I'm naked, are you?.....let's huddle.

[GaryK]

LOVE NOT THE WORLD

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3720.0.html


"Gen 2:25  And they were both naked...

What does that mean?

They were 'spiritually' naked.

You say, 'no that means physical.'

It has a spiritual application, the words of Christ and the words of the book are Spirit! Yes they were physically naked and if that is all you see then you will never understand this book.

This says "they were naked" just like it says in Revelation 3 concerning the church at Laodicea.

Rev 3:17  Because you say, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and NAKED:

They weren't going around without clothes. They were wretched and poor and spiritually naked. Adam and Eve were spiritually naked BEFORE they ate the fruit. That's why they ate the fruit."


VVVV



I can see it, understand, and agree with Ray:  "They were 'spiritually' naked."

But.


Genesis 3
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


6And the woman seeth that the tree [is] good for food, and that it [is] pleasant to the eyes, and the tree is desirable to make [one] wise, and she taketh of its fruit and eateth, and giveth also to her husband with her, and he doth eat;

7 and the eyes of them both are opened, and they know that they [are] naked, and they sew fig-leaves, and make to themselves girdles.



Why Genesis 7 and a 'physical' application as a follow-up to a 'spiritual' nakedness?  What's the latter to do with the former?

Not seeing it.

gk

[jnoah]

Could it be they were like the rest of us, and all religions and tried to cover themselves with some type of physical attire ( suit tie, fig leaf, long robe) as to not be ashamed and appear naked before God knowing not that we are all these things wretched, miserable an poor! JUST A THOUGHT   

[John from Kentucky]

LOVE NOT THE WORLD

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3720.0.html


"Gen 2:25  And they were both naked...

What does that mean?

They were 'spiritually' naked.

You say, 'no that means physical.'

It has a spiritual application, the words of Christ and the words of the book are Spirit! Yes they were physically naked and if that is all you see then you will never understand this book.

This says "they were naked" just like it says in Revelation 3 concerning the church at Laodicea.

Rev 3:17  Because you say, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and NAKED:

They weren't going around without clothes. They were wretched and poor and spiritually naked. Adam and Eve were spiritually naked BEFORE they ate the fruit. That's why they ate the fruit."


VVVV



I can see it, understand, and agree with Ray:  "They were 'spiritually' naked."

But.


Genesis 3
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


6And the woman seeth that the tree [is] good for food, and that it [is] pleasant to the eyes, and the tree is desirable to make [one] wise, and she taketh of its fruit and eateth, and giveth also to her husband with her, and he doth eat;

7 and the eyes of them both are opened, and they know that they [are] naked, and they sew fig-leaves, and make to themselves girdles.



Why Genesis 7 and a 'physical' application as a follow-up to a 'spiritual' nakedness?  What's the latter to do with the former?

Not seeing it.

gk

They covered themselves with leaves.  God covered them with skins of animals.  God's covering was of better quality of their spiritual nakedness.  First the physical, then the spiritual.  God's solutions are better than man's.  The Scriptures are filled with parables, stories, symbols that teach higher spiritual truths.  It's just not in the New Testament that Jesus speaks in parables and symbols.  The Truth is thereby hid from the Many.  Only the Few can understand during this age.  The Many see Genesis as a nice story and primarily literal and physical, just like children.

[GaryK]

Could it be they were like the rest of us, and all religions and tried to cover themselves with some type of physical attire ( suit tie, fig leaf, long robe) as to not be ashamed and appear naked before God knowing not that we are all these things wretched, miserable an poor! JUST A THOUGHT    

And a thought appreciated jnoah.   There's some sense in your view.

gk

God covered them with skins of animals.  God's covering was of better quality of their spiritual nakedness.  First the physical, then the spiritual.  God's solutions are better than man's.

I can believe that god's solutions are better than man's, but, forgive me John I don't see it, even still, obviously being one of the many.   A covering of leaves or a covering of animal skin, how is either........physical.........application a better 'spiritual' covering?   I can see where the two felt nakedness physically and covered themselves, but why the covering of 'skin' from God?   What's important about skin?  That isn't helping spiritually anything.   Unless it has to do with sacrifice, perhaps.

gk




In the theme of the 'humility' that Ray is teaching, maybe, perhaps, it's  simply impossible that we can attain a sincere 'spiritual' humility, as Jesus had, while we are on this earth and in these earthly tents.  Don't know.   Just a rambling of incoherency.  

[John from Kentucky]

Could it be they were like the rest of us, and all religions and tried to cover themselves with some type of physical attire ( suit tie, fig leaf, long robe) as to not be ashamed and appear naked before God knowing not that we are all these things wretched, miserable an poor! JUST A THOUGHT    

And a thought appreciated jnoah.   There's some sense in your view.

gk

God covered them with skins of animals.  God's covering was of better quality of their spiritual nakedness.  First the physical, then the spiritual.  God's solutions are better than man's.

I can believe that god's solutions are better than man's, but, forgive me John I don't see it, even still, obviously being one of the many.   A covering of leaves or a covering of animal skin, how is either........physical.........application a better 'spiritual' covering?   I can see where the two felt nakedness physically and covered themselves, but why the covering of 'skin' from God?   What's important about skin?  That isn't helping spiritually anything.   Unless it has to do with sacrifice, perhaps.

gk




In the theme of the 'humility' that Ray is teaching, maybe, perhaps, it's  simply impossible that we can attain a sincere 'spiritual' humility, as Jesus had, while we are on this earth and in these earthly tents.  Don't know.   Just a rambling of incoherency.  

Hi gk,

Not worth arguing about.  I'm not considering the literal, physical aspects of the story.  The whole story may be a parable.  God will have to let us know if anything in the story of Adam and Eve literally occurred.

But the fig leaves and the animal skins are symbols of something else.  Higher Spiritual Truths.  All of God's words are spiritual; They have a higher spiritual meaning other than what is literally said.  That's what I wanted to get across.  Have a good weekend.

John

[G. Driggs]

Seems Ray is saying to be spiritually naked means to be carnally minded. Meaning there was nothing good or spiritual about Adam and Eve, they had nothing "on" that was spiritual.

Here is an email reply I found.

http://www.bible-truths.com/email12.htm

Dear [omitted],

Thank you for your email and comments. And let me parrot your sentiments by saying: "I pray this will not upset YOU" what I have to say in response to your email. While I can certainly appreciate some of the statement you make, nonetheless, the premise of your email is in error.

You state: "What they had [Adam and Eve], I can only dream of having. They knew what good is without evil, good in it's purest form!"

Well, if what you want is what Adam and Eve had BEFORE they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, then I have news for you:  You can stop dreaming.  You REALLY DO ALREADY HAVE what they had!!  That's right! Your ALREADY possess what they HAD! I have it too! But I am not as thrilled over this possession as much as you seem to think you would be if only you had it. You do have it, I have it, Hitler had it, Saddam STILL has it, in his jail cell in Iraq. ALL MANKIND HAS IT. It's called "THE CARNAL MIND," and it's not a pretty thing either: "For to be CARNALLY MINDED is DEATH; but to be spiritually minded is LIFE and PEACE.

Adam and Eve did not eat of the forbidden tree and disobey God because they were "spiritually minded" or because, "they knew what good is without knowing evil, good in it's purest form" as you suggest. THEY WERE TOTALLY CARNAL. The were 'NAKED'--This was not just a physical fact, it was a SPIRITUAL REALITY. They were spiritually NAKED just as everyone else who thinks they have sufficient spirituality to live righteously by their own carnal mind:

   "Because you say, I am rich and increased with goods [they owned all in the garden; it was ALL FOR THEM] and have need of NOTHING [how could they have need of anything if they already possessed, "good in it's PUREST FORM' as you suggest? But there's was a problem with Adam and Eve just as there is with ALL OF US. We DO NOT possess proper knowledge {without the tree of the knowledge of good and evil}, and therefore we like Laodicea...] ... and KNOW NOT  that you are WRETCHED, and MISERABLE, and POOR, and BLIND, and [SPIRITUALLY] NAKED" (Rev. 3:17)!!!

If they already knew good (inside of their very spirit and innermost being), good in it's PUREST FORM, then how could ANYTHING, influence, persuade, cause, or MAKE them manifest the root causes of EVERY SIN ON EARTH?  Notice it carefully:

   "And when the woman [1] SAW THAT THE TREE WAS GOOD FOR FOOD [lust of the flesh], and that it was [2] PLEASANT TO THE EYES [lust of the eyes], and a tree to be [3] DESIRED TO MAKE ONE WISE [pride of life], she TOOK [stole, disobeyed, lusted after the flesh, put an idol before God, worshiped her own presumed but false goodness, helped cause her husband to sin, hid themselves, LIED to God about it, tried to pass the buck and blame others for their sin, etc., etc., etc., and a dozen other sins] of the fruit thereof, and did eat..." (Gen. 3:6).

And so, were Adam and Eve REALLY "good without knowing evil?"  Did they really have "good in it's PUREST FORM?" Or did Eve having nothing but a spiritually naked and carnal mind that did NOT possess the love of God in any way, shape or form?  Let the Scriptures answer. Notice what Eve did:

   Lusted with her FLESH, wanting to EAT the forbidden fruit.
   Lusted with here EYES, because it seemed so pleasant to her carnal mind.
   Was filled with PRIDE, desiring worldly WISDOM.

Now let's compare Eve's sin with what John tells us are the three root CAUSES OF ALL SIN:

   "Love not the world, neither the things are are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is NOT IN HIM.  For [here's the reason why] ALL that is in the world, [1] the LUST OF THE FLESH, and [2] the LUST OF THE EYES, and [3] the PRIDE OF LIFE, is not of the Father, but is of the world" (I John 2:15-16).

There we have the exact three sins of Eve!  And I assure you on the authority of Jesus Christ and the Word of God that these are NOT, 'good in it's purest form.' We must all be CRUCIFIED WITH CHRIST and then be CLOTHED WITH HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS, before we will have even a hint of "good in it's purest form."

There is no knowledge of good without a knowledge of evil! That is WHY God put both good AND evil IN THE SAME TREE; IN THE SAME FRUIT.!!

God be with you,

Ray
-----------

Good question, with an answer I did not know and always wondered about.

G.Driggs

[Marky Mark]

6And the woman seeth that the tree [is] good for food, and that it [is] pleasant to the eyes, and the tree is desirable to make [one] wise, and she taketh of its fruit and eateth, and giveth also to her husband with her, and he doth eat;

7 and the eyes of them both are opened, and they know that they [are] naked, and they sew fig-leaves, and make to themselves girdles.

Why Genesis 7 and a 'physical' application as a follow-up to a 'spiritual' nakedness?  What's the latter to do with the former?

Not seeing it.
gk

Hey Gary.

  I would have to say when God Spiritually opened their eyes to the condition that they were in and realized that they had fallen short and missed the mark of the Lords command their own carnal heart thought best to cover up their mistake the only way any carnally minded man or woman could, which would be to cover themselves in their own self-righteousness [the fig leaf] and not seeing the need for the Lords righteous covering in their own lives, ie; taking upon themselves to fix their own spiritually weak and dead condition.

That is what the carnal heart will always think,my ways or my own coverings will suffice in my life thereby leaving out Gods righteous coverings in and of His Spiritual Truths. When we see things with Spiritual eyes instead of fleshy ones His Righteousness will prevail within.When we put our ways above Gods ways we then miss the mark and are blinded by our Spiritually dead condition [our nakedness].

Isa 61:10  I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.

Rev 3:18  I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

Just my two cents.

Peace...Mark

[Joel]

Innocent and naked before God, and guilty and naked before him are two different things, Spiritually speaking.
There is a difference between a baby and an adult when it comes to bare skin.

Genisis 3:11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked?

Joel

[Marky Mark]

The whole story may be a parable.  God will have to let us know if anything in the story of Adam and Eve literally occurred.

Hey John.

  I don't think you can base a parable on something that is not based on reality or truth. Notice a parable is a fictitious narrative based on common life,and not a comparison based on fiction.

G3850
παραβολή
parabolē
par-ab-ol-ay'
From G3846; a similitude ("parable"), that is, (symbolically) fictitious narrative (of common life conveying a moral), apoth gm or adage: - comparison, figure, parable, proverb.

As Ray has said many times,the bible is one giant parable and I agree.But that does not mean that the bible is not literally true from Genesis through Revelation.

If Adam and Eve were only a parable and did not actually live in flesh and blood bodies in the garden,then what are we to do with the Word of God in these verse?

Gen 3:20  And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Gen 5:5  And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Being a mother and giving birth and dying in physical bodies seems like a common occurrence to all people,not a fictitious narrative.

The words of God clearly show to me that Adam and Eve were truly literal human beings created by God.The literal stories of Scripture were written for our admonition in order to teach the few chosen Gods Spiritual truths, through parables or not. We should believe Gods Word,not mans.

1Jn 5:10 He who is believing in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; he who is not believing God has made Him a liar, for he has not believed in the testimony which God has testified concerning His Son."

1Co 10:11  Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

1Co 10:6  Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

Rom 3:3  For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Rom 3:4  God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;

1Co 10:12  Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.


Peace...Mark

[JohnMichael]

But.


Genesis 3
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


6And the woman seeth that the tree [is] good for food, and that it [is] pleasant to the eyes, and the tree is desirable to make [one] wise, and she taketh of its fruit and eateth, and giveth also to her husband with her, and he doth eat;

7 and the eyes of them both are opened, and they know that they [are] naked, and they sew fig-leaves, and make to themselves girdles.



Why Genesis 7 and a 'physical' application as a follow-up to a 'spiritual' nakedness?  What's the latter to do with the former?

Not seeing it.

gk

Hi GK,

Working off of the premise that first comes the physical, then the spiritual follows. They discovered they were naked after eating of the fruit. They tried to physically cover themselves; then, God covered them physically. Both are physical representations of the spiritual covering that (1) man tries to accomplish, and (2) that God gives under the New Testament. Man seeks to cover himself spiritually with religion/Babylon (the spiritual reflection of the fig leaves), and then God covers them with His Spirit indwelling/Jesus' sacrifice/white raiment of righteousness (the spiritual reflection of the animal skins). Do you notice that the animal skins required a sacrifice?

Just food for thought. I hope this helps.

In Him,
John

[John from Kentucky]

The whole story may be a parable.  God will have to let us know if anything in the story of Adam and Eve literally occurred.

Hey John.

  I don't think you can base a parable on something that is not based on reality or truth. Notice a parable is a fictitious narrative based on common life,and not a comparison based on fiction.

G3850
παραβολή
parabolē
par-ab-ol-ay'
From G3846; a similitude ("parable"), that is, (symbolically) fictitious narrative (of common life conveying a moral), apoth gm or adage: - comparison, figure, parable, proverb.

As Ray has said many times,the bible is one giant parable and I agree.But that does not mean that the bible is not literally true from Genesis through Revelation.

If Adam and Eve were only a parable and did not actually live in flesh and blood bodies in the garden,then what are we to do with the Word of God in these verse?

Gen 3:20  And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Gen 5:5  And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Being a mother and giving birth and dying in physical bodies seems like a common occurrence to all people,not a fictitious narrative.

The words of God clearly show to me that Adam and Eve were truly literal human beings created by God.The literal stories of Scripture were written for our admonition in order to teach the few chosen Gods Spiritual truths, through parables or not. We should believe Gods Word,not mans.

1Jn 5:10 He who is believing in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; he who is not believing God has made Him a liar, for he has not believed in the testimony which God has testified concerning His Son."

1Co 10:11  Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

1Co 10:6  Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

Rom 3:3  For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Rom 3:4  God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;

1Co 10:12  Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.


Peace...Mark

Hi Mark,

You can believe as you are led, but be careful it does not become an idol of the heart.

Lazarus and the Rich Man teaches us great spiritual truths, but I do not think the story itself is literal.  It is a parable.

The story of Adam and Eve teach great spiritual truths, but I do not know if the story is literally true.  Maybe so.  Maybe not.

Adam is also the Hebrew name for all humanity.  Eve is the mother of all living.  The names may not literally apply to a specific man and a specific woman.  I just do not know for sure.

You also make an assumption that 930 refers to the literal days of Adam's life.  You could be correct if the numbers in the genealogies are literal.  The Septuagint contains different numbers of years.  Everything is not what it appears to be.

One day God will let us know which stories in the Scriptures were literally true as opposed to being parables that show higher spiritual truths.

I don't think that the New Testament was the first time that the WORD (Jesus) taught in parables.  Take care.

John

[Marky Mark]

 

Hi Mark,

You can believe as you are led, but be careful it does not become an idol of the heart.

John,are you saying that the Word of God concerning the creation of Adam and Eve, which is called Scripture, is an idol of the heart?

Lazarus and the Rich Man teaches us great spiritual truths, but I do not think the story itself is literal.  It is a parable.

Yes, Lazarus and the Rich Man is without a doubt a parable because we know that Jesus did not speak unto them unless it was.

Mat 13:34  All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

The definition of a parable is in fact based on a reality of some type.How else could anyone relate to a story if in fact one could not believe that the characters involved were real in a sense of there really could be a man named Lazarus somewhere or there could be a certain rich man somewhere. Without one being able to relate to what the parable is saying in a real and meaningful way, the parable would lack any type of substance or significance.

The Spiritual significance far outweighs the parable itself,but none the less, it has to be able to be understood in a way that the multitudes could relate to it,a reality,if you will,but with no perception of the Spiritual realites.

The story of Adam and Eve teach great spiritual truths, but I do not know if the story is literally true.  Maybe so.  Maybe not.

By now you know what I think.

Adam is also the Hebrew name for all humanity.  Eve is the mother of all living.  The names may not literally apply to a specific man and a specific woman.  I just do not know for sure.

May I ask if they have no real application in Scripture what would be the purpose of God telling us their names or the genealogies that relate back to Adam and Eve? I always thought that names were given to people,places or things for the reason of identity and not for speculation.

You also make an assumption that 930 refers to the literal days of Adam's life.  You could be correct if the numbers in the genealogies are literal.  The Septuagint contains different numbers of years.  Everything is not what it appears to be.

I assume nothing,I can only believe what the Word of God says in the Scriptures.

One day God will let us know which stories in the Scriptures were literally true as opposed to being parables that show higher spiritual truths.

I believe all of the scriptures show a higher Spiritual truth by virtue of where the inspiration to record them came from.

I don't think that the New Testament was the first time that the WORD (Jesus) taught in parables.  Take care.

John

That I can agree with, but it still does not take away from the literal words spoken of in Scripture.




Peace...Mark

[John from Kentucky]

Hi Mark,

You can believe as you are led, but be careful it does not become an idol of the heart.

John,are you saying that the Word of God concerning the creation of Adam and Eve, which is called Scripture, is an idol of the heart?

Lazarus and the Rich Man teaches us great spiritual truths, but I do not think the story itself is literal.  It is a parable.

Yes, Lazarus and the Rich Man is without a doubt a parable because we know that Jesus did not speak unto them unless it was.

Mat 13:34  All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

The definition of a parable is in fact based on a reality of some type.How else could anyone relate to a story if in fact one could not believe that the characters involved were real in a sense of there really could be a man named Lazarus somewhere or there could be a certain rich man somewhere. Without one being able to relate to what the parable is saying in a real and meaningful way, the parable would lack any type of substance or significance.

The Spiritual significance far outweighs the parable itself,but none the less, it has to be able to be understood in a way that the multitudes could relate to it,a reality,if you will,but with no perception of the Spiritual realites.

The story of Adam and Eve teach great spiritual truths, but I do not know if the story is literally true.  Maybe so.  Maybe not.

By now you know what I think.

Adam is also the Hebrew name for all humanity.  Eve is the mother of all living.  The names may not literally apply to a specific man and a specific woman.  I just do not know for sure.

May I ask if they have no real application in Scripture what would be the purpose of God telling us their names or the genealogies that relate back to Adam and Eve? I always thought that names were given to people,places or things for the reason of identity and not for speculation.

You also make an assumption that 930 refers to the literal days of Adam's life.  You could be correct if the numbers in the genealogies are literal.  The Septuagint contains different numbers of years.  Everything is not what it appears to be.

I assume nothing,I can only believe what the Word of God says in the Scriptures.

One day God will let us know which stories in the Scriptures were literally true as opposed to being parables that show higher spiritual truths.

I believe all of the scriptures show a higher Spiritual truth by virtue of where the inspiration to record them came from.

I don't think that the New Testament was the first time that the WORD (Jesus) taught in parables.  Take care.

John

That I can agree with, but it still does not take away from the literal words spoken of in Scripture.




Peace...Mark

No, I am not saying that the Word of God is an idol of the heart.

I am saying that many people have an interpretation of a certain Scripture, that they absolutely believe is truth, and that the interpretation can become an idol of their heart.

[cjwood]

just a thought, but, wouldn't the story of adam and eve have to have physically happened/occurred if we are to have an actual physical, human, line to Jesus Christ?  just asking.

also, could it have been their shame, after their eyes were opened by God, that caused them to know they were (physically) naked?

claudia

[GaryK]

Hi GK,

Do you notice that the animal skins required a sacrifice?

Just food for thought. I hope this helps.

In Him,
John

Thank you all for your words here, much wisdom, much appreciated.

JohnMichael, I did indeed and the reason for my comment above:  "unless it has to do with sacrifice, perhaps".  So yes, noticed, and I'm glad you did as well, meaning, not far off base it seems.

Again all, thanks.

gk

[JohnMichael]

Hi GK,

Do you notice that the animal skins required a sacrifice?

Just food for thought. I hope this helps.

In Him,
John

Thank you all for your words here, much wisdom, much appreciated.

JohnMichael, I did indeed and the reason for my comment above:  "unless it has to do with sacrifice, perhaps".  So yes, noticed, and I'm glad you did as well, meaning, not far off base it seems.

Again all, thanks.

gk

Hi GK,

I meant no offense by that question. It was just meant as one of those thought-provoking type questions. It actually only dawned on me after I read your question.

In the story of Adam and Eve, when God clothed them, an innocent sacrifice was required in order to cloth them. Granted, in that scenario, the sacrifice was a physical one [the animal(s)] to give a physical covering for the physical Adam (and Eve).

Fast forward to the New Testament, and we have the innocent spiritual sacrifice for spiritual nakedness by the spiritual Adam who is Jesus Christ. It was one of those, "OH WOW!" moments for me when that clicked. I am definitely starting to see physical precedents in the story of Adam and Eve with spiritual reflections in the life of Jesus Christ. "Here a little, there a little."

In Him,
John

[GaryK]

Hi GK,

I meant no offense by that question. It was just meant as one of those thought-provoking type questions. It actually only dawned on me after I read your question.

In Him,
John

Hi JohnMichael,

Of course, didn't look at it that way at all..........so none taken, not even thought of.   But I appreciate your kindness of thought. 

gk