Did Adam and Eve and animals have genitals before the fall?

[AdamjEdgar]

Adam and Eve were always going to die (otherwise the presence of the Tree of Life is meaningless)

Oh this is theological rubbish. The existence of the tree of life does not signify the idea that Adam and Eve were always going to die. You are making the claim that God isn't perfect and therefore needed some magic trick potion to fix his creation cockups...immediately after he created Adam and Eve!

It doesn't stand the logic stink test for a start. Are you really going to push the idea a being powerful enough to create wouldnt have also thought of that BEFORE he created?

The tree of life vs the tree of good and evil are theological evidences that prove the war in heaven and the fall of Lucifer...they do not theologically prove theistic evolution!

 

[Yokefellow]

I never suggested reproduction was a sin, just that it might eventually become a problem if more and more are born with nobody dying.

Psalms 51:5
"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

 

[blü 2]

Oh this is theological rubbish. The existence of the tree of life does not signify the idea that Adam and Eve were always going to die.

Of course it does. It works on exactly the same principle as the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil ─ you eat the fruit, you get the result, until then you don't. Why else would you need a Tree of Life?

You are making the claim that God isn't perfect and therefore needed some magic trick potion to fix his creation cockups...immediately after he created Adam and Eve!

Don't blame me. That's exactly what the story says. For example, WHAT DID GOD SAY WAS [HIS] REASON for kicking Adam and Eve out of the Garden? Quote it to me, it's there.

It doesn't stand the logic stink test for a start.

It's a folk tale, like the Creation, or Noah's flood, or the Tower of Babel, or Aaron and Moses contesting with Pharaoh's magicians and turning the entire Nile into real blood and back, or Moses being found in the rushes and adopted by a "princess" and named "Son" (which is what Moses means in Egyptian), or Moses parting the sea or &c &c &c.

Are you really going to push the idea a being powerful enough to create wouldnt have also thought of that BEFORE he created?

The tree of life vs the tree of good and evil are theological evidences that prove the war in heaven and the fall of Lucifer...they do not theologically prove theistic evolution!

No, wrong book ─ you're thinking of Milton.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Of course it does. It works on exactly the same principle as the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil ─ you eat the fruit, you get the result, until then you don't. Why else would you need a Tree of Life?

The reason both of these trees were in the garden of eden was to provide Adam and Eve with a choice. They could choose one or the other and the theological reason why is because of the charge that Lucifer made against the God of heaven before he revolted. The Bible tells us quite clearly that the earth is the place in the universe where this is playing out. Quite a number of individuals also believe that it is likely that these two trees were/are also found on other worlds as a constant test of their loyalty too.

An interesting thing about these two trees is when were they removed from this planet?

I am not sure the Bible specifically says they have been removed, however, if an angel was placed at the entrance to the garden of Eden to prevent access, then i would suggest that both trees were either removed miraculously or destroyed during Noahs Flood.

What we do know is that the bible makes the statement that Christs death on the cross was a single event only. He died once in order to make atonement for sin. Some may argue that is only on this earth...however, if the claim Lucifer made against God, and the subsequent revolt was heavenly, then the rest of the universe were clearly looking on. It therefore seems logical to also conclude that Christs atonement on the cross is universal rather than merely local. It could also be evidence to suggest that only this planet has ever fallen into sin. Either way, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is no longer here.

In addressing your last statement about Noahs flood, creation etc, all being a myth...here is the problem with your claim.

1. We know for a fact that New Testament Gospel writers really existed...the apostles existence is without question.
2. We know from both Jewish and external historical sources that the biblical narrative of the history of Israel is relatively accurate...so the kings of Israel existed as the bible claims. We have lots of archelogical artifacts and other evidence that prove this...such as Hezekiahs water ducts (Siloam tunnel), the destruction of Herods temple by the Romans, the babylonian empire, rulers of Medo Persia...even kingdoms such as the hittites where for many years the only evidence in support of this race of people was the bible (until archeological evidence was discovered that also supported the bible claim).
3. whilst many modern scientists scoff, there is an ever increasing flow of evidence that supports a global flood event. Similar rock layers found in different regions of the world that were clearly deposited at the same time is but one significant example.
4. Even the claim that dinosaurs could not have existed alongside humanity is now being discredited...a classic example is the motif in an asian temple (Ta Prohm in Cambodia) of what appears to be a dinosaur (possibly a stegosaurus or similar creature) . Yes i have read the counterclaims however, if you read closely...these counterclaims do not actually provide any evidence that supports their view other than..."it simply cannot be because men and dinosaurs didnt exist together". It is a crazy reasoning to use theories to prove theories. That is not factual evidence!

Christians, rather than relying on theories to prove theories, use an extensive library of historical and archeological evidence to support their world view...evidence that is proven to go back to at least 700 years before Christ for Bible writings (Isaiah scroll), and much older with archeological evidence)

So the atheistic claim "the bible is a myth" is a gross ignorance of factual evidence that proves such a claim false. Can we prove God? Well thats a philosophical question. At the end of the day, one has a choice...what alternative does one have after death? If you believe in God and it turns out that he really does exist as the bible says, then you will obtain eternal life.

If God doesnt exist, then the Christian suffers thee same fate as the atheist, but if he does exist, then the atheist loses...so either way, its a win win for Christianity isnt it!

The bottom line is, that if an individual is to think about the question of existence and eternal life logically, given the evidence that does support the bible narrative is quite comprehensive and overwhelmingly in favour of its characters and the narrative being relatively true, then the best educated guess would be to have faith in the bible.

 

[Monty]

The reason both of these trees were in the garden of eden was to provide Adam and Eve with a choice. They could choose one or the other and the theological reason why is because of the charge that Lucifer made against the God of heaven before he revolted. The Bible tells us quite clearly that the earth is the place in the universe where this is playing out. Quite a number of individuals also believe that it is likely that these two trees were/are also found on other worlds as a constant test of their loyalty too.

An interesting thing about these two trees is when were they removed from this planet?

I am not sure the Bible specifically says they have been removed, however, if an angel was placed at the entrance to the garden of Eden to prevent access, then i would suggest that both trees were either removed miraculously or destroyed during Noahs Flood.

What we do know is that the bible makes the statement that Christs death on the cross was a single event only. He died once in order to make atonement for sin. Some may argue that is only on this earth...however, if the claim Lucifer made against God, and the subsequent revolt was heavenly, then the rest of the universe were clearly looking on. It therefore seems logical to also conclude that Christs atonement on the cross is universal rather than merely local. It could also be evidence to suggest that only this planet has ever fallen into sin. Either way, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is no longer here.

In addressing your last statement about Noahs flood, creation etc, all being a myth...here is the problem with your claim.

1. We know for a fact that New Testament Gospel writers really existed...the apostles existence is without question.
2. We know from both Jewish and external historical sources that the biblical narrative of the history of Israel is relatively accurate...so the kings of Israel existed as the bible claims. We have lots of archelogical artifacts and other evidence that prove this...such as Hezekiahs water ducts, the destruction of Herods temple by the Romans, the babylonian empire, rulers of Medo Persia...even kingdoms such as the hittites where for many years the only evidence in support of this race of people was the bible (until archeological evidence was discovered that also supported the bible claim).
3. whilst many modern scientists scoff, there is an ever increasing flow of evidence that supports a global flood event. Similar rock layers found in different regions of the world that were clearly deposited at the same time is but one significant example.
4. Even the claim that dinosaurs could not have existed alongside humanity is now being discredited...a classic example is the motif in an asian temple (Ta Prohm in Cambodia) of what appears to be a dinosaur (possibly a stegosaurus or similar creature) . Yes i have read the counterclaims however, if you read closely...these counterclaims do not actually provide any evidence that supports their view other than..."it simply cannot be because men and dinosaurs didnt exist together".

So the atheistic claim "the bible is a myth" is a gross ignorance of factual evidence that proves such a claim false. Can we prove God? Well thats a philosophical question. At the end of the day, one has a choice...what alternative does one have after death? If you believe in God and it turns out that he really does exist as the bible says, then you will obtain eternal life.

If God doesnt exist, then the Christian suffers thee same fate as the atheist, but if he does exist, then the atheist loses...so either way, its a win win for Christianity isnt it!

But has anyone recently seen a god and had a face to face chat with one and shared a meal together as described in Gen 18?

The bible, however, doesn't say that the flood which drowned most of Noah's family was global, since it was only 15 cubits high and had no effect on an olive tree from which a fresh leaf was plucked by Noah's pet bird.

And what evidence do you have that dinosaurs lived in Cambodia less than 1000 years ago? That scupture looks more like a water buffalo with lotus petals on it's back, and not an animal with a tiny head and a long neck and pointed tail.

 

[blü 2]

The reason both of these trees were in the garden of eden was to provide Adam and Eve with a choice.

That's not what the story says. What kind of a choice is the command "Do not eat from the Tree otkog&e"?

And now you've looked up the reason why God chucked them out of the Garden, so you've already read Genesis 3:22 ─

"Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good from evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" ─ 23 therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden ..."​

Gee, it would help discussions like this if some people actually read the text instead of thinking it says what they've been told.

They could choose one or the other and the theological reason why is because of the charge that Lucifer made against the God of heaven before he revolted.

That was very clearly not God's intention, since [he] commanded them not to eat of the Tree otkog&e and [he] kicked them out of the Garden to stop them eating from the Tree of Life.

The Bible tells us quite clearly that the earth is the place in the universe where this is playing out.

More than that, the bible tells us that the earth is flat, and immovably fixed at the center of the universe, and the sun and stars &c go around it, and the sky is a hard dome you can walk on and to which the stars are affixed so that if they come loose they'll fall to earth &c. I listed some of the relevant quotes where it says those things >here<, so you don't have to take my word for it, you can confirm it for yourself.

Quite a number of individuals also believe that it is likely that these two trees were/are also found on other worlds as a constant test of their loyalty too.

Read those quotes I linked for you. The bible doesn't assert the existence of any other star or planet. Above the flat earth is heaven and below the flat earth is the deep.

In addressing your last statement about Noahs flood, creation etc, all being a myth...here is the problem with your claim.

1. We know for a fact that New Testament Gospel writers really existed...the apostles existence is without question.

We don't know the actual names of any of the gospel authors. We know that none of them ever met an historical Jesus and were recording a variety of oral traditions.

3. there is an ever increasing flow of evidence that supports a global flood event.

No, there isn't. I say again what I say every time here ─ IF there had been a biblical flood THEN we MUST find ─

1. a single universal geological flood layer, all over all continents, islands and the ocean floor, dated within the last say 10,000 years, and
2. a genetic bottleneck in every species of land animal, every bottleneck dating to the same date as the flood layer, and
3. one billion cubic miles of water over and above the water presently on the earth.

And instead we find nothing ─ absolutely stark motherless nothing ─ like that.

 

[shunyadragon]

That's not what the story says. What kind of a choice is the command "Do not eat from the Tree otkog&e"?

And now you've looked up the reason why God chucked them out of the Garden, so you've already read Genesis 3:22 ─

"Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good from evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" ─ 23 therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden ..."​

Gee, it would help discussions like this if some people actually read the text instead of thinking it says what they've been told.


That was very clearly not God's intention, since [he] commanded them not to eat of the Tree otkog&e and [he] kicked them out of the Garden to stop them eating from the Tree of Life.

I have read the text and it is based on ancient mythology and not meaningful or relevant in understanding the nature of being human. If you read it in context it proposed that God set up two poor fallible humans Adam and Eve to eventually fail and commit the first sin, blaming the poor shmucks for all the future sin, death, and suffering in the world Also sort of puts God in the driver's seat as the cause of all the future sin, death and suffering in the world. God apparently didn't get it right, even had to clean it up and do it again with a world flood.

In the ancient tribal Biblical scenario, God is omnipotent, All-powerful, All-knowing and All-wise, and God is responsible for screwing up God's Creation.

 

[blü 2]

I have read the text and it is based on ancient mythology and not meaningful or relevant in understanding the nature of being human. If you read it in context it proposed that God set up two poor fallible humans Adam and Eve to eventually fail and commit the first sin, blaming the poor shmucks for all the future sin, death, and suffering in the world Also sort of puts God in the driver's seat as the cause of all the future sin, death and suffering in the world. God apparently didn't get it right, even had to clean it up and do it again with a world flood.

In the ancient tribal Biblical scenario, God is omnipotent, All-powerful, All-knowing and All-wise, and God is responsible for screwing up God's Creation.

But in the Garden story [he] comes across as naive, something of a novice at godding. [He] tells a lie, for example, and it's up to the Snake to put Eve straight, as to whether or not, if she eats the fruit, she'll die the same day. Nor does it occur to [him] to move the two trees to a safe place, or at least to put an electric fence or equivalent dragon to prevent fruit-eating. [He] gives a similar amateur impression with the Tower of Babel. I suspect that's because the stories are from Mesopotamian lore and are very old by the time they get written down here. A similar naivety is found in the telling of the story, or legend, of Moses ─ the idea, for instance, that Pharaoh's magicians can instantly match the examples of magic which God enables Moses and Aaron to perform. I'd guess it arises from the idea that the Hebrew god was simply another tribal god in the Canaanite pantheon, even if on [his] way to becoming in the eyes of his followers the pre-eminent one.

 

[Yokefellow]

That's not what the story says. What kind of a choice is the command "Do not eat from the Tree otkog&e"?

The choice was to disobey, obviously.

 

[Yokefellow]

This thread is like the blind leading the blind. Such a waste of bandwidth.

 

[blü 2]

The choice was to disobey, obviously.

What's wrong with disobeying when you've specifically been denied knowledge of right and wrong and so have no idea,. no way of knowing, that disobedience is wrong?

In that condition you can never form an intention to do wrong, so you can never be guilty of wrongdoing.

You'll notice that God in the Garden story never accuses them of wrongdoing. [He] says instead they might become a threat to [his] own position.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Don't blame me. That's exactly what the story says. For example, WHAT DID GOD SAY WAS [HIS] REASON for kicking Adam and Eve out of the Garden? Quote it to me, it's there.

oh i forgot to also add an important thought into my statement about this...if a theistic evolutionist is claiming that eating the fruit of the tree of life in the garden was necessary for life...how did creatures survive before that tree evolved?

 

[AdamjEdgar]

What's wrong with disobeying when you've specifically been denied knowledge of right and wrong and so have no idea,. no way of knowing, that disobedience is wrong?

In that condition you can never form an intention to do wrong, so you can never be guilty of wrongdoing.

now thats an interesting statement and there is a direct answer to it...

Genesis 3: 1Now the serpenta was more crafty than any beast of the field that the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden?’ ”​

​

2The woman answered the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden, 3but about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You must not eat of it or touch it, or you will die.’ ”​

​

4“You will not surely die,” the serpent told her. 5“For God knows that in the day you eat of it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”​

​

6When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, she took the fruit and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it.​

​

It appears to me that God did the very thing you are claiming he did not. Adam and Eve were specifically told "do not eat of the tree in the middle of the garden"​

​

Just because a writer doesn't tell the whole story we should not take that to mean there is not more to it. I am quite certain, given the remaining 1188 chapters in the bible go into great detail about how God has attempted to restore what sin ruined...Adam and Eve were versed in the dangers of Satan lurking around the Garden of Eden. We can obviously deduce that this happened relatively soon after creation and that they did not have any experience with sin...but given there was no sin prior to this in the world, how could they have had any experience even if it was many years after creation?​

 

[Yokefellow]

What's wrong with disobeying when you've specifically been denied knowledge of right and wrong and so have no idea,. no way of knowing, that disobedience is wrong?

They were not denied knowledge of right and wrong. They were specifically told not to partake. They knew that what they were doing was wrong.

In that condition you can never form an intention to do wrong, so you can never be guilty of wrongdoing.

Again, they were commanded not to eat of that tree. They disobeyed. Thus, they are guilty.

You'll notice that God in the Garden story never accuses them of wrongdoing. [He] says instead they might become a threat to [his] own position.

Where does it say, 'they might become a threat to [his] own position'?

 

[AdamjEdgar]

I am still waiting for a christian old age earther to explain to me in a.manner theolgically consistent with the bible... if the tree of life was necessary for survival prior to the fall (as one of the respondants on this thread seems to claim), how did creatures survive on this earth before the tree of life evolved? And even if the tree of life did exist, how did creatures all over the earth access its fruit? Did they (even microbes and bacteria) catch a lift to the centre of the garden periodically to eat the fruit before returning to their homeland somewhere else on the planet? (BTW the earths circumference is 40,000km...thats huge distance for a microbe to travel to eat the fruit of this tree)

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Nice facsimile, characters of the story, writing their own narrative.
Correct and many stories are make believe.... perfect example: genesis (creation)
Worshiped? People write that kind of nonsense. let me play assistant: G-d wants each to know love and maintain PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY or else.
Gandolf did not write Lord of the rings but I recognized the best point, the character of the story cannot write the story
designer? Moses did not observe creation as the story suggests but since he did claim to write torah and was born and raised in egypt, the house of pharoah, then it make sense, that he learned from the libraries of egypt and their culture.
The good of mankind (middle earth)
OK.... the wisdom that none are perfect and each of us must learn how to forgive, makes perfect sense for the evolution of the torah belief system.
But then look at mark 10:17-19. What do you see of those 3 scriptures? Huge items, take a moment to witness for yourself.

Thank you for your reply. Yes, we don't know the translators of the King James Version, but we can see the harmony among the many Bible writers because of the many cross reference verses and passages in agreement.

The Earth was created for the humble meek to inherit the Earth - Matt. 5:5; Psalm 37:9-11, 38; Psalm 22:26
Wicked people would destroy humble meek people. That is why there will be divine involvement into mankind's affairs.
Who would want to live with a serial killer, a thief, a murderer, etc.
So, the HUGE items of Mark 10:19 protect righteous upright ones.
God shows mercy upon repentant ones - Psalm 86:5
Jesus will bring justice for righteous ones - Isaiah 11:3-4; Rev. 19:14-15
The good of righteous mankind (middle earth) the humble figurative 'sheep' at Jesus coming Glory Time - Matt. 25:31-34,37

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I am still waiting for a christian old age earther to explain to me in a.manner theolgically consistent with the bible... if the tree of life was necessary for survival prior to the fall (as one of the respondants on this thread seems to claim), how did creatures survive on this earth before the tree of life evolved? And even if the tree of life did exist, how did creatures all over the earth access its fruit? Did they (even microbes and bacteria) catch a lift to the centre of the garden periodically to eat the fruit before returning to their homeland somewhere else on the planet? (BTW the earths circumference is 40,000km...thats huge distance for a microbe to travel to eat the fruit of this tree)

The Law of Eden started with Adam then Eve. Not eating from the forbidden tree was for: humans.
Genesis teaches that humankind was directly created by God starting with Adam - Gen. 2:7
God's tree was already existing in Eden in the middle of the garden before Adam existed.
Out of all the trees on Earth only one tree belonged to God.
Nothing wrong with the tree itself rather it was the breaking of the law by Adam that was wrong.
Adam knew what death was because all he had to do was step on a bug and know the bug was dead.
Only people were offered everlasting life on Earth, just like only angels were offered everlasting life in Heaven.

 

[Monty]

The Law of Eden started with Adam then Eve. Not eating from the forbidden tree was for: humans.
Genesis teaches that humankind was directly created by God starting with Adam - Gen. 2:7
God's tree was already existing in Eden in the middle of the garden before Adam existed.
Out of all the trees on Earth only one tree belonged to God.
Nothing wrong with the tree itself rather it was the breaking of the law by Adam that was wrong.
Adam knew what death was because all he had to do was step on a bug and know the bug was dead.
Only people were offered everlasting life on Earth, just like only angels were offered everlasting life in Heaven.

Our aborigines, however, arrived here over 50,000 years before Adam's grandmother was born, and there is no reference to a forbidden tree in their mythology.

 

[Bthoth]

So, the HUGE items of Mark 10:19 protect righteous upright ones.

Mark 10:19 you know the commandments: 'You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; You shall not defraud; Honor your father and mother. '”

Follow the rules. you know them!

God shows mercy upon repentant ones - Psalm 86:5

from a song

Jesus will bring justice for righteous ones - Isaiah 11:3-4; Rev. 19:14-15

jesus was.......... not now.

The good of righteous mankind (middle earth) the humble figurative 'sheep' at Jesus coming Glory Time - Matt. 25:31-34,37

Came and left.

The reason so many suggest He will come back, is because the writers knew that HE did not fulfill prophecy.

basic

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Mark 10:19 you know the commandments: 'You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; You shall not defraud; Honor your father and mother. '”
Follow the rules. you know them!
from a song
jesus was.......... not now.
Came and left.
The reason so many suggest He will come back, is because the writers knew that HE did not fulfill prophecy......

Don't those rules work for the good of everyone in every nation __________
Jesus gave us a New Commandment found at John 13:34-35 to have the same self-sacrificing love for others as he has.
In other words, we are now to love neighbor MORE than self, More than the Golden Rule of Leviticus 19:18

Yes, Jesus came and left - Luke 19:11-15 - but that does Not me he will Not take the action of Isaiah 11:3-4; Rev. 19:14-15.
Both those verses will be fulfilled.
When the powers in charge will be saying, " Peace and Security...." (1st Thess. 5:2-3) that will be the precursor to the coming Great Tribulation of Rev. 7:14 before Jesus' sword-like words will rid the Earth of the wicked.