Posted on 11/19/2011 7:23:19 PM PST by pastorbillrandles
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:(Genesis 3:1-4)
The gospel begins in a God-given garden of delight, with a very simple cast of characters, Adam, Eve, the serpent, and God. The man and woman were given but one negative commandment by God, a prohibition. They were commanded not to eat of one tree, the tree of the knowledge of good and of evil. A vast array of other beautiful, fruit bearing trees were theirs to enjoy at will.
We can only know what went wrong with the world, and with the human race, by Divine revelation. God would have to show us what went wrong with the world, and He has. The man and the woman were undermined by the subtlety of the Serpent, they were seduced into repudiating God and siding with the serpent in his primeval rebellion against God.
I believe that an understanding of Genesis three is essential to a proper perspective on all of the rest of the gospel. It is important to see that the same thing that happened in Genesis three is played out on a larger, worldwide scale in the last days leading up to the final judgment of the world and the consummation of the purposes of God. Genesis three is both history and eschatology.
Now the Serpent was subtil…but can a snake be subtil? Isn’t subtlety a feature of intelligence? Subtlety is an attribute that can only be given to a responsible, moral being, therefore the scripture itself is being subtle, for it is implying that something more than a mere reptile is involved in this story.The serpent is the vehicle for another malevolent personality.
We are told without explanation, that the snake spoke to the woman. We remember that to the man, Adam, had been given the task of naming all of the animals. The act of naming the animals carries with it the idea that the one who names, has dominion over the ones named. This is in accord with the original commission given to the man, to rule over creation.
But something is amiss, for in the fact that the serpent spoke to the woman, there is rebellion against the divine order. It is the man’s wife that the serpent addresses, not the man standing there, the one who named the serpent. Obviously there is something very much out-of-order here.
The method of seduction is enlightening. The serpent probes the understanding of the woman, not by proposition but by loaded question;
,I>Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
What a masterpiece of insinuation! He is not saying that God did say that, nor is he denying God said that, he is merely asking a question.
Yet the question itself is slanted- it could be paraphrased, ,b>Did God really deny you the freedom to eat of every tree of the garden? The serpent insinuated that God’s sole limit upon the couple was altogether unreasonable, not by stating so, but just by asking the loaded question.
The woman’s response offered the serpent clues to the couple’s inner state, openings to exploit;
And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Her answer betrayed a slight hint of dissatisfaction. First, she maximised the prohibition of God, (though not as greatly as the serpent ), by saying that not only were they not to eat of the tree, they weren’t even supposed to touch it! Thus she portrayed her benevolent, Creator in a harsh light, as though he were being unreasonable.
Secondly she minimized the sanction, by saying that God said , lest ye die, when originally God had said, You shall surely die! As if it may or may not be true that those who transgress the word of God are liable to the revealed punishments. Maybe not?
Now the Serpent perceived that the couple, (for Adam had been standing there also ),were ready to hear God’s Word openly denied;
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die…
God had already said that the day you eat of the tree of knowledge , literally, “In dying you shall die”, but the serpent’s new ‘word’ was a direct contradiction of God’s word.
The subtlety of the Serpent is first to make an indirect appeal, not to the man whom God ordained to name and rule, but to the woman who was to be his helpmeet. It is a distortion of the Divine order. The confusion of the God assigned gender roles is a sign of satanic influence.
Secondly the Serpent seeks to call into question the revealed word of God. He ever hisses, Hath God really said…? In the modern age, the faith of millions has been ravaged through the virulent attacks on the veracity of scripture by groups such as the higher critics, and the so-called Jesus seminar.
Liberal theology has made a corpse of the mainstream protestant churches and is now marshalling its troops for an all out infiltration and attack on the evangelical church.
Through his servants, apostate ministers, the serpent currently suggests that the God of the Bible is harsh, ‘fundamentalist’, demanding and unreasonable. Through the new preachers, the serpent offers a new and improved “god” of love and mercy. In fact more than mercy, the new ‘God’ presented by liberal theology and the ‘emergent’ stream of the church is indulgent, tolerant of every kind of ‘lifestyle’, for he is a ‘God’ of “unconditional love”.
The serpent also is adamant that no one is “surely going to die”, for the new ‘God’ is too tender to damn anyone to hell. A fiery Hell as a place of punishment for the reprobate, is now seen as a ‘barbaric notion’ held on to by fundamentalists, a holdover from the dark ages. Religion has evolved such a sadistic concept of God.
Finally, when the serpent percieves that we are ready to recieve it, he offers an alternative “Word” in the place of the Word of God. These days there are many “words” from God and many “gospels”. We must be very near the final judgment.
The modern evangelical church has been undergoing this seduction for at least the past fifty years. Steadily the Bible colleges and seminaries have made on accommodation after another to the Spirit of the Age, in its constant question, Hath God really said…? Thousands of sons and daughters of Bible believing christians have been sent to study theology only to lose all faith in God as a result of the experience!
We are finally to the point where it is becoming easier and easier for ministers, theologians, christian musicians and television personalities to openly deny the Word of God. Jesus’ teaching on Creation, marriage, divorce, Heaven, Hell, Judgment, homosexuality, morality, love , the exclusivity of the gospel, all are being attacked and in many cases denied.
If judgment begins in the house of God, what shall become of the ungodly and the sinner?
more to come…
Agreed, then it would follow, would it not, that the answer to my original question would be that Adam and Eve would never have aged and died nor their offspring?
But God did not curse them until Adam ate the fruit. I wonder what would have happened if he said NO....
Well yeah...but what life on Earth would have looked like without sin is a whole other road of speculation which is a dead end to contemplate. Sin did happen, Christ was the corrective applied for those who would accept him so that restoration to the Father was made possible. As for higher motives and considerations, only God knows.
"Again, she did not heed God's Word and one can learn from that - not heeding HIS WORD alone leads to destruction. "
She first ignored that she was bound to Adam, that was HIS WORD just as much as the command to not eat of the tree. Of course, some people prefer to ignore or discard portions of The Word that disagree with their own understanding and inclinations. Such folks choose to always ignore the entirety of the Word and instead pick and chose what they apply in order to rationalize the conclusion they've already reached on their own. For them, I guess The Word is The Word except when it's not The Word because they find it inconvenient. Usually, though, they try to reinterpret things rather than just ignoring something like God saying that Adam and Eve were one flesh.
"God doesn't bind anyone - those who love and accept HIM He indwells with His Holy Spirit. "
Rom 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
Rom 12:4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: Rom 12:5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
Sounds pretty binding to me but then again I've never found the whispers of, " then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil", as alluring as so many others seem to.
Once someone adopts doctrines that agree with the serpent and claim all knowledge and power for themselves, they can easily manipulate The Word to mean whatever they want it to. Anyone who recognizes "The Lego Block Method of Scripture Interpretation", though, is also going to recognize that such folks don't actually care what The Word says, they've decided what it should say and they're going to manipulate Scripture any way they have to in order to say it agrees with their opinion.
Of course, that's only natural, Satan does quote Scripture and can easily provide someone with an appropriate out of context quote as needed. When read in context, though, the Scripture can't be distorted the way it so commonly is by so many people. Now, naturally, each and every one of the tens of thousands of churches and millions of independent actors all claim to have the proper interpretation due to their personal relationship to the Holy Spirit. That's exactly what you'd expect from a bunch of sheep who each and every one claim to be their own shepherd. It's also what Christ avoided by establishing His Church to teach us and to provide shepherds for us.
Before there was any need for the Church which is the one body of the Bride of Christ, there was just Adam and Eve who God commanded to be as one flesh. Those who abide by The Word consider themselves so bound do not enshrine their own thoughts and desires so readily as those who see themselves as independent actors do. Nor are they easily isolated and tempted away from what they know is the correct path because they know to rely on the other parts of the body when they feel weak or tempted and to help those other parts when they are feeling weak or tempted.
For some folks being in any way bound to anything other than their own understanding is just a bit too much like surrender and they prefer to make their own deal then to help convince them self that Christ will accept their deal, proclaim to any who will listen that surrender and a cross are just options, not requirements. For them, nothing is ever going to match their sweet imagination and they won't recognize as Truth what they now call foolishness until it's too late. It's a shame, but it's a consequence of habitually ignoring context in order to make Scripture say whatever they like and liking to be the head that controls the body.
I've read a couple of articles that speculated along those lines but that's all we can really do, speculate. From what I recall, several articles agreed on something along the lines of Satan being banished from the Garden, Adam and Eve being put out of the Garden but with the world outside not being cursed and death not being introduced. I didn't keep track of where those articles were because I didn't think it was anything other than a form of mental, um, self-gratification, I guess you'd call it.
I bet you can try different terms in some of the search engines and find more than a couple such speculations, though, so all I can really say is that if it's something you're really interested in there is at least a little stuff around that follows that line of thought to various conclusions.
The exact word...”restoration”. Thanks!
While it all seemed hopeless to the hapless couple at the time he stated it, God’s promise, that Eve’s “seed” would be at emnity with the serpent and would crush his head even when the serpent was biting the “seed’s” heel, was the promise of such “restoration”. Christ was the “second” Adam and the first of the seed of Eve; then we who are Christ’s children have become a part of Eve’s seed or another word’s, Christ’s great Church. Hell shall not prevail against us!
So let us wash each other’s feet and look, but not judge any bite marks...we’ll all have them!(we can help each other drain the poison out)
OK, so now it's just you and me, not theory right? You want to make it personal.
First, your whole disagreement with me is over whether or not what is clearly written in the Bible means what it says or not. I say God telling Adam and Eve to be as one is a command, you say that I'm ignoring Scripture as the final authority because I see Eve not obeying that command as a sin.
Second, I'm not the one redefining or denying any Scripture, I'm just reading what it says and then saying that if the Scripture says it the Scripture means what it says. God said they were to be as one, God said we are to be as one, but no, you say if I believe The Word, I'm ignoring The Word?
I'd say if anyone needs to learn from Adam and Eve it's you and you could start by getting on your knees and asking Christ to the damn snake you're listening to out of the tree in your back yard and begging him to forgive your for ever having listened to that snake. You're sure not listening to the indwelling Christ as the Holy Spirit, Christ doesn't contradict Himself. You, on the other hand, contradict both yourself and Christ on a regular basis around here.
Have a wonderful day
You didn't find that part in Corinthians...You added to the word of God and you know what he says about that, and it ain't good...
Act 9:31 Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.
Act 15:41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.
Act 16:5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.
In fact, the CHURCHES were spoken of 37 times in the scriptures...There is not just one church...
Of course, that's only natural, Satan does quote Scripture and can easily provide someone with an appropriate out of context quote as needed. When read in context, though, the Scripture can't be distorted the way it so commonly is by so many people.
Now, naturally, each and every one of the tens of thousands of churches and millions of independent actors all claim to have the proper interpretation due to their personal relationship to the Holy Spirit. That's exactly what you'd expect from a bunch of sheep who each and every one claim to be their own shepherd. It's also what Christ avoided by establishing His Church to teach us and to provide shepherds for us.
God did provide shepherds for us...And he listed their qualifications...
1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
1Ti 3:4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
1Ti 3:5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
Now if you know of someone who belongs to a religion that claims it has shepherds 'from God' and they don't meet all of these qualification, tell them to abandon that religion faster than rats fleeing a sinking ship...Because that's what it is...A sinking ship...
To boot, God created man with a primal urge to test, explore, and discover. Anyone with children knows that the surest way to have them do something dangerous is to tell them not to do it.
And on top of all that, God allowed Satan to have free access to his creations in order to tempt them.
Either Genesis is an allegory, or the garden was a setup for enslavement.
< flame suit>
No I don’t, Romans 5 teaches that death came because of the transgression of the one man.
LOL! The freaks are coming out again enmasse aren’t they?
From my consideration of the Scriptures I’d conclude that they would have lived on endlessly while filling the earth with offspring.
And I see no reason to think Satan was able to frustrate or prevent God’s will being done.
Before anyone can answer your question, one needs to know from whence your get your sense or moral ethics. The use of the term” seems to me” is a “wiggle room term” designed for you to question the ethical basis of other’s beliefs while feigning “pseudo-objectivity” and vain intellectual snobbery.
As for allegory; true allegory is not a denial of higher existent truth but rather an simple explanation of higher planar truths that can’t be quite described in cold intellectual logic but are easily grasped thru stories, fables and legends. Or as the Bible states, “ I thank God that he has been hidden his wisdom from the wise of this world and instead has revealed it unto babes”
The story of the Garden being allegorical or not, the rest of Genesis’ early chapters leave no doubt that an event happened(perhaps only understood better by allegory or not) that changed the early course of man into a living chaotic nightmare. Apparently it was made worse by direct genetic corruptions by visitations of the “Nephilim” to the daughters of men. Now the question remains, do you believe it or not?
We can only love them, a double tap to the head won’t put down these zombies!
Actually, Adam is the one responsible.
HE was the authority God established and he was given dominion over all the earth. HE watched Satan tempt HIS OWN WIFE and did NOTHING to stop it. He heard her misquote what God told him and did not intervene.
Then he watched her eat and when nothing happened to her, he ate himself. It was after he ate that the eyes of both of them were opened.
Eve was deceived. She did not *ignore* anything.
It was not Eve’s responsibility to make sure she was under proper authority, it was the responsibility of the authority, Adam.
That’s a mighty big chip on your shoulder, partner.
Galatians 5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
Matthew 7:1-5 1 "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when there is the log in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
You cannot know what's in another person's heart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.