The Spheres of Science and Religion

[OldWiseGuy]

No rush. I'm not going anywhere.



For someone who argues that he has such a literal historical understanding of Genesis, you have missed the blatant assertion: "So God created Adam in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." The woman isn't just sort of thrown into this passage as an addendum.

Eve was the main reason for the creation as we know it. God had to create Adam first in order to establish a heirarchy with man as the head, and to provide someone to take responsibility for what Eve would do. Note that Adam isn't given the distinction of being 'the father of all living'.

 

[Pats]

Eve was the main reason for the creation as we know it. God had to create Adam first in order to establish a heirarchy with man as the head, and to provide someone to take responsibility for what Eve would do. Note that Adam isn't given the distinction of being 'the father of all living'.

As Wiltor pointed out, the passage clearly states that humans, man and woman, were created in the image of God.

Eve was created from the rib bone of Adam because she was to be his help mate, she completed him.

Adam was to take responsibility for what he did, willfully disobeyed.

Eve had to take responsibility for her own part, allowing the serpant to trick her, or listening to the serpant instead of God.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

If you think "the church" isn't ready for your theory there, you better find out if Christian women are ready before you start trouble.

That would be like asking prisoners for their permission before we hang them.

 

[Pats]

That would be like asking prisoners for their permission before we hang them.

I was thinking more along the lines of you finding some protection before going around saying these things where the women could get a hold of you!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

As Wiltor pointed out, the passage clearly states that humans, man and woman, were created in the image of God.

Of course. But what does that mean?

Eve was created from the rib bone of Adam because she was to be his help mate, she completed him

Adam was complete before his rib was removed. God said that "it is not good that the man be alone". No need is implied. God created a need by the act of removing part of Adam, leaving him a little weaker than before. Eve was to compensate for the weakness that her own creation had brought to Adam. The social arrangement, that didn't exist before, also creates it's own needs. Needs that Adam now became part of, and thus now needed Eve. The competness that God envisioned is competely different from what is normally thought of regards man and wife. If you look honestly at life you'll see that somehow the roles got reversed, and now a man is the helpmeet, building a world designed mostly by women. Women aren't too interested in helping men. They want men to help them do what they think is important. Why do think men are so frustrated with women?

Adam was to take responsibility for what he did, willfully disobeyed.

Adam willINGLY disobeyed. It was not a willful act.

Eve had to take responsibility for her own part, allowing the serpant to trick her, or listening to the serpant instead of Go

Eve didn't take responsibility. If you examine the atonement ritual you'll see the innocent lamb (Adam) slain to pay the sin debt that was imputed to him, and the (escape)goat (Eve) released. That pattern continued even to Christ's death when Barabbas escaped as well.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I was thinking more along the lines of you finding some protection before going around saying these things where the women could get a hold of you!

Christian women?

 

[Pats]

Christian women?

Yep!

 

[Pats]

Of course. But what does that mean?

It sounded like you were disputing this. Glad we agree.

Adam was complete before his rib was removed. God said that "it is not good that the man be alone". No need is implied.

I'm going to research that and get back to ya.

Adam willINGLY disobeyed. It was not a willful act.

Are we back to posting dictionary quotes now?

Explain the difference and why it's sooooo significant to you, if you please.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Explain the difference and why it's sooooo significant to you, if you please.

Adam, like Christ, was willing to make the sacrifice. It was not willful disobedience on his part. In other words he assented to his own death sentence. Assent is the highest form of agreement, and the primary element of agape. Thus the event was a true metaphor of Christ sacrificing himself to redeem the church.

 

[Willtor]

Adam, like Christ, was willing to make the sacrifice. It was not willful disobedience on his part. In other words he assented to his own death sentence. Assent is the highest form of agreement, and the primary element of agape. Thus the event was a true metaphor of Christ sacrificing himself to redeem the church.

This is totally inconsistent with theology. Adam most certainly acted against the command of God. That is sin. Christ never did this. His taking on of sin was grace. It was totally undeserved because he never disobeyed the command of God. Your interpretation makes Adam into the hero of the story. It is not so.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

This is totally inconsistent with theology. Adam most certainly acted against the command of God. That is sin. Christ never did this. His taking on of sin was grace. It was totally undeserved because he never disobeyed the command of God. Your interpretation makes Adam into the hero of the story. It is not so.

Adam is still a metaphor for Christ, Eve the church (looking forward only), even if he isn't a hero. The typology of the event demands it be so. He had to do what he did.

Some great bible truth is inconsistant with (orthodox) theology. Orthodoxy is the hedge that can exclude new truth.

Does no one ever wonder why God created Adam and Eve to succumb to sin? What was he thinking? Remember it is the glory of God to hide a thing, and the honour of Kings to search it out. Do you think that orthodox theology has searched out all that God has hidden? Not me. There are too many unanswered questions.

 

[Willtor]

Adam is still a metaphor for Christ, Eve the church (looking forward only), even if he isn't a hero. The typology of the event demands it be so. He had to do what he did.

Your interpretation is very unusual, and even if you are correct, you can't pretend it's the only one. The typology of the event demands no such thing.

Some great bible truth is inconsistant with (orthodox) theology. Orthodoxy is the hedge that can exclude new truth.

Does no one ever wonder why God created Adam and Eve to succumb to sin? What was he thinking? Remember it is the glory of God to hide a thing, and the honour of Kings to search it out. Do you think that orthodox theology has searched out all that God has hidden? Not me. There are too many unanswered questions.

Lots of people wonder why Adam and Eve fell. There are almost as many answers as there are people who write about such things. Most of them are variances on a few themes, but there is ample writing regarding this question. Besides, this isn't a question of what remains hidden. This is a question as to whether orthodox theology has been totally mistaken on these issues for all this time.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Your interpretation is very unusual, and even if you are correct, you can't pretend it's the only one. The typology of the event demands no such thing.

The event has many meanings. The most important is yet to be revealed to the 'Church', although the 'church' may well have received this revelation. I believe it will at least help to cause the 'falling away' when revealed.

Lots of people wonder why Adam and Eve fell. There are almost as many answers as there are people who write about such things. Most of them are variances on a few themes, but there is ample writing regarding this question. Besides, this isn't a question of what remains hidden. This is a question as to whether orthodox theology has been totally mistaken on these issues for all this time

That's not my view. I believe much is rightly interpreted. But there is more in the story than is known at this time i.e. "Go your way , Daniel......" All the scholars of history cannot unlock understanding that God has sealed up.

Funny, I just heard this comment and I think it fits in nicely here:

"There are moments that are so large that they cannot be contained in the present, but spill over into the past, and into the future."

The fall of Adam and Eve is such a moment.

 

[Willtor]

The event has many meanings. The most important is yet to be revealed to the 'Church', although the 'church' may well have received this revelation. I believe it will at least help to cause the 'falling away' when revealed.

That's not my view. I believe much is rightly interpreted. But there is more in the story than is known at this time i.e. "Go your way , Daniel......" All the scholars of history cannot unlock understanding that God has sealed up.

But your view is not a supplement to theology. It is a refutation of it.

Funny, I just heard this comment and I think it fits in nicely here:

"There are moments that are so large that they cannot be contained in the present, but spill over into the past, and into the future."

The fall of Adam and Eve is such a moment.

Perhaps. But looking at the subject matter, I'd appreciate it if you would start a new thread with this. I'm not sure many people are interested in the original subject matter of this thread, but if that's so, then let this one die. If it's not so, then it should get back on topic.

If you start a new thread with this, it should be easy to quote anything you like from this one.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But your view is not a supplement to theology. It is a refutation of it.



Perhaps. But looking at the subject matter, I'd appreciate it if you would start a new thread with this. I'm not sure many people are interested in the original subject matter of this thread, but if that's so, then let this one die. If it's not so, then it should get back on topic.

If you start a new thread with this, it should be easy to quote anything you like from this one.

You're right, this isn't the thread for this discussion.