what can we learn from Genesis 1, 2, & 3?

[lmnop9876]

even if you don't accept the creation account of genesis 1 & 2 as completely literal, there are many theological and practical lessons that can be learnt from it. i thought i'd start a thread where people can post what they think can be learnt from Genesis 1, 2, & 3.
i think two of the most important lessons we can learn are, 1. every person is a special creation of God, He gave us our life and our soul, and we are all created for Him. 2. God created humanity perfect, but we have fallen from that condition and deserve to die, but God has provided a way of salvation for us.
there's other ones i'm thinking of, but i'll see if anyone else has any ideas first.

 

[Angel of God]

I believe in the Spirit of the Bible.
I don't believe, for example, that the snake speaks if
it's not a Miracle(it's clear with Creation that an animal cannot
speak......).
My opinion is that Eve has listened..the devil and then a lot of animals...(that have been created for her...) has been damned...,
it's as if the snake..spoke...

 

[Dragons87]

The sanctity(sp?) of marriage

 

[mutzrein]

even if you don't accept the creation account of genesis 1 & 2 as completely literal, there are many theological and practical lessons that can be learnt from it. i thought i'd start a thread where people can post what they think can be learnt from Genesis 1, 2, & 3.
i think two of the most important lessons we can learn are, 1. every person is a special creation of God, He gave us our life and our soul, and we are all created for Him. 2. God created humanity perfect, but we have fallen from that condition and deserve to die, but God has provided a way of salvation for us.
there's other ones i'm thinking of, but i'll see if anyone else has any ideas first.

Most astounding for me is that there are two different accounts of the creation of man.

One being the physical creation (the breath of life – man became a living being) and the other being the spiritual (made in God’s image)

Jesus said that to inherit the kingdom of God man must be born again. Ie two births – one of the flesh and one of the spirit.
Paul also writes about the first Adam being a living being and the last Adam a life giving spirit . . .
When Adam sinned he was barred from the garden so that he could not take from the tree of life and live forever. Accordingly we know that the man of the flesh is blinded to truth & knowledge of things of the spirit – they are foolishness to him.
Again Paul writes ‘for since death came through one man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man, for in Adam all die and so all in Christ will be made alive.’
Now Jesus said, no-one can come to the Father except through me and so Jesus is the tree of life – the one through whom alone we have eternal life.

I now view scripture on a totally different premise to what I used to and I hope that it has given you something to chew on too.

Regards

 

[Willtor]

At one time, Man had unity with God, acknowledging God (and God alone) as his origin. He was "like God" because he shared fellowship with God and knew nothing of what he ought to do but the Commandment of God. He was with God and he was like God because God raised him for that fellowship.

At some point, he was told that he could be even more like God if he were to take his eyes off God, put them on himself, and divide right from wrong. He could make himself his own deity. The deception was the idea that he could become like God, because he already was like God. In deciding good and evil for himself, therefore, he broke God's only Commandment, and truly became his own deity. He became like God, but against God.

When he took his eyes off God, he lost everything he had. God was no longer his origin, but it didn't change his need for an origin. Since he no longer knew anything, he made himself his own origin, or he crafted an idol to be his origin. And he did what was right in his own eyes.

But God didn't forget Man. He promised Man that He would heal his atrophied vision and return him to the fellowship. Because no single man can repair a damaged relationship, and because no human had a desire, God, Himself, became Man and raised Man back to unity with God; thereby taking on the role of both sides. He reestablished Himself as Man's origin in a "new Creation." Therefore, Man is no longer held guilty of transgression. It is the role of the Christian, who recognizes the precise act of reconcilliation in the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ to convince our fellow men of this truth by living in a way that is consistent with Christ as our origin.

 

[lmnop9876]

great stuff Willtor! also the sanctity of marriage, i didn't think of that one.

 

[Willtor]

great stuff Willtor! also the sanctity of marriage, i didn't think of that one.

That's mostly St. Athanasius and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Wish I could take credit.

 

[nephilimiyr]

even if you don't accept the creation account of genesis 1 & 2 as completely literal, there are many theological and practical lessons that can be learnt from it. i thought i'd start a thread where people can post what they think can be learnt from Genesis 1, 2, & 3.
i think two of the most important lessons we can learn are, 1. every person is a special creation of God, He gave us our life and our soul, and we are all created for Him. 2. God created humanity perfect, but we have fallen from that condition and deserve to die, but God has provided a way of salvation for us.
there's other ones i'm thinking of, but i'll see if anyone else has any ideas first.

Well certainly the people who have already responded here has come up with some good things. Allow me to add one more thing but certainly not the least for there are many more things people could add here.

I believe that God knows the beginning from the end.Isaiah 46:10, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

So if God knows the beginning from the end then I think these verses from Ecclesiastes sheads light.
Eccl. 1:9-11, The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.

If God knows the beginning from the end and nothing that is now and about to come a new thing then I suggest that if we want to know the end we must study the beginning. And this includes the first 3 chapters of Genesis.

 

[nephilimiyr]

Also, I just remembered this. In Psalm 23:3 where it says "he leadeth me in paths of righteousness for his name sake", the Hebrew word used for paths does not mean a straight line but actually means an entrenched circle. He leads us in paths that are circular but an entrenched circle implying that it has been walked many, many times before.

So what we must understand is that God doesn't lead us or teach us things on a straight line but in cycles or in circles. If I had a straight line here I could show you that, ok, we are at point A on the line and we are moving towards point B and past point B the line just keeps moving forward in unchartered territory. This is not how it happends.

What happends is we, either personally or within the family of man as a group, are on a line that is a circle, ok, and we are at point A and moving towards point B, BUT the line does not move toward another point in unchartered territory but sooner or later will bring us back to point A.

So when Eccl. 1-9 says "that which hath been, it is that which shall be" it is saying that everything moves in full circle.

Sorry if you think I'm moving too far off subject guys but my point is that if we want to study end times theology, if that is something you want to do or are interested in then it would be very wise to read the first chapters of Genesis for the end should be revealed there.

Just to illustrate this, Jesus said in Luke 17:26, And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. so what must we do to learn about what the days of Noe were like? read the book of Genesis.

Please remember this...what comes around, goes around.

 

[chesslord243]

We learned that God created everything perfectly and then we blew it.

 

[lmnop9876]

We learned that God created everything perfectly and then we blew it.

best 1 sentence summary i've heard yet

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Genesis One is a metaphor for everything that has ever been and everything that will be. The rest of the bible fills in the details. But here's a one that I learned: Adam foreshadowed the sacrifice of Christ by eating of the fruit

oldwiseguy

 

[nephilimiyr]

Just wanted to bump this up to re-subscribe to it.

 

[Leimeng]

~ We learn that Adam and Eve in a state of perfect communion with God fell and lost their status before God providing yet another Biblical proof against the false teaching of extreme eternal security of the Believer.
~ We find that Adam and Eve were inside the garden and given dominion over it. They failed in two ways, one was they allowed the serpent (the devil) to get into the garden, and second was they chose to disobey God and trust in themselves and the serpent. Then they ate the fruit. Two sins before the one causing their expulsion.
~ Man was given dominion over the earth thus implying that God allowed at least some limits on His sovereignty theirby trashing the idea that man is a robot as taught by several groups. (Calvinist et al.)
~ It is also interesting what God did NOT say in the Genesis account. He does not say how long Adam and Eve were in the garden before the fall. He does not say anything major about what was happening outside of the Garden. (Can anyone say dinosaurs?) While it is assumed that Adam and Eve started having kids after their explusion from Eden, we are told that God commanded man and the earth to "Be Fruitful and Mulitply" If Adam and Eve did not have kids and start to be fruitful and mulitply in the garden, that would be yet another instance of sin before the fall.
~ The fall was from innocence. While assumed that this is original sin, we now have at least two, and maybe three instances of Adam and Eve disobeying God before the fall. Sin entered the world because of Adam, (one man, not one man and one woman). Was the sin Adam eating the fruit, or something else? After all, Eve ate the fruit before Adam. (The failure Adam to watch over his gift (Eve) could be interpreted as yet another instance of sin/disobediance before the fall).
~ Continue to discuss amongst yourselves....

Peace,

Leimeng

Flatulo Ergo Sum ~~~

(***Insert Personal One Liner Here***)

 

[Leimeng]

~ We learn that Adam and Eve in a state of perfect communion with God fell and lost their status before God providing yet another Biblical proof against the false teaching of extreme eternal security of the Believer.
~ We find that Adam and Eve were inside the garden and given dominion over it. They failed in two ways, one was they allowed the serpent (the devil) to get into the garden, and second was they chose to disobey God and trust in themselves and the serpent. Then they ate the fruit. Two sins before the one causing their expulsion.
~ Man was given dominion over the earth thus implying that God allowed at least some limits on His sovereignty theirby trashing the idea that man is a robot as taught by several groups. (Calvinist et al.)
~ It is also interesting what God did NOT say in the Genesis account. He does not say how long Adam and Eve were in the garden before the fall. He does not say anything major about what was happening outside of the Garden. (Can anyone say dinosaurs?) While it is assumed that Adam and Eve started having kids after their explusion from Eden, we are told that God commanded man and the earth to "Be Fruitful and Mulitply" If Adam and Eve did not have kids and start to be fruitful and mulitply in the garden, that would be yet another instance of sin before the fall.
~ The fall was from innocence. While assumed that this is original sin, we now have at least two, and maybe three instances of Adam and Eve disobeying God before the fall. Sin entered the world because of Adam, (one man, not one man and one woman). Was the sin Adam eating the fruit, or something else? After all, Eve ate the fruit before Adam. (The failure Adam to watch over his gift (Eve) could be interpreted as yet another instance of sin/disobediance before the fall).
~ Continue to discuss amongst yourselves....

Peace,

Leimeng

Flatulo Ergo Sum ~~~

(***Insert Personal One Liner Here***)

 

[jacquidube]

Did God not create sin for even lucifer to think the way he did?

 

[Willtor]

Did God not create sin for even lucifer to think the way he did?

Sin is opposition to God and His commandment. Sin, itself, is enmity with God. The notion of "creating sin" is a misunderstanding as nothing is created when someone sins.

 

[jacquidube]

Sin is opposition to God and His commandment. Sin, itself, is enmity with God. The notion of "creating sin" is a misunderstanding as nothing is created when someone sins.

I still believe God created all things and that includes sin.
God still created that which had sinned, unless someone of the opposite was with Him during the creation, which is unlikely.

 

[jacquidube]

Sin is opposition to God and His commandment. Sin, itself, is enmity with God. The notion of "creating sin" is a misunderstanding as nothing is created when someone sins.

I still believe God created all things and that includes sin.

 

[Willtor]

I still believe God created all things and that includes sin.
God still created that which had sinned, unless someone of the opposite was with Him during the creation, which is unlikely.

Sin is not a "thing" to be created, as Lucifer, or Gabriel, or Willtor, or Jacquidube is a thing. When we choose not to follow the will of God, we call that decision sin. Sin is not so much a path (even if it is described as such, metaphorically) as it is the absence of a path.