07 Jan 10
1 edit
"Adam & Eve" = believe (Cocney rhyming slang)
The few Christians I know tell me that they do not take the bible literally whoever i note that a lot of posters on RHP do. How do you cope with this:
In Genesis 1:27 God creates man (male and female) and in Genesis 1:28 tels them to "Be fruitful, and multiply"
Two questions
1.Was it God's intention for Adam & Eve to have children prior to Eve eating the apple?
2.How does the woman from Adam's rib fit in with this?
It seems obvious that Geneseis is a combination of at least two creation accounts (which is fine) but how can you take it literally if they contradict each other?
07 Jan 10
2 edits
Originally posted by wolfgang591. yes it was Gods purpose for Adam and Eve to procreate and have children, in fact, it was God who brought Eve to Adam, even as a father brings his daughter and 'gives her away', to the bridegroom at a formal wedding service.
"Adam & Eve" = believe (Cocney rhyming slang)
The few Christians I know tell me that they do not take the bible literally whoever i note that a lot of posters on RHP do. How do you cope with this:
In Genesis 1:27 God creates man (male [b]and female) and in Genesis 1:28 tels them to "Be fruitful, and multiply"
Two questions
1.Was it God's int accounts (which is fine) but how can you take it literally if they contradict each other?[/b]
2. In the creation of woman, God did not make her separate and distinct from man by forming her from the dust of the ground, as he had done in the creation of Adam. He took a rib from Adam’s side, and from it He built for Adam a perfect counterpart, the woman Eve. (Ge 2:21, 22) Adam, nevertheless, remained a perfect man, now united as ‘bone of bone and flesh of flesh’ with his wife. (Ge 2:23; De 32:4) Moreover, this did not disturb the reproductive cells of Adam so as to affect his children, boys or girls, in their rib structure. The human male and female both have 24 ribs.
It is of interest to note that a rib that has been removed will grow again, replacing itself, as long as the periosteum (the membrane of connective tissue that covers the bone) is allowed to remain. Whether Jehovah God followed this procedure or not the record does not state; however, as man’s Creator, God was certainly aware of this unusual quality of the rib bones.
3 Genesis account is a single account, the second so called creation account simply provides additional details, there is NO reason to believe that it is a separate account.
4. it was a fruit, there is no reason why it should be construed that it was an apple!
your questions are excellent wolfgang and a welcome respite to the usual infighting of the forum! 🙂
07 Jan 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobie...according to the myth, perhaps...
1. yes it was Gods purpose for Adam and Eve to procreate and have children, in fact, it was God who brought Eve to Adam, even as a father brings his daughter and 'gives her away', to the bridegroom at a formal wedding service.
2. In the creation of woman, God did not make her separate and distinct from man by forming her from the dust of the groun ...[text shortened]... uestions are excellent wolfgang and a welcome respite to the usual infighting of the forum! 🙂
07 Jan 10
hmm i wonder if eve had any say in her being married to adam. was she asked if she liked him? or was she just handed over like an object? would she maybe have preferred solitude rather than be with adam (who was a wimp and a moron)? she didn't have much choice, that's true, but god could have made another man. and when they fought, did she threatened adam she will move to her mother's?
07 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut Genesis 1:27 says
1. yes it was Gods purpose for Adam and Eve to procreate and have children, in fact, it was God who brought Eve to Adam, even as a father brings his daughter and 'gives her away', to the bridegroom at a formal wedding service.
2. In the creation of woman, God did not make her separate and distinct from man by forming her from the dust of the groun ...[text shortened]... uestions are excellent wolfgang and a welcome respite to the usual infighting of the forum! 🙂
so God created man,
in his own image,
in the image of God
created he him;
male and female
created he them
(all this on the sixth day)
surely this implies that males and females were created at the same time and that the later story of eve coming from Adam's rib is a different account.
In Genesis 2:7 God creates man (after he rested on the seventh day) and in Genesis 2:22 (an indertiminate day but after the seventh day) God creates Eve.
TWO STORIES
07 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59===================================
"Adam & Eve" = believe (Cocney rhyming slang)
The few Christians I know tell me that they do not take the bible literally whoever i note that a lot of posters on RHP do. How do you cope with this:
In Genesis 1:27 God creates man (male [b]and female) and in Genesis 1:28 tels them to "Be fruitful, and multiply"
Two questions
1.Was it God's int accounts (which is fine) but how can you take it literally if they contradict each other?[/b]
Two questions
1.Was it God's intention for Adam & Eve to have children prior to Eve eating the apple?
=====================================
By "apple" I will assume you mean the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In understanding the Bible it is good to first be accurate about what it actually says.
Before the fall of man God had plans for man. So yes it was God's plan for Adam and Eve to multiply and fill the earth. The eternal purpose for man is not simply to be saved from sin and hell.
Apart from man's fall God had a purpose for man's creation. Human beings have a purpose for their being created which is apart from their fall into sin.
======================================
2.How does the woman from Adam's rib fit in with this?
===============================
Apart from the need for God to redeem the fallen man and save him, God has an eternal purpose for man's creation. The story of Eve being built out of a part of Adam's body, (the rib) is a little window into the eternal purpose of God.
From out of Himself He would build a counterpart, a mate to match Him and share in a kind of divine and eternal romance. I do not mean sexually. I do mean that God chose marriage and the male female paradigm to express His eternal plan to us in ways we can appreciate.
In other words - human marriage is a shadow of a more profound universal reality. That reality is that God, from within His own life and nature, purposed to build a corporate counterpart.
Out of one came two. Then God brought the two together to be one. This is a little glimpse into the eternal purpose of God.
Out of one God made two. Then He brought the two together to be one. God became a man in Jesus Christ so that He might produce sons of God to collectively be the Wife and Bride this incarnated God.
So in the end of the Bible the holy city New Jerusalem comes down out of God to become the Wife of the Lamb, the incarnated Redeemer.
In a sense the only male is God. Collectively, all of mankind was brought into existence to be the "female" couterpart to the one universal Male - God.
======================================
It seems obvious that Geneseis is a combination of at least two creation accounts (which is fine) but how can you take it literally if they contradict each other?
======================================
Two accounts with different focuses. Two accounts from different angles.
Originally posted by wolfgang59no because the account from which you wish to make the claim that it is a secondary account simply has added details, nor could Adam have been created at the same time, for it states, quite clearly, that he continued for an unspecified amount of time by himself, before Eve was created, or have you not read,
But Genesis 1:27 says
[b]so God created man,
in his own image,
in the image of God
created he him;
male and female
created he them
(all this on the sixth day)
surely this implies that males and females were created at the same time and that the later story of eve coming from Adam's rib is a different account.
In Genes ...[text shortened]... n Genesis 2:22 (an indertiminate day but after the seventh day) God creates Eve.
TWO STORIES[/b]
(Genesis 2:18-20) . . .God went on to say: “It is not good for the man to continue by himself. I am going to make a helper for him, as a complement of him.” Now Jehovah God was forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call it, each living soul, that was its name. So the man was calling the names of all the domestic animals and of the flying creatures of the heavens and of every wild beast of the field, but for man there was found no helper as a complement of him.
when did this event occur, that is correct, during the so called third creative day, when the animals were STILL being formed.
07 Jan 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie why do you completely ignore Genesis chapter 1?
no because the account from which you wish to make the claim that it is a secondary account simply has added details, nor could Adam have been created at the same time, for it states, quite clearly, that he continued for an unspecified amount of time by himself, before Eve was created, or have you not read,
(Genesis 2:18-20) . . .God went on to s ...[text shortened]... t is correct, during the so called third creative day, when the animals were STILL being formed.
Verses 26-31 inclusive clearly tell a story of the creation of man and woman (on the 6th day)
The Eve from rib story happens after the 7th day.
Whats going on???
If they are the same story it is SO BADLY WRITTEN. Why would God want to confuse us?
Also Genesis 2:27 says God created man (not a man) mae and femae ... its quite clear. Why do you not believe this?
PS when do you think God created Adam?
07 Jan 10
2 edits
Originally posted by wolfgang59i do not ignore it my friend, i embrace it! the contents of Genesis chapter two with regard to the creation of Eve merely provide details, there is no evidence to suggest otherwise, they are not, as you and many others have suggested, in conflict with another account of creation in chapter 1. It simply refers to a point in the third “day,” after dry land appeared but before land plants were created, adding details that were pertinent to the arrival of humans, Adam the living soul, his garden home, Eden, and the woman Eve, his wife. The account of Eve does not happen after the seventh day, i have shown you how they animals were still being formed, how this can happen after the seventh day,I do not know, please consider the content of the verse before making these assertions. Who is confused, certainly not I.
Robbie why do you completely ignore Genesis chapter 1?
Verses 26-31 inclusive clearly tell a story of the creation of man and woman (on the 6th day)
The Eve from rib story happens after the 7th day.
Whats going on???
If they are the same story it is SO BADLY WRITTEN. Why would God want to confuse us?
Also Genesis 2:27 says God created man ( ...[text shortened]... emae ... its quite clear. Why do you not believe this?
PS when do you think God created Adam?
Adam was created to reflect Gods qualities, that is why it is stated, he was made in 'Gods image'.
07 Jan 10
Originally posted by wolfgang59Those who says that the bible is error free haven't read it.
The animals - when were they created?
Chapter 1 says before Man.
Chapter 2 says after Man.
If they have, then they haven't understood it.
If they've understood it, then they must be fundamentalists.
08 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasAnyone who condemns something without having made an evaluation of it himself needs his bum felt, especially if he simply takes it upon trust from dubious sources, he is a gullible man, putting faith in every word!
Those who says that the bible is error free haven't read it.
If they have, then they haven't understood it.
If they've understood it, then they must be fundamentalists.
The science of mathematical probability offers striking proof that the Genesis creation account must have come from a source with knowledge of the events. The account lists 10 major stages in this order: (1) a beginning; (2) a primitive earth in darkness and enshrouded in heavy gases and water; (3) light; (4) an expanse or atmosphere; (5) large areas of dry land; (6) land plants; (7) sun, moon and stars discernible in the expanse, and seasons beginning; (8) sea monsters and flying creatures; (9) wild and tame beasts, mammals; (10) man. Science agrees that these stages occurred in this general order. What are the chances that the writer of Genesis just guessed this order? The same as if you picked at random the numbers 1 to 10 from a box, and drew them in consecutive order. The chances of doing this on your first try are 1 in 3,628,800! So, to say the writer just happened to list the foregoing events in the right order without getting the facts from somewhere is not realistic, nor scientific!!!
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by wolfgang59my dear Wolfgang you are clutching at non existent straws here, for as has already been pointed out, when Adam was created and during the creation of Eve, the animals themselves were still being formed, as in a continual process, how you can construe that this is before or after, i do not know. Chapter one also says nothing of the sort.
The animals - when were they created?
Chapter 1 says before Man.
Chapter 2 says after Man.
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou try to explain why animals are created before man as well as after. The bible says very clearly in one place that man comes first, and another place that animals came first. Very clearly. But you try to show that this error is errorfree. So in vain.
my dear Wolfgang you are clutching at non existent straws here, for as has already been pointed out, when Adam was created and during the creation of Eve, the animals themselves were still being formed, as in a continual process, how you can construe that this is before or after, i do not know. Chapter one also says nothing of the sort.
Why not accept that they are two different myths. Both cannot be the ultimate truths. You cannot have it both ways.
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by FabianFnaswhy do i not accept it, because its pants, that is why! i have clearly shown, with reference that the animals were still being formed during the creation of eve, why you noobs do not understand this, i do not know?
You try to explain why animals are created before man as well as after. The bible says very clearly in one place that man comes first, and another place that animals came first. Very clearly. But you try to show that this error is errorfree. So in vain.
Why not accept that they are two different myths. Both cannot be the ultimate truths. You cannot have it both ways.