:27. Adam was cast out of the garden before he could eat of the tree of life and live forever since he brought evil into the world as sin, not Adams direct sin, was passed down through all the generations.

The plan of God's salvation has always been through Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world, and the shedding of blood as we read that God made the first blood sacrifice using animals making coats of skin to cover Adam and Eve's shame. Jesus came to earth not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. John 3:16-17.

Prophecy given
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Prophecy fulfilled
Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

God's kingdom is an everlasting kingdom that will be established here on earth after the return of Christ who makes an end of all sin in the fulfillment of God's will for mankind.

 

[for_his_glory]

It would be better if you stopped telling others to "just cry out to God and He will send an answer" because there is no such promise that God gives understanding to everyone who does this and this is for good reasons.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

The problem is that some people become so indoctrinated with man's doctrines that they would rather believe a man's word instead of asking the Holy Spirit teach them. I use to let man teach me, but apart from the Holy Spirit man can not teach me anything, so eddif was right in what he said.

 

[for_his_glory]

Hi Gold,

In Jay's defense, a lot of Christians cherry pick out of the Bible what they like. Lots and lots. It does not mean little faith. It is more like a self-designed faith that appeals to them. You will find this in those who pull out individual passages sans the surrounding passages, especially those who just list a lot of verses and refuse to quote any of them.

We live in a democratic society where everyone, up until recently, had the right to their own opinion. This has translated to many Christians thinking that they have the right to believe about God what they like and everything everyone believes is equally valid. No one is wrong about what they believe because we are, after all, a democracy. So few search the scriptures for the truth. Most of them find a theology they like and search for verses that validate that chosen theology. But as I said, they are most often isolated verses. There is a thread about the Bride in the Bible but when I did a search, that word is used exactly once in the NT and it is only "like a bride" not talking about a bride. And yet a whole theology is built on one verse. That is an example of what I mean.

Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
Proverbs 3:6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

Just because one does not agree with another does not mean they have no faith, it only means many lean unto their own understandings, theologies, points of view.

 

[Goldwing]

Hi Gold,

In Jay's defense, a lot of Christians cherry pick out of the Bible what they like. Lots and lots. It does not mean little faith. It is more like a self-designed faith that appeals to them. You will find this in those who pull out individual passages sans the surrounding passages, especially those who just list a lot of verses and refuse to quote any of them.

We live in a democratic society where everyone, up until recently, had the right to their own opinion. This has translated to many Christians thinking that they have the right to believe about God what they like and everything everyone believes is equally valid. No one is wrong about what they believe because we are, after all, a democracy. So few search the scriptures for the truth. Most of them find a theology they like and search for verses that validate that chosen theology. But as I said, they are most often isolated verses. There is a thread about the Bride in the Bible but when I did a search, that word is used exactly once in the NT and it is only "like a bride" not talking about a bride. And yet a whole theology is built on one verse. That is an example of what I mean.

Mae, on this post I couldn't agree with you more. Right on!

 

[Goldwing]

I can't help what you believe about me. I know what I believe, based on Scripture and the teaching of the Holy Spirit.

Do you understand the principle of reductio ad absurdum?

I do not understand the principle of reductio ad absurdum. Have never heard of it.

 

[daninthelionsden]

It doesn't have to be either/or. When I study I always look at the literal and try to see the Spiritual within the meaning. That's how I roll

Me too!