Yes, I agree.
When this happens, then most of the time, Occam’s Razor will usually apply.
The basic teachings / tenets of God’s Word, when He reveals them (no one else can, Luke 10:21), really are simple & easy to understand.
The Garden
- Thread starter Truthnightmare
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
When this happens, then most of the time, Occam’s Razor will usually apply.
The basic teachings / tenets of God’s Word, when He reveals them (no one else can, Luke 10:21), really are simple & easy to understand.
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
I've been reading this thread. I will be doing some research on whether or not the Hebrew article used with the word Adam in Genesis 2 implies that God created mankind, and then afterward formed the man, Adam.
But I have a completely different take on what the tree of knowledge of good and evil is referring to. The tree of life is the same as the bread of life, the Word of God in whom is life.
Of this I have no doubt. But what God commanded, and what Satan said, is all about words of "religion" (I've used the word "religion" for want of a better word, but I'm referring to the words of believing and of faith in a word).
John 1:4 tells us that (eternal) life is in the Word|Logos. 1 Timothy 6:16 tells us that Jesus the last Adam alone has immortality and John 5:26 tells us that the Son of God alone has (eternal) life in Himself.
God breathed Adam's life into his soul. Without the breath|Spirit of God we cannot have eternal life. The words "dying you will die" imply that Adam|mankind does not have immortality in Himself but His immortality in in the Logos in whom is (eternal) life.
The words "you shall NOT surely die" imply that Adam's immortality was in himself.
The law which reflects the Holiness and righteousness of God gives us the knowledge of good and evil:
"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Let it not be said! But I did not know sin except through the law. For also I did not know lust except the law said, You shall not lust." Romans 7:7.
"Is the Law then against the promises of God? Let it not be said! For if a law had been given which could have given life, indeed righteousness would have been out of Law." Galatians 3:21
The hidden truth in the above statements IMO is that though Adam gained the knowledge of good and evil, yet the creature cannot without fail do what is good and right to the standard of God his Creator, and hence live (eternally) | gain immortality by his righteousness, in other words, Adam | mankind cannot make himself like the Most High and live forever by his own righteousness ("You will be like God, knowing both good and evil") - and this is not only because of the fall.
The fall came because Adam believed he could always do what is good and right to the standard of God, and therefore would not die, obtaining eternal life by his own righteousness.
So there was the Word: The Word of God, and there was another word, which was the lie. And still today we have the choice of whose righteousness we will place our hope of eternal life in.
The tree of life is the Word | Logos of God. The fruit of the Spirit is the fruit of the Spirit. It's not the created being's fruit.
"It is the Spirit that makes alive, the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit and are life." John 6:63.
The tree of knowledge of good and evil was Adam believing he would always do what is good and right and thereby gain eternal life by his own righteousness. And this is why God gave the law - because it makes us all guilty and proves that we cannot.
But I have a completely different take on what the tree of knowledge of good and evil is referring to. The tree of life is the same as the bread of life, the Word of God in whom is life.
Of this I have no doubt. But what God commanded, and what Satan said, is all about words of "religion" (I've used the word "religion" for want of a better word, but I'm referring to the words of believing and of faith in a word).
John 1:4 tells us that (eternal) life is in the Word|Logos. 1 Timothy 6:16 tells us that Jesus the last Adam alone has immortality and John 5:26 tells us that the Son of God alone has (eternal) life in Himself.
God breathed Adam's life into his soul. Without the breath|Spirit of God we cannot have eternal life. The words "dying you will die" imply that Adam|mankind does not have immortality in Himself but His immortality in in the Logos in whom is (eternal) life.
The words "you shall NOT surely die" imply that Adam's immortality was in himself.
The law which reflects the Holiness and righteousness of God gives us the knowledge of good and evil:
"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Let it not be said! But I did not know sin except through the law. For also I did not know lust except the law said, You shall not lust." Romans 7:7.
"Is the Law then against the promises of God? Let it not be said! For if a law had been given which could have given life, indeed righteousness would have been out of Law." Galatians 3:21
The hidden truth in the above statements IMO is that though Adam gained the knowledge of good and evil, yet the creature cannot without fail do what is good and right to the standard of God his Creator, and hence live (eternally) | gain immortality by his righteousness, in other words, Adam | mankind cannot make himself like the Most High and live forever by his own righteousness ("You will be like God, knowing both good and evil") - and this is not only because of the fall.
The fall came because Adam believed he could always do what is good and right to the standard of God, and therefore would not die, obtaining eternal life by his own righteousness.
So there was the Word: The Word of God, and there was another word, which was the lie. And still today we have the choice of whose righteousness we will place our hope of eternal life in.
The tree of life is the Word | Logos of God. The fruit of the Spirit is the fruit of the Spirit. It's not the created being's fruit.
"It is the Spirit that makes alive, the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit and are life." John 6:63.
The tree of knowledge of good and evil was Adam believing he would always do what is good and right and thereby gain eternal life by his own righteousness. And this is why God gave the law - because it makes us all guilty and proves that we cannot.
Last edited:
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
Genesis 1:26-27
And elohiym said "Let us make man [adam] in our image according to our likness .."
So elohiym created this particular man [et ha adam] .. and let them rule .. male and female He created them.
Genesis 2:7
And formed YHVH elohiym this particular man [et ha adam] from the dust of the ground.
In both cases it's talking about this particular man Adam that God made | formed.
I think you're barking up the wrong tree with what you posted above, if you'll pardon the pun.
Heya Zao!
I see a few errors in your above statements.
Because of the way that we and others have taught it, it has come to mean in the students mind that 'eth haa Aadam is like Adam's proper full name or something, like my name is Brian Powell.I know that it seems like the definitions are 'splitting hairs,' but it is much easier to understand these words and their different meanings and weights & values when viewing them in a Scripture:
Gen 1:26-27
26 And God said, Let us make manin our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created manin his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. KJV
Gen 2:7
7 And the LORD God formed manof the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and manbecame a living soul. KJV
But this is not the case. 'eth haa Aadam does not mean Mr. Adam Eden. While the man Adam from the Garden of Eden may be properly called 'eth haa Aadam, it does not mean that it is his proper name.
Literally, 'eth haa Aadam, means This same man (that particular being spoken of). So that:
In other words "in the image of God created he him" (the male), but "male and female created he them" (i.e., not in the image of 'Elohiym, but that both male and female were created at the same time).
I wonder if I am getting my point across? If I am then you will be thinking to yourself how perfect the Word of God is, for it differentiates things that we don't even know are there (i.e., that females, while indeed being created by God, and blessed (vs. 28), are simply not in His image).
And that is no big mystery, for was not Jesus a male, circumcised on the eighth day, and yet He told His Disciples that when they saw Him they had seen God; i.e., God is male when in the flesh. Don't feel bad women, for even Eve was not in God's image but was rather taken from Adam. It boggles the mind to imagine how many other hidden truths are right there in the open within the Scriptures!
The 'eth haa Aadam of Genesis 1:27 & 2:7
|
| Gen 1:27 - "So God created man...." (KJV) |
|
| Gen 2:7 - "And the LORD God formed man...." (KJV) |
| Source: INTERLINEAR TRANSLITERATED BIBLE Copyright ©1994 by Biblesoft. All rights reserved. OLD TESTAMENT: Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Copyright ©1967/77, 1983 Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart. Used by permission. |
but in Gen 2:7 the Article and the Particle are to denote that this particular man (on the eighth day) in the Garden was formed by Yehovah 'Elohiym (the Lord God) apart from the males created on the previous creation (on the sixth day).
However, there are many other points to proclaim this position as one of truth.
Peace.
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
l'll bear in mind what you say but I can't say I agree.Heya Zao!
I see a few errors in your above statements.
Because of the way that we and others have taught it, it has come to mean in the students mind that 'eth haa Aadam is like Adam's proper full name or something, like my name is Brian Powell.
But this is not the case. 'eth haa Aadam does not mean Mr. Adam Eden. While the man Adam from the Garden of Eden may be properly called 'eth haa Aadam, it does not mean that it is his proper name.
Literally, 'eth haa Aadam, means This same man (that particular being spoken of). So that:
In other words "in the image of God created he him" (the male), but "male and female created he them" (i.e., not in the image of 'Elohiym, but that both male and female were created at the same time).
I wonder if I am getting my point across? If I am then you will be thinking to yourself how perfect the Word of God is, for it differentiates things that we don't even know are there (i.e., that females, while indeed being created by God, and blessed (vs. 28), are simply not in His image).
And that is no big mystery, for was not Jesus a male, circumcised on the eighth day, and yet He told His Disciples that when they saw Him they had seen God; i.e., God is male when in the flesh. Don't feel bad women, for even Eve was not in God's image but was rather taken from Adam. It boggles the mind to imagine how many other hidden truths are right there in the open within the Scriptures!
The 'eth haa Aadam of Genesis 1:27 & 2:7
Gen 1:27 - "So God created man...." (KJV) Gen 2:7 - "And the LORD God formed man...." (KJV) Source: INTERLINEAR TRANSLITERATED BIBLE Copyright ©1994 by Biblesoft. All rights reserved. OLD TESTAMENT: Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Copyright ©1967/77, 1983 Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart. Used by permission.
In both of the above we see Adam with BOTH the Article and the Particle. The Particle and Article in Gen 1:27 is to denote that the man (the male of the species) is made in the image of 'Elohiym (God) unlike the female;
but in Gen 2:7 the Article and the Particle are to denote that this particular man (on the eighth day) in the Garden was formed by Yehovah 'Elohiym (the Lord God) apart from the males created on the previous creation (on the sixth day).
However, there are many other points to proclaim this position as one of truth.
Peace.
Regarding male and female I think since woman is taken out of man, and man is created in the image of God, then woman is created in the image of God. Bone of our bones and flesh of our flesh. I believe it's a picture of Christ and His elect, His bride. In Him we are in the image of God.
Last edited:
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
Not that I'm aware of or have ever taken notice of.
I do not believe that the reason Eve saw the tree as "pleasant to the eyes" is for any sexual reason. She saw it as "desirable to make one wise" because Satan had told her that she would be like God, knowing good and evil. The word "know" is key. So she saw it as "good for food" meaning spiritual sustenance, instead of the Word of God alone being "good for food". The whole idea was pleasing to her, so gazing at it she saw the tree as "pleasing to the eyes, good for food and desirable to make one wise".
I do not believe that the nakedness being referred to is physical nakedness either, but rather nakedness in the sense that Jesus uses the word in the Revelation. Nor do I see the fig leaves they tried to cover themselves with as literal. The fig leaved represent good works. Whereas what God clothed them with represents a sacrifice that involved the shedding of the blood of the animal.
Personally I'm very cautious not to insert any sort of "hidden knowledge" into the text, or to look for "hidden knowledge" in the text. I believe that the rest of the scriptures gradually enlighten us as to what took place in Genesis 3. I maintain the more traditional view.
I do not believe that the reason Eve saw the tree as "pleasant to the eyes" is for any sexual reason. She saw it as "desirable to make one wise" because Satan had told her that she would be like God, knowing good and evil. The word "know" is key. So she saw it as "good for food" meaning spiritual sustenance, instead of the Word of God alone being "good for food". The whole idea was pleasing to her, so gazing at it she saw the tree as "pleasing to the eyes, good for food and desirable to make one wise".
I do not believe that the nakedness being referred to is physical nakedness either, but rather nakedness in the sense that Jesus uses the word in the Revelation. Nor do I see the fig leaves they tried to cover themselves with as literal. The fig leaved represent good works. Whereas what God clothed them with represents a sacrifice that involved the shedding of the blood of the animal.
Personally I'm very cautious not to insert any sort of "hidden knowledge" into the text, or to look for "hidden knowledge" in the text. I believe that the rest of the scriptures gradually enlighten us as to what took place in Genesis 3. I maintain the more traditional view.
Last edited:
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil had a fruit. The tree of life had a fruit. Now the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was not called the tree of death, yet eating of it's fruit produced a slow rotting (aging) process, and eventually death, and the life remaining was temporal because man's dependency and faith on the five senses separated man further and further from God . The tree of life produced everlasting life without the need for dependency on the flesh, but rather faith in God as our Father (the relationship), the provider of all things that would be added unto His children without end.
Its only hidden knowledge to those who have yet to see it.
For instance… Is it hidden knowledge that God addressed the 2 things a woman utilized when having sex.
Desire and the womb.
Is it hidden knowledge that Cain is not listed in the Genealogies of Adam.
You know figs represent many things, one being mystery, why did they cover their private areas with fig leaves….
There is much more to this, perhaps I can elaborate later.
But in its simple form…
God created man, man was bad but there was no law.
God then formed a special man that would be a type of savior.. this man sinned, this was the man in which the Messiah would come through, the man Adam.
Satan knew this and impregnated Eve to stop the bloodline, but she had twins.
Cain kills Abel, and at this point there is not a person for Christ to be born through, until Seth (substitute)
After a while there are many people Christ can come from, so the fallen angels attacked doing just what there leader did…
Impregnating women that Christ could be born through.
Noah survived…. Event after event lead to one man having sex with his own daughters to keep the bloodline.
Skip ahead…
This irruption of fallen angels was Satan's first attempt to prevent the coming of the Seed of the woman foretold in gen. 3:15. (Actually the second) If this could be accomplished, God's Word would have failed, and his own doom would be averted.
As soon as it was made known that the Seed of the woman was to come through ABRAHAM, there must have been another irruption, as recorded in Gen. 6:4, "and also after that" (i.e. after the days of Noah, more than 500 years after the first irruption). The aim of the enemy was to occupy Canaan in advance of Abraham, and so to contest its occupation by his seed. For, when Abraham entered Canaan, we read (Gen. 12:6) "the Canaanite was then (i.e. already) in the land."
In the same chapter (Gen. 12:10-20) we see Satan's next attempt to interfere with Abraham's seed, and frustrate the purpose of God that it should be in "Isaac". This attempt was repeated in 20:1-18.
This great conflict may be seen throughout the Bible, and it forms a great and important subject of Biblical study. In each case the human instrument had his own personal interest to serve, while Satan had his own great object in view. Hence God had, in each case, to interfere and avert the evil and the danger, of which his servants and people were wholly ignorant. The following assaults of the great Enemy stand out prominently :--
- The destruction of the chosen family by famine, Gen. 50:20.
- The destruction of the male line in Israel, Ex. 1:10, 15, &c. Cp. Ex. 2:5. Heb. 11:23.
- The destruction of the whole nation in Pharaoh's pursuit, Ex. 14.
- After David's line was singled out (2Sam. 7), that was the next selected for assault. Satan's first assault was in the union of Jehoram and Athaliah by Jehoshaphat, notwithstanding 2Chron. 17:1. Jehoram killed off all his brothers (2Chron. 21:4).
- The Arabians slew all his children, except Ahaziah (2Chron. 21:17; 22:1).
- When Ahaziah died, Athaliah killed "all the seed royal" (2Chron. 22:10). the babe Joash alone was rescued; and, for six years, the faithfulness of Jehovah's word was at stake (2Chron. 23:3).
- Hezekiah was childless, when a double assault was made by the King of Assyria and the King of Terrors (Isa. 36:1; 38:1). God's faithfulness was appealed to and relied on (Ps. 136).
- In Captivity, Haman was used to attempt the destruction of the whole nation (Est. 3:6, 12, 13. Cp. 6:1).
- Joseph's fear was worked on (Matt. 1:18-20). Notwithstanding the fact that he was "a just man", and kept the Law, he did not wish to have Mary stoned to death (Deut. 24:1); hence Joseph determined to divorce her. But God intervened : "Fear not".
- Herod sought the young Child's life (Matt. 2).
- At the Temptation, "Cast Thyself down" was Satan's temptation.
- At Nazareth, again (Luke 4), there was another attempt to cast Him down and destroy Him.
- The two storms on the Lake were other attempts.
- At length the cross was reached, and the sepulcher closed; the watch set; and the stone sealed. But "God raised Him from the dead." And now, like another Joash, He is seated and expecting(Heb. 10:12, 13), hidden in the house of God on high; and the members of "the one body" are hidden there "in Him" (Col. 3:1-3), like another Jehoshaba; and going forth to witness of His coming, like another Jehoiada (2Chron. 23:3).
The irruption of "the fallen angels" ("sons of God") was the first attempt; and was directed against the whole human race.
- When Abraham was called, then he and his seed were attacked.
- When David was enthroned, then the royal line were attacked.
- And when "the Seed of the woman" Himself came, then the storm burst upon Him.
As I said friend… there is much more to this, and a quick study might not suffice. Please consider what many overlook.
This 'beguiling' is far more than a simple deceiving, for we see that the Greek word beguiled 'exapatao' (#1818) is composed of the Greek word for deceive ‘apatao’ (#538), but added to it is the prefix ‘ek’ (#1537) meaning: from within, exceedingly, vehemently, heartily.... Observe the simple Greek word for deceive, it is less to be deceived than it is to be beguiled:
Okay, so bear with me… knowing that Eve's sin did involve a sexual act we are immediately confounded with Adam's sin: "...she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." {Gen 3:6}. If the sin was merely to partake of the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil" (satan), it would appear that Adam's sin was sexual in nature as well, for he also partook after Eve did. This brings the unthinkable to mind, but then satan is a supernatural being and could have appeared as a man to Eve and a woman to Adam, but there is so much more here. Once again we go to the New Testament and dig a little deeper into what the Holy Spirit has revealed through Paul. For as we see, there is some difference in what Adam did and what Eve did:
In verse 15 above, Eve was saved in childbearing (as we all could be) because through her children, umbilical cord to umbilical cord, 4000 years later, would be born the Savior of the world Jesus Christ (not Cain the son of satan, but Able then Seth the sons of Adam was the promise to come through). Now if they both 'ate' of the 'tree', then what command is it that Eve transgressed which Adam did not? Well what was the command that Eve received that Adam did not? Compare:
This word "Touch" in Eve's instructions is 'naga' in the Hebrew, and it is a euphemism for sex (i.e., to lie with a woman). Adam was not warned about this from God, perhaps He knew it wouldn't happen:
Once satan had deceived them "religiously" it was a small thing for him to take all of Eve (sexually). It was through that sexual union that Cain was born. And it was through those false teachings that idolatry away and apart from God was born. That is why God was so upset! It is a shame that even today from the Pulpits of Christendom people are still taught that the order of the world was rocked, and God's wrath was so hotly fired because Adam and Eve ate an apple from the wrong tree.
Similar threads
