What is your interpretation of this scripture?

[Coliseum]

1 hour ago, Jostler said:

But this  next bit really makes all that a moot point.  Adam was not  off somewhere weeding the potatoes when satan started working on Eve......the  one who  heard the truth, from the horse's mouth, was right there listening to all of  it....yet for some reason he did not  correct the  misinformation.

Mankind did not fall until Adam ate.  Eve got tricked, Adam walked into disobedience with  eyes wide open.....

Do we really know where Adam was when Eve partook?

"So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate." Some scholars believe that what "who was with her" means is that he was not literally right there, but in the area close by. In that case he would not have known. If that is the case, God deliberately waited until both ate before they were cursed. Imagine if God did not wait, assuming Adam was not immediately with her. One would have had his eyes opened, and the other would not have. The implications would have been enormous. Also, we do not know how long before Eve's eyes were opened after she ate. Was she cursed instantly, therefore deceiving Adam that what she did was good? We are speculating a lot unless I am not seeing something more absolute.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Coliseum

[BeauJangles]

1 hour ago, Margo1945 said:

Adam and Eve both disobeyed so were both guilty of sin 

Yes, Margo. I do believe my post was indicative of that. Wasn't it? Well, perhaps I didn't say it in so many words. My reply was written in a pretty big hurry. I'd also love to see an end to this topic as well. God bless you.

[BeauJangles]

6 minutes ago, Coliseum said:

Do we really know where Adam was when Eve partook?

"So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate." Many scholars believe that what "who was with her" means is that he was not literally right there, but in the area close by. In that case he would not have known. If that is the case, God deliberately waited until both ate before they were cursed. Imagine if God did not wait, assuming Adam was not immediately with her. One would have had his eyes opened, and the other would not have. The implications would have been enormous. Also, we do not know how long before Eve's eyes were opened after she ate. Was she cursed instantly, therefore deceiving Adam that what she did was good? We are speculating a lot unless I am not seeing something more absolute.

If that was the case, why didn't the serpent ask Adam then? Maybe he strolled up immediately after the fact? I dunno, maybe I'm wrong about that. Maybe. 

[BeauJangles]

25 minutes ago, bcbsr said:

Given that there are about 300 posts, a "quick-scan" of a few seconds each would require about an hour of my time. 

Oh. I see. It took me a mere few minutes. And I'm a pretty old dude with dyslexia to boot. I suppose some catch on more quickly than others. God bless. 

[BeauJangles]

1 minute ago, Betha said:

well, if Adam was not 'literally there with Eve HOW could she give him the fruit ? he would have had to be 'at arms length....duh !  Scholars are being 'carried away in their own intellect ! 

Guess it remains a mystery today. Since none of us were there ALL of us are merely surmising. I still contend that IF Adam was there on the spot, why didn't the serpent ask him first? Again, guess we won't know in this present world. Perhaps we'll get the opportunity to ask him personally. I won't be angry at either of them doing it once I'm in Heaven. Not exactly pleased with them at the moment. Okay, leaving the topic permanently. I'm more than tired and bored of the entire subject.  

[ayin jade]

Isnt this a bit of straining at gnats? Regardless of whether or not adam was right there or if eve knew from the Lord or not the upshot is God held them both accountable.

[Coliseum]

Just now, Betha said:

well, if Adam was not 'literally there with Eve HOW could she give him the fruit ? he would have had to be 'at arms length....duh !

No need for sarcasm. You misunderstand what I implied. Here, the point is not that he would have necessarily been at arms length immediately; if he were in the immediate area, but distant enough not to either hear or be in reach, he could not have known until he came closer to receive the fruit. You also missed perhaps the point I was making that no one knows how long it took before Eve's eyes were opened before she realized she was deceived. We are not told that, but speculation proves my point: everyone is making his own argument in his own eyes. 

And your last point---"Scholars are being 'carried away in their own intellect !" Suggests that your intellect must somehow be greater than theirs. No one here has a handle on this, and no one should be pretending to have. I am simply pointing out different arguments one can make. 

[BeauJangles]

1 hour ago, Betha said:

so why did the serpent not ask Adam ?

Hmm... Seems a bit odd knowing that God gave Adam dominion over the animal kingdom. He named them in Genesis 2:20, so obviously he must have been able to communicate with them as well. He did the same to Noah, also giving him the same authority. Sorry, that makes no sense to me at all. Here's a brief commentary that does make sense. I guess we all believe what we insist on believing. 

 

Dominion over Animals (Forerunner Commentary)

https://www.bibletools.org/.../Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/2163/Dominion-over-Animals.htm

Genesis 9:1-2 Once again God gives man dominion over all other life on the earth, and with this renewed authority comes the implicit responsibility to tend and keep what was explicitly given to Adam. In this post-Flood world, God gives mankind a second chance to use and preserve the resources He had so abundantly provided.

[JohnD]

On 1/12/2020 at 5:33 PM, johnthebaptist said:

If you walked into my church, and I ordered you to keep silent, would you think I'd crossed a line?

If I were to disrupt your church... then no.

[JohnD]

22 hours ago, RogerDC said:

That's an interesting passage, but it doesn't demonstrate that angels appeared as women.  Firstly, the passage is describing a vision, and biblical visions can feature all sorts of fantastic creatures that aren't necessary real, but are usually symbolic of something.  (For example, consider the leopard-like beast in Rev 13, that has ten horns and seven heads, feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion.   No such beast actually exists.)

 Secondly, the winged-women in Zechariah 5:9 are not called angels.

Thirdly, there is another woman mentioned in this passage and she is called "Wickedness".  She is carried off in the ephah by the two-winged women, to a place where a house will be built for it, so it's possible the winged-women are also wicked.    Furthermore, the women's wings are described as like those of a stork, a bird listed in Lev 11:19 as an "abomination".

 

women with wings...

huh...

what else could it be?

If you want to spiritualize everything as if it weren't real...

why stop there?

Some spiritualize existence itself as if we are all not really here.

BTW I do not engage with those who go down this route.

They aren't really here. After all.

Edited January 14, 2020 by JohnD