Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam?

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

I recently spoke to a JW who ***erted (like every orthodox Christian I have come across also ***erts), that Adam did wrong in following Eve, and didn't need to choose to follow her because God could have made another Eve for him.

Do all orthodox Christians believe this?

Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam? --And make as many as it took to find an Eve that would never yield to temptation?

What would have happened then?

[dfoJC]

I recently spoke to a JW who ***erted (like every orthodox Christian I have come across also ***erts), that Adam did wrong in following Eve, and didn't need to choose to follow her because God could have made another Eve for him.

Do all orthodox Christians believe this?

Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam? --And make as many as it took to find an Eve that would never yield to temptation?

What would have happened then?

Yes, Adam did wrong. No, God would not have made another Eve. So, no, I don't believe this.

The fact is, if Adam had not sinned, someone would have eventually. Why do I say this? Well, because the Word makes a big distinction between the "1st Adam" and the "Last Adam." The 1st was the disobedient one. The Second was Obedient. I used to be a son of the first, I am no longer. I am now a son of the Last.

Take care,
dfoJC

[akaSeerone]

Another irrelevant OP for this forum.

You have a very bad habit of not following the format of this forum....why is that?

Andy

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Yes, Adam did wrong. No, God would not have made another Eve. So, no, I don't believe this.

So, you think that Adam's choice was 1) Make the right choice to separate himself from Eve, and remain alone forever in the garden of Eden without Eve who would have been cast out and eventually die. or 2) Make the wrong choice and follow Eve to whom he was married, and have a family.

Or was there another choice, given the fact that God would not create another Eve for him.




The fact is, if Adam had not sinned, someone would have eventually. Or another Eve would have been deceived as well, perhaps.



Why do I say this? Well, because the Word makes a big distinction between the "1st Adam" and the "Last Adam." The 1st was the disobedient one. The Second was Obedient. I used to be a son of the first, I am no longer. I am now a son of the Last.

Take care,
dfoJC

Thanks for your input, dfoJC

[Vlad III]

Another irrelevant OP for this forum.

You have a very bad habit of not following the format of this forum....why is that?

Andy

Ironic....

[Vlad III]

Yes, Adam did wrong. No, God would not have made another Eve. So, no, I don't believe this.

The fact is, if Adam had not sinned, someone would have eventually. Why do I say this? Well, because the Word makes a big distinction between the "1st Adam" and the "Last Adam." The 1st was the disobedient one. The Second was Obedient. I used to be a son of the first, I am no longer. I am now a son of the Last.

Take care,
dfoJC

First, I hadn't heard that idea - that God could create a new Eve to replace the fallen one. Interesting thought.

Second, it sounds like dofc is saying something different than other Christians. Most Christians say that if Adam and Eve had not eaten the fruit all of humanity would have lived in the garden in perfection and purity. But you are saying that if they hadn't eatn of the fruit, SOMEONE would have and the fall would have still happened, banishment would still happen, and sin would still happen, etc..It was inevitable, then, that the fall happen.

[James Banta]

Another irrelevant OP for this forum.

You have a very bad habit of not following the format of this forum....why is that?

Andy

Andy you see that all Vlad can say is "ironic".. These what if this, or what if that are meaningless.. What happened is what happened and we are not responsible for what God would have done if Adam had decided not to sin. It is a silly point because it didn't happen the way these mormons would like to have see it happen.. Jesus said something about looking beyond Him to other people these circumstances seem to bring this into same perspective.. What has that to do with you? You Need to follow Jesus.. To bad that mormons can't see this they are living in the "WHAT IF" land of fantasy.. IHS jim

[akaSeerone]

Andy you see that all Vlad can say is "ironic".. These what if this, or what if that are meaningless.. What happened is what happened and we are not responsible for what God would have done if Adam had decided not to sin. It is a silly point because it didn't happen the way these mormons would like to have see it happen.. Jesus said something about looking beyond Him to other people these circumstances seem to bring this into same perspective.. What has that to do with you? You Need to follow Jesus.. To bad that mormons can't see this they are living in the "WHAT IF" land of fantasy.. IHS jimYep, the what if are total foolishness and have nothing to do with mormon doctrine.....Just so much "Jib Jab" to try and take peoples minds off mormonism and show everyone how Biblically illiterate they are....and they are doing a very good *** at the illiterate thing.

AND then there is the fact that after God created Adam and Eve He said it was perfect/good and that totally shoots down their nonsense.

Either way the OP is against the formant of this forum.

Andy

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

I recently spoke to a JW who ***erted (like every orthodox Christian I have come across also ***erts), that Adam did wrong in following Eve, and didn't need to choose to follow her because God could have made another Eve for him.

Do all orthodox Christians believe this?

Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam? --And make as many as it took to find an Eve that would never yield to temptation?

What would have happened then?

What was the right choice for Adam to make? Eve had eaten, meaning she would need to leave the garden and eventually die.

Since orthodoxy teaches that Adam made the wrong choice, I ask, what were Adam's choices? And what would have been the "right" choice for him to make?

And if Adam has perpetually made the right choice, what would have been the outcome? The consequence? Especially if God never intended to make another Eve for him?

Would it mean that ideally, if Adam always made the right choice, that he would forever be alone in the Garden of Eden, while Eve would have been alone outside of the Garden of Eden until she died. Right?

Then what?

I think it is good to think about these things, rather than to ignore such questions and discourage them. Questions lead to understanding and knowledge, after all.

[James Banta]

What was the right choice for Adam to make? Eve had eaten, meaning she would need to leave the garden and eventually die.

Since orthodoxy teaches that Adam made the wrong choice, I ask, what were Adam's choices? And what would have been the "right" choice for him to make?

And if Adam has perpetually made the right choice, what would have been the outcome? The consequence? Especially if God never intended to make another Eve for him?

Would it mean that ideally, if Adam always made the right choice, that he would forever be alone in the Garden of Eden, while Eve would have been alone outside of the Garden of Eden until she died. Right?

Then what?

I think it is good to think about these things, rather than to ignore such questions and discourage them. Questions lead to understanding and knowledge, after all.


Please explain what good talking about a "what if" is? Why not understand what happened instead of making up more fiction? It is appearing that mormonism thrives on fiction and shies away from actual truth.. IHS jim

[Vlad III]

Please explain what good talking about a "what if" is? Why not understand what happened instead of making up more fiction? It is appearing that mormonism thrives on fiction and shies away from actual truth.. IHS jim

james,

It isn't a matter of wondering "what if". It's a matter of taking what actually happened and then trying to understand what the other options could have been available for Adam to not have sinned. If I recall correctly, you are one of those that believes that had Adam and Eve not eaten the fruit, all of us would have still been born and all of us would have lived in the perfect garden as perfect people. But others say that sin and falling was inevitable and had it not been Adam and Eve it would have eventually been another person.

[dfoJC]

What was the right choice for Adam to make? Eve had eaten, meaning she would need to leave the garden and eventually die.

Since orthodoxy teaches that Adam made the wrong choice, I ask, what were Adam's choices? And what would have been the "right" choice for him to make?

The bible teaches that Adam did indeed make the wrong choice, I have never read in the Bible anywhere where "Eve's sin" is spoken of, however, you can find "Adam's sin." His choices were simple, obedience, or disobedience. And as you LDS are so fond of saying, "obedience is necessary..."(BTW, I agree and believe in obedience.)

And if Adam has perpetually made the right choice, what would have been the outcome? The consequence? Especially if God never intended to make another Eve for him?

He would have lived his life in obedience to God's one command. And I believe it would have been in the garden. However, I do not believe he would have lived there alone. This is sheer speculation on my part, because this story has all ready been lived, and told.

Would it mean that ideally, if Adam always made the right choice, that he would forever be alone in the Garden of Eden, while Eve would have been alone outside of the Garden of Eden until she died. Right? Then what?

The one thing that God desired was relationship with His creation. So I would think that He would have figured out a way for Adam & Eve to continue to go on living together in the garden, after all, is He not The God of forgiveness?

I think it is good to think about these things, rather than to ignore such questions and discourage them. Questions lead to understanding and knowledge, after all.

But as well, questions can lead to confusion and misunderstanding, however, your questions do have some legitimacy, thus it is good to explore the possibilities. Knowledge is good, if it profits something. I have yet to determine if what we are discussing is profitable or not, but, that will be revealed sooner or later, no?

Take care,
dfoJC

[James Banta]

james,

It isn't a matter of wondering "what if". It's a matter of taking what actually happened and then trying to understand what the other options could have been available for Adam to not have sinned. If I recall correctly, you are one of those that believes that had Adam and Eve not eaten the fruit, all of us would have still been born and all of us would have lived in the perfect garden as perfect people. But others say that sin and falling was inevitable and had it not been Adam and Eve it would have eventually been another person.

There are no other options.. What happened happened! Here is the point God gave Adam two commandments.. That is fact. One was not to eat the fruit. The other was to reproduce and fill the earth.. I am one of those weird people that believe God doesn't give contradictory commandments.. That God doesn't force anyone into sin that goes even for Adam.. Therefore God's perfect will would have been realized and we would have entered a perfect world had sin not have tainted all things.

Tell me why is it you claim the statement of Nephi only for what you want your god to do and not a statement as to the nature of the real God.. Remember what Nephi said about the commandments of God..

1 Nephi 3:7
And it came to p*** that I, Nephi, said unto my father: I will go and do the things which the Lord hath commanded, for I know that the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them.

Now talk about what is and forget about "WHAT IF".. IHS jim

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Please explain what good talking about a "what if" is? Why not understand what happened instead of making up more fiction? It is appearing that mormonism thrives on fiction and shies away from actual truth.. IHS jim

Well, you are speculating, aren't you, when you ***ert that Adam made the wrong decision. So, I think the question is a good one, and it spurs thought. And thought is good.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

What was the right choice for Adam to make? Eve had eaten, meaning she would need to leave the garden and eventually die.

Since orthodoxy teaches that Adam made the wrong choice, I ask, what were Adam's choices? And what would have been the "right" choice for him to make?

The bible teaches that Adam did indeed make the wrong choice, I have never read in the Bible anywhere where "Eve's sin" is spoken of, however, you can find "Adam's sin." His choices were simple, obedience, or disobedience. And as you LDS are so fond of saying, "obedience is necessary..."(BTW, I agree and believe in obedience.)

I'm glad you believe in obedience.:D




And if Adam has perpetually made the right choice, what would have been the outcome? The consequence? Especially if God never intended to make another Eve for him?

He would have lived his life in obedience to God's one command. And I believe it would have been in the garden. However, I do not believe he would have lived there alone. This is sheer speculation on my part, because this story has all ready been lived, and told.

So, if Adam made the "right" decision, as you say, then either God was ready to make another Eve for him, OR, God was willing to erase the consequences of Eve's transgression by forgiving her of her sin. That's all I can think of.




Would it mean that ideally, if Adam always made the right choice, that he would forever be alone in the Garden of Eden, while Eve would have been alone outside of the Garden of Eden until she died. Right? Then what?

The one thing that God desired was relationship with His creation. So I would think that He would have figured out a way for Adam & Eve to continue to go on living together in the garden, after all, is He not The God of forgiveness?

Yes. He is that too.

Thanks, dfoJC. I just wanted to know what more orthodox Christians would say about this.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

There are no other options.. What happened happened! Here is the point God gave Adam two commandments.. That is fact. One was not to eat the fruit. The other was to reproduce and fill the earth.. I am one of those weird people that believe God doesn't give contradictory commandments.. That God doesn't force anyone into sin that goes even for Adam.. Therefore God's perfect will would have been realized and we would have entered a perfect world had sin not have tainted all things.

So, what were Adam's options AFTER Eve already ate? And do you think Adam considered the consequences?

1. Do the "right" thing, and separate from Eve--leaving her alone outside the garden, eventually to die, while he remained in the Garden, without a wife, forever. And this gets back to my question, of whether God was ready to make another Eve for Adam so he wouldn't be alone.

or.

2. Do the "wrong" thing and stay united with his wife, and have a family with her.

[Russianwolfe]

There are no other options.. What happened happened! Here is the point God gave Adam two commandments.. That is fact. One was not to eat the fruit. The other was to reproduce and fill the earth.. I am one of those weird people that believe God doesn't give contradictory commandments.. That God doesn't force anyone into sin that goes even for Adam.. Therefore God's perfect will would have been realized and we would have entered a perfect world had sin not have tainted all things.


You are correct, God does not give contradictory commandments, when they are obeyed. But when one is obeyed then a contradiction can exist because of our disobedience.

When Eve told Adam what she had done, he then had a choice of which commandment to disobey, he could not obey both. He could refuse to partake of the fruit but that would mean that he could not follow the second comnmandment. Or he could disobey the first commandment, partake of the fruit and then be able to obey the second commandment. There was no problem as long as both parties in the Garden obeyed both commandments. The conflict arose when Eve partook of the fruit.





Tell me why is it you claim the statement of Nephi only for what you want your god to do and not a statement as to the nature of the real God.. Remember what Nephi said about the commandments of God..

1 Nephi 3:7
And it came to p*** that I, Nephi, said unto my father: I will go and do the things which the Lord hath commanded, for I know that the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them.

Now talk about what is and forget about "WHAT IF".. IHS jim

As I pointed out above, there was no conflict as long as both obeyed both commandments. The problem was created by Eve breaking one of the commandments. The way was provided, all they had to do is obey both commandments. You can't blame God for problems that they created by disobeying the commandments.

Marvin

[Russianwolfe]

So, what were Adam's options AFTER Eve already ate? And do you think Adam considered the consequences?

1. Do the "right" thing, and separate from Eve--leaving her alone outside the garden, eventually to die, while he remained in the Garden, without a wife, forever. And this gets back to my question, of whether God was ready to make another Eve for Adam so he wouldn't be alone.

or.

2. Do the "wrong" thing and stay united with his wife, and have a family with her.

Its more complicated that just one right thing. If Adam obeyed one commandment he could not obey the other. That is the real situation he found himself in.

Marvin

[nrajeff]

Most or all of the Evangelicals whom I have seen comment on this question have said that Adam blew it for the entire human race when he decided to join Eve. They said that the "plan" was for Adam and Eve to both remain in the garden, immortal and sinless, and to have billions of immortal, sinless children. Adam screwed that whole plan up and basically should be hated for the traitor to the human race that he is.

So, if Adam, seeing that Eve had disobeyed, was supposed to just sit it out and wait until a replacement wife who could AVOID eating the fruit was created, then wouldn't that have made Adam a.....

.........







..........


POLYGAMIST? :eek::eek:

[James Banta]

So, what were Adam's options AFTER Eve already ate? And do you think Adam considered the consequences?

1. Do the "right" thing, and separate from Eve--leaving her alone outside the garden, eventually to die, while he remained in the Garden, without a wife, forever. And this gets back to my question, of whether God was ready to make another Eve for Adam so he wouldn't be alone.

or.

2. Do the "wrong" thing and stay united with his wife, and have a family with her.

There was only one right thing to do but Adam didn't do that. He stopped trusting God and trusted his feeling instead.. That done it was done. Adam made a mess of the perfect world God have given to him and surrendered it to Satan. From that time all the world was tainted by the sin of the man. God had to come as a Savior to rescue us from a condition we could do nothing about.. Was Adam wrong for doing what he did? YES! Should he have trusted God? YES! But know he allowed feeling to rule him moving God from the first place in his heart and mind to second place behind his wife.. That is idolatry. Adam's sin was far wore than Eve's she was deceived, Adam chose to disobey. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Its more complicated that just one right thing. If Adam obeyed one commandment he could not obey the other. That is the real situation he found himself in.

Marvin

I can see by this statement that you don't trust God and His power either.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

[Russianwolfe;63827]You are correct, God does not give contradictory commandments, when they are obeyed. But when one is obeyed then a contradiction can exist because of our disobedience.

This is a perfect statement of the condition of mormonism. "when one (commandment) is obeyed then a contradiction can exist because of our disobedience.. I would love to understand how you spin obedience into disobedience.. God gives No contradictory commandment at all.. Never is one given that requires another to be broken. That would be an evil God would never force of man..

Mormonism teaches that for man to be Adam had to sin. But God's commands were clear.. Don't eat the fruit but still be fruitful. Mormons teach these as contradictory commandments making God out to be the one who causes sin. That is of course blasphemy.


When Eve told Adam what she had done, he then had a choice of which commandment to disobey, he could not obey both. He could refuse to partake of the fruit but that would mean that he could not follow the second comnmandment. Or he could disobey the first commandment, partake of the fruit and then be able to obey the second commandment. There was no problem as long as both parties in the Garden obeyed both commandments. The conflict arose when Eve partook of the fruit.


Of he could have trusted in God and allowed God to repair the problem. But No Adam took the issue into his own hands and thereby committed sin.. He was faithless to God allowing His love for his with to overshadow his love for God. But you don't see that as sin do you?

This is really what you believe? That Adam and Eve, before Eve was deceived into taking the fruit, could have had children while in the Garden? That isn't the standard teaching of the church.. As a TBM I was taught that they were not capable of having children until they took the fruit. This is a new twist of the scripture and one I am sure the brethren would not agree with you.. This is a private doctrine one you can't support either in the Bible or in mormonism.. Just because Eve failed to keep God's word doesn't make Adam a sinner.. What he should have done is put his faith in God and waited on Him to resolve the problem.. But No Adam thought He would fix it. After all it was just a small piece of fruit..

Your "what if" here doesn't matter. The facts are that Adam did take the fruit and God still in His knowledge and wisdom had a plan to repair the damage done by these first sins.. IHS jim

[Sentinus]

I recently spoke to a JW who ***erted (like every orthodox Christian I have come across also ***erts), that Adam did wrong in following Eve, and didn't need to choose to follow her because God could have made another Eve for him.

Do all orthodox Christians believe this?

Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam? --And make as many as it took to find an Eve that would never yield to temptation?

What would have happened then?


(like every orthodox Christian I have come across also ***erts), that Adam did wrong in following Eve, and didn't need to choose to follow her because God could have made another Eve for him.

CFR on this, find another source that verifies your belief that your statement is indeed "Orthodox Christian" in nature, No doubt it should be easy for you to find someone, anyone that has taught this idea.. Please provide links instead of your weak hearsay.

[Sentinus]

Most or all of the Evangelicals whom I have seen comment on this question have said that Adam blew it for the entire human race when he decided to join Eve. They said that the "plan" was for Adam and Eve to both remain in the garden, immortal and sinless, and to have billions of immortal, sinless children. Adam screwed that whole plan up and basically should be hated for the traitor to the human race that he is.

So, if Adam, seeing that Eve had disobeyed, was supposed to just sit it out and wait until a replacement wife who could AVOID eating the fruit was created, then wouldn't that have made Adam a.....

.........










..........


POLYGAMIST? :eek::eek:


Lets get past all the hearsay, why not provide a link to any "Christian leader" that has taught this... I have heard LDS say all sorts of things, yet I am told that their thoughts are of no authority, neither are yours or Figs, as of yet no one has shown any documentation that this is taught or being taught.. I'll wait.. Also please ensure that context is provided in your ***ertions..

[Sentinus]

Most or all of the Evangelicals whom I have seen comment on this question have said that Adam blew it for the entire human race when he decided to join Eve. They said that the "plan" was for Adam and Eve to both remain in the garden, immortal and sinless, and to have billions of immortal, sinless children. Adam screwed that whole plan up and basically should be hated for the traitor to the human race that he is.

So, if Adam, seeing that Eve had disobeyed, was supposed to just sit it out and wait until a replacement wife who could AVOID eating the fruit was created, then wouldn't that have made Adam a.....

.........










..........


POLYGAMIST? :eek::eek:


Lets get past all the hearsay, why not provide a link to any "Christian leader" that has taught this... I have heard LDS say all sorts of things, yet I am told that their thoughts are of no authority, neither are yours or Figs, as of yet no one has shown any documentation that this is taught or being taught.. I'll wait.. Also please ensure that context is provided in your ***ertions..

[Vlad III]

Adam's sin was far wore than Eve's she was deceived, Adam chose to disobey. IHS jim

I thought there were no degrees of sin in your world, James??

And it seems you are afraid to address the issue that, once Eve partook of the fruit and before Adam did, he had to make a choice to either obey one commandment (multply and replenish) or the other (don't eat the fruit). He could no longer do both. So essentially, according to James, Adam was FORCED to choose one of the commandments to follow because of Eve's choice. But yet Adam was worse since he CHOSE his path. And yet, either path that Adam chose would've been violating one of the commandments.

Adam had no way out.

[akaSeerone]

I thought there were no degrees of sin in your world, James??

And it seems you are afraid to address the issue that, once Eve partook of the fruit and before Adam did, he had to make a choice to either obey one commandment (multply and replenish) or the other (don't eat the fruit). He could no longer do both. So essentially, according to James, Adam was FORCED to choose one of the commandments to follow because of Eve's choice. But yet Adam was worse since he CHOSE his path. And yet, either path that Adam chose would've been violating one of the commandments.

Adam had no way out.
Of course Adam had a "way out." All he had to do was to intercede for Eve as Jesus has done for us and God would have forgiven her, but Adam partook of the fruit, thus disobeying God and all of creation fell.

The important thing is that sin came into the world through Adam and not Eve and you seem to be overlooking that fact.

Also Adam was not forced to do anything. God told them to be fruitful and multiply and not to eat of the tree and God does not contradict Himself, so it was expected of Adam and Eve to do both.

Andy

[Vlad III]

Of course Adam had a "way out." All he had to do was to intercede for Eve as Jesus has done for us and God would have forgiven her, but Adam partook of the fruit, thus disobeying God and all of creation fell.

Are you saying that it was possible for Eve to NOT suffer the consequences of eating the fruit?
Can you support that theory somehow? That God would've forgiven Eve and not kicker her out of the garden.


The important thing is that sin came into the world through Adam and not Eve and you seem to be overlooking that fact.

Okay.


Also Adam was not forced to do anything. God told them to be fruitful and multiply and not to eat of the tree and God does not contradict Himself, so it was expected of Adam and Eve to do both.

Andy

Right...God told them to do X and Y. But when Eve chose to disobey Y, Adam had to choose if he was going to obey Y (and thus be seperated from Eve when she receives the consequence of God. Since God doesn't lie, He had to follow through with the consequence) or if he was going to obey X and therefore would need to do the same thing that would send him with Eve.

[akaSeerone]

Are you saying that it was possible for Eve to NOT suffer the consequences of eating the fruit?
Can you support that theory somehow? That God would've forgiven Eve and not kicker her out of the garden.I already did and you seem to have missed it. The Bible says sin came into the world by one man...the man Adam. Creation did not fall when Eve ate, it fell when Adam did.


Right...God told them to do X and Y. But when Eve chose to disobey Y, Adam had to choose if he was going to obey Y (and thus be seperated from Eve when she receives the consequence of God. Since God doesn't lie, He had to follow through with the consequence) or if he was going to obey X and therefore would need to do the same thing that would send him with Eve. It is your false ***umption that Eve would have been separated from Adam had Adam not of partaken of the tree and that mod edit
All Adam had to do was obey God and not partake of the tree and sin would not have entered the creation at that time.

Andy

[Vlad III]

mod edit

It's too bad that you mod edit cannot have a conversation about something with a Mormon without making insults and disparaging comments to them.

[James Banta]

[Vlad III;63879]I thought there were no degrees of sin in your world, James??

And it seems you are afraid to address the issue that, once Eve partook of the fruit and before Adam did, he had to make a choice to either obey one commandment (multiply and replenish) or the other (don't eat the fruit). He could no longer do both. So essentially, according to James, Adam was FORCED to choose one of the commandments to follow because of Eve's choice. But yet Adam was worse since he CHOSE his path. And yet, either path that Adam chose would've been violating one of the commandments.

Adam had no way out.

What are you talking about I addressed that completely.. Adam took the fruit. You are correct he did have a way out. The trouble is he didn't take it. Adam didn't have to do what he did.. There is no "what if" to it he sinned.. He could have said no and counted on the Lord to solve the problem but he didn't. He tried to solve it himself. He let his love for his wife replace his love for God. He betrayed God and did things his own way..

None of what I have explained here is a "what if" it is a "what is". The same goes for us. We can look to God to solve the problem for us or try to fix it ourselves.. One way, allowing God to be Lord, is the way of life. Trying to fix things with God by your own effort is the way of sin and death.. IHS jim

[akaSeerone]

mod edit

It's too bad that you mod edit cannot have a conversation about something with a Mormon without making insults and disparaging comments to them.

mod edit

And why can't you accept the fact that sin came into creation through Adam and God didn't want Adam to sin and expected Adam and Eve to multiply before they sinned?

Your god may be a god of what ifs, my God is the God of Yes and Amen, not conjecture. mod edit

If there are any what ifs to be considered it should be what if you accepted the fact that Smith was a lying con man and false prophet and because of his behavior and lying about visits from God and the gold plates and moroni and etc, I'll bet he didn't even believe in God. After all, who in there right mind would come up with the God bashing and Christian bashing nonsense he did if he actually believed in God and knew that one day he would have to answer for his deceit?

Smith tried to reduce God to man's level and that is idol worship, not Christianity!

Andy

[Sentinus]

Too bad most LDS here have no interest in real dialogue, I still await CFR's in numerous thread (Two in this one alone), not from you as of yet but frustrating nonetheless.

[alanmolstad]

Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam? --?


No.



But there are some people, in many different faiths,both christian and non, who are swept up in a story about Adam's "other wife"

and so from time to time, we see this idea about God making another wife for Adam.


I reject the whole idea.


But....but I will say that when I read the story I see it a bit differently than many others see it.
I see it as all a plan that Adam had to be able to eat from the tree and not die.....I see it as a plan to put all the blame onto Eve,

[alanmolstad]

I recently spoke to a JW who ***erted (like every orthodox Christian I have come across also ***erts), that Adam did wrong in following Eve, and didn't need to choose to follow her because God could have made another Eve for him.

Do all orthodox Christians believe this?

Was God hoping to make another Eve for Adam? --And make as many as it took to find an Eve that would never yield to temptation?


Adam sinned...we are told over and over that sin came to this world via Adam...

Eve on the other hand is said to have been "deceived".



So this means that Adam clearly knew better, and yet chose to sin,whereas Eve was misled and ended up fooled into doing wrong.

[alanmolstad]

All we know for sure are the things the story of Adam and Eve tells us.

This is what we know: - We know that Eve ate first,then gave to her husband that was right there "with her"

This is key to understanding the "why?"question.....and many people miss this in the story.

Adam was right there with Eve at the time, (he was not off doing stuff.)

This means that when Eve was talking to the snake(Satan) that Adam was also right there the whole time listening.


This is interesting because Adam was there when Eve spoke the error to Satan about not being allowed to "touch" the forbidden fruit.
Eve added this part, and Adam who clearly knew full well that that as wrong, says nothing?

Why Adam does not correct his wife's error?

Satan does not correct Eve as well.


So you got Adam and Satan keeping their mouth's shut while they both likely know that what Eve just said was in error.

Why did Adam not say anything?.......it does not say.

We don't know why he kept his mouth shut.


All we got is a guess...
I'm going to guess therefore as to the reason why Adam did not speak up and correct Eve's error.

My answer is - "Adam had a plan"

[BigJulie]

All we know for sure are the things the story of Adam and Eve tells us.

This is what we know: - We know that Eve ate first,then gave to her husband that was right there "with her"

This is key to understanding the "why?"question.....and many people miss this in the story.

Adam was right there with Eve at the time, (he was not off doing stuff.)

This means that when Eve was talking to the snake(Satan) that Adam was also right there the whole time listening.


This is interesting because Adam was there when Eve spoke the error to Satan about not being allowed to "touch" the forbidden fruit.
Eve added this part, and Adam who clearly knew full well that that as wrong, says nothing?

Why Adam does not correct his wife's error?

Satan does not correct Eve as well.


So you got Adam and Satan keeping their mouth's shut while they both likely know that what Eve just said was in error.

Why did Adam not say anything?.......it does not say.

We don't know why he kept his mouth shut.


All we got is a guess...
I'm going to guess therefore as to the reason why Adam did not speak up and correct Eve's error.

My answer is - "Adam had a plan"

This is a really interesting interpretation of this chapter. It could also mean that Adam was with her in the Garden of Eden and not directly beside her when she ate of the fruit. Looking up the Hebrew, the term "with her" is not there at all. It goes literally, husband (iysh), and eat (akal). I think the "with her" is typical of Hebrew (from what I have learned) or a qualifier--what man? The man with her?

[alanmolstad]

...... Looking up the Hebrew, the term "with her" is not there at all......


Where did you find that?

In many bible translations they will put the added words in Brackets [] or in italic

So what Bible translation are you using that shows "with her" was added?



Also, if it is added, I think its strange that so many bible commentators have not pointed this out to students?
http://www.studylight.org/commentary/genesis/3-6.html



Perhaps Im not looking at the same source that you are, but I looked at this in a lot of sources and they all do confirm that "with her" is in the text.

Most all the commentators actually go out of their way to talk about "with her" and while they may disagree with me as to its meanings, I have yet to find one that says its been added....http://biblehub.com/genesis/3-6.htm

[alanmolstad]

no word on that?

[alanmolstad]

well?


Well I have no reason to expect an answer I guess, so Im just going to build on what I have learned about this section of the Bible over the years from my study.

I believe that the words "with her" are in the text and that they are telling us that Adam was right there 'with her" when the events of the story took place.

Now in the many commentaries that talk about the words "with her"a lot of them will then attempt to change the meanings to "with her" and have it seem like Adam was not actually right there with Eve.
But they don't do this based on the text or the word meanings, rather they base this change only on the context that they simply don't understand.

The many commentaries just don't see how Adam could be with Eve at the time and not have spoken up?

They don't see why Adam kept his mouth shut when Eve clearly makes the error in what she says to the Satan.?

So that is why a lot of Bible teachers will try hard to find a way to get Adam off into the distance at this part of the story.
They need Adam to be missing because if Adam is there the way the text teaches they simply don't understand why he acted the way he did?????


Well..to that I just say this..."Let the Bible tell us what it says"

The bible clearly tells us that Adam with right there "with her" at the time.
Thats what the Bible says thats what I believe.

[MickeyS]

Hmmm, what sort of plan do you think Adam had?

[alanmolstad]

Hmmm, what sort of plan do you think Adam had?

well, Lets look what Adam knew...
and then lets look what he did knowing what he knew.



First what did he know about the Apple?...

He knew that to eat was to die..... but he also knew that there was much to desire in eating.

And lets remember, the tree was planted right in the middle of the garden.


So Adam has this tree he sees all the time, he cant help but always have it on his mind.
He knows it would be great to eat,,,good for food, and to make one wise about good and evil, and would totally change his life...But he also knows that if he eats it he is going to die.

Thats what Adam knows....





Is that all Adam knows?
Well....there is the conversation he heard going on between Eve and the Snake.
Adam was there "with her" and so Adam heard Eve say to the Snake that they were not to "touch" the apple.
Now from the story so far we know that while the Lord had told Adam the law concerning the tree and the apple, we also know that God never actually told Eve this law.

So we can understand that when Eve talked to the snake about the law, she was just telling what she had been told by the only person that actually was told the law by god...her husband Adam.

Thus we have this problem....
Eve was never told the law by God.
God only told the Law to Adam...
and when Eve tells what the law is to the snake she adds this part about not touching the apple.

Thus,(as we know that Adam was there when Eve said this to the snake) he knew first-hand that what Eve just said was in error.

Adam knew that Eve said something to the snake that was wrong.



That is what Adam knew.....

[alanmolstad]

Now....knowing what Adam knew...what did he do?


First, he is right there with his wife Eve when she says something that Adam knew in his heart was wrong about not being allowed to touch the apple....and yet he does....nothing!


Adam does not speak up to correct his wife.

Knowing full well she was making an error, he says nothing to help her out.

Knowing that she was adding to the law, he does not disagree with her.




Now look at this from Eve's point of view too.
Eve was never told by God what the law was concerning the tree and the apple, and so all she knew is what she had been told by Adam .
And, Adam is standing right there with her as she is talking, and so there is no way to pretend that she wanted to add something to the law on her own....nor can we say she just made a mistake,



So.....what does it mean?

It means to me that based on what Adam knew and what he did, that Eve had no clue she was telling the snake something that was wrong.

It means that when Adam heard Eve say this error to the snake, and said nothing, he had a reason for keeping his mouth shut.



and what was the reason?
What was the plan that Adam had?
What was the point behind his not saying anything to correct his wife?

That answer comes at " The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it."



Lets just take a look at this verse...
The most important part is that when you put yourself in the place of Adam, knowing what Adam knew....and then look at what he does here, the reason and the plan of Adam become totally clear...

"The woman"
"she gave me"



Adam knew to eat was to die....

Adam needed a way to eat and not die.

The words he speaks to God "The women" and "she gave me" point us to the only conclusion we can come to that shows us the true reason Adam has acted the way he did all throughout this whole story...


Adam needed a scapegoat.



When Adam was alone in the garden he never ate the apple....he knew it would mean death.
Adam changed the law that he spoke to Eve.....and nothing happened.

Eve repeated this error to the snake, and nothing happened.

That was a very good test....a way to test how much he can get away with.


I think this gave Adam the confidence to keep going with his plan and eat and just get all the blame onto Eve....

[alanmolstad]

this is why the Bible never really puts the blame of eating the apple onto Eve...
The Bible tells us that Adam sinned....but it says that Eve was deceived.

Over and over in the Bible we read that Eve was deceived.

While we might just ***ume that Eve was deceived by the snake....I think there is another level to this deception going on that involves Adam as well.


From the text, and from reading the text we can support the idea that Adam seems to have worked with the Snake and both deceived Eve.







So in this one story we actually have a kinda guide to how Satan deals with humans.

Adam wanted to eat and not die.
Satan wanted Adam to eat and fall into sin.
Eve was just there, and was used by both Adam and Satan.


Satan cast doubt in Eve's mind as to what God had said.
Adam misinformed Eve as to what God had said.

[alanmolstad]

and....being the weekend...no new posts?

[MickeyS]

Yeah, people probably have better things to do all weekend then check up on your posts lol...

Wow, that's a lot, you've really thought about this.

So in your mind, Adam used cunning, deceitfulness and manipulation. Do you really think Adam would have been capable of that kind of thinking and scheming before eating of the fruit??? To be able to craft a plan like that, one must have experience to compare these actions to. The first thing a child will do is be completely honest and speak their mind. It's only after they've had an experience where honesty got them in "trouble" or didn't give them the outcome they desired that they even think to lie next time.

Who taught Adam how to lie and manipulate, because without knowledge and experience, he wouldn't even think to do what you're suggesting. How could he??

But lets get down to the simplest way we know they weren't together. Adam tells God that EVE talked him into eating the fruit. And God believed him.
"17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree.."

You don't believe God wouldn't know if Adam had been present during Satans presentation do you? You think that Adams crafty little trick fooled God??

[MickeyS]

As far as the discrepancy between the not "touching" the fruit. Doesn't it make much more sense that either Eve added that exaggeration naturally because she was expressing the seriousness of not eating the fruit...OR, that Adam made the embellishment to Eve out of love for her because he wanted to make sure she didn't go near the fruit? I find these much more plausible than an elaborate scheme to throw his wife under the bus. You're a strange cat lol

[alanmolstad]

well......where do i start?

The first thing that stands out is the comment about kids telling the truth at first and only later learning to lie.

Thats wrong....


Kids lie...children tell lies as a normal part of being who they are.....telling a lie is natural...tell the truth is the thing that must be actually taught.

[alanmolstad]

As far as the discrepancy between the not "touching" the fruit. Doesn't it make much more sense that either Eve added that exaggeration naturally because she was expressing the seriousness of not eating the fruit...OR, that Adam made the embellishment to Eve out of love for her because he wanted to make sure she didn't go near the fruit? I find these much more plausible than an elaborate scheme to throw his wife under the bus. You're a strange cat lol


It was wrong....
What Eve said was wrong...

Regardless of anything else we might try to say about it, it was wrong.
We can agree on that correct?


If it was wrong, and it was concerning the Law of God,,,then its not just a little mistake, its a huge SIN!

So.....we got Eve openly committing a sin , right in front of both the Snake and Adam....


Who corrects her?



Lets look at this another way and see why no one did correct her.

What was the main attack of the Snake?..
The first main attack was to cast doubt on what God had said..
I quote:""Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"



So, the first words of the Snake point us to the real thing going on between Adam and Eve...and that was the fact as we find out in a moment when Eve tells what the Law is that Adam was telling a lie to Eve about what God said...

Eve was being lied to...

Eve was being "deceived" as the Bible tells us over and over.

Satan brings up the issue when he asks "Did God really say_______?"

Satan was not just making conversation....
And while Eve did not catch the thing Satan was pointing to, Adam had to make the connection, for Adam knew that he had taught Eve things that God had not actually said....

So the moment Adam heard Satan say this he knew he was caught....
But Adam did not know if he was in trouble yet...

So Satan was letting Adam know he was in on it,,,Satan was in on the lie.....,and would help.

[alanmolstad]

because he wanted to make sure she didn't go near the fruit?l


To lie with good intentions?....let us do evil that good may come?....

I don't think so.

Think about this one point for a moment..."What was Adam's ***?"


Yes I know he named all the animals, but what was Adam's real *** at the time?


The answer is that God placed the man into the protected garden to tend to it.
This means that Adam was there to care for all the things inside the garden..including the tree of good and evil...
He just could not eat from it...
But his *** was to look after it, tend to it, and care for it...

So to do his *** people had to be able to touch the things they are working to care for,,,

So....when Adam came out with the idea "don't touch"...it had to be something else that he had in mind...

Adam had a plan.....

This all comes out later when God tells the women the results of this story..."He will rule over you"



Think about that for a moment...
"He will rule over you"


If you drop back in the story and read what life was like at the start, you see that BOTH the man and the woman were to RULE over the earth...
There is nothing about the man ruling the woman to....they were equal....

But now things are told to the woman differently...

She will desire her husband...
she will do so much for him,,,
she will die for him,,
even the act of giving the apple to the husband shows us that she was doing all she could to help her husband..
she shared food
She never had any thought at all of keeping it for herself...she shared...

She shared because she loved him ...

But the result is only pain for her...

Although she would die for him,,,he will treat her only as just another part of the creation he gets to rule over.

Gone is the equality they were in God's plan....




So when God said to the woman,"and he shall rule over you",,he was not pronouncing a judgement, rather he was just telling the women what the women really knew was the truth between her and her husband...

The woman knew this was the truth the moment her husband pointed at her as being at fault and guilty of death.
She saw him do this....and knew he aimed to place all the blame onto her.

She knew he aimed to get her killed to save her own life...


yet even then, she would still desire the relationship she had with him at the start...









What should have Adam done?
The answer to that is that Adam should have done the thing that Eve would have wanted him to do,,,,what she longed for him to do.

When he knew they were caught by God, Adam should have stood in front of his wife...said "I and I alone have sinned"
taken all the blame, and begged God not to hold his wife guilty...
Adam should have offered his own life up to protect his wife....

in many ways..Christ on the cross heals this flaw in man...for Christ does do what Adam failed to do.
Christ took all the blame so that his bride would live.

[MickeyS]

well......where do i start?

The first thing that stands out is the comment about kids telling the truth at first and only later learning to lie.

Thats wrong....


Kids lie...children tell lies as a normal part of being who they are.....telling a lie is natural...tell the truth is the thing that must be actually taught.

Deception and MANIPULATION are not inherent. We do not know to be manipulative until we have witnessed or experienced how it works. Children are not deceptive in a complex way until they're given a reason to. They get in trouble for doing something, they know NEXT time if they do this same thing, they'll get in trouble, so they lie. Then we must teach them WHY that's not the right thing to do and guide them from going down that path.

Wow, you believe kids are born in sin? Really?

As for the rest of that.....umm, wow, that's just ....wow. For somebody who takes scripture "as is", you just added a WHOLE bunch of stuff that isn't even there.

There's nothing to address with that, because there is no basis for your ***umptions of everybody's intentions. And the scenario you just painted about Adam, Eve and God from the beginning of Time....if this shapes your beliefs, I REALLY will pray for you, because I can't even imagine how all of this has warped your ideas of everything.

I think I know why you couldn't answer my question about family....because you truly don't know...I'm sorry Alan...I really am, I didn't realize. This isn't sarcasm, seriously. Putting aside the fact that you have absolutely NO way of knowing the intentions of someone who's been gone for thousands of years....its just so scary how this no doubt affects your outlook on everything. I know you'll think I'm being a smart aleck, whatever. Think I'm done posting again for a bit, I know I've been wanting to find out what others believe and why, but this just makes no sense to me. And it's incredibly sad :(

[BigJulie]

no word on that?

Crazy, I know--but I mean it is not in the Hebrew text. I looked, it is not there. As I noted, I think it is used as a qualifier of the man that is being talked about--the man that is with Eve in the garden. Even if it was there in the original Hebrew, this could be used simply as a qualifier.

[BigJulie]

well?


Well I have no reason to expect an answer I guess, so Im just going to build on what I have learned about this section of the Bible over the years from my study.

I believe that the words "with her" are in the text and that they are telling us that Adam was right there 'with her" when the events of the story took place.

Now in the many commentaries that talk about the words "with her"a lot of them will then attempt to change the meanings to "with her" and have it seem like Adam was not actually right there with Eve.
But they don't do this based on the text or the word meanings, rather they base this change only on the context that they simply don't understand.

The many commentaries just don't see how Adam could be with Eve at the time and not have spoken up?

They don't see why Adam kept his mouth shut when Eve clearly makes the error in what she says to the Satan.?

So that is why a lot of Bible teachers will try hard to find a way to get Adam off into the distance at this part of the story.
They need Adam to be missing because if Adam is there the way the text teaches they simply don't understand why he acted the way he did?????


Well..to that I just say this..."Let the Bible tell us what it says"

The bible clearly tells us that Adam with right there "with her" at the time.
Thats what the Bible says thats what I believe.

Nope, it does not say "right there with her" .

[alanmolstad]

Prove it...

What says it's not there?


check this out -
http://qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/genesis/3.html


what is your source?...
I wish to check where you get your support for the idea that its not found there?...

[alanmolstad]

Nope, it does not say "right there with her" .

Prove it...

I believe it is there.
I have shown many,many Bible translations that show it there.
I use the King James,and my King James will put added words in italic, and the words 'with her" are not in italic, this points to the fact that the words are there.

Also you can use the STRONG'S concordance and research the words to show they are actually there in the Hebrew.



I also have shown many commentaries that all talk about this "with her" and all of them talk about the words as if there are there.

So whats translation says they are not there?
or, What commentary are you looking at?

[alanmolstad]

..... I REALLY will pray for you, because I can't even imagine how all of this has warped your ideas of everything.

.....(

Is it possible for you to have an intelligent conversation with someone without getting personal?







(there used to be a poster here called "The Way" who did not think my warning to them was serious)

[alanmolstad]

Crazy, I know--but I mean it is not in the Hebrew text. I looked, it is not there. .


You looked eh?

Post that link please....



Show me what you looked at.


Here is a link for students who want to know what appears in the hebrew text - http://qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/genesis/3.html
Go check it out for yourself!
Look at what words appear in the text.

You can see right there in black and white that the Hebrew word understood by us as 'with" is there.


This is a fact that is supported in every source I have found.
I have not found a single source that lists the word as being added .

What source do you have that even slightly suggests that all the many different Bible translations are adding "with" ?








I dont think you can.
I have done enough study on this issue to know that I can support the ideas I talk about here with a lot of sources...

I dont think you can list any source that says "with" was added.



Prove me wrong.

[MickeyS]

Is it possible for you to have an intelligent conversation with someone without getting personal?







(there used to be a poster here called "The Way" who did not think my warning to them was serious)

Wait a minute....someone here clearly stated that he could call ones ideas ridiculous, as long as he didn't call the person ridiculous.

I said your ideas warped, (that they MAY be warped) I did not call YOU warped.

The rules were made clear to me on this matter, I did exactly what this person had done to me. The only difference is, I didn't even state for a fact that your ideas are warped, I said I could only imagine....I don't understand how these rules constantly change.

[MickeyS]

A moderator clarified this point to me, he said

"You are a fool" = a personal attack as it is aimed only at the person themselves.

"Your ideas are foolish"= is not a personal attack as it is aimed only at the "ideas' and not at the person.
This shows that the person writing this understands that there is a difference between "ideas' and with "people"

Please clarify where I broke this rule. Again, I didn't even state for a fact that your ideas are warped, I said "I could only imagine" I don't know what's going on in your head. Either way, I did not attack YOU, see the clarifications of the rules above.

[alanmolstad]

I am talking about a few words found in the Hebrew text .

But....
But if you can not be part of a conversation with me about the text (or about Mormon history or past Mormon leaders etc), without getting personal then please also understand what can result from that behavior too.

[alanmolstad]

I think I have more than proved that the idea that when Eve was talking to the Snake that Adam was there with her.

I have supported this fact with supporting bible translations, with works by about every respected bible commentator,and with a link to allow people to check the actual words found in the real Hebrew text themselves.

Against this I have heard?......nothing?

Thus I will stand behind what I have said and I believe that it is just a fact of the Bible's text.


I also have shown that all the Bible commentators that try hard to make the story have Adam somewhere else are basing that not on the text at all, but rather they just base this on the fact they they just don't understand why Adam did not say anything?

My idea that I believe is what the story is talking about is that there is a very good reason why Adam does not say anything to correct Eve.
There is a good reason why Satan does not bring up her error...
There is a good reason why Eve got the law wrong when she talks to the snake.
And there is a reason why Satan begins the whole conversation with Eve by bringing up the topic of her knowing exactly what God really said or not?


all of this was connected...

[alanmolstad]

now....some may speak against my idea because Im pointing to a sin of Adam that takes place before he actually eats..

and that is true....I do.

But in reality Im pointing to the same understanding of sin that Jesus also points us to having.

Remember how Jesus said that even to look at another woman with lust makes you guilty of adultery?
Remember how he told us it is better to pluck out an eye?

What Jesus was teaching us is that while some might say that as long as you did not have intercourse with the girl you are not guilty, but Jesus says that way, way, way before any sex you were just as guilty when you just looked at the other women with lust....

Jesus calls looking at a girl as being guilty of adultery.




Its the same with the story of eating the apple in genesis.
The sin was the whole story...from start to finish.

From the first moment when Adam decided to change what he taught Eve about the law, to not correcting her error in front of Satan,to allowing his wife to eat first, to taking the apple in his own hands, to the act of eating the apple....its all the same single sin.


Adam's sin started in his eye like Jesus warns us about...and in that moment when Adam first looked at the apple wanting to eat of it, he became just as guilty as if he had already eaten...

[MickeyS]

I clearly stated why Adam could not have been with her.

God Himself stated that Adam took the fruit because EVE talked him into it. If he had been present during Satans presentation, he would have been a part of it. Just because he didn't say anything does not mean God would have dismissed him in what? A technicality?

God wouldn't have been "fooled" by Adams "trickery".


And "respectable" commentary is subjective, if you want to believe it, that's up to you, but the surrounding context does not agree with your theory.

[alanmolstad]

I clearly stated why Adam could not have been with her.
y.The Bible says he was "with" her...
There is not a line in the Bible that even hints that Adam was not "with" her at the time.

The Bible says he was "with her" and that is what I have shown and what I believe...


Disagree?....then prove it

Show me one verse that you think says he was off somewhere else...???

[alanmolstad]

http://biblehub.com/genesis/3-6.htm

[alanmolstad]

God Himself stated that Adam took the fruit because EVE talked him into it..but...then go read the whole story again and find out if Eve actually talked to Adam at all?

Find one verse that has Eve talking Adam into something...?

You cant.
At no place in this story do we read that Eve said anything to Adam...

[MickeyS]

The Bible says he was "with" her...
There is not a line in the Bible that even hints that Adam was not "with" her at the time.

The Bible says he was "with her" and that is what I have shown and what I believe...


Disagree?....then prove it

Show me one verse that you think says he was off somewhere else...???

With her when? When they were in the garden? When she ate the fruit? When she took the fruit? Nothing specifies he was with her when the "serpent" spoke to her. Nothing. Any amount of time could have transpired between Satan convincing Eve and her plucking the fruit off the tree, eating it, and offering it to her husband. What you're doing is speculating. And because GOD Himself places Adam elsewhere at the time of the presentation by Satan, then I choose to believe God. Unless you believe God fell for Adam's little trick? Do you?

[MickeyS]

now....some may speak against my idea because Im pointing to a sin of Adam that takes place before he actually eats..

and that is true....I do.

But in reality Im pointing to the same understanding of sin that Jesus also points us to having.

Remember how Jesus said that even to look at another woman with lust makes you guilty of adultery?
Remember how he told us it is better to pluck out an eye?

What Jesus was teaching us is that while some might say that as long as you did not have intercourse with the girl you are not guilty, but Jesus says that way, way, way before any sex you were just as guilty when you just looked at the other women with lust....

Jesus calls looking at a girl as being guilty of adultery.




Its the same with the story of eating the apple in genesis.
The sin was the whole story...from start to finish.

From the first moment when Adam decided to change what he taught Eve about the law, to not correcting her error in front of Satan,to allowing his wife to eat first, to taking the apple in his own hands, to the act of eating the apple....its all the same single sin.


Adam's sin started in his eye like Jesus warns us about...and in that moment when Adam first looked at the apple wanting to eat of it, he became just as guilty as if he had already eaten...

Then why was Adam specifically "punished" for hearkening to his wife?

[BigJulie]

http://biblehub.com/genesis/3-6.htm

My source is the Hebrew Bible--I own one. But you can see the actual Hebrew in Strongs Concordance in Hebrew and Greek. Hebrew is a lot trickier to understand than you are giving it credit.

The way I read this --"with her" is a qualifier" just as when God tells Abraham to sacrifice his son and then qualifies "only son".

[alanmolstad]

My source is the Hebrew Bible--I own one. .

Can you find me any translation,or any bible commentary,or any bible study link,or anything at all that supports your idea?

Because right now, you have not shown anything to support your idea at all...zip...nothing....




and if you cant?,then Im just going to consider your idea just "your idea"and not based on the text in any way, shape,or form....

I have asked youa few times now to "prove it"and clearly you cant....


So....you fail and Im going to move on to my next point.

[alanmolstad]

Then why was Adam specifically "punished" for hearkening to his wife?

lets not worry about the "why?" question right now...

First do you see my point that the Bible story never has Eve actually convincing Adam to eat at all?

[alanmolstad]

And because GOD Himself places Adam elsewhere at the time of the presentation by Satan,


Show me one verse in the whole Bible that teaches that Adam was not there "with her" at the time.....

Prove it !

[MickeyS]

lets not worry about the "why?" question right now...

First do you see my point that the Bible story never has Eve actually convincing Adam to eat at all?

You mean like this?

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree..

[MickeyS]

Show me one verse in the whole Bible that teaches that Adam was not there "with her" at the time.....

Prove it !

You have yet to prove what "time" Adam was "with her"

During the presentation by Satan?

While she picked the fruit?

While she ate the fruit?

While she was convincing him to eat the fruit?

In the garden in general?

Yes Alan, please prove at what "time" he was "with her"

[MickeyS]

but...then go read the whole story again and find out if Eve actually talked to Adam at all?

Find one verse that has Eve talking Adam into something...?

You cant.
At no place in this story do we read that Eve said anything to Adam...

Except that God said Adam hearkened unto THE VOICE of his wife.

"17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree.."

Pretty darn clear

[BigJulie]

Can you find me any translation,or any bible commentary,or any bible study link,or anything at all that supports your idea?

Because right now, you have not shown anything to support your idea at all...zip...nothing....




and if you cant?,then Im just going to consider your idea just "your idea"and not based on the text in any way, shape,or form....

I have asked youa few times now to "prove it"and clearly you cant....


So....you fail and Im going to move on to my next point.

I am not saying that those who translate it do not put the qualifier, I am saying that most understand it as a qualifier rather than meaning that Adam was standing there while Eve spoke with the serpent.

Here is the Hebrew that is translated to "husband with her": אִישׁ ʼîysh, eesh; (or perhaps rather from an unused root meaning to be extant); a man as an individual or a male person; often used as an adjunct to a more definite term (and in such cases frequently not expressed in translation):—also, another, any (man), a certain, champion, consent, each, every (one), fellow, (foot-, husband-) man, (good-, great, mighty) man, he, high (degree), him (that is), husband, man(-kind), none, one, people, person, steward, what (man) soever, whoso(-ever), worthy.

The verse reads:

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

There is nothing that denotes that Adam was standing there while Eve had this conversation. But, especially telling, this word is used for a man or husband who is "noble" or denotes of "man of more noble quality."

In other words, the Hebrew word used that is translated to "man with her" or "husband with her" literally means a man who is noble or good or worthy.

[MickeyS]

Oh snap....I was just pointing out that no time was specified when he was "with her", which is also true..

Jul pulled out the big guns ;)

Either way....nothing in the text, at all, English, Hebrew...at any time states that Adam was with Eve, WHEN SHE SPOKE TO THE SERPENT.

It's been made very plainly clear, I have yet to see different. It's NOT THERE.

[alanmolstad]

I am not saying .....
We can check what you said....








All Im saying, is that the Bible teaches that Adam was "with her"

Thats what the Bible says....
Thats whats you also know is the truth too..


Adam was with her......

[BigJulie]

Oh snap....I was just pointing out that no time was specified when he was "with her", which is also true..

Jul pulled out the big guns ;)

Either way....nothing in the text, at all, English, Hebrew...at any time states that Adam was with Eve, WHEN SHE SPOKE TO THE SERPENT.

It's been made very plainly clear, I have yet to see different. It's NOT THERE.

Sorry to jump in. But I learned a little more about how God sees Adam. On one hand his name, in Hebrew, literally means dirt. "Dust thou art" is literal of his name as well. But when he speaks of him as a "man with her" or a husband, the term denotes worthiness, goodness.

[alanmolstad]

Oh snap....I was just pointing out that no time was specified when he was "with her", which is also true..

Jul pulled out the big guns ;)

Either way....nothing in the text, at all, English, Hebrew...at any time states that Adam was with Eve, WHEN SHE SPOKE TO THE SERPENT.

It's been made very plainly clear, I have yet to see different. It's NOT THERE.Does the Bible say he was away?....nope.

What does the Bible say?...it says he was with her (case-closed)



If you want me to go over the many translations that prove my point and totally undercut any other point of view on the matter?..I will...No problem,no problem at all....


There is not a single translation that teaches that Adam was not there "with her" at the time...

None...

Zero...

Goose egg....

You want to see it in the Hebrew?..I already posted the link to the real Hebrew text



Thus I am correct......(once again)....

[BigJulie]

We can check what you said....








All Im saying, is that the Bible teaches that Adam was "with her"

Thats what the Bible says....
Thats whats you also know is the truth too..


Adam was with her......

Alan--I was going to the Hebrew Bible-the place where the interpretations began. You read this to mean that he was standing with her while the serpent was talking. I do not see this at all. The Hebrew does not say "with her"--that is my point. I gave you what is there in Hebrew. I believe translators put "with her" to denote who he is to her in the garden, her husband.

Here is another verse with a qualifier:

Genesis 9:9
And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you (wouldn't it seem redundant to say "after you" because would his seed ever come before him?) Hebrew often does this type of thing.

[alanmolstad]

so once again...Here is the real truth about what this story is teaching.

Before Adam ate the apple, there was clearly a serious problem going on between Adam and his wife.

The conversation she has with the snake shows us that she was not correctly telling the snake what the law was.

Her husband was there....her husband heard her make this error...(This is the reason later God tells Adam that he had "listened" to his wife).
Adam listened....He did not speak with her, she was not talking to him at all...


A lot of people miss this important point, and then they start to add their own stuff to the story to make it work.
But if you just stick to the Text you wont go off the rails.

There is no need to add things to the story,just read it as it is written.

Was Adam with Eve?....yes!

And Adam listened to his wife?.....yes!

And Eve was speaking at the time?....yes!


Did Eve say anything to Adam?......NO!



So Adam was there?....yes!

and Adam was listening to his wife speak?....yes!

who was his wife speaking to?.....Satan!

Adam was right there and he heard.....he listened to what Eve said to the snake and he knew it was wrong and did nothing to correct her.
at that moment, the sin was already going forth.

The moment Adam heard his wife say the part about the Law not allowing anyone to touch the apple and did not correct her, the cat was out of the bag.



This is why God tells him that because he listened....and because he ate, he would suffer...

[alanmolstad]

Alan--I was going to the Hebrew Bible-
I have asked you over and over to post any link or any proof at all that says Adam was not "with" Eve...


You have failed to do this..

I now believe you cant...and Im sure you know this too..

So Im really not paying much more attention to you at this point as you are not adding to the conversation,nor are you willing to post a link to a translation or anything that teaches that the Hebrew does not have "with" in the text.


In other words you have failed, and Im moving on...

[BigJulie]

I have asked you over and over to post any link or any proof at all that says Adam was not "with" Eve...


You have failed to do this..

I now believe you cant...and Im sure you know this too..

So Im really not paying much more attention to you at this point as you are not adding to the conversation,nor are you willing to post a link to a translation or anything that teaches that the Hebrew does not have "with" in the text.


In other words you have failed, and Im moving on...

Wow Alan, your narration of this story is so important you are willing to ignore how the Bible is written in Hebrew. Go ahead---please, go on, and have this conversation by yourself. Clearly, you have a need to denote Adam as scheming and wicked even before he ate of the fruit and when the Hebrew word for him denotes him as good and worthy.

But--please go on. Clearly, you are smarter than everyone before you.

[alanmolstad]

Wow Alan, your narration of this story is so important you are willing to ignore how the Bible is written in Hebrew. Go ahead---please, go on, and have this conversation by yourself. Clearly, you have a need to denote Adam as scheming and wicked even before he ate of the fruit and when the Hebrew word for him denotes him as good and worthy.

But--please go on. Clearly, you are smarter than everyone before you.Once again...you have not a single bit of proof to support your many words...
No links to anything...
No address of even a crazy Mormon website that supports you...
Not a single Bible translation

You got Nothing to support you at all...

So you are once again caught in an Epic Fail !

[MickeyS]

Sorry to jump in. But I learned a little more about how God sees Adam. On one hand his name, in Hebrew, literally means dirt. "Dust thou art" is literal of his name as well. But when he speaks of him as a "man with her" or a husband, the term denotes worthiness, goodness.

I understand what you're saying, that's good to know :)

I agree as I don't see for one second how Adam could have been capable of Satan-level manipulation and deception before eating the fruit.

[MickeyS]

so once again...Here is the real truth about what this story is teaching.

Before Adam ate the apple, there was clearly a serious problem going on between Adam and his wife.

The conversation she has with the snake shows us that she was not correctly telling the snake what the law was.

Her husband was there....her husband heard her make this error...(This is the reason later God tells Adam that he had "listened" to his wife).
Adam listened....He did not speak with her, she was not talking to him at all...


A lot of people miss this important point, and then they start to add their own stuff to the story to make it work.
But if you just stick to the Text you wont go off the rails.

There is no need to add things to the story,just read it as it is written.

Was Adam with Eve?....yes!

And Adam listened to his wife?.....yes!

And Eve was speaking at the time?....yes!


Did Eve say anything to Adam?......NO!



So Adam was there?....yes!

and Adam was listening to his wife speak?....yes!

who was his wife speaking to?.....Satan!

Adam was right there and he heard.....he listened to what Eve said to the snake and he knew it was wrong and did nothing to correct her.
at that moment, the sin was already going forth.

The moment Adam heard his wife say the part about the Law not allowing anyone to touch the apple and did not correct her, the cat was out of the bag.



This is why God tells him that because he listened....and because he ate, he would suffer...

Nothing in that entire chapter of Genesis says ANY of this. It's been pointed out. It's been clarified. This is absolute speculation from two words that don't prove anything.

As for adding what's not there....

Man, seriously.

Again, terribly sad that there are people that show the father of the human race as being as evil and diabolical as Satan himself....especially since, Adam had nobody to learn such diabolical behavior from...because if the serpent had taught him...it would have stated that Adam listened to him...sad, seriously sad.

Julie's right, if you want to continue down your path of believing what you would like, go ahead....

[alanmolstad]

There is no need to add things to the story,just read it as it is written.

Was Adam with Eve?....yes!

And Adam listened to his wife?.....yes!

And Eve was speaking at the time?....yes!


Did Eve say anything to Adam?......NO!



So Adam was there?....yes!

and Adam was listening to his wife speak?....yes!

who was his wife speaking to?.....Satan!

Adam was right there and he heard.....he listened to what Eve said to the snake and he knew it was wrong and did nothing to correct her.
at that moment, the sin was already going forth.



all of the above is true and taken right out of the text...
If you want to disagree you better have a verse to back up you ideas,,,right now they are just your personal views that are not supported by the text at all...

Just wishful thinking on your part...

Once again you are caught in an Epic Fail....LOL

[MickeyS]

"Adam was right there and he heard.....he listened to what Eve said to the snake and he knew it was wrong and did nothing to correct her.
at that moment, the sin was already going forth."

None of that is in the text

Sorry

And still...even if "with her" means he was in fact "with her" you still have not proven where it specifies WHEN or WHERE he was "with her". Because the Bible itself does not state this.

When God says Adam hearkened to his wife, He did not say "when she was talking to the serpent"

So, you are adding what is...not...there.

I would say "epic fail", but that's such a childish thing to do, I'm not in high school

[alanmolstad]

New International Version ...She also gave some to her husband, who was with her,

New Living Translation...Then she gave some to her husband, who was with her

English Standard Version.... and she also gave some to her husband who was with her

New American Standard Bible ....and she gave also to her husband with her

King James Bible,,,,,and gave also unto her husband with her


Holman Christian Standard Bible.... she also gave some to her husband, who was with her,

International Standard Version....Then she also gave some to her husband who was with her,







LOL.........

Once again unless you gotsome type of screw Mormon-type Bible...(and I doubt that) the Text teaches the same as I teach.

Once again you are caught in an Epic Fail!



come back when you got some proof to show me...
Your private opinions are just not equal to the weapons I got on my side,,, :)
http://biblehub.com/text/genesis/3-6.htm

[alanmolstad]

http://biblehub.com/text/genesis/3-6.htm

[MickeyS]

All you have "proved" is that he was with her

You still have not proved WHEN or WHERE

Your above verses, read at direct literal English face value, (not taking into account the bible translations) state he was with her when she had the fruit, but could also mean he was "with her" in the garden, which he was.

Nowhere do any of the verses ANYWHERE state he was with her when she talked to the "serpent"

Period, you still have not proven that the bible says he was with her WHEN SHE TALKED TO SATAN. The burden of proof is upon you my friend

Oh, and thanks for proving my point about childish behavior, my goodness

[alanmolstad]

so all Im saying is what I can quote word for word out of the bible...

She also gave some to her husband, who was with her,





so unless you got anything else to say?..
I win,,,you girls fail

[alanmolstad]

Nowhere do any of the verses ANYWHERE state he was with her when she talked to the "serpent"

lwe can prove Adam was there, because the Text says he was there with Eve...

And God confirms this when he tells Adam that Adam did hear Eve talking to the snake when God says Adam "listened"


If God knew Adam was there then God also knew that Adam heard Eve talking to the snake....

Eve never says squat to Adam, but Eve says a lot to the snake and Adam heard every word....

[MickeyS]

we can prove Adam was there, because the Text says he was there with Eve...

And God confirms this when he tells Adam that Adam did hear Eve talking to the snake when God says Adam "listened"


If God knew Adam was there then God also knew that Adam heard Eve talking to the snake....

Eve never says squat to Adam, but Eve says a lot to the snake and Adam heard every word....

If God knew Adam was there, then God also knew that ADAM heard the snake too. Funny how that isn't mentioned anywhere.

But seriously, keep adding WHATS NOT THERE, since you have to concoct a complete conspiracy theory scenario to back up your claims....I'm not going to keep going back and forth on this. You're story doesn't make any sense. You didn't even slide what God said to Adam into your narrative until I continually brought that up and you had to adjust your story...so, carry on...

Which reminds me of a story...

Stop me if you've heard this....it's about those people who believe 20 children never died at Sandy Hook...they have a whole story to back their claim as well, and will continually change their narrative also when any of their "evidence" is debunked...

[MickeyS]

What I find REALLY interesting is that you have spent hundreds of words on this....


Yet, you don't want to answer my questions about the purpose of family being ordained of God, because you don't want to take up too much of a thread with long posts.

So interesting .... Still not ready to comment on that one?

[alanmolstad]

still nothing to back your ideas eh?

must be hard for you to want so much to find a translation of the Bible that supports your views and knowing there are none?.....


I can post tons of translation that teach the same as Im saying...You got none...

Once again you FAIL.....

[alanmolstad]

the problem Mormons have when you are asking them to support their views with the bible, listing a Bible verse, or a Bible translation, is that about everything within Mormonism is not backed-up by the Bible at all .

Mormonism is not supported by the Bible.


This shows up so clearly in this video where from start to finish you have one error piled on top of the next error..
Nothing is found in the text...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gd0_qbxv6Y

thats why on this topic when I ask Julie to support her views with a link?...she cant.

thats why when I ask Mickey to "prove it" with a translation?...she cant.

[MickeyS]

Let's see....I've looked through all these non-Mormon "CHRISTIAN " commentaries....I can't find any that support your narrative

http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.php?com=mhc&b=1&c=3

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/jamieson-fausset-brown/genesis/genesis-3.html

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/3-1.htm

https://www.blueletterbible.org/comm/guzik_david/studyguide_gen/gen_3.cfm

I could have kept going, but really, Bible Hub alone has SEVERAL...none state Adam was with Eve during the temptation, none support the Adam Conspiracy Theory...so if you have more "CHRISTIAN" commentary stating otherwise, it just shows

You guys can't make up your minds what to believe, why can't you guys agree upon things??

[alanmolstad]

http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.php?com=mhc&b=1&c=3

Looking at this first one you listed,,,There is nothing here to support the idea that Adam was not there "with" Eve..

Nothing...zip...

In fact, the guy who wrote this commentary says very clearly "She gave it also to her husband with her.".....Tadaa!



Notice also the commentary does not address that I can see the fact that before Eve ate the apple she had quoted the Law in error>..... :)

So this first commentary does nothing at all to support your argument, and says not a single word against my views..

Once again you have returned to yet another "EPIC FAIL!"

[alanmolstad]

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/jamieson-fausset-brown/genesis/genesis-3.html


This source of yours does not even address the words spoken by Eve!!!


Epic fail!

[MickeyS]

Looking at this first one you listed,,,There is nothing here to support the idea that Adam was not there "with" Eve..

Nothing...zip...

In fact, the guy who wrote this commentary says very clearly "She gave it also to her husband with her.".....Tadaa!



Notice also the commentary does not address that I can see the fact that before Eve ate the apple she had quoted the Law in error>..... :)

So this first commentary does nothing at all to support your argument, and says not a single word against my views..

Once again you have returned to yet another "EPIC FAIL!"

Tadaa?? LOLOL

No Alan, he does not say Adam was with her DURING THE TEMPTATION.

Then look at the several others that SPECIFY she was ALONE DURING THE TEMPTATION.

But NOT ONE say that she was with Adam WHEN THE SERPENT TALKED TO HER.

I'm not saying I believe everything these commentaries say, but you should since they're "CHRISTIAN", and these "CHRISTIAN" interpretations state she was alone, some don't clarify where Adam was DURING THE TEMPTATION.

NOT ONE...says says he was with her DURING THE TEMPTATION.

TADAA!! :)

[MickeyS]

This source of yours does not even address the words spoken by Eve!!!


Epic fail!

What????? LOLOL???

What are you TALKING about. I am addressing

WHERE ADAM WAS DURING THE TEMPTATION.

Period.

[alanmolstad]

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/3-1.htm


at this link I find the following.." the woman replied, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." She was aware of the prohibition, therefore, and fully understood its meaning; but she added, "neither shall ye touch it," and proved by this very exaggeration that it appeared too stringent even to her, and therefore that her love and confidence towards God were already beginning to waver. Here was the beginning of her fall:
""

Notice the writer is attempting to deal with the words of Eve that the other commentators overlooked.

he says concerning the fact that Eve added to the Law as being the moment " Here was the beginning of her fall"



SO this commentary actually agrees with me! that the fall happened before they actually ate...

This writer puts all the blame onto eve for adding to the word of God, making it her forst sin.
I on the other hand do not place any fault on to Eve at all, because the Bible is clear in not blaming Eve too.

Adam sinned, but Eve was deceived...


This commentator says Eve was guilty of adding to the word of god...and if that is so then she sinned..
So this commentator is close, but still in error as to that point..

Adam sinned....Eve was only fooled.

[MickeyS]

Now you've changed the subject lol

Where does that say that Eve was with Adam when she had her conversation with the "serpent"??

[alanmolstad]

https://www.blueletterbible.org/comm/guzik_david/studyguide_gen/gen_3.cfm

I?


Notice what it says on this commentary
"c. God has said: Eve's ignorance of exactly what God said was really Adam's responsibility. He did a poor *** of relating to his wife the word God gave him.



So the writer understands that Eve errors here, and that this is clearly a sin...

it also puts the blame for eves error right back to Adam...

The writer only says Adam did a poor ***...

I have a view that Adam knew what he was doing....it was not an accident that he taught Eve things that god did not say...

[MickeyS]

He said he did a "poor ***" which is quite different than he "intentionally lied"

Now....where does that state that Adam was with Eve during her conversation with the serpent?

Oh....it doesn't, actually, further down in this same commentary it states this

"Because you have heeded the voice of your wife: It wasn't just as if Adam took Eve's advice. He chose to be with Eve intead of obeying God."

This clarifies the point that Adam took Eve's advice...meaning she talked him into eating the fruit. AFTER she had spoken with Satan

[alanmolstad]

so once a aging....you got nothing...

Epic Fail again and a again....



You want to try again to find a source,,,a translation that teaches that the word "with" is not in the Hebrew text?...go ahead and try..

So far you have failed to even come close

[alanmolstad]

So letme once again teach you what is really being talked about in this story in genesis.

God planted the tree in the middle of the garden.
God tells only Adam the Law.

God never tells Eve the Law.

Eve can quote the Law to the snake....
Only Adam was told the law, yet his wife can quote the law....thus the idea that she had to have learned the Law only from the one single source she had for receiving the law is Adam.


So we can understand that when Eve quotes the Law to satan, she is simply quoting Adam actually.

Satan begins the conversation with the question about what God actually said?
To Eve, this is a very innocent question, but when Adam heard it it had to point him back to the main thing Satan was drawing his attention to...that being the difference in what he taught God said, and what he actually knew God said.


There was a difference....

That change, is a error.....a sin...

This is Satan pointing to a sin of Adam's that happens well before anyone eats anything...

Satan is pointing out that Adam was already guilty in God's eyes of adding to the Word of God.


Eve did not have a clue about any of this, as she was simply answering a question based on what she was told by the only person who knew first-hand what God had said....he husband Adam.


What this means is that Adam had already stopped treating Eve as a equal, and now started to treat her as someone he was in***led to lie to for his own reasons...
In other words...Adam was starting to 'rule" over her...


This is totally against God's plan.
God never told Adam he was to "rule" over his wife..

What was to be ruled over and who was to be doing it?....that answer is found at Genesis 1:28 "God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."



So while Adam had started to rule over his wife, he actually was never told to do that at all, rather both Eve and Adam were to rule over the life of the earth together..
Both were equal in their right to rule.
none was given the right to rule over the other at all...

[alanmolstad]

Adam is there "with" Eve...
The Bibel does not tell us that Eve had to "find" her husband and talk him into eating.

This is where so many people start to add to the Word of God to make it fit with their teachings.

They want Eve to be alone because they dont understand why Adam did not speak up?
They want Eve to have to "find" Adam as a way to have Adam not to blame.
And they want Eve to speak to Adam, so that when God says that Adam had "listened" to his wife it works with their ideas that Adam got talked into sinning.


But the problem is...The Bible tells us a different story!!!!


The Bible teaches that Adam was there with Eve.
The Bible does not say Eve had to hunt down and find Adam later at all....rather all she had to do is hand the apple to him.
Adam was there the whole time, heard his wife speak to the snake...heard the snake raise the issue about what God had said,,,Adam know what that was talking about...Adam heard his wife repeat the law to the snake and knew she was in error....

Adam knew that the only person that could have taught Eve this wrong Law is himself....

By asking Eve that question at the start,Satan is drawing Adam's attention to the very thing Adam was guilty of.

[alanmolstad]

so....clearly then we can see how Adam must have had a plan...

The speed that Adam points to his wife as being to blame, knowing that this would likely end in her being killed...shows us more of the dark heart of Adam concerning his wife...

[MickeyS]

so once a aging....you got nothing...

Epic Fail again and a again....



You want to try again to find a source,,,a translation that teaches that the word "with" is not in the Hebrew text?...go ahead and try..

So far you have failed to even come close

So far you have failed to show in any of those commentaries that Eve was with Adam DURING HER CONVERSATION WITH THE SERPENT.

And you have refused to address the several commentaries that SPECIFY she was ALONE. On that same Bible Hub site you love so much.

In the Bible Hub commentaries (there are SEVERAL) you read the FIRST

All commentary either specify she was ALONE, or make a point of staying that the serpent spoke to Eve because she was the weaker, more vulnerable, more susceptible of the two, certainly implying that Satan wouldn't be so clever to address the woman, but stupid enough to do it in front of the man. But most definitely NONE state Adam was with Eve when she spoke to the tempter. NONE even IMPLY it.

Mclarens Expositions
"The woman’s more emotional, sensitive, compliant nature made her the first victim,"

Benson Commentary
"He said unto the woman — Whom it is probable he found alone."

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
"The person tempted was the woman-it was Satans policy to enter into talk with her when she was alone"

Barnes Notes on the Bible
"The tempter addresses the woman as the more susceptible and unguarded of the two creatures he would betray"

Jamiesson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
"and, above all, her being alone, unfortified by the presence and counsels of her husband."

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
"And he said to the woman; being alone, which he took the advantage of; "

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
"The serpent, in order to secure success, addresses the woman, who (a) was the weaker, (b) was apparently alone"

Pulpit Commentary
"As it were, Eve was first placed at the furthest distance possible from the supreme, and then ***ailed"

Keil and Delitzsch OT Commentary
"For its subtilty was manifested as the craft of a tempter to evil, in the simple fact that it was to the weaker woman that it turned;"

Are you staying these are all unreliable?

[alanmolstad]

This is why Later when God tells Eve that her desire will be to the man, and he was rule over you, its not how God wanted it, but it was how things were.

Eve could clearly see this was now true in her life.

Adam never stuck up for her.
Adam never tied to defend her.
Adam did not try to take the blame and give up his life and allow his wife to live

Rather Eve had watched as her husband pointed to her as being to blame....and being to blame meant death.

She watched as Adam attempted to have her take the blame, and therefore killed , so that he would get away with his sin,



"He will rule over you"......was just God telling it like it was....

Sorta like saying to a mistreated wife, "Wake-up and smell the coffee"

[alanmolstad]

this is also one of the main reasons the christian church is called the "bride"

for Christ has to fix not only my issue with sin...but also Christ has to deal with Adam's issue,,,,



The Bride of Adam was tossed out and basically left on her own in the hope that she would take all the blame and that the man would live.

The groom was attempting to sacrifice his bride to save his own life.


This then points us to the way we talk about the Lord Jesus, and the church.
In that case, the groom will give up his life, to save his bride.

in Christ we see what a groom should do....and what Adam could not do...




That is why Christ spoke of us in the church as his Bride...for he is pointing back to the start of the human issue with sin...that a man treated his wife as something he was to rule over....and lie to....and blame....and try to get killed to save his own life.

[MickeyS]

So you're just going to ignore the sources you taunted me for not having...

If you translate that into "winning" because you simply decide to ignore what doesn't agree with you, and continue to add what isn't there....then that just shows your inability to translate anything. The sources are there, it's been confirmed, it's been verified by other "CHRISTIAN" sources. NOWHERE in the Bible does it show that Adam was with Eve WHEN SHE SPOKE TO SATAN.

You have not shown that it does, and your continued elaboration of your conspiracy theory isn't helping your case, because the Bible DEFINITELY does not ever for one second state what Adam was thinking or what his intentions were.

"I have a view that Adam knew what he was doing....it was not an accident that he taught Eve things that god did not say..."

You're just making that junk up


Anyway, I'm not playing these games, have fun playing with yourself, because I have better things to do with my day :)

[BigJulie]

Once again...you have not a single bit of proof to support your many words...
No links to anything...
No address of even a crazy Mormon website that supports you...
Not a single Bible translation

You got Nothing to support you at all...

So you are once again caught in an Epic Fail !



I didn't give you a Mormon link or website. I gave you Strong's Concordance in Hebrew and Greek. A website that gives the Hebrew and Greek--a Christian website, so you could look it up yourself. Then I gave you what this Christian website says.

[BigJulie]

He said he did a "poor ***" which is quite different than he "intentionally lied"

Now....where does that state that Adam was with Eve during her conversation with the serpent?

Oh....it doesn't, actually, further down in this same commentary it states this

"Because you have heeded the voice of your wife: It wasn't just as if Adam took Eve's advice. He chose to be with Eve intead of obeying God."

This clarifies the point that Adam took Eve's advice...meaning she talked him into eating the fruit. AFTER she had spoken with Satan

I think Alan's commentaries that he is giving us--that Adam did a "poor *** of relating to his wife the word God gave him" is very chauvinistic. Holy Smokes---half of the Christian commentaries also speak of women as the more "susceptible gender." No wonder it has taken years for women to be treated with any type of decency.

Imagine if the world understood what we understand through revelation given to Joseph Smith, that Eve thought through what the serpent had told her and while deceived, understood the important of learning good from evil. And that Adam, being a noble and worthy husband understood that she was right--that learning to understand good from evil was a good thing. And yet, how grateful both were to learn of the Atonement of Jesus Christ who would save them from this Fall.

Christian's version of the Fall (from the commentary Alan has given us or Alan's viewpoint):

1. Eve chose badly, but did so with Adam standing there.
2. Adam was bad and did a poor *** of teaching his wife.
3. The Fall is a bad thing and not part of God's plan.
4. We could all be living in Paradise if it wasn't for Adam and Eve.

Mormon's version:
1. Adam and Eve were as children, not understanding good or bad.
2. The Fall is a necessary part of the God's plan.
3. Eve, while deceived, acted to the best of her understanding that it would be a good thing to understand good and evil.
4. Adam, a good and worthy husband chose to stay with Eve and saw the wisdom in her choice.
5. God, knowing that Adam and Eve would choose this, provided a Savior so that Adam and Eve could both learn good from evil and return to a state of happiness.
6. God knowing that our natures, like Adam and Eve, are not perfect, also gave us a chance--through the Fall--to learn good from evil and return to him (happiness).

[BigJulie]

This is why Later when God tells Eve that her desire will be to the man, and he was rule over you, its not how God wanted it, but it was how things were.

Eve could clearly see this was now true in her life.

Adam never stuck up for her.
Adam never tied to defend her.
Adam did not try to take the blame and give up his life and allow his wife to live

Rather Eve had watched as her husband pointed to her as being to blame....and being to blame meant death.

She watched as Adam attempted to have her take the blame, and therefore killed , so that he would get away with his sin,



"He will rule over you"......was just God telling it like it was....

Sorta like saying to a mistreated wife, "Wake-up and smell the coffee"

Really--this is how you see it? Eve was this abused wife and God was just pointing out the women would now stay in this abused position? UGH!

[BigJulie]

this is also one of the main reasons the christian church is called the "bride"

for Christ has to fix not only my issue with sin...but also Christ has to deal with Adam's issue,,,,



The Bride of Adam was tossed out and basically left on her own in the hope that she would take all the blame and that the man would live.

The groom was attempting to sacrifice his bride to save his own life.


This then points us to the way we talk about the Lord Jesus, and the church.
In that case, the groom will give up his life, to save his bride.

in Christ we see what a groom should do....and what Adam could not do...




That is why Christ spoke of us in the church as his Bride...for he is pointing back to the start of the human issue with sin...that a man treated his wife as something he was to rule over....and lie to....and blame....and try to get killed to save his own life.

Oh, so you believe that God created Adam and Eve and set them up as husband and wife, just so he could show Adam what a miserable failure he was and how a husband should act? So, with your thinking then--if man treated his wife as "something he should rule over"--then wouldn't Christ, as a good husband, let the wife rule?

[alanmolstad]

I think Alan's commentaries that he is giving us--......mine?........

[alanmolstad]

Oh, so you believe that God created Adam and Eve and set them up as husband and wife, just so he could show Adam what a miserable failure he was and how a husband should act? So, with your thinking then--if man treated his wife as "something he should rule over"--then wouldn't Christ, as a good husband, let the wife rule?

The wife will live, while the groom dies.
This is the opposite the Genesis story where the groom wanted to live even if it meant the bride would die.

There is also the opposite as seen that Christ is innocent and yet he dies for the guilty, whereas in Genesis the groom was guilty and tried to get the Bride who was "deceived" to die for him and his sin.

[alanmolstad]

Really--this is how you see it? Eve was this abused wife and God was just pointing out the women would now stay in this abused position? UGH!

God was only telling the woman what the woman now knew was the truth.
Gone is the equality with the man she had been created with.

That although she would seek to give and share and want only the best for the man, in return she would find herself treated as yet another thing the man attempts to rule over...


and when you look at how things went into the future....that is how things have turned out time and time again.

[BigJulie]

God was only telling the woman what the woman now knew was the truth.
Gone is the equality with the man she had been created with.

That although she would seek to give and share and want only the best for the man, in return she would find herself treated as yet another thing the man attempts to rule over...


and when you look at how things went into the future....that is how things have turned out time and time again.

Well, thanks for sharing your beliefs Alan---but all I can say is, thanks, but no thanks. (All I see is men's religious excuse to mistreat women).

[alanmolstad]

Well, thanks for sharing your beliefs Alan---but all I can say is, thanks, but no thanks. (All I see is men's religious excuse to mistreat women).

God's words proved to be very, very true....

1,000s of years go by, and the words prove to be so very true over and over again.
Eve might not have wanted to hear it, and so that is likely why God does speak these words to her...

but Eve also needed to hear it from God so that she does not live in a false world of her own making.

[BigJulie]

God's words proved to be very, very true....

1,000s of years go by, and the words prove to be so very true over and over again.
Eve might not have wanted to hear it, and so that is likely why God does speak these words to her...

but Eve also needed to hear it from God so that she does not live in a false world of her own making.

You need to read up on Cooley's "Looking Gl*** Self".

My beliefs see Eve as noble and esteemed. As I said, thanks but no thanks.

[alanmolstad]

Eve was lied to and deceived.

The common understanding is that when the Bible tells us that Eve was deceived that it must be talking about the conversation she has with the snake.

My opinion is that if you only have her being deceived by the snake you don't fully understand the whole story.

The story of Eve's being deceived starts way before her conversation with the snake, and it starts to be more about her relationship with her husband.

When the Bible tells us later that she "gave also to her husband who was with her," we start to see that she was being truly manipulated in this story to take the blame.

So we see that Adam was there the whole time.
He was not off fixing a flower cart somewhere .
Adam was right there the whole time Eve was talking to the snake...
So Adam knew what was happening...
Adam knew that when Eve tells the snake this part of the Law (that was not really part of the Law) he had to know it was a sin.

There is simply no way around this...Adam was there,
Adam was listening to his wife speak...
Heard her say this error...
knew that the addition to the Law was totally in error and therefore a sin...

Yet he says nothing?


Now in the commentaries we read on this problem we find that writers struggle hard to find a reason why Adam did not speak up?
The common answer the many commentators have to answer this mystery is to try to make it seem that Adam was not with Eve at the time.

Even though the Text says clearly that Adam was there.
They need to make him be not there to make the story work the way they want it to work.


That is where I differ.

I differ with all the commentaries because I don't have a need to write Adam out of the story.

I simply read the text as it was written and allow it to tell me its story.

The story as written is that Adam was there.
Adam hears Eve make this error about the Law and Adam says nothing to correct her.
The Bible's context has presented it clearly that only Adam was told the Law by God, and that Eve had to learn the Law from him.

That is just a fact of the bible's context.

So this points us to the only conclusion we can come to that :If Eve was not told the Law but had to receive the Law from Adam...and if she repeats the Law as she does with the clear error in it, she is either telling a lie, or she has been lied to!

Eve either lied to the snake.....or......Adam lied to her beforehand when he taught her the Law.



So what is the answer?...

The answer we find in the Text is that the Bible never calls Eve as being guilty of telling a lie,so this means Eve had been lied to by Adam when he taught her what the Law was.

And as Eve had to trust her husband to teach her the Law (as there was no other way for here to learn the Law), she had to have been "deceived" by both Satan and her husband Adam.



thus when I read the Bible describe Eve's actions in this story I can see how truly the Bible is correct when it says of Eve that she was "Deceived".

[MickeyS]

"we see that Adam was there the whole time"

The Bible does not say Eve was with Adam when she spoke to Satan. You have not shown that it does. At the very most (IF the English translation "with her" meant what you believe it did) it states he was there when she gave him the fruit. Several things happened in the text.

Satan spoke with Eve about the fruit
She saw the fruit, she considered the fruit, she thought about it making her wise
She took the fruit
She ate the fruit
She gave some to her husband.

Several steps there....the first of which was speaking to Satan. The Bible does not state at which point Adam was with her. Stop adding what isn't there. Adam is never mentioned during the conversation with Satan. Quit adding what is not there.

So let's break it down and look at Adams action and his consequence.

Adam stated he was given the fruit by his wife, and he ate (two actions, took the fruit from his wife, ate it)
God said because he listened to his wife and ate the fruit that he was forbidden to eat....consequence given.(two actions, took the fruit from his wife, ate it)

God was repeating back to Adam what Adam had admitted doing. Simple

The consequence given by God was in direct correlation with the action spoken by Adam. Him taking the fruit from Eve, him eating the fruit he was commanded not to. So the "hearkening" that he did was to Eve when he took the fruit. The fact that he "hearkened" means he listened to her.

It doesn't get any simpler than that. He was not there.

But the problem still lies in your continued claim of Adams great "deception" which is, of course, completely IMPOSSIBLE. And you point that fact out several times.

"Adam was listening to his wife speak...
Heard her say this error...
knewthat the addition to the Law was totally in error and therefore a sin.."

"Adam knew what was happening...
Adam knew that when Eve tells the snake this part of the Law (that was not really part of the Law) he had to know it was a sin.

With only one commandment on the table
"Thou shalt not eat the fruit"
How would Adam have known anything else was wrong....before eating the fruit of KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL?

He wouldn't, it's impossible. You are writing THE FRUIT out of the story and rendering it completely useless. If Adam knew good from evil before eating the fruit...what exactly was it the fruit was supposed to do?

[BigJulie]

"
With only one commandment on the table
"Thou shalt not eat the fruit"
How would Adam have known anything else was wrong....before eating the fruit of KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL?

He wouldn't, it's impossible. You are writing THE FRUIT out of the story and rendering it completely useless. If Adam knew good from evil before eating the fruit...what exactly was it the fruit was supposed to do?

And that is the material point--Adam did not know good from evil. Therefore, you are right--on this basis alone, Alan's theory cannot be correct.

[alanmolstad]

try to talk among yourselves...

(alan sick this week)

[BigJulie]

try to talk among yourselves...

(alan sick this week)

Sorry you have been sick. I hope you get feeling better soon.

[alanmolstad]

Sorry you have been sick. I hope you get feeling better soon.

and now the wife has got it! (*^$@%_(&%#!#!!!

But Im feeling better...

I cant remember where I was in this subject, so if anyone has a question or a comment to kick-start the conversation, now would be a good time....

[alanmolstad]

thus.....

The topic was ***led dealing with the question - was it God's plan to replace Eve with another woman?

And I think I have shown that there may have been a plan to replace Eve, but it was really looking that it was Adam's plan.

[alanmolstad]

what the deal seems to be with the story and the fall of man is the following.

God planted a tree right smack in the middle of the garden that Adam was banned from eating, yet was told to tend to it and help it grow.

Adam wanted to eat from that tree.
But Adam did not want to die.
So Adam did not eat from it.

Then Eve comes along, and God tells Adam and Eve they both get to rule over the whole world.

But Adam now has a plan....

Adam comes up with a plan to eat of the forbidden tree and yet live.
The plan is to get Eve to take the blame for his eating, and have her die in punishment,

The snake seems to be aware of this plan.

The snake approaches both Adam and Eve, and talks to them.

Eve answers the snake and tells the snake the law that she learned from Adam.
The law she reports has an error within it.

Adam does not correct Eve
The snake does not correct Eve.

Eve listens to the snake and gets convinced that eating is a good idea.

Eve eats
Adam does not reach for the food, but waits for Eve to hand him some
Adam eats.

God speaks now.

Adam puts the blame onto his wife, knowing that this will likely get her killed according to the Law.

Eve points to the snake.

The snake does not seem to need to speak.

God casts the snake down to the earth.
God tells Eve that she will be ruled over by her husband
God informs Adam what his death will be like.

Adam and Eve get kicked out of the protected garden and face a future ....

Only then, only when Adam finally sees that he is going to be stuck with his wife and that she will not be killed and replaced, only then does he get around to calling her by a real name.,,,before this she was only "the woman".