Did Adam and Eve fall?

[sentipente]

Sentipente, I got the point but I continue to argue that the point is irrelevant. Adam died spiritually immediately and physically about 900 years later. The sentence was carried out.

You are throwing out the parts of the story that don't fit your interpretation. The result is that you miss the real message of the story.

 

[sentipente]

Cimbk, our theology says that the consequences of 'good' are different from the consequences of 'evil.' The text clearly teaches that the consequences are the same for both.

 

[Hentenza]

You are throwing out the parts of the story that don't fit your interpretation. The result is that you miss the real message of the story.

I am not throwing out anything but I would be interested in what you think the real message is.

 

[sentipente]

I am not throwing out anything but I would be interested in what you think the real message is.

The current teaching ignores the fact that the tree was of the knowledge of good AND evil. Then we also act as if the pair disobeyed God when it is clear that the women was tricked into doubting the word of her husband. Every significant detail of the story is ignored by our interpretations.

 

[Hentenza]

The current teaching ignores the fact that the tree was of the knowledge of good AND evil. Then we also act as if the pair disobeyed God when it is clear that the women was tricked into doubting the word of her husband. Every significant detail of the story is ignored by our interpretations.

So far we have discussed the story in general terms not in its expanded context. I generally agree with what you posted though.

 

[cimbk]

Cimbk, our theology says that the consequences of 'good' are different from the consequences of 'evil.' The text clearly teaches that the consequences are the same for both.

No thats what your taking from the story, I and anyone eles who reads this story takes that the sin was the disobedience of eating from the tree, that God told them not to eat from. because part of the consequence of eating it, they gained a sin nature they had never known, and everyone knows sin leads to death

 

[WinBySurrender]

The current teaching ignores the fact that the tree was of the knowledge of good AND evil. Then we also act as if the pair disobeyed God when it is clear that the women was tricked into doubting the word of her husband. Every significant detail of the story is ignored by our interpretations.

I don't think there is biblical evidence that she doubted Adam. She repeated to Satan (the serpent) the warning God had given Adam, but she added the word "touch," as in "not to touch" the fruit. Interesting addition, in that the word naga' -- translated "touch" -- can mean to apply something, in other words to apply knowledge. God did not forbid the "touching" of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and in fact, applying the knowledge that there is, in fact, good and there is evil, is something we should do. However, in "eating" ('akai) we take something into us, allowing it to nourish us, become a part of us. In short, eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil gave Adam and Eve the knowledge that there is pleasure go be found in doing evil. Simply having the knowledge that good and evil exist did not endanger their heretofore eternal lives, but taking that knowledge into them and acting on it, that is what "killed" them spiritually.

 

[redeemedbychrist]

Notice in the passage that Satan cast doubt on God's word
Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Notice he makes it look as though God was with holding from them- actually God said to them "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it..."
And again- "Ye shall not surely die"
That is how Satan works- by casting doubt on the word of God. And no offence intended here but when we go into extremes of being picky about the passage one must ask is that what is happening?

Eve was also in the wrong here. She should have directed Satan to her husband Adam-
1) Because he was the head of the home and her leader
2) Because she was not there when God commanded Adam, she will have only been told about it by Adam

Notice that she-
1) Takes way from what God has said- "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden" Actually he had said "freely" eat
2) Adds to what God has said- 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. There was no mention by God or prohibition of touching the tree.

 

[LLWHA]

I don't think there is biblical evidence that she doubted Adam. She repeated to Satan (the serpent) the warning God had given Adam, but she added the word "touch," as in "not to touch" the fruit. Interesting addition, in that the word naga' -- translated "touch" -- can mean to apply something, in other words to apply knowledge. God did not forbid the "touching" of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and in fact, applying the knowledge that there is, in fact, good and there is evil, is something we should do. However, in "eating" ('akai) we take something into us, allowing it to nourish us, become a part of us. In short, eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil gave Adam and Eve the knowledge that there is pleasure go be found in doing evil. Simply having the knowledge that good and evil exist did not endanger their heretofore eternal lives, but taking that knowledge into them and acting on it, that is what "killed" them spiritually.

Eve had sex with Lucifer and she had Cain she also had sex with Adam and had Abel. The fight between Good and evil started and Cain was a murderer and liar from the start

3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.


Lucifer's seed and Adams seed have been fighting for control of this planet every since. Lucifer's seed has the domination of this world today as was predicted later on in Genesis with the blessing to Esau.

 

[redeemedbychrist]

Eve had sex with Lucifer and she had Cain she also had sex with Adam and had Abel. The fight between Good and evil started and Cain was a murderer and liar from the start

3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.


Lucifer's seed and Adams seed have been fighting for control of this planet every since. Lucifer's seed has the domination of this world today as was predicted later on in Genesis with the blessing to Esau.

I would love to see your backing up your 1st statement.
Genesis 4 v1-2 "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground" I see there clearly stated Adam as the father of Cain

And Genesis 3v15 is a prophecy regarding the Lord Jesus

 

[wirkkalaj]

But if there was no death he would not know what it means to die or surely die. Why use surely if there was no death, anyhow? I think we missed something.

Why does it matter if knew what it meant to die or surely die? If you say to your child. "Do not touch that stove or it will burn you". Even if the child has no idea what burn means, he will understand it is bad simply from your tone of voice and the fact that you commanded him not to do it. Given most kids will touch it anyway and learn the hard way, just like Adam and Eve.

To address another two points with a similar analogy. You could say to a child. "Don't eat that moldy apple or you will die". Again the child will understand that to die is a bad thing even though he may have never seen anything die in his life, and when he eats of the moldy apple he does not die right away, but instead gets sick and dies later. The parents statement of "you will die" is still very true.

 

[wirkkalaj]

But the word would make no sense to Adam unless he understood the event. There had to be death in the garden. Lions had to eat. And let us not suggest that plants do not die when they are eaten.

I believe that plants are more of a biological machine rather than a living creature. They are not alive in the sense that animals are and therefore do not die. Just as animals are not alive spiritually in the same sense that humans are.

 

[wirkkalaj]

If they were under a penalty of death eating of the tree of life could not have reversed it.

Why could it have not reversed? Plus, I don't know if it was a penalty as much as a consequence. If it is the Tree of Life then it could have reversed it!? I guess God could have said "You will surely die, unless you eat of the Tree of Life". Would that be better?