Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | EdB | 25881 | ||
Hi Paul The sin wasn’t eating the fruit. The sin was rebellion against God. When Eve was tempted, the serpent tempted her in three areas. These three are explained in 1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. Notice the flow Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, (lust of the flesh) and that it was a delight to the eyes, (lust of the eyes) and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, (pride of life) she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. What happened after they ate? Since the tree was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil they lost their innocents. They became aware they were naked and hide. The sin was in the rebellion to God’s command not to eat of the tree. Instead of obeying God they gave into the these three ingrained fleshly desires and rebelled. Your argument that this hypothesis can some how been seen to flow from Genesis to Revelation is based on the fact that human sin manifested throughout the whole Bible. Whether it be fornication or gossiping the flesh is being fulfilled. We as humans tend to think of ourselves before we think of God. That is exactly what happened in the garden the question came down to which do you love more God or your flesh? To suggest that Eve had sex with the serpent and thus brought sin into the world further begs the question in what did Adam sin? Surely you don’t suggest he to had sex with the serpent also. I can appreciate your testimony of this revelation as being given by the Holy Spirit but we have the validate these revelations with the Word. Without making some rather large assumptions and basically adding to the scripture I think you will agree there is no way to reach the conclusion you did. God would not keep something this important hidden for thousands of years and then reveal something that seemingly invalidates what is related in His scriptures. EdB |
||||||
2 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Paulfromnys | 25892 | ||
Hello Ed, the question is, what was the action involved in the partaking of the fruit, and what act was taken by Eve to Adam to do likewise?? I don't believe it was eating of literal fruit. It could well of been the all encompassing choice of taking the lust of the flesh, eye, and the pride of life in itself. But I believe these motives of the heart were expressed in an act of partaking of the very fruit of sin. It makes perfect sense to me that conceiving life in these motives would bring the seed of an enemy among men, even as the parable of the two sowers shows. I guess in spiritualizing the whole episode with Adam, Eve, and the serpent, it could be excactly as you say, for this indeed bears out throughout scripture. I'm just stuck on the actual act of partaking. Thanks, and I'll post if I get anymore clarity, hope you'll do likewise. Yours in Christ, Paul |
||||||
3 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Morant61 | 25934 | ||
Greetings Paul! Gen. 3;6 says that Adam and Eve "ate" the fruit. The verb "ate" is the Hebrew word "Oakal". It is used 810 times in the Old Testament. Each time, it means "to eat." I never saw one verse where it meant "to have sex with." Thus, I would have to say that I can't buy your interpretation. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Paulfromnys | 25948 | ||
Hi Tim, Then your saying it was literal fruit like an apple?? You make a valid point, but I believe we have to see what was the reality of the trees in the garden, and consequently their fruit. Do you believe the tree of Life to be a person, even our Lord Jesus Christ?? If this is true, the His fruit would be his very life, symbolically consumed in the eating of bread. In specific terms His fruit would be SPECIFIC ACTS from love, joy, peace, ect... |
||||||
5 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Reformer Joe | 25978 | ||
Show us from Genesis 1 that the trees were spiritual beings. If the tree of life is Jesus, why did God say that Adam and Eve could eat from ANY tree except that of the knowledge of good and evil. So Eve could have "fornicated" with all trees except Satan?!? Your interpretation just doesn't hold any water at all... --Joe! |
||||||
6 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Paulfromnys | 25990 | ||
Hi Joe, read Ezekiel 31:1-9 to get a sense of where i get the idea of trees representing men. In the spiritual sense, this is the only way to see it. GOD apparently has made physical creation to be reflections of spiritual realities. There is only one LIFE, and only one death; sin. So I'm seeing the man of life, and the man of sin residing in the garden, and our great..............................................................great grandparents between them, just as all men are today. To consume the tree of life is to embrace and act on what it presents to you as your life; Jesus said, why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not as I say?? Life has one master; Christ, and death has one master; sin. Both are personified; the one who manifests GODS life fully: Jesus Christ, and the one who manifests sin fully: as yet unidentified. Anyway Joe, these are not things to be brushed aside abruptly, for the truth is, neither one of us knows these things, but before GOD we desire to, and we have the freedom to think on them in His presence. Please read Malachi 3:16-18, as this is how I believe we should approach these things TOGETHER. Joe ---If the tree of life is Jesus, why did God say that Adam and Eve could eat from ANY tree except that of the knowledge of good and evil. So Eve could have "fornicated" with all trees except Satan?!? ---------------------------------- Because the fellowship(not fornicating) of these trees would not have produced fruit(acts) contrary to the spirit of GOD as the tree of the knowledge of Good and evil did. Fornication is an act which is contrary to GOD, and this is what she took to Adam, I believe. I must say though that the idea of many trees being food does make me think of literal food. Thanks Joe, and please share any other thoughts you get concerning this. Yours in Christ, Paul |
||||||
7 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Morant61 | 25995 | ||
Greetings Paul! I don't mean to be rude, but to put it bluntly: this is a dangerous method of interpretation. You referred to Ez. 31:1-9. Yes, a Cedar is used as a symbol for the nation of Assria. But, did you notice that the text clearly indicates that the tree in this passage is symbolic. Gen. 3 makes no such distinction. The normal rule of interpretation is that a passage is to be taken literally unless there is something in the passage which indicates that is to be taken in some other way. There is no such indication in Gen. 3. If we all followed this interpretational method, we could make any passage say anything we want. Earlier you cross referenced Gen. 3:1-7 with the parable of the seeds in the NT. I have heard other people make that connection recently. If you don't mind, where did you hear that from? Somebody out there must be teaching it! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
8 | Genesis 3:1-7 | Genesis | Paulfromnys | 26025 | ||
Tim:---I don't mean to be rude, but to put it bluntly: this is a dangerous method of interpretation.-------------------------------- Your right. I'm just trusting that it's clear that I'm honestly considering these things with you in GODS presence, and by no means setting myself up as speaking for GOD. Tim:-- If we all followed this interpretational method, we could make any passage say anything we want. ---------------------------------------- regardless of what rules we apply to understanding scripture, the bottom line is revelation from GOD. I think your guidelines are sensible, but not the conclusion of this matter. Tim:----Earlier you cross referenced Gen. 3:1-7 with the parable of the seeds in the NT. I have heard other people make that connection recently. If you don't mind, where did you hear that from? Somebody out there must be teaching it! I was introduced to these understandings through the ministry of Bill Branham. Your brother in Christ, Paul |
||||||