bible-truths.com/forums
=> General Discussions => Topic started by: octoberose on April 28, 2015, 07:28:27 PM
-
Didn't we have a discussion not that long ago speculating that there are people who were not descended from Adam (so not related to Noah)? I'm looking for it but can't put my finger on it.
-
Hi Rose,
I mentioned this idea in a post here http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,16077.0.html reply #10. Kat added by citing ray's comments on the matter in reply #12.
There was another more indepth discussion about it of which I remember myself, kat, dave and another forum member engaging in the idea but the thread was either deleted or moved to private mod area because dave felt we were going into territory that ray did not cover.
Here is another place ray briefly covers this (different reply than kat's link in the other thread).
----------------------------------------------------------http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,12719.msg111472.html#msg111472
RAY'S COMMENT: Chapter two does not contradict chapter one. The order in chapter one is plants, animals, and then humanity. Is this not the order found in the geologic table? Chapter two does not recount the creation of humanity, but rather the creation of Adam and Eve. In Genesis 1:26 God "made" [Heb: 'asah'] male and female. In Gen. 2:6 God "formed" [Heb: 'yatsar'] Adam--two difference Hebrew words: two different formations. Notice that it doesn't say in chapter 2 verse 3 that there was no man on earth at this time, but rather that there was "no man to till the ground." There were men, but they were hunters/gatherers, not farmers. God is now going to make a more advance human to cultivate and farm the land.
The phrase "dress it and keep it" in verse 15, is "tend and cultivate." God is teaching Adam to be a farmer. When in doubt, read a proper translation. God did not create the animals AFTER He created Adam. Notice a proper translation from the Concordant Literal Old Testament: "And furthermore, Ieu Alueim ['the Lord God'] HAVING FORMED [yes, having ALREADY formed, millions of years in the past] all field life and every flyer of the heavens." God is bringing to Adam the Animal species which He had already created millions of years in the past, to have Adam give names to them. This obviously took years. Some, such as the dinosaurs (the reptilian 'tannyin, tannyim,' of Gen. 1:21 had already been extinct for many millions of years. These were decidedly not, "great whales," as the King James erroneously translates it).
It was from this first group of humanity that Cain apparently got his wife, cities were built, etc.
Chapter two does not cover the creation of plant life. That began hundreds of millions of years earlier. What God is doing in Chapter two is He is planting a garden for the man to cultivate, farm, and harvest. The word "planted" in Gen. 2:8 is from the Hebrew meaning "to sprout." God "sprouted" newly planted trees, etc. They were mere buds, which would require years to produce fruit to eat. What was Adam expected to eat until these trees matured?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thread took place back in January/February of this year and I believe it was rck's thread about the "nephelem/giants" which we tried to point out was a bad translation of the phrase. You might be able to convince dave to bring the thread out of hiding so you can take a look inside it again but otherwise its gone. Well, maybe it's not gone but I can't find it anywhere.
God bless,
Alex
-
There's nothing in that thread that answers the question that can't be brought out again from Ray's teaching. No need to 'bring it back' for that.
-
Octoberrose, Ray taught that there were 'mankind' before Adam. He taught as well that Cain's wife was 'likely' from these other peoples. He also taught that the flood was regional and did not wipe out every living thing over the entire face of the planet. The 'problem' with your question is that it assumes that Noah was distinctly and only descended from Adam through Seth. Since there is no mention of who the 'mothers' were, this can't be proven (and can't be dis-proven either, I reckon). It can't be proven as well that some of those who died from the flood might not also have been descended from Adam through Seth. Scripture says what it says, but it doesn't tell us everything.
-
Thank you for finding that for me. Now my question:
One of our verses for the reconciliation of all is I Corinthians 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."
We teach that the All who die in Adam is the same as the All who will Live in Christ. So, does that not mean that all of redeemed mankind have to be 'in Adam' as in related to Adam?
-
A more thorough 'passage' than just the one verse. Maybe it will help.
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
1Co 15:21 for since through man is the death, also through man is a rising again of the dead,
1Co 15:22 for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive,
1Co 15:23 and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,
1Co 15:21 For since through man death came, and through man there is resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be restored to life.
I don't think vs 21 and vs 22 are saying the EXACT same thing, but rather verse 21 gives the concept and vs 22 the example.
Worth remembering too, perhaps, that "Adam" means "red/earthy". The first time the word is used is in Genesis 1:26. I've run this usage down, and "adam" (H120 אדם) is the primary word used for any man, men, and mankind in general. To me, it's kind of a nickname if it's used for an individual--like naming your dog "Dog". From usage, the "meaning of the word" is used before a "name" is ever used.
Adam was never designed to live forever in Eden. As Ray taught, he was as carnal as we are, not some kind of "glorified" extra-shiny human being. We die just as he did, and just as all mankind/"red" has since the beginning of us.
In this way, we are ALL related to Adam. We are all "ADAM", in fact, if we are "mankind". And we are. Our ultimate father, according to every genealogy I've seen in scripture, is GOD, not Adam.
Do we have to be physical descendants of Jesus Christ in order to be "raised from the dead"?
Only thing I can think of to add: There are 'theories' out there that put a lot of stock into "racial lineages" and how they operate in salvation. I never saw Ray espouse any of them. Even in the OT, God "chose" in sovereignty according to His own counsel, and justified according to faith.
-
Thank you for finding that for me. Now my question:
One of our verses for the reconciliation of all is I Corinthians 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."
We teach that the All who die in Adam is the same as the All who will Live in Christ. So, does that not mean that all of redeemed mankind have to be 'in Adam' as in related to Adam?
Hi Rose,
I think dave makes an excellent point. I am inclined to agree with him.
Also, if I may add, let me bring to your attention for verse 22.
Notice that it says not that "ALL IN CHRIST shall be made a live," but rather, "IN CHRIST, SHALL ALL...." in other words, THROUGH CHRIST will ALL be made alive. This includes every single creature of creation whether they were genealogically of adam or not. Lastly, remember what paul said, that God has made all nations of ONE BLOOD. So whether you are a descendant physically of adam or not doesn't change the fact that we all have the same one blood which courses through our veins.
Acts 17:25
25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring [Race / Kindred].
As Dave said, The promise is NO LONGER after the FLESH. The old covenant is old, waxing away, and ready to vanish. It served its point at one time to bring about the salvation of all, to Herald the Messiah, but now as Christ put off the flesh and was raised so do we too put off the flesh. Circumcision of the flesh profits nothing. We worship God in spirit and truth.
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Romans 91 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Romans 8
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Gal 3
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Romans 2
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Galatians 4
27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
Galatians 6
15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God [They are the Israel of God].
1 Peter 2:8-10
8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;
10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
God bless,
Alex
-
Thank you for the answers. I really appreciate all the time you took to respond.
Am I the only one that is a bit freaked out at the whole not related to Adam thing? This is hard. It's like thinking you were related to Abraham Lincoln all your life and you find out you're really related to John Wilkes Booth! :-[
-
Thanks for all the comments.
So here then is the question that my kids and I have.
Did God create a tribe of humans all at once, both male and female, from the red earth?
Similar I suppose to creating a herd of adult Elk to graze on the hillside?
Is it important to our understanding of God's ways of carrying out his plan that there needed to be a large herd of humans from which to choose the ones that would receive the "spirit" in man that made man able to wonder where they came from and to seek an answer?
Did God need to begin with a large tribe of humans in order to find one to carry the genetic strain into the future leading to a savior of all, including those who had been in the original tribe of multiple individuals?
This idea is quite strange to me, and I'm in a serious quandary over the very thought.
-
Thank you for the answers. I really appreciate all the time you took to respond.
Am I the only one that is a bit freaked out at the whole not related to Adam thing? This is hard. It's like thinking you were related to Abraham Lincoln all your life and you find out you're really related to John Wilkes Booth! :-[
Hi Rose,
Initially when I contemplated this idea it did seem strange but everything fits very well together. All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer). It also helps explain why the Jews were so meticulous about their genealogies, keeping them pure, and recording their history. Why they also had such disdain for the gentiles, because they could literally trace their bloodline back to God through adam and the gentiles could not. It really helps shed light on how this new covenant which was prophecized to be a stumbling block to the jews, did become such a thing. Here is Christ telling them that their flesh profits nothing, this was never about the physical but was all along about the spiritual. "I had not known sin unless the law said, 'thou shall not covet.'" I tell you verily, that whosoever looks at a woman and lusts (covets) after her, has already committed adultery in his heart."
Jeremiah 31:31-34
31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
From the start... it was about the heart.
Deuteronomy 6:4-6
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:
5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:
Matthew 22:36-40King James Version
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
So we see from the start this prophecy that God is going to call the gentiles:
Deuteronomy 32:19-21
19 And when the Lord saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.
20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.v
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
Isaiah 42:1-9
1Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.
3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
4 He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
5 Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
6 I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;
7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
8 I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
9 Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.
Acts 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.
Romans 11
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
These verses and many others really come into sharp focus when you finally understand adam, his place in the world, and how the jew's viewed themselves because of him.
God bless,
Alex
-
Thanks for all the comments.
So here then is the question that my kids and I have.
Did God create a tribe of humans all at once, both male and female, from the red earth?
Similar I suppose to creating a herd of adult Elk to graze on the hillside?
Is it important to our understanding of God's ways of carrying out his plan that there needed to be a large herd of humans from which to choose the ones that would receive the "spirit" in man that made man able to wonder where they came from and to seek an answer?
Did God need to begin with a large tribe of humans in order to find one to carry the genetic strain into the future leading to a savior of all, including those who had been in the original tribe of multiple individuals?
This idea is quite strange to me, and I'm in a serious quandary over the very thought.
Hi Bob,
As Paul told the greeks:
Acts 17:25
25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring [Race / Kindred].
All of the human race is made of that same one blood. Adam was not different in that regard.
What made Adam unique was his ability to 'till the soil.' This included dressing the garden. He was a farmer. It appears from what little we can glimpse in genesis that the majority of the human race was still only "hunters." These were the people cain interacted with outside and feared. They were also the people from which Cain took his wife from. Adam was capable of writing since he was able to write his genealogy down which Moses used to write that part of genesis with. Writing may have been something unique that God introduced to adam and his descendants but this is purely speculation in that regard.
Jesus Is the savior of mankind and since all men share that same 'one blood,' whether you are physically and literally a descendant of Adam means nothing. The jews could not get past this and it was a source of contention and great vanity. The law is spiritual and those that worship God must worship Him in spirit and truth! Circumcision of the heart makes you apart of the Israel of God and NOT circumcision of the flesh.
Hope this helps.
God bless,
Alex
-
Or, it could be that the creation story in Genesis is a parable, a story, an allegory, not literally true, but filled with immense spiritual truths.
Jesus didn't just start teaching in parables in the New Testament.
That would explain a snake walking on its hind legs talking to a woman and the woman talking back to him.
That would explain two trees. One whose fruit brought death. The other tree that brought age abiding life, and why the two dummies did not eat from that tree first.
Why the Cherubim, associated with the throne of God, guarded this tree, and a flaming sword turning every which way also guarded this tree.
Symbolism? Maybe not literally true? But full of deep spiritual truths as revealed by the Spirit of God.
Adam is the Hebrew name for mankind, humanity. Eve is the mother of all living. Symbols, not literal.
Also, remember that the Gospel was preached to Abraham---namely that in you all the nations would be blessed. All saved. No one left out. Good news indeed. Read Galatians 3:8.
Later we learn that neither Abraham or Isaac are that important. That the One Seed is Jesus, God Almighty, Who will save all the nations. Read Galatians 3:16.
And if Jesus is in us, then We are the heirs of the promise of salvation. Galatians 3:29
-
Hi Rose,
Initially when I contemplated this idea it did seem strange but everything fits very well together. All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer). It also helps explain why the Jews were so meticulous about their genealogies, keeping them pure, and recording their history. Why they also had such disdain for the gentiles, because they could literally trace their bloodline back to God through adam and the gentiles could not.
Alex, while I appreciate the rest of your post, I have an issue with this bolded bit. If you mean they "could not" because they did not (for whatever reason) keep such records...I don't have any major issue with that. If you mean they "could not" because they WERE NOT, then I do. Spend some time thinking about a genealogy--any genealogy--and how they work. They only trace back through a relatively small selection of 'family'. In the case of the genealogies in scripture, they tend to trace back only through ONE LINE. Even when they 'diverge' (as they do below with the three sons of Noah), they eventually peter out and return to the one line.
Here's the genealogy in Genesis up to Noah and his sons.
Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Gen 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
Gen 5:6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
Gen 5:7 And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:8 And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.
Gen 5:9 And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
Gen 5:10 And Enos lived after he begat Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:11 And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died.
Gen 5:12 And Cainan lived seventy years, and begat Mahalaleel:
Gen 5:13 And Cainan lived after he begat Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:14 And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died.
Gen 5:15 And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:
Gen 5:16 And Mahalaleel lived after he begat Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:17 And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died.
Gen 5:18 And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch:
Gen 5:19 And Jared lived after he begat Enoch eight hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:20 And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died.
Gen 5:21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:
Gen 5:22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years:
Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
Gen 5:25 And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech:
Gen 5:26 And Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:27 And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died.
Gen 5:28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
Gen 5:29 And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
Gen 5:30 And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:31 And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
Gen 5:32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Among those named, there is not a single Jew yet. And there are many NOT named. Are they "gentiles"? Are their descendants Gentiles? Can not the other un-named 'begatted sons and daughters" also trace their lineage back--at least to the point where they diverged? Who are the mothers, and what is THEIR lineage? We just don't know. CAIN apparently took a wife from someone outside his lineage.
The same apples to the other "updated" genealogies.
Here's what immediately follows this "genealogy".
Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
So Cain was not alone in going outside the "family" for mates.
And so far, even Abraham hasn't arrived.
Trace your own roots back 14 generations, if you can. You may can get it back to one couple. But you have to go FORWARD from there to include all your 14th cousins 12 times removed from half-sisters of your great-great-great grand-aunt's second marriage to the adopted son of the travelling salesman.
I simply don't believe in this "pure-bloodline" concept.
Bob, I wish I could help you with your perplexity. All I can tell you is--I'm not perplexed. I might be WRONG, but I'm not perplexed.
-
Or, it could be that the creation story in Genesis is a parable, a story, an allegory, not literally true, but filled with immense spiritual truths.
Jesus didn't just start teaching in parables in the New Testament.
That would explain a snake walking on its hind legs talking to a woman and the woman talking back to him.
That would explain two trees. One whose fruit brought death. The other tree that brought age abiding life, and why the two dummies did not eat from that tree first.
Why the Cherubim, associated with the throne of God, guarded this tree, and a flaming sword turning every which way also guarded this tree.
Symbolism? Maybe not literally true? But full of deep spiritual truths as revealed by the Spirit of God.
Adam is the Hebrew name for mankind, humanity. Eve is the mother of all living. Symbols, not literal.
Also, remember that the Gospel was preached to Abraham---namely that in you all the nations would be blessed. All saved. No one left out. Good news indeed. Read Galatians 3:8.
Later we learn that neither Abraham or Isaac are that important. That the One Seed is Jesus, God Almighty, Who will save all the nations. Read Galatians 3:16.
And if Jesus is in us, then We are the heirs of the promise of salvation. Galatians 3:29
Hi John,
I think the majority of us understand that the old testament, and indeed all of scripture, has spiritual application and importance to us beyond the literal. This doesn't change the fact that these things literally happened first.
A burning talking bush is somehow more believable to you than a talking serpent?
Paul says all these things HAPPENED unto THEM. Happened. His words by inspiration of God. Paul speaks of adam and eve as actual people and goes on to discern spiritual truth regarding Christ and His church.
Paul also tells us that what is first is not the spiritual (parabolic truths) but the natural (those literal stories) and THEN that which is spiritual.
Denying Adam and Eve's literal historical existence as recorded seems to me to create many scriptural problems.
I suppose we agree to disagree on this issue. That isn't to say I disagree with you about the spiritual truths and their importance. Simply that I see a natural story there first that actually happened but in such a way that with the spirit of God greater and more important spiritual insight are revealed. The spiritual truths are always more important than the literal so I don't want anyone thinking I'm denying that.
Yes eve is the mother of all living because from her would eventually come our God born of a virgin to take away the sins of the world and reconcile humanity to Himself. Isn't this also another way to interpret her as the mother of all living?
God bless,
Alex
-
Hi Rose,
Initially when I contemplated this idea it did seem strange but everything fits very well together. All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer). It also helps explain why the Jews were so meticulous about their genealogies, keeping them pure, and recording their history. Why they also had such disdain for the gentiles, because they could literally trace their bloodline back to God through adam and the gentiles could not.
Alex, while I appreciate the rest of your post, I have an issue with this bolded bit. If you mean they "could not" because they did not (for whatever reason) keep such records...I don't have any major issue with that. If you mean they "could not" because they WERE NOT, then I do. Spend some time thinking about a genealogy--any genealogy--and how they work. They only trace back through a relatively small selection of 'family'. In the case of the genealogies in scripture, they tend to trace back only through ONE LINE. Even when they 'diverge' (as they do below with the three sons of Noah), they eventually peter out and return to the one line.
Here's the genealogy in Genesis up to Noah and his sons.
Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Gen 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
Gen 5:6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
Gen 5:7 And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:8 And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.
Gen 5:9 And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
Gen 5:10 And Enos lived after he begat Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:11 And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died.
Gen 5:12 And Cainan lived seventy years, and begat Mahalaleel:
Gen 5:13 And Cainan lived after he begat Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:14 And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died.
Gen 5:15 And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:
Gen 5:16 And Mahalaleel lived after he begat Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:17 And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died.
Gen 5:18 And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch:
Gen 5:19 And Jared lived after he begat Enoch eight hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:20 And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died.
Gen 5:21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:
Gen 5:22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years:
Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
Gen 5:25 And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech:
Gen 5:26 And Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:27 And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died.
Gen 5:28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
Gen 5:29 And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
Gen 5:30 And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
Gen 5:31 And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
Gen 5:32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Among those named, there is not a single Jew yet. And there are many NOT named. Are they "gentiles"? Are their descendants Gentiles? Can not the other un-named 'begatted sons and daughters" also trace their lineage back--at least to the point where they diverged? Who are the mothers, and what is THEIR lineage? We just don't know. CAIN apparently took a wife from someone outside his lineage.
The same apples to the other "updated" genealogies.
Here's what immediately follows this "genealogy".
Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
So Cain was not alone in going outside the "family" for mates.
And so far, even Abraham hasn't arrived.
Trace your own roots back 14 generations, if you can. You may can get it back to one couple. But you have to go FORWARD from there to include all your 14th cousins 12 times removed from half-sisters of your great-great-great grand-aunt's second marriage to the adopted son of the travelling salesman.
I simply don't believe in this "pure-bloodline" concept.
Bob, I wish I could help you with your perplexity. All I can tell you is--I'm not perplexed. I might be WRONG, but I'm not perplexed.
Hi Dave,
Its as you said in the first line. I simply did not desire to flesh out the intricacies and details that my perspective would require so I took a blanket approach.
Cain is a perfect example of what you just mentioned. For whatever reason, these other people (who from scripture are referred to as gentile nations when the Jews come about) either did not keep details of their lineage if they truly were decedent's of adam or these details where lost over time.
The main point is that Adam was not the first human on this planet and there were already people outside the garden whom cain feared and eventually married into. This is most likely what occurred with Adam's children too as they increased and spread across the earth. How many decedents of Adam did marry with those outside the garden, how many people were outside the garden during adam's formation etc... are questions I don't think we will ever answer In this lifetime.
Hope I'm making sense.
God bless,
Alex
-
In Gen. 1:26-27 "created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them," this is the first creation of human beings. Not as a herd, Bob, but a single man and woman that God started with, probably many thousands of years before Adam and Eve. Possibly similar to what scientist say, where they gradually spread out across the world.
Then at the time appointed God "formed" Adam (Gen 2:7), this was the beginning of His plan of salvation for mankind, through that lineage. It is not hard for me to believe that God kept a pure line from Adam all the way to the point that the Son was born into the world.
I do believe Adam and Eve were real people, but I believe much of the story elements are symbolic... the tree of life - is Christ for obvious reasons, the talking serpent was not a snake, but the nature of the 'person' was symbolized by a snake as cunning, crafty, prudent, subtile to lure Eve into disobeying.
There is symbolism throughout Scripture, there are higher spiritual message in all of it. But it's hidden from the world, they can only see the literal story, the physical/natural comes first.
1Co 15:46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer).
I am not so sure about Adam being the first farmer, humans started farming about 12,000 years ago (10,000 BC). It seems that there were farmers long before Adam, do some research on history of agriculture if you like.
-
All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer).
I am not so sure about Adam being the first farmer, humans started farming about 12,000 years ago (10,000 BC). It seems that there were farmers long before Adam, do some research on history of agriculture if you like.
Hi Zvezda,
I don't have a problem with the dating being off. Its not off very much. I understand the dating techniques used in science, [removed], and we humans aren't without error in our study of the past. Our techniques are subject to their own limitations as well as human error. A perfect example of this is the current Egyptian chronology and the fierce debate that is currently going on to revise it. When you look this far back into the past, with nothing but fragments of it remaining, the image you get is quiet murky and unclear. Mistakes are made. What I do trust without a doubt is God and His timeline.
God bless,
Alex
-
In Gen. 1:26-27 "created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them," this is the first creation of human beings. Not as a herd, Bob, but a single man and woman that God started with, probably many thousands of years before Adam and Eve. Possibly similar to what scientist say, where they gradually spread out across the world.
Then at the time appointed God "formed" Adam (Gen 2:7), this was the beginning of His plan of salvation for mankind, through that lineage. It is not hard for me to believe that God kept a pure line from Adam all the way to the point that the Son was born into the world.
I do believe Adam and Eve were real people, but I believe much of the story elements are symbolic... the tree of life - is Christ for obvious reasons, the talking serpent was not a snake, but the nature of the 'person' was symbolized by a snake as cunning, crafty, prudent, subtile to lure Eve into disobeying.
There is symbolism throughout Scripture, there are higher spiritual message in all of it. But it's hidden from the world, they can only see the literal story, the physical/natural comes first.
1Co 15:46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
:)
-
I agree Alex that dating issues are a problem that as of now are mostly unresolved.
The Bible that we have does a lot to help in understanding how things came about. God chose Abram,(Abraham) a shepherd that was constantly moving his flocks to greener pastures.
After many years of God blessing him and increasing his family and flocks one of his sons Jacob, (Israel) took his family into Egypt.
Egypt was one of the first places that put growing crops and raising cattle together (farming) and became a mighty people. After 400 years God moved the Israelites out of Egypt to a land flowing with milk and honey. (The fertile crescent).
Another thing that comes to mind; The sons of God, those that are chosen of God, lead by his Spirit, and have faith, could still to this day be taking wives from the daughters of men.
Joel
-
All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer).
I am not so sure about Adam being the first farmer, humans started farming about 12,000 years ago (10,000 BC). It seems that there were farmers long before Adam, do some research on history of agriculture if you like.
Hi Zvezda,
I don't have a problem with the dating being off. Its not off very much. I understand the dating techniques used in science, I am a cellular biologist by study, and we humans aren't without error in our study of the past. Our techniques are subject to their own limitations as well as human error. A perfect example of this is the current Egyptian chronology and the fierce debate that is currently going on to revise it. When you look this far back into the past, with nothing but fragments of it remaining, the image you get is quiet murky and unclear. Mistakes are made. What I do trust without a doubt is God and His timeline.
God bless,
Alex
I agree Alex that dating issues are a problem that as of now are mostly unresolved.
It reminds me of those christains who are still in babylon, when I talked to them about the fossil evidence that Adam was not the first human, they said the similar reasons (dating methods are not reliable, humans aren't without error, etc) to reject all the researches and deny there were people before Adam.
There's no verse that says Adam was the first farmer, is there? Genesis 2:5 only says there was not a man to till the ground, it doesn't say Adam was the first man to till the ground. I don't think it contradicts God's words even if there were farmers long before Adam. The bible doesn't tell us a lot about what happened before Adam. All I said in my previous post was that if you like you can do some research, then you can decide if you still think Adam was the first farmer.
-
There's no verse that says Adam was the first farmer, is there? Genesis 2:5 only says there was not a man to till the ground, it doesn't say Adam was the first man to till the ground. I don't think it contradicts God's words even if there were farmers long before Adam.
Hmmm...Zvezda makes a good point. Indeed, you have to pay attention to all the words!
-
In Gen. 1:26-27 "created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them," this is the first creation of human beings. Not as a herd, Bob, but a single man and woman that God started with, probably many thousands of years before Adam and Eve. Possibly similar to what scientist say, where they gradually spread out across the world.
Then at the time appointed God "formed" Adam (Gen 2:7), this was the beginning of His plan of salvation for mankind, through that lineage.
I know we talked about having 'different ancestors' before, but still, I'm not at all clear on this question... What do you mean when you say "God formed" Adam? If he was physically (biologically) a unique creature (not a mixing and replication of existing genes via sexual reproduction), then he had no ancestry--no lineage--"Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God".
Like the King of Salem.
So two different creations of "man", and two different lineages...
Or, did you mean that "Adam" was 'formed, i.e., born/begotten/descended' from the earlier race? In which case, what did God actually DO? (A Damascus road experience?)
The former: Two separate Creations, unrelated. The latter: One Creation; shared ancestry; God intervenes.
I was thinking you subscribed to the former. (?)
-
All the scriptures harmonize perfectly when you come to realize that adam wasn't the first man on the earth, just the first man to till the earth and dress it (farmer).
I am not so sure about Adam being the first farmer, humans started farming about 12,000 years ago (10,000 BC). It seems that there were farmers long before Adam, do some research on history of agriculture if you like.
Hi Zvezda,
I don't have a problem with the dating being off. Its not off very much. I understand the dating techniques used in science, I am a cellular biologist by study, and we humans aren't without error in our study of the past. Our techniques are subject to their own limitations as well as human error. A perfect example of this is the current Egyptian chronology and the fierce debate that is currently going on to revise it. When you look this far back into the past, with nothing but fragments of it remaining, the image you get is quiet murky and unclear. Mistakes are made. What I do trust without a doubt is God and His timeline.
God bless,
Alex
I agree Alex that dating issues are a problem that as of now are mostly unresolved.
It reminds me of those christains who are still in babylon, when I talked to them about the fossil evidence that Adam was not the first human, they said the similar reasons (dating methods are not reliable, humans aren't without error, etc) to reject all the researches and deny there were people before Adam.
There's no verse that says Adam was the first farmer, is there? Genesis 2:5 only says there was not a man to till the ground, it doesn't say Adam was the first man to till the ground. I don't think it contradicts God's words even if there were farmers long before Adam. The bible doesn't tell us a lot about what happened before Adam. All I said in my previous post was that if you like you can do some research, then you can decide if you still think Adam was the first farmer.
Hi Zevda,
I'm currently on my phone. Just moved into my new apartment in virginia and I am without internet or computer so please forgive me for the spelling errors or brevity of post.
You say that adam wasn't the first farmer only that there was "no man to till the soil." Your argument does not follow the logic though. The word man is the generic word for humanity. If there is no humanity during the time adam was formed who coild "till the soil" and God creates him to do just that as well as "dress and keep" the garden then it follows by reason that Adam was that first human who could. You mean to tell methat there is in fact plebty of tilling the soil before adan was forned going on and that God just didn't notice it? Maybe he lied? So yes, by If A then B elementary logics, Adam was the first man to tilll the soil, dress and keep the garden--the first farmer. God has introduced agriculture to the planet and if you know scripture, you know how fond God is of agricultural analogies and parables.
God bless,
Alex
-
Hi Alex, Genesis 2:5 says there was not a man to till the ground, and then v15 God put Adam into the garden to dress it and to keep it. First of all, we don't know what happened outside the garden during the time between "no man to till the ground" and "God put Adam into the garden." Not that God didn't notice what's going on outside the garden during that time, just that He doesn't tell us much about it in the bible. Secondly, God put Adam into the garden to dress it and to keep it. What kind of job it is to "dress it and to keep it"? There were already food for Adam to eat, and he definitely didn't need to water the garden.
2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food.....
2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.
To me, "dress it and keep it" is not the same as "till the ground". It's after God kicked Adam out of the garden that he actually "till the ground". Adam didn't really "till the ground" inside the garden.
3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Like I said, we don't know what happened outside the garden before God made Adam, but the scientists discovered there were already humans who did farm work (again, not that God didn't notice it or He lied, I never said that, He just doesn't tell us much what happened outside the garden). Hunter-gatherers need to constantly be on the move to look for food, when they started to settle down, it indicates they had another way to get food, how else could they get food if it's not farming? They didn't become farmers overnight, there was a transition period. We trust the fossil evidence discovered by scientists to prove that Adam was not the first human, we can't just turn around and said the other evidence they discovered to prove farmers before Adam is wrong simply because the dating methods are not reliable. I understand scientists are not always right, that's why you need to read not just one but plenty of researches from different experts.
-
Still on my phone so this will be short (sorry).
I've made my peace and I think you are highly mistaken to think Adam did not till the soil, dress and keep THE GARDEN until AFTER he was kicked OUT OF the garden.
My king james margin says that the word "dress" means to tend or CULTIVATE.
I also think you err greatly to believe that from cahpter 2 until chapter three of genesis where man is banished from the garden, that in all those years (adam lived nearly a thousand) where he was naming all those animals that God brought to him, that adam did no CULTIVAT--till the soil-- of the land. You cant just brush off all that time.
Btw, just because adam didn't NEED to water the plants doesn't mean God didn't teach him to do that and more while he was there. First off its what God's Word said he did and secondly God doesn't NEED man for half the things he uses man to do but He does it anyway for OUR BENEFIT. Adam didn't water the garden, culyivate it and keep it for Gods sake or the gardens sake but FOR HIS OWN BENFIT.
[Removed] You put too much faith in men [removed]. Don't get me wrong, science isn't the devil and certainly has done many great things by God's planning but one area of weakness in science is its attempt to study the past and date those events. Estimates are as good as it gets but they are just that--estimates!
God be with you,
Alex
-
What ground did he till/cultivate/dress?
-
Good question, Dave. I just don't see the need for Adam to till the garden's ground. It's the ground outside the garden that God told him to till.
in all those years (adam lived nearly a thousand) where he was naming all those animals that God brought to him, that adam did no CULTIVAT--till the soil-- of the land.
sure, why not? Besides naming the animals, God may have something else for Adam to do if it's not farm work, we just don't know. There were a lot of stuff that God could teach Adam besides farming. Even if Adam did some farm work - till the ground - in the garden, it still doesn't prove that the humans outside the garden did zero farm work. My main point is - the bible doesn't say anything about what happened outside the garden. See my previous post:
Genesis 2:5 says there was not a man to till the ground, and then v15 God put Adam into the garden to dress it and to keep it. First of all, we don't know what happened outside the garden during the time between "no man to till the ground" and "God put Adam into the garden." Not that God didn't notice what's going on outside the garden during that time, just that He doesn't tell us much about it in the bible.
just because adam didn't NEED to water the plants doesn't mean God didn't teach him to do that and more while he was there.
Right, maybe God taught Adam to do it, but that also doesn't mean Adam actually did the farm work. I think there were a lot of other things that God taught Adam but he didn't actually have hand on experience. Your professors teach you how to treat a disease, it doesn't mean you actually are treating the disease.
If you say the scientists discoveries are just estimates, then we can just say we can't be sure if Adam was the first farmer or not. We probably can't even trust the fossil evidence that Adam was not the first human or dinosaurs did exist millions of years ago too, right?
-
Zevda, it does prove that because it says there was 'NO MAN ( that means no one of the human race) to TILL the soil.' The word man means 'mankind.' If there was no mankind to till the soil, why is that? I believe its because mankind was still hunting and had not yet learned to cultivate, dress, and keep a garden.
When it comes to science, I said 'the study of THE PAST and DATE(ing) those events' was an area of weakness because we estimate things or approximate them. I did not refer to all scientific discoveries as estimates.
In Christ,
Alex
P.S. I removed my own personal acquaintences with my fields of study and experiences as it comes off a bit proud and boastful. This was not my intent and I am sorry for that. All wordly wisdom is foolishness in the eyes of God. Its all vanity. Dung compared to Christ.
-
Zevda, it does prove that because it says there was 'NO MAN ( that means no one of the human race) to TILL the soil.' The word man means 'mankind.' If there was no mankind to till the soil, why is that? I believe its because mankind was still hunting and had not yet learned to cultivate, dress, and keep a garden.
Alex, I was talking about the period of time between "no man to till the ground" and "God put Adam into the garden." We don't know how long it was, maybe those humans were hunters for a few thousands of years, then there was a transition period from hunters to farmers at a later time before Adam. Or maybe they were hunters the whole period of time. We just don't know for sure. The bible doesn't tell us about it, period.
When it comes to science, I said 'the study of THE PAST and DATE(ing) those events' was an area of weakness because we estimate things or approximate them. I did not refer to all scientific discoveries as estimates.
The 2 fossil examples I gave do involve the study of the past and dating the events.
P.S. I removed my own personal acquaintences with my fields of study and experiences as it comes off a bit proud and boastful. This was not my intent and I am sorry for that. All wordly wisdom is foolishness in the eyes of God. Its all vanity. Dung compared to Christ.
Okay, I was actually scratching my head why you had to emphasize your background - twice. The four years of education doesn't make any of us an expert of the field. I am sure no one (at least not most of us) here to put the worldly wisdom before God's words. We are just trying to see how the science fits in the bible, that's all. It may or may not fit it, when the bible is silent about something, we just can't be too sure what we think the bible implies.
-
In Gen. 1:26-27 "created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them," this is the first creation of human beings. Not as a herd, Bob, but a single man and woman that God started with, probably many thousands of years before Adam and Eve. Possibly similar to what scientist say, where they gradually spread out across the world.
Then at the time appointed God "formed" Adam (Gen 2:7), this was the beginning of His plan of salvation for mankind, through that lineage.
I know we talked about having 'different ancestors' before, but still, I'm not at all clear on this question... What do you mean when you say "God formed" Adam? If he was physically (biologically) a unique creature (not a mixing and replication of existing genes via sexual reproduction), then he had no ancestry--no lineage--"Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God".
Like the King of Salem.
So two different creations of "man", and two different lineages...
Or, did you mean that "Adam" was 'formed, i.e., born/begotten/descended' from the earlier race? In which case, what did God actually DO? (A Damascus road experience?)
The former: Two separate Creations, unrelated. The latter: One Creation; shared ancestry; God intervenes.
I was thinking you subscribed to the former. (?)
Hi Michael, "Formed" is the word used in Scripture and I believe it meant that God literally "formed" a new creature with Adam, but of the same type as the rest of humanity already there, "one blood" (Acts 17:26). So yes I do see it as the formed one you said, "So two different creations of "man", and two different lineages." But Adam was not like the king of Salem in that he DID have beginning of days and an end to his life.
Alex, already posted where Ray had made comments in an email on this subject, but here it is again.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,12719.msg111472.html#msg111472 ---------
RAY'S COMMENT: Chapter two does not contradict chapter one. The order in chapter one is plants, animals, and then humanity. Is this not the order found in the geologic table? Chapter two does not recount the creation of humanity, but rather the creation of Adam and Eve. In Genesis 1:26 God "made" [Heb: 'asah'] male and female. In Gen. 2:6 God "formed" [Heb: 'yatsar'] Adam--two difference Hebrew words: two different formations. Notice that it doesn't say in chapter 2 verse 3 that there was no man on earth at this time, but rather that there was "no man to till the ground." There were men, but they were hunters/gatherers, not farmers. God is now going to make a more advance human to cultivate and farm the land.
The phrase "dress it and keep it" in verse 15, is "tend and cultivate." God is teaching Adam to be a farmer. When in doubt, read a proper translation. God did not create the animals AFTER He created Adam. Notice a proper translation from the Concordant Literal Old Testament: "And furthermore, Ieu Alueim ['the Lord God'] HAVING FORMED [yes, having ALREADY formed, millions of years in the past] all field life and every flyer of the heavens." God is bringing to Adam the Animal species which He had already created millions of years in the past, to have Adam give names to them. This obviously took years. Some, such as the dinosaurs (the reptilian 'tannyin, tannyim,' of Gen. 1:21 had already been extinct for many millions of years. These were decidedly not, "great whales," as the King James erroneously translates it).
It was from this first group of humanity that Cain apparently got his wife, cities were built, etc.
Chapter two does not cover the creation of plant life. That began hundreds of millions of years earlier. What God is doing in Chapter two is He is planting a garden for the man to cultivate, farm, and harvest. The word "planted" in Gen. 2:8 is from the Hebrew meaning "to sprout." God "sprouted" newly planted trees, etc. They were mere buds, which would require years to produce fruit to eat. What was Adam expected to eat until these trees matured?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Zvezda, I know that you said we don't know when the statement, "there was no man to till the ground" was speaking of, but if not before Adam then when, before mankind altogether or some other arbitrary time back in history? Why would God make that comment there, doesn't make sense to me. But that statement was made just prior to God speaking of His creating Adam, and then God goes on to say He "put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it." How could this be speaking of anything else? God said there was no man to till and then right there gave the solution for that, He created Adam to tend and keep the garden.
If you would rather hold to what scientist teach on this, than that is your prerogative. But the Scripture does speak pretty clearly on this and to me Scripture comes before science every time.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
What comment was made? "There was no man to till the ground". What ground? Didn't Eden have boundaries?
"Adam" doesn't simply mean humanity. Individual 'men' were also 'adam' in the Hebrew.
In the end, it doesn't matter much to me whether Adam was the first farmer. The first farmer was certainly "adam".
I think we have to have a measure of humility in these matters...it certainly seems to me that God required it of people who lived a lot closer in both time and proximity to these things. "Where were you when I...?"
-
I know that you said we don't know when the statement, "there was no man to till the ground" was speaking of, but if not before Adam then when, before mankind altogether or some other arbitrary time back in history?
Hi Kat, no, I know it's before Adam. It was when there were no plants and no grass and no rain, of course it was before Adam. When God put Adam in the garden there were already plants and food on the trees.
2: 5 In the day when the Lord God made earth and heaven there were no plants of the field on the earth, and no grass had come up: for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to do work on the land.
I think it's something like this:
(A) no man to till the ground --> (B) there were hunters outside the garden --> (C) a transition from hunters to farmers outside the garden (??) ---> (D) God put Adam into the garden.
What I don't know is how long it was the period of time between "no man to till the ground" and "God put Adam into the garden" (A and D) and what was happening during this time outside the garden. The time when there were no plants no grass no rain (2:5) must be very long before Adam, it didn't last until God put Adam in the garden (2:7) since by the time Adam was in the garden there were plants.
God said there was no man to till and then right there gave the solution for that, He created Adam to tend and keep the garden.
Right, but the verse only mentions it's inside the garden, it doesn't say what was happening outside the garden.
If the Scripture does speak pretty clearly to you, that's fine. It doesn't clear to me. When we were in babylon, we were told the science was wrong about Adam not being the first human. Now we found out that science is right all along. I am not saying the science is always right. It's just something I am not sure (yet). I know Ray spoke about this, I wish we had the chance to ask him how about all those reseaches that show farmers before Adam. I know this forum is for discussing Ray's work, since we can't verify it with Ray now, we can leave it at that if you like.
One more thing - Ray did say "It was from this first group of humanity that Cain apparently got his wife, cities were built, etc." So the first group of humanity (the hunters as you call them) did build cities? If they could build cities, how hard was it for them to grow food? Besides, the fact that they built the cities indicates that they had settled down, it also indicates they had another way to find food besides hunting.
-
Since God gave me the understanding that the creation account is a parable and not literally true, but contains profound spiritual truths, I do not have a problem with others who understand things differently.
I do not have to do the mental gymnastics to try to fit a parable to a literal understanding or a modern scientific understanding.
Whether you are an atheistic evolutionist or a fundamentalist Christian who believes every word is literally true, you will believe as you are led to believe.
Jesus is the true Savior. Only He can give true understanding. Until He frees you, you will be a prisoner of your own thoughts and beliefs.
HINT: Follow the two witnesses and Jesus will give you understanding if you seek it with all your heart.
-
Zvezda, in Genesis 2 it starts out by saying...
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
v. 2 And on the seventh day God finished His work that He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all his work that He had done.
v. 3 So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all His work that He had done in creation.
v. 4 These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
It says there quite specifically that the works of the beginning of creation "were finished," and that would certainly have included plants...
Gen 1:11 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so.
When you come down to verse 5 in Genesis 2, I see that is where you are making your assumptions that there are no plants on the earth at that time.
Gen 2:5 before any plant of the field was in the earth H776 and before any herb of the field had grown. For the LORD God had not caused it to rain on the earth H776, and there was no man to till the ground;
Consider that the word "earth" in this verse is the same word uses in the account for the flood that came on the "earth" and we know a better word there was 'land,' as the flood only covered a portion of land that God had predetermined for it to.
So in Genesis 2 where it had just stated that the work of creation was finished, then in verse 5 I believe it is probable that the word did not mean the whole earth and should have been 'land' as the ESV has it.
Gen 2:5 When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up—for the LORD God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground,
It seems that God is saying that this portion of "land" in verse 5 was a desolate place with no plants growing there and how did He remedy that...
Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east...
This was a special place/garden God was preparing for Adam, there on a certain land that He was going to bring into being.
v. 8 ...and there He put the man whom He had formed.
v. 9 And out of the ground the LORD God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food...
This was a very special place, not just because of all the herbs and fruits that were put there, though I can see they were a necessity, because it would taken time for Adam (a new creature) to learn how to tend and grow food... but the main thing that made that place so special was the Tree of Life.
v. 9 ...The tree of life was in the midst of the garden...
God was there with Adam teaching him all that He wanted this man to bring into the world and I don't think it was just farming, but that was certainly part of it. Adam taught Cain to be a farmer, but the curse took that away (Gen 4:11-12), and it was Cain that went out and built the city, so through Adam great changes were coming to the world. Adam taught his son Cain, and he could teach the other people how to farm and obviously how to build, you can see how quickly that knowledge, starting with Adam, was being spread to the world.
Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he (Cain) built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
It seems that God is saying that this portion of "land" in verse 5 was a desolate place with no plants growing there and how did He remedy that...
Kat, sorry I am not clear what you are trying to say. Does that mean verse 5 is saying before any plant of the field was in this desolate place and before any herb of the field had grown in this desolate place. For the LORD God had not caused it to rain on this desolate place, and there was no man to till the ground in this desolate place? And are you saying that this desolate place is the garden of Eden? If it's saying there was no man to till the ground in this desolate place, it sounds like it's implying there were men to till the ground in some other places?
I know the garden was a special place, God was teaching Adam a lot of things, through Adam great changes were coming to the world. Cain went out and built the city and taught other people how to farm and build. I agree with that. We can find out a lot of stuff from the verses regarding Adam and Cain. But still, it doesn't tell us anything about the hunters. The thing remains unknown is that if the hunters outside the garden really did zero farm work and built nothing? Sure, Cain was teaching them how to farm and build, I just think it's also possible that they already had the basic skills to do simple farming and building before Cain came to them. Now Cain was teaching them some more advance methods to do and improve everything. I think it's a possibility that we can't find out for sure from the verses. And I don't think this possibility contradicts God's words.
-
But still, it doesn't tell us anything about the hunters. The thing remains unknown is that if the hunters outside the garden really did zero farm work and built nothing? Sure, Cain was teaching them how to farm and build, I just think it's also possible that they already had the basic skills to do simple farming and building before Cain came to them. Now Cain was teaching them some more advance methods to do and improve everything. I think it's a possibility that we can't find out for sure from the verses. And I don't think this possibility contradicts God's words.
Hi zvezda, you're right, these verses do not gives us all the the information on these things, it is one of "the mystery hidden for ages," that there were other people before Adam and Eve. That is a major thing to understand there were others, so I try not to get hung up on certain points that are not perfectly clear.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
Hi Kate. Yeah, it's such a great mystery. Like Dave said, it doesn't matter much if Adam was the first farmer or not. I think what matters is that we shouldn't say the bible says this and says that while it's not perfectly clear. The more I study, I more I think we shouldn't conclude that bible shows us Adam was the first farmer. The verse 5 is still a mystery to me. If verse 5 is saying there were no plants no grass no rain no men to till the ground of the whole earth, then it sounds like it's before the very first rain on earth. So when was the first rain on earth? The first rain probably was millions of years ago. Were there any humans at all before the first rain? But if verse 5 is referring to a desolate place like you suggested, then it implies that there were plants and grass and rain and men to till the ground in some other places. Either way, it's not helping us to solve the mystery.
When bible doesn't give us enough information, shouldn't we look at the scientific discoveries? I just think it's not fair that you trust the scientists when they told you they used some dating methods to find out there were humans before Adam and the dinosaurs were millions of years ago, then you turn around and say you don't trust them when they used the same methods to find out there were farmers before Adam.
Anyway, it was a good discussion, thanks everyone!
-
First rain. Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
-
First rain. Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Earth:
From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land): - X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X nations, way, + wilderness, world.
-
Genesis 2:6-But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
What would the earth have looked like geographically before downpours of rain?
Whatever Adam was doing in the garden must not have been back breaking labor that caused him to sweat.
Cursed ground and "sweat of thy face" comes after judgment. Genesis 3:17-19
Genesis 7:11-In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
12-And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
How much water could have been added by the fountains of the GREAT DEEP?
Is there a difference in windows of heaven, and rain from heaven?
What parts of the earth see rainbows?
Genesis 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
What was Noah saying to the ungodly during his time of preaching? Had the people ever seen rain?
If rain was common during the time of Noah, were there not rainbows also? I don't think so.
Genesis 9:13-I do now set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.
2 Peter 2:5-And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.
Joel
-
Hi Joel,
Thanks for the added comments.
There are a multitude of options for what the earth, the planet, looked like before recorded history came along about 4500 years ago. The mountain heights, the frozen poles, the vegetation, the numbers of humans living on this planet etc.
The fact is that we, commoners as well as the great minds of science, just don't know how the earth appeared or how the climate functioned during the past millennia.
The billions of papers written on the subject are plain speculation based upon the opinions of previous science writers of plain speculation.
To my mind, sincere speculation is O. K., but it (speculation) should not contradict inspired scripture no matter how many thousands or millions of scientist concur with it.
Isn't the spiritual lesson that mankind, doing what seemed right to themselves, had become so evil that God had to start over with eight not so perfect individuals?
And don't we, who believe God, realize that God knew from the beginning that a "do over" would be needed? I think so...
And there is another "do over" coming soon.
Ole "indianabob"
-
And don't we, who believe God, realize that God knew from the beginning that a "do over" would be needed? I think so...
Hi Bob,
I’m not sure how to interpret your statement above, for one to say God needs to do a do over in my opinion is saying God made a mistake and needs to correct the mistake He made in my opinion.
Its to my understanding we humans are made in vanity in order to learn virtue through righteousness otherwise all this evil and wickedness in our lives would be in vain.
I’ll be first to admit there are so many things I don’t understand concerning spiritual things, I was just reading on this forum that some have the view that Adam and Eve are symbolic but I say if that is so then maybe I’m symbolic too but I believe Adam and Eve were real people just like me.
I wonder can a person be so spiritual or heavenly minded that they become no earthly good ? :)
-
First rain. Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Earth:
From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land): - X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X nations, way, + wilderness, world.
I don't quite understand. I posted the first time rain in mentioned, what has From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land): - X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X nations, way, + wilderness, world.
to do with anything?
-
Hi Rick,
Thank you for the sincere critique.
Sorry to be obtuse in my comments. Short statements such as mine are prone to be misunderstood. I knew what I was thinking, but did not make my thoughts clear.
1. I agree that God does not make mistakes.
2. The "do over" I was referring to was meant to acknowledge that God was doing his will in more than one phase. That God knew exactly what Adam and Eve would do and what all of their children would do. AND that God was not in the least surprised. God knew that he would have to destroy the whole population AND all the gross things that they had built. Especially considering that they would most probably retain their memories of what life had been like during their first life and it would not be helpful for them to believe that God approved of the way they had lived then.
So then from the human perspective, the fact of the need to begin again with Noah to spread the human population over the whole earth, could seem to be a "do over".
Of course God had everything under His control and knew from the beginning that this burying of the first population of humans was to reserve them to a later time when God's son would be ruling in righteousness and justice.
In like manner, the population that came from Noah and spread over the earth once again will need to be put to sleep and then brought back when conditions are right for the teaching of righteousness. So that then is the second or subsequent "do over" (phase 2)
All planned from the beginning although not revealed by God to the general population and in fact not revealed unto the prophets or even the angels of God until God was ready to reveal His mysteries to a select group of called out persons that God would then use for His own great purpose of teaching righteousness under the reign of His son Jesus.
I hope that will explain a little better and thank you for bringing my poor explanation to my attention.
Sincerely, indianabob
And don't we, who believe God, realize that God knew from the beginning that a "do over" would be needed? I think so...
Hi Bob,
I’m not sure how to interpret your statement above, for one to say God needs to do a do over in my opinion is saying God made a mistake and needs to correct the mistake He made in my opinion.
Its to my understanding we humans are made in vanity in order to learn virtue through righteousness otherwise all this evil and wickedness in our lives would be in vain.
I’ll be first to admit there are so many things I don’t understand concerning spiritual things, I was just reading on this forum that some have the view that Adam and Eve are symbolic but I say if that is so then maybe I’m symbolic too but I believe Adam and Eve were real people just like me.
I wonder can a person be so spiritual or heavenly minded that they become no earthly good ? :)
-
I have zero desire to contradict inspired scripture. I don't mind a whit contradicting theologians and translators. In fact, I think it's not only GOOD, but necessary.
-
I wonder can a person be so spiritual or heavenly minded that they become no earthly good ? :)
I'd have to say "NO" to this, but then I'd just open up a can of worms about what it means to be "spiritually minded".
Guys and girls, we are not going to convince each other on these matters. I know this is true, because I can't count the number of times 'we' have tried since October of 2008. Ray made himself clear on these (or as clear as was possible in a 2 day conference and a little subsequent study). Yet MUCH of what I've read on the forum on these topics since then (and I read pretty much EVERYTHING, since it's kinda my job) has either been a rejection of that study or (often unfounded) speculation that goes beyond what Ray had to say. I'm not 'not guilty' of this myself.
In order for any of you to 'follow' my train of thought (and for me to follow any of yours) would require a background that very closely resembles my own (or for me to have one that very closely resembles yours). I don't believe as I did when I was a boy and a young man in babylon. It's been one long string of repentance and struggle--sometimes with joy, sometimes with pain, sometimes with awe and trembling. And in most ways, I wouldn't wish my 'background' on my worst enemy, much less any of you.
This 'very close' similarity of background hasn't happened, by the will of God. Yet I have to 'love one another' and grow in the fruit of His Spirit--love, joy, faith, peace, patience, long-suffering) my own self, even though everybody else is "wrong" and surely needs to do that more than I do.
Of course NOW, all my thoughts are right. After all, His thoughts are my thoughts and His ways are my ways. (I'm pretty sure that's in the bible). How could it be any other way? Think about it.
-
Time to shut her down dave. We know by ray and through God's word that the flood was not global. We know too that adam and eve were not the first people on this planet but a very special people to God. We know that all these things no longer pertain after the flesh but after the spirirt. Those who worshop God must worship Him in spirirt and truth. Flee from evil, repent and circumcise your hearts! In God's time we will attain the unity of the faith that we strive for but some area's of scripture are purposely left without certain conclusion. Perhaps to keep us humble and remind us all of who gives understanding and who shuts up the book.
God bless brothers and sisters and may God keep you until that day.
Alex
-
Dear "young" friend Alex,
I appreciate and agree with your last statement with the obvious exception of your leading sentence.
"We know by ray and through God's word that the flood was not global."
Who is this WE that you speak of? ::) :o ;D
I have examined the evidence available to me and totally disagree with your conclusion.
I do not however with to make an issue of my considered "elderly" understanding.
I only hope to live long enough to witness your future enlightenment.
Kindly offered, your friend in the faith, ole Indiana Bob
-
Dear "young" friend Alex,
I appreciate and agree with your last statement with the obvious exception of your leading sentence.
"We know by ray and through God's word that the flood was not global."
Who is this WE that you speak of? ::) :o ;D
I have examined the evidence available to me and totally disagree with your conclusion.
I do not however with to make an issue of my considered "elderly" understanding.
I only hope to live long enough to witness your future enlightenment.
Kindly offered, your friend in the faith, ole Indiana Bob
Dearest elder bob!
I adore and respect your words of wisdom! ;)
I must inform you though, perhaps to your greatest disaapointment, that I may remain no more enlightened than a doornail the rest of my days!
Your little brother in tragedy,
Much love,
Alex!
;) ;D :D
-
Before you 'shut her down', I thought I heard a video once with Ray talking about Noah. I searched under Ray's Audio and nothing came up. If it exists, maybe you all could post that link?
I spent the weekend with my granddaughter for her 3rd birthday. She's the sweetest thing. When receiving one of her gifts she said, "Oh, it's perfectly lovely!" I don't say it enough, but thank you all for the perfectly lovely gifts you give to me. :)
-
Before you 'shut her down', I thought I heard a video once with Ray talking about Noah. I searched under Ray's Audio and nothing came up. If it exists, maybe you all could post that link?
I spent the weekend with my granddaughter for her 3rd birthday. She's the sweetest thing. When receiving one of her gifts she said, "Oh, it's perfectly lovely!" I don't say it enough, but thank you all for the perfectly lovely gifts you give to me. :)
Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
Proverbs 11:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.
Thank YOU for the thread rose! Glad you had a good weekend with your grand daughter! My daughter is having a hard time in a new place but I think she's starting to adjust. She misses "nanna" and "pappa." I took God with me so I don't feel so far away from home but for her I understand how it can be hard.
God bless,
Alex
-
Is this what you are looking for: https://youtu.be/QMbxaFCJ59c (https://youtu.be/QMbxaFCJ59c) ?
-
alex, you crack me up little brother! i don't happen to believe though that you will be no more enlightened than a doornail the rest of your days. God willing, you will have many days ahead of you that will bring enlightenment by His Spirit within you. you still be so young yet! 8)
just sayin.
claudia
-
alex, you crack me up little brother! i don't happen to believe though that you will be no more enlightened than a doornail the rest of your days. God willing, you will have many days ahead of you that will bring enlightenment by His Spirit within you. you still be so young yet! 8)
just sayin.
claudia
Well I love you too sister! ;)
To have many more days would truly be nice only because there is so much work to do in me still! My heart every now and then likes to beat to some strange rhythm, strange enough to spook me, that it makes me think my days could be few! I try and look at it as God reminding me of just how truly in control He is over that breath of life He's given me.
Thanks for saying :)
Alex
-
Is this what you are looking for: https://youtu.be/QMbxaFCJ59c (https://youtu.be/QMbxaFCJ59c) ?
I think that's it :) This is what you just put on You Tube !
-
Hi Alex,
I'm not a doctor and not very educated so take this for what it's worth. The heart issue could be something as simple as low magnesium levels. That will cause what you described. It would be very easy to add food high in magnesium and see what happens. Also, sugar and processed food are certainly best limited since they can block nutrients absorbing properly.
Doug