The Garden of Eden

Discussion in 'Bible Prophecy' started by Joshuastone7, May 7, 2022.

  1. 4,111
    827
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,111
    Likes Received:
    827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    Greetings,

    In the last few months, I have been going around and around about what exactly happened in the garden of Eden, and last night I had an epiphany that I believe answers all of the questions.

    Some of those questions included:

    How did the angels know good and evil?
    What is the knowledge of good and evil?
    Why did this happen on this planet?
    Did Adam and Eve have free will?

    -------

    Once Adam and Eve had sinned, they realized they were naked.

    "I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.” Gen 3:10

    I had always believed nakedness in Scripture was denoted as sin.

    "I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see." Rev 3:18

    However, the keyword in this scripture above is shame. Adam and Eve were already naked before they sinned and were not ashamed of it.

    "And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." Gen 2:25

    Their nakedness did not become shameful until they became conscious of something being right or wrong. Before that, they had free will in actions, without consciousness of shame. Once they had become conscient that actions could be right or wrong, their free will now had boundaries within themselves. In essence, they lost their free will without internal crisis. They applied laws and regulations to themselves at that moment. Adam and Eve adopted laws and restrictions of consciousness.

    Nakedness in itself in Scripture is not sin; shameful nakedness, however, is. A seared conscious through shaming the nakedness of free will is sin

    In the garden, Adam and Eve were naked, being in a state of not having any knowledge of shame for any actions. Once they ate of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, they then introduced shame of certain actions into the human condition.

    "Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked." Gen 3:7

    Where once they lived with free will and without law, they now introduced free will through restrictions and predestination upon themselves.

    In other words, something like covetousness would not have been sin before the fall. In this view, free will is nakedness in Scripture. Your free will can be maintained through a clean conscience or a shameful naked conscious after knowing good and evil. This is how we can keep free from sin today by keeping a clean conscious. All life is self-regulated through their nakedness of free will.

    -------

    Since the angels already knew good and evil, this means that they were aware that their actions could shame their consciousness. This question had already come up in that realm, and they lived with the awareness of their actions that could cause shame to their conscious. We are not told whether they lived with this knowledge for an extended or brief period.

    This is why the satan chose this planet. He knew it was special to God.

    "Then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man." Prov 8:30,31

    "And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day," Gen 3:8

    The satan chose this planet because it was special to God. He did it out of spite. That's why it happened here...

    Adam and Eve became ashamed of their free will and therefore introduced predestination through their disobedience.

    "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” Gen 3:15

    Through the clothing of Adam and Eve, God gave them the ability to hide their shamefulness and hence an avenue to a clean conscious.

    "The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them." Gen 3:21

    -------

    Lovingly, there is a way back into that garden of Eden, however. It is through the flaming sword.

    "After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life." Gen 3:24

    "From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty." Rev 19:15

    "I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see." Rev 3:18

    All love...
     
  2. 84
    35
    18
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    I wouldn't mind if we hit the Pause button and establish the context we're seeing in the account:

    I'll assume that we're in agreement that the account begins with the serpent [through which, we later learn, Satan was there for the Temptation of Adam]. No surprise, given Hebraic references to the Seraphim (Hebrew, serpents)-- at least with the convenience of scriptural hindsight as we receive the two written witnesses, our "Old" and "New" Testaments.

    Now the serpent was more cunning than any living thing of the field which Jehovah God had made. And he said to the woman, Has God indeed said, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden? —Genesis 3:1 VW-Edition

    The serpent poses the question to Eve— but there is no mistaking that Adam is right there as this is happening (See Genesis 3:6b).

    And not saying a word.

    Eve replies:

    And the woman said to the serpent, We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die. —Genesis 3:2-3 Ibid

    But this is not what God commanded [See Genesis 2:16-17]... which tells me that Adam added to God's command with the command to not even touch the fruit when he, at some point, instructed Eve concerning the tree in the midst of the Garden.

    Again, keeping in mind that the Man is standing right there, right now as the Woman God had given him is being approached and into conversation with this seraph [serpent]. The same Woman he had borne witness to being flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone!

    Even the apostle Paul, in his day, understood that Eve was deceived by Satan (2 Corinthians 11:3) and establishes that Adam was not. (1 Timothy 2:14)

    This was not a Man who would give up his body... his life for his bride as Christ, the Second Adam, did for his bride, the body of believers (colloquially, "the church") to redeem her from the events of the day we're discussing.

    I think it's safe to say that at this point, neither Eve nor Adam (even in his dangerous inaction in behalf of his Woman before this seraph [serpent]) had any awareness of their state of undress or nakedness. Au natural, as some say.

    Anyhow, this seraph tells Eve after she'd answered him:

    And the serpent said to the woman, You shall not die the death. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be as God, knowing good and evil. —Genesis 3:4-5 Ibid

    I think the majority of Bible translations render "You shall not die the death" as "You shall not surely die" which actually detracts from the original language's doubling of the word "die" ("mûth" in the original Hebrew). The doubling may even be an early reference to the second death we find referenced in the first century scriptures.

    Still no word from Adam here.

    So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. —Genesis 3:6a Ibid

    Bottom line, she disobeyed, the seraph having successfully deceived Eve.

    She sinned.

    But it's important to note, isn't it, that she still has no awareness of nakedness or her being naked— having just sinned. In other words, she sinned but still had no idea that she was naked.

    She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.—Genesis 3:6b Ibid

    Adam stood there watching all this go down, saw that Eve didn't die when she ate the fruit, and then ate the fruit, too. A very different Man from the Second Adam we have in Jesus Christ, wouldn't you say?

    Now that Adam's disobeyed God, the account records:

    And the eyes of both of them were opened... —Genesis 3:7a Ibid

    This opening of their eyes is separated in the record with their knowing that they were naked.

    In other words: first their eyes were opened, then they knew they were naked.

    So, who or what opened their eyes as to their nakedness? I think it interesting that Adam doesn't answer Jehovah's first question.

    And He said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat? —Genesis 3:11 Ibid

    Adam doesn't answer Jehovah as to who had told him that he was naked, but does proceed to lay the cause of his disobedience at the feet of the woman whom God had given Adam— flesh of his flesh, bones of his bones, a helpmeet made to be a perfect complement to him. (Cf. Job 2:4)

    And the man said, The woman whom You gave to be with me, she has given to me of the tree, and I ate. —Genesis 3:12 Ibid

    And things continued to both escalate and go downhill from here, as everyone knows.

    Eve then explained she had been deceived by the seraph [serpent], which suggests that she had become aware of the deception by this point. And then Jehovah turned His attention to this seraph in the Garden and did NOT ask anything-- but instead issued His Divine Edict and, ultimately, the pronouncement of the destruction of Satan and his works.

    But the question that is not answered is Who told Adam he was naked?

    While scriptures uphold Jehovah's Sovereignty in the opening and closing of the eyes of Man (Cf. Isaiah 44:18), the only other party present before Jehovah asked Adam the question is the seraph [serpent], or Satan. As a heavenly being, Satan has the power and authority to veil minds (close eyes) (Cf. 2 Corinthians 4:3-4), he can also open eyes of Men, as attested by Jesus. (Cf. Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7)

    Bottom line: Adam and Eve's disobedience did not invoke their awareness of nakedness.

    I see three immediate possibilities for how Adam was made aware that he was naked:

    Jehovah God. This would make God's question to Adam a curious one, perhaps as a way of seeing if Adam was aware of how he became aware that he was naked? I seriously doubt it was Jehovah God who did this, however, considering awareness that they were naked was never given as a consequence of disobedience regarding the tree in the middle of the Garden— the Second Death was. ("dying the death," mûth mûth, original Hebrew)

    Satan. The extent of Satan's malice toward Man (and Woman) is clear throughout the scriptures. Theologically, one could argue that once Adam and Eve disobeyed Jehovah God, they came into subjection to Satan (Cf. 1 John 5:19), and that Satan immediately proceeded to make bad what God had pronounced good-- letting Adam and Eve in on some big cosmic joke about how Adam and Eve had no idea they were naked as jaybirds. Adam could have pointed his finger at Satan as to who told him he was naked, but he didn't. And Adam had a two-for-one here, completely shifting responsibility for his own actions: "Who told you that you were naked?" "The serpent did. "Did you eat from the tree?" "The woman you gave me, God. SHE gave it to me and so I ate." Adam doesn't do that here, however.

    Personally, I am leaning toward the third possibility: Adam didn't know how he was made aware. That's not to say that he was deceived like Eve-- the scriptural evidence condemns Adam beyond all doubt for his disobedience, not to mention standing by while Eve was being deceived, perhaps observing whether she would die from eating of the fruit.

    Rather, it was upon Adam's disobedience that Jehovah's Spirit departed from Adam, for God's Spirit cannot have fellowship with wickedness/evil. (Cf. 2 Corinthians 6:14-15) Adam's God-given conscience felt the departure of Jehovah's Spirit, and experienced fear for the very first time, aptly described later by the writer of Hebrews:

    For if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, but [there is] a certain fearful expectation of judgment... —Hebrews 10:26-27 New World Translation

    The apostle Paul likewise touches on this:

    For whenever people of the nations that do not have law do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused. —Romans 2:14-15 Ibid

    Those of us who have our eyes opened to the good news personally come to know what a blessing it is to have a portion of our Father's holy spirit, the Comforter, and our God-given conscience grieves us when we are disobedient to the Will of our Father, thankfully taking away the pleasure and enjoyment that sinning appears to provide and condemning us in our heart.

    Unlike Adam, we as believers seek to become fully known and exposed before our Father and His appointed King-Priest, Jesus. (Cf. 1 Corinthians 8:3; 1 Corinthians 13:12) We have nothing to hide. All of our works can be brought into the light and examined by anyone, for our conscience is clear. Not that this means we're good-to-go as far as physical nakedness and therefore can go unclothed as we live our our lives serving God and our fellowmen. Thankfully, in my case!

    As the apostle Paul writes:

    Do your utmost to present yourself approved to God, a workman with nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of the truth aright. —2 Timothy 2:15 Ibid

    What a contrast from Adam, who was afraid and hid from his God, convicted by his own God-given conscience in his willful disobedience. As are we ourselves when we willfully disobey our Repurchaser, subsequently hiding from He that examines hearts. (Cf. Proverbs 17:3)

    That Adam and Eve imagined it possible to hide their disobedience from Jehovah by covering themselves with fig leaves just goes to demonstrate how successfully Satan was in fomenting the chain of events which led to the cutting off of Man from God for two Ages (the Noahic Age and the Mosaic Age).

    I've got to clip this response, though, to at least get something posted by way of a reply to your opening of the discussion. My apologies for not getting back to the remainder of your post, brother.

    A fellow believer,
    Timothy
     
  3. 4,111
    827
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,111
    Likes Received:
    827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    I have to disagree, brother. The Bible is communication, just like any other.

    "She took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked." Gen 6,7

    If someone is telling you a story, the narrative flows from one fact to another. The central part of this section is that she ate. Then she gave it to Adam, and he ate.

    The word then does not occur in the original Hebrew. It simply says, "Their eyes were opened." Any normal flow of information from one person to another would assume that their eyes were opened because of their eating. As written, Adam and Eve were focused on eating the fruit, and once Adam had completed his bite, they both realized they were naked. This would be the assumed flow of information from the narrator to the audience.

    According to the narrative, their recognition of their nakedness came from their eating.

    I have to disagree here with you again, brother. Adam's answer shows he was answering God's question. And I'll explain why.

    Firstly, while you believe God knew these two would sin, I believe that is not the case. I happen not to believe it was JHVH Himself in the Garden but rather a representative who was completely unaware. Whether it was YHVH or not is irrelevant to me. If YHVH knew or chose not to know isn't a debate for right now anyway. :)

    In communication, the first reason one asks a question is that they don't know its answer. I see nothing in the narrative to say the questions are hiding some ulterior motive in some attempt to test Adam.

    Adam answers God's question as honestly as he knew it to be. Since no one told him he was naked, he lays out the events that led to his realization of his nakedness.

    This is the simplest explanation of the flow of communication.

    And this was the point of my first post.

    When Ham uncovered the nakedness of Noah, he uncovered Noah's sin. Nakedness in the narrative of Scripture is used to denote sin. Once Adam and Eve sinned, they introduced the consciousness of right and wrong; therefore, they brought upon themselves the recognition of their own nakedness, their sin. We all personally have the conscience recognition of our own sin; it's not something others can make us recognize.

    Therefore no one could have made Adam and Eve recognize their sin; it was something they had to be conscious of within themselves personally. No one can make you feel or think anything; you choose to allow others' opinions to form your own or not.

    They were naked before they sinned and were not ashamed. And by their sin, their nakedness became shameful because they were now conscious of sin. Nakedness wasn't shameful before sin.

    I appreciate how you ended this post. And shows that sin is a personal recognition through our conscience based on actions. Just as Adam and Eve recognized their nakedness through their disobedience. Their conscience was at that point seared when disobeying God, and they didn't need anyone to tell them they were naked. Hence why Adam answered in the way he did. It was the eating of the fruit that brought about their recognition of their sin against God's commands.

    All love...

    Joshua
     
    Regent Lessard likes this.
  4. 84
    35
    18
    Timothy Kline

    Timothy Kline New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2021
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perry, MI
    Timothy Kline said:

    This opening of their eyes is separated in the record with their knowing that they were naked.

    In other words: first their eyes were opened, then they knew they were naked.
    ______________​


    I’m not seeing where we are disagreeing about the flow, or series of events.

    Having said that, what the central part of the section is has to be established within the context of the situation taking place. You say that it’s that she ate, then she gave it to Adam and he ate.

    Which, of course, I concur provisionally, for there can be so much more unpacked here, as time allows.

    Back on point: Each of these actions implies “and then,” wouldn’t you agree? In other words, the actions were not simultaneous.

    She ate.


    [And then…] She gave it to Adam.


    [And then…] Adam ate.


    [And then…] Their eyes were opened.


    [And then…] They realized they were naked.

    Whether the word “then” is in the original language, it most certainly is a logical enough inference, considering the alternative is that each act occurred simultaneously— which, to me, is preposterous and a non-starter.

    ______________​


    No, this would constitute an assertion.

    If their eyes were opened as a result of eating from the tree of Knowledge, then Eve’s eyes logically would have been opened before Adam’s, not after because of her eating [your position], nevermind that she didn’t drop dead because of her eating— if physical death that very day was what Jehovah God was declaring to Adam.

    ______________


    Again, there are some assertions you seem to be imposing on the written word.

    Assertion 1: Adam and Eve were so focused on the fruit, to such an extent, that after Eve took her bite, she had some form of tunnel vision that kept her ignorant as to their nakedness until Adam took his own bite, even though, logically, she would need to look at Adam so as to hand him the apple— unless you argue that she never took her eyes off the apple while this is taking place (which circles us back to the “tunnel vision” theory and imposing assertion on the written word).

    Assertion 2: They then realized they were naked— which skips full over the opening of their eyes, a distinction made by the Bible writer, not myself— resulting in your apparent conflating the written word. The Bible writer first notes that their eyes were [then] opened, and [then] they realized they were naked; you, unless I’m mistaken, seem to be of the opinion that these two statements are one-and-the-same.

    As I touched on the problem with the first assertion you made here, earlier, let’s have a look at the second assertion and why it creates a problem for me.

    The biggest issue for me with conflating here is the scriptural record itself, which time and again demonstrates Jehovah God’s power to open and close eyes so as to provide or shroud understanding:

    They have not known nor understood; for He has shut their eyes so that they cannot see; and their hearts so that they cannot understand. —Isaiah 44:18 VW-Edition

    He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, that they should not see with their eyes, that they should not understand with their hearts and be turned, and I should heal them. —John 12:40 Ibid

    Yet Jehovah has not given you a heart to perceive and eyes to see and ears to hear, to this very day. —Deuteronomy 29:4 Ibid

    Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in Heaven. —Matthew 16:16-17 Ibid

    But as it is written: Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it dawned upon the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him. But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. . . But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he is not able to know them, because they are spiritually discerned. —1 Corinthians 2:9-10, 14 Ibid

    These are just some of the examples that, for me, overturn your assertion that the opening of their eyes and what they saw with their physical eyes are one-and-the-same— keeping in mind that throughout the Bible there is a distinction made between eyes of understanding and eyes that see things which are in the physical realm (2 Corinthians 4:18, 5:7; Hebrews 11:13 (really, Hebrews 11:1,13,25-27)). And there are others.

    Except at Genesis 3:7?? I guess this is where you’ll need to convince me.

    First, Adam and Eve’s eyes were opened following Adam’s disobedience. They then both suddenly understood and then, or, as a result of now understanding they yâda‛ (ascertained by seeing) that they were physically naked. What Jehovah God had pronounced as good (their form in which He created them, naked as a baby fresh out of the womb) they now saw through a marred perception of each other. The same skewed perception drove them to shame and they sought to cover themselves and hide their perfectly created bodies using fig leaves.

    This word yâda‛ makes another appearance at Genesis 4:1, when Adam yâda‛ Eve, his wife, and she conceived. Here, we understand the word to mean that Adam had intimate relations with Eve, and that the word is a euphemism for sexual relations leading to pregnancy (“...and she conceived…”). He ascertained by seeing, how to enter upon sexual relations with Eve, so as to cause pregnancy. Some time did pass here, after all, since Adam did not have sexual relations with his wife, Eve, until after their expulsion from the garden into the wilderness.


    Timothy Kline said:

    And He said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat? —Genesis 3:11 Ibid

    Adam doesn't answer Jehovah as to who had told him that he was naked, but does proceed to lay the cause of his disobedience at the feet of the woman whom God had given Adam— flesh of his flesh, bones of his bones, a helpmeet made to be a perfect complement to him. (Cf. Job 2:4)​


    {I want to mention/note the expanded ellipses I used in your quote to indicate that I clipped out some of your response to squeeze your follow-up together for simpler responding. I agree that a discussion about whether that was an avatar for Jehovah God in the garden or not would take us too far afield from the present discussion.}

    Alright, so let’s start with the assertion “In communication, the first reason one asks a question is that they don’t know the answer.”

    First, the obvious problem: When God asked Adam who told Adam he was naked, God didn’t know the answer?? Otherwise, why ask, right?

    Nah, I don’t see it because your assertion contradicts scripture:

    Remember the former things from a long time ago; for I am the Mighty God, and there is no other; I am God, and no one else is like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from antiquity things which are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure… —Isaiah 46:9-10 VW-Edition

    Not to be forgotten: Many a parent down through the centuries has asked their child about something the child did, knowing already, full and well, the answer but asking the child to answer for themselves-- whether the child is a toddler, teen, or adult child.

    John the baptizer already knew the answer to the question he asked the Pharisees:

    But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his immersion, he said to them, Offspring of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? —Matthew 3:7 Ibid

    This is demonstrated by his then proceeding to denounce them in verses 9-12.

    Still, the penultimate full-stop for me is any suggestion that God didn’t know how Adam now knew he was naked, when Jehovah doesn’t just know the end from the beginning— He declares it.

    Back to Adam, then, of whom you write: “Adam answers God's question as honestly as he knew it to be.”

    I’m worried you might be conflating things here, as well.

    Jehovah God asks Adam two questions:

    1. Who told you that you were naked?

    2. Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?

    Adam’s answer:

    ...The woman whom You gave to be with me, she has given to me of the tree, and I ate. —Genesis 3:12 VW-Edition

    How this answers Jehovah’s first question about how Adam [now] knows he is naked, I must be blind because I see no correlation.

    Rather, it seems like the simplest answer is that Adam refuses to answer the question about how he [now] knows, in spite of his own heart condemning him, even as he hides in his shame and guilt from God when God manifests in the garden. This would be consistent with his next throwing Eve under the bus and back-handing Jehovah in saying that Jehovah had given him the woman in the first place.

    He had an opportunity to answer a simple Yes or No (Cf Matthew 5:37) as to whether he had eaten from the tree, yet Adam points his finger at Eve for giving him the fruit— and, as I just mentioned, even going so far as to blame Jehovah, since it was Jehovah Who had given the woman to him in the first place!

    This, too, flatly contradicts your assertion that “Adam answers God's question as honestly as he knew it to be.”

    An honest answer would have been Yes and a contrite heart, brother. (1 John 1:9)

    Yet even now turn to Me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning, declares Jehovah. So, tear your heart, and not your garments; and return to Jehovah your God. For He is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and He has compassion concerning the evil. — Joel 2:12-13 VW-Edition

    A couple great examples for comparison are found in 1) David’s repentance when called out by Nathan (2 Samuel 12:13; Psalm 51:1-4), and; 2) the tax collector (Luke 18:13-14).

    I want to close out this portion of my response to your post with a few thoughts about Adam:

    Adam was not repentant, he was afraid (Cf Hebrews 10:26-27). Rather than bare himself before his Creator, Who might then search Adam’s heart and see repentance, Adam covered himself with fig leaves.

    And I want to reiterate that Adam is standing right here during this entire exchange and yet remains utterly silent!

    That just seems like a pretty big deal to me. First, because I cannot imagine— me, a miserable wretch of a man who just happens to be, for some inexplicable reason, blessed with belief and awareness of our Creator, our Father by adoption— just standing there while ho Satan carries on in a conversation with my wife, knowing full-well the wrongness of it.

    And that’s why I just don’t see how it can possibly be over-emphasized: Adam was not deceived by any measure at any point during this moment in the garden. This man who had declared the woman flesh of his own flesh and bones of his bones, a reference ho Satan would later make before the heavenly court during the trial of Job. (Job 2:4)

    Admittedly, we’re not told what he was thinking as this is all going on, but I still wonder— and I suspect he was waiting and watching to see what would happen if someone ate of the tree of Knowledge, knowing the heart of Man to the extent I do. ~~~ Okay, she didn’t die when she touched the fruit like I told her— and now she’s eating of the fruit and she … she… she isn’t dead! ~~~

    And having seen that she didn’t die like God had said would happen (God was speaking to spiritually dying that day), Adam full-on (I’ve seen/read believers argue he follows Eve into sin but that’s a whole other discussion) disobeys Jehovah God.

    One point you had raised I didn’t really get to, so maybe I should do that before I wrap this miserably long response up and get it posted.

    You wrote, “I see nothing in the narrative to say the questions are hiding some ulterior motive in some attempt to test Adam.”

    I hope I never suggested or said there was some ulterior motive to be witnessed here. But I do want to remind you of the example I gave earlier where a parent will ask a child if they’ve done a thing— even though the parent already knows the answer to the question.

    Was Adam being tested here? You don’t think so, I gather?

    Consider: Jesus as the second Adam was certainly tested by ho Satan— so it seems reasonable that the first Adam was tested. The only difference, really, is that Adam was tested in the garden under the best of conditions and Jesus was tested in the harsh wilderness. That, and Adam failed to remain obedient, and he set his own will above that of God’s Will.

    But the natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he is not able to understand them, because spiritually they are discerned. —1 Corinthians 2:14 Berean Literal Bible

    And he said, “Father, if you are willing, let this cup pass from me; however not my will, but yours be done.” —Luke 22:42 Aramaic Bible in Plain English

    It wasn’t Eve who was being tested that day, it was Adam. Eve was deceived, we must always keep in mind. It would be a skewed test from the outset, if she had been the one being put to a test of faithfulness. Adam was not deceived. He knew and he did nothing. Jesus knew and he laid down his life to protect the bride which was being prepared for him. He provided a covering for his bride while Adam let his wife be deceived.

    Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to Himself as a glorious church, without stain or wrinkle or any such blemish, but holy and blameless.—Ephesians 5:25-27 Berean Study Bible

    That this came about as some sort of arrangement for Adam to be tested is suggested by the very basic fact that Eve and Adam are standing near enough to the tree to encounter the seraph in the first place, out of all the garden places they could otherwise be. I’m dubious that the seraph just appeared out of thin air when Adam and Eve approached the tree, and why hadn’t Adam steered her clear of the tree in the first place?!?!

    His silence during the exchange between the seraph (“serpent”) and Eve speaks volumes.

    Admittedly, the evidence is circumstantial, but it’s still pretty compelling. Adam’s inaction reveals there was something already forming in his heart regarding the tree, or he wouldn’t have been standing there in the first place, not to mention failing to protect Eve from being deceived.

    ...afterward the desire having conceived, gives birth to sin, and sin having been perfected, brings forth death. —James 1:15 Literal Version Bible

    But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts.—Romans 13:14 VW-Edition [Another contrast between Jesus, who provides a raiment of righteousness, and Adam’s pitiable fig leaves providing no righteousness, only an attempt to cover shame.]​

    Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.—James 4:17 Ibid

    Flee from sin as from the face of a serpent [seraph]: for if thou comest too near it, it will bite thee: the teeth thereof are as the teeth of a lion, slaying the souls of men.”—Ecclesiasticus 21:2 King James Version (Yes, I know this last one’s extra-canonical or deuterocanonical, but what an uncanny reference, nonetheless!)​

    I can’t help but discern the marked contrast between Adam and Jesus. The first Adam was selfish… carnal. I know because as a son of the first Adam, I strive with the inclinations of the flesh passed down from Adam (Genesis 8:21). The second Adam, Jesus, laid down his self and was willing to die for the bride Jehovah God had prepared for him.

    I strive with the first Adam, that I might become like the second Adam.

    Alright, I better put a wrap on this portion of my follow-up.

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    A fellow believer / Timothy
     
  5. 4,111
    827
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,111
    Likes Received:
    827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    Greetings brother,

    I think you've misunderstood my premise.

    Indeed, each event is mentioned as occurring one after the other.

    Think about it like this: Eve looked upon the fruit and thought it appealing. Next, she took it and ate it; then she gave it to Adam, who also ate it. Now, what is the mindset of sin?

    "But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death." Jam 1:13,15

    What is the state of mind when being lured and enticed by desire? We all understand that it is a matter of focusing on improper actions.

    Now, what is the mindset once one is in the act of sinning? Is one focusing on the negative impact of their actions at that moment, or are they focusing on fleshly indulgences? At what point does one generally turn their attention to the wrong they had just committed? Is it not after sin?

    This is the reason the flow of information in the account is stated as it is. They ate because the fruit was pleasing to the eye. They indulged in it, and then only after did they become ashamed of their actions.

    Yes, I believe we are in agreement about the event's separateness; however, my reading of the text indicates that there were no events between their eyes being opened and the recognition of nakedness (their sin). After the enjoyment of sin, they regretted their actions. They realized that their short-term pleasure of the fruit did not constitute equality to the ultimate results that would come from doing so.

    The narrative is not about being shy or a newfound reservedness for their private parts.

    Again, I believe you have misunderstood me. I believe the opening of their eyes is equal to their recognition of their nakedness, meaning their sin. I believe the opening of their eyes was not to recognize their physical nakedness because they were already naked; they already knew that. What they didn't know, which was something new, was that now their nakedness was shameful.

    "And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed." Gen 2:25

    "I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see." Rev 3:18

    "Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father’s nakedness." Gen 9:22

    "And you shall not go up by steps to My altar, so that your nakedness will not be exposed on it.’" Ex 20:26

    "“Your nakedness will be uncovered, Your shame also will be exposed; I will take vengeance and will not spare a man.” Ish 47:3

    -------

    I could go on, but you get the gist.

    See, I don't believe that is the correct view of this scripture. I believe they knew they were naked physically and were not ashamed. We are told they were previously not ashamed of their nakedness. It is simply the fact that the Bible uses shameful nakedness as a metaphor to show they were now ashamed of it as a sign of sin. This story in Genisis establishes a metaphor to be used all the way down to Revelation.

    Think about it like this: It's not that they just suddenly understood that they were once physically naked and didn't realize it; the moral of the story is about their sin, not their reservedness. The moral isn't about physical nakedness; the story is about sin. They were now ashamed of what they had just done.

    It is a metaphor.

    See, I don't think that is the case. Yes, the narrative goes on to indicate they covered themselves with leaves, and Jehovah covered them with skins. But these also are metaphors. All through Scripture, palm branches and leaves are depicted in metaphor, as well as skins in sacrifices, etc... The covering of shameful nakedness is a narrative for sin.

    When Jesus said to buy refined garments from Him to cover our shameful nakedness, he didn't mean to purchase clothes from Him physically. The narrative in the garden is about once not being ashamed of nakedness, to now being ashamed of nakedness.

    You are right to mention Jehovah opens and closes the eyes of man. Where once Adam and Eve had free will in all things except the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, they now took upon themselves consciousness of limitations or, better said, predestination. They no longer had complete free will; at that point, they would have restrictions of conscience. After which our eyes, being opened or closed, were now in the hands of the Father and Christ.

    We are looking at God's words in that Scripture after the beginning and after the fall. You see, I believe the beginning being spoken of is after the fall of man. As you will read in my book, I open in the Preface entitled The Garden, "Before the beginning of the heavens and earth, and before the foundation of the world, God made man."

    Once Adam and Eve had sinned, they lost free will. In my summation, it was only after that point did God decide to see from the begging to the end in order to separate the light from the darkness. Hence why, Adam and Eve were to die in that day. Each day from the beginning is 1000 years long as we approach the end of that 6000th year.

    While the individual in the garden could have decided to know the future, they chose not to. This is what gave Adam and Eve free will up until they lost it.

    Now see, I have started to have a differing view on Adam's response here. Yes, I still believe Adam answered honestly, but the narrative is about now being ashamed of their nakedness. Being ashamed of a sin is a recognition of it and a realization he had made a mistake. However, Adam did not go as far as to take the blame for his own actions. But, can that come down to the fact that sin was new, and that was simply an example of another sin?

    We already know how Scripture denotes God covering our sins by clothing us. Is the narrative in the garden telling us that God forgave Adam and Eve? Something to think about...

    The reason Adam answered God honestly is that the narrative isn't about physical nakedness; it is about sin. The narrator uses physical nakedness to make a point. They were already naked, brother, and weren't ashamed of it. It is only after they sin that are they now ashamed. Had they not sinned, they would not have been ashamed of their nakedness.

    Do you think the narrative is about Adam and Eve being shy? The narrative isn't about their intimate parts being seen; it's about their sin. And that's why Adam answers the way he does.

    This is answered once I realized they had free will before their sin and lost that after. Adam wasn't just standing by to see what would happen; he had free will to do whatever he wanted. God did not know what would occur, and neither did anyone else. Did the satan already know they would sin? Certainly not... In fact, there probably wasn't anything out of the ordinary for him to be speaking to them at all; The angelic realm resided with man at that time.

    To me, the moral of the story is this: At one time, Adam and Eve had free, as the narrative tells us in its assertion they may eat of every tree. No one had knowledge of the future. (Again, without getting into the debate about Jehovah or a spokesman.)

    Then, an angel decided to disobey and tempt Eve. She allowed desire to grow and took pleasure in that sin. Adam as well took pleasure in his sin. After that pleasure, they realized it did not equal the consequences, and they were now aware of what it meant to disobey God's commands. They took upon themselves a conscience of right and wrong.

    At which point they lost their free will when God foresaw from that beginning to the end, and predestination set in. The beginning being the "bruising of His heel, and the bruising of your head."

    Only after that do we have restrictions to come to God.

    All love...

    Joshua
     

Share This Page