According to the introduction in the First Book of Adam and Eve, this tale was written by unknown Egyptians and parts of it have found its way into the Talmud (Jewish Oral Law/Tradition), The Qur'an, and "elsewhere." As I may have stated before, I'm going to be going over this book because of it's contribution to Christian mythology and folklore, and because of the interesting prophecies about Christ that fill this tale. Of course, since we have no idea when the book was written, I can't be sure whether or not these prophecies are truly "prophecies." The book was translated into English by Rutherford H. Platt, Jr in 1926 (according to the information in the introduction). From what I have read so far (the first 60 chapters), I can say that this is quite an interesting literary gem in the way of religious mythology and speculation. Today I'll cover chapters 1, 2, and 3. You can click on each number for a link to read along.
We know that Adam and Eve (from now on, AE) have been exiled from the garden, but the Bible doesn't tell us where they went. The First Book of Adam and Eve (from now on FBAE) gives us a bit of speculation about where they may have gone. The book opens up by telling us about the Crystal Sea, where God has planned that at the last day, all of the righteous will have their souls returned to their bodies, bathe in the Crystal Sea, and repent of their sins. When God exiles AE, he doesn't want to send them to the North, because that is too near the sea. God feels that AE would simply bathe in the sea, forget their sin, and forget about the fact that they are deserving of punishment.
God also doesn't want AE to go South, because the wind that blows from the Garden would carry its sweet scent into the South, and AE would smell that sweet smell of the fruit and feel justified in their disobedience. Who wouldn't want to eat good fruit? The Garden is in the East - AE obviously can't go back there - so the only direction left for them to head is West. God commands AE to go to a cave called the "Cave of Treasures"
AE leave the Garden by subconsciously walking. They don't realize they are walking, and I'm not sure if this is a hint at how emotionally numb they must be feeling - or if it is a hint that before the fall they didn't need to use their feet. Immediately after leaving the Garden, AE both faint. Before their exile, all they'd ever seen were beautiful trees, flowers, and bushes. Everything had been lush and plentiful in the Garden, but outside of the garden everything is barren. Rocks, sand, and dry earth are what they must now become accustomed to. After their fainting, God sends his "Word" to AE and God's "Word" raises them up. Since the Bible declares Jesus to be God's "Word," I am assuming that Jesus is the "Word" God is sending to AE.
God's Word speaks to AE and tells them that He has ordained years and days, and that AE and their descendants will live in the earth until he "shall send the Word...that will save thee when the five and a half days are fulfilled." (FBAE 3:1-2). Adam misunderstands and is afraid that he only have five and a half days to live. God explains to Adam that the "five and a half days" actually means 5,500 years, after which time "one would ten come and save (Adam) and his seed."
Right now in the Jewish Calendar, I believe we are in the year 5773, so unless AE lived for quite some time before being expelled from the Garden - Jesus is late in coming. Or, if this prophecy refers to the first time Jesus came, Jesus was early. But I'm really not that good at math, and I know that different calendars have been used throughout the centuries - so who knows!
Chapter three continues with another story about Adam having fainted, I'm not sure of the order of the events in these first few chapters. It seems like AE have passed out more than once. But I'll let you decide that for yourself, if you're reading along. The Cherub appointed to guard the garden prays for Adam, and God sends his "Word" to AE again and instructs them to go to the Cave of Treasures.
For me, the first few chapters of the FBAE really emphasizes how we should react to sin. AE are constantly passing out in grief over their circumstances. There's going to be more "passing out" to come in future chapters. When reading this book, I actually get sick of them fainting all the time. I just want to shake them and say, "Guys, it's not that serious!" But I think society has desensitized us to the reality of our accountability to God. It is that serious! May we all learn to take our wrong-doings so seriously!
Not that I want anyone passing out every time they screw up....
Friday, December 7, 2012
Monday, December 3, 2012
Intro! The Forgotten Books of Eden, The First Book of Adam and Eve.
It's always exciting for me to read some of the extra-Biblical accounts of things that may (or may not) have happened during the lives of famous Biblical characters. So I'm excited to get into the details of what may (or may not) have happened to Adam and Eve during their exile from the garden. There are about 70 something very short chapters (by short I mean like - mere paragraphs long) that describe some of the things that Adam and Eve went through during their exile before Cain and Abel were born.
What I find incredibly interesting about "The Forgotten Books of Eden" and more specifically "The First Book of Adam and Eve," from which I'll be reading, is that despite their non-canonical status - they have incredible amounts of prophecy about Jesus Christ. One of the questions I have is whether these books were written before Christ (as opposed to after Christ, but set in a time period before Christ). The Forgotten Books of Eden seem to have been written before Christ by Egyptians, and discovered and translated into English the early 1900s. Of course, no one really knows the origins of these books (as far as I am aware) and I guess that is one reasons why they can't be considered apart of the canon of scripture.
I'm going to do a little more research into the origins of these books and I'll post what I find. I'll get into the actual text of the book in my next post, which should be soon! So stay tuned :-)
What I find incredibly interesting about "The Forgotten Books of Eden" and more specifically "The First Book of Adam and Eve," from which I'll be reading, is that despite their non-canonical status - they have incredible amounts of prophecy about Jesus Christ. One of the questions I have is whether these books were written before Christ (as opposed to after Christ, but set in a time period before Christ). The Forgotten Books of Eden seem to have been written before Christ by Egyptians, and discovered and translated into English the early 1900s. Of course, no one really knows the origins of these books (as far as I am aware) and I guess that is one reasons why they can't be considered apart of the canon of scripture.
I'm going to do a little more research into the origins of these books and I'll post what I find. I'll get into the actual text of the book in my next post, which should be soon! So stay tuned :-)
Monday, November 26, 2012
Gen 3:14-24. Leading into "Forgotten Books of Adam and Eve."
I left off talking about the "blame game," where Adam blames Eve for his disobedience, Eve blames the serpent for her disobedience, and God begins to dish out the curses.
In Genesis 3:14-24, God begins by cursing the serpent, the serpent is "cursed...above all livestock." The serpent will now have to crawl on its belly, women and snakes will apparently hate one another, and the offspring of the woman will crush the snake's head - while the serpent will strike the woman's offspring's heel.
This curse seems to go from literal to metaphor. We all know that snakes crawl around on their bellies (which doesn't seem like much of a punishment compared to what humans got), so that seems kind of literal. However, not all women hate snakes - so that can't be literal. And there is not literal way to interpret the woman's offspring crushing the snake's head, while the snake strikes his heel. Unless we are merely talking about the fact that men kill snakes all the time.
My assumption has always been that Satan entered a serpent and got him to trick Eve. But why are all snakes punished to crawl because of the demon-possession of one snake, hundreds of thousands of years ago? Why did Satan choose a snake, when He could have chosen any other animal?
And this brings me to another point - we always assume that Satan has possessed this snake and caused it to tempt Eve, but the Bible never actually says that. In fact, the Bible says that "the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made (Gen 3:1)." So, according to the Bible - Satan was not Eve's tempter. A wild animal was.
How did this snake become evil? How was an evil snake able to enter a (presumably) perfect garden? Does any of this give weight to the idea that sin and evil existed in the earth before Adam and Eve disobeyed?
To Eve, God cursed her so that she will have pains in childbearing -again, how does the punishment fit the crime? And does this curse mean that she'd already had easy deliveries? If so, who were her other children? How many of them did she have? God's other punishment was that Eve's desire would be for her husband, and that her husband should rule over her. Is it possible that, because of this, God views men and women as unequal? Or does this have more to do with sexual and romantic desire, where it seems that women are always searching for a man and doing whatever they can to appear more beautiful and arousing, while men can (it seems, sometimes) non-chalantly begin and end relationships with no emotional, social, or physical consequences?
And Adam will only be able to eat through hard labor. This punishment is the only one that seems to fit, because it has to do with eating what comes from the earth and how that food is provided. Before this, God allowed the earth to just grow food and Adam could eat any of it. Now that Adam has eaten the one thing God told him not to eat, it is as if God is saying, "Fine then. Grow your own food." God also curses Adam with death, which somehow transfers over to Eve and all of creation, as well.
Adam names his wife Eve, saying that she would become the mother of all the living. This implies not only that Adam and Eve had no children yet, but that God was not making other people elsewhere, either.
God makes clothes for Adam and Eve - because the leaves they'd sewn together clearly were not good enough. God makes clothes out of animal skins. Could this be the first time in the Bible where one of God's creations dies? Obviously, we can get the skin of the animal without killing it (think of shearing a sheep?) But we do not know how God came by this animal skin.
Finally, God desires to keep Adam and Eve from eating from the tree of life and becoming immortal. There is no mention here that humans will now be inherently sinful, nor are Adam and Eve ever reported to have repented. They are, however, forced to leave the garden and that will be where we enter into the psuedopigraphia entitled "The Forgotten Books of Adam and Eve."
In Genesis 3:14-24, God begins by cursing the serpent, the serpent is "cursed...above all livestock." The serpent will now have to crawl on its belly, women and snakes will apparently hate one another, and the offspring of the woman will crush the snake's head - while the serpent will strike the woman's offspring's heel.
This curse seems to go from literal to metaphor. We all know that snakes crawl around on their bellies (which doesn't seem like much of a punishment compared to what humans got), so that seems kind of literal. However, not all women hate snakes - so that can't be literal. And there is not literal way to interpret the woman's offspring crushing the snake's head, while the snake strikes his heel. Unless we are merely talking about the fact that men kill snakes all the time.
My assumption has always been that Satan entered a serpent and got him to trick Eve. But why are all snakes punished to crawl because of the demon-possession of one snake, hundreds of thousands of years ago? Why did Satan choose a snake, when He could have chosen any other animal?
And this brings me to another point - we always assume that Satan has possessed this snake and caused it to tempt Eve, but the Bible never actually says that. In fact, the Bible says that "the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made (Gen 3:1)." So, according to the Bible - Satan was not Eve's tempter. A wild animal was.
How did this snake become evil? How was an evil snake able to enter a (presumably) perfect garden? Does any of this give weight to the idea that sin and evil existed in the earth before Adam and Eve disobeyed?
To Eve, God cursed her so that she will have pains in childbearing -again, how does the punishment fit the crime? And does this curse mean that she'd already had easy deliveries? If so, who were her other children? How many of them did she have? God's other punishment was that Eve's desire would be for her husband, and that her husband should rule over her. Is it possible that, because of this, God views men and women as unequal? Or does this have more to do with sexual and romantic desire, where it seems that women are always searching for a man and doing whatever they can to appear more beautiful and arousing, while men can (it seems, sometimes) non-chalantly begin and end relationships with no emotional, social, or physical consequences?
And Adam will only be able to eat through hard labor. This punishment is the only one that seems to fit, because it has to do with eating what comes from the earth and how that food is provided. Before this, God allowed the earth to just grow food and Adam could eat any of it. Now that Adam has eaten the one thing God told him not to eat, it is as if God is saying, "Fine then. Grow your own food." God also curses Adam with death, which somehow transfers over to Eve and all of creation, as well.
Adam names his wife Eve, saying that she would become the mother of all the living. This implies not only that Adam and Eve had no children yet, but that God was not making other people elsewhere, either.
God makes clothes for Adam and Eve - because the leaves they'd sewn together clearly were not good enough. God makes clothes out of animal skins. Could this be the first time in the Bible where one of God's creations dies? Obviously, we can get the skin of the animal without killing it (think of shearing a sheep?) But we do not know how God came by this animal skin.
Finally, God desires to keep Adam and Eve from eating from the tree of life and becoming immortal. There is no mention here that humans will now be inherently sinful, nor are Adam and Eve ever reported to have repented. They are, however, forced to leave the garden and that will be where we enter into the psuedopigraphia entitled "The Forgotten Books of Adam and Eve."
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Genesis 3:1-13. Yetzer HaTov, and Yetzer Hara.
The chapter I am writing about in this entry is Genesis 3:1-13, and as usual you can click the link to follow along on Bible Gateway - using the New American Standard Bible version or any version you like (just click the drop arrow at the top of the website to change versions).
Genesis 3 relays the story of the "fall of man." And, as usual, there are some things in this chapter of the Bible that I have some questions about. The first is the issue of whether or not eating from the tree is really the first sin. In my last post, I mentioned the fact that Adam was the only one who was given the instruction not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil - Eve had not yet been created. And yet in Genesis 3:2-3, after the serpent asks Eve - "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden?' Eve replies, "...from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said 'You shall not eat from it, or touch it, or you will die.'"
Actually, though, what God said was "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely, but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17). God never mentioned anything about not touching the tree. This implies to me that either Adam added to God's instruction, or Eve added to the instructions that Adam had given her. Why does the narrator consider this inconsistency important enough to include in the Bible? Or, did the narrator not even notice it? Or, if God dictated each and every word of the Bible to man - as some believe - why did God consider this inconsistency important enough to include? It seems, here, that the first sin of man was not disobedience concerning the tree - but lying and/or adding onto God's words. Then again, if no law concerning lying or adding onto God's words had yet been given - perhaps it cannot be considered a sin.
After this, the serpent convinces Eve and Adam to eat the fruit. Adam, according to the Hebrew word for "with her," was standing right next to Eve as she conversed with the serpent -and did nothing to interject and keep Eve from sinning. And I want to talk a little bit about Yetzer Tov and Yetzer Hara here.
Yetzer Tov (or Yetzer Hatov) can be translated into "good inclination," while Yetzer Hara can be translated into "bad inclination." If you're Jewish and you're reading, feel free to correct any mistakes I make in explaining these. From what I understand, Jews believe that God breathed into us both the good and bad inclinations. The good inclination is just what it sounds - our desire to please God, to make good choices, to be kind to and care for others, etc. The bad inclination, however, is not exactly what it sounds. When the Jews think of a 'bad inclination,' they are not thinking necessarily of people who steal, murder, and hurt others. They are thinking of our natural desire for self-preservation. If we had no 'yetzer hara,' we wouldn't eat, we wouldn't procreate, we wouldn't start businesses, we wouldn't do anything -really. We would have no ambition. It is believed that God gave us the 'yetzer hara' so that we would have ambition. But we always have to remember to keep our yetzer hara in check. It's okay to eat when you're hungry - but should you eat so much that no one else gets any? It's okay to start a business and make money - but should you make large amounts of money at others' expense? It's okay to have sex and reproduce - but should you sleep with every woman you meet, get her pregnant, and leave her? This is the difference between yetzer hara that is in check, and yetzer hara that has gone unchecked.
And, since Adam and Eve are believed to have been immortal before the fall (to which I question - if they were immortal, why was there also a 'tree of eternal life?') there would have been no need for procreation (to which I question why God commanded them to reproduce?). If this is the case, none of us would be here if Eve had not eaten from the tree. So, from that perspective - Adam and Eve's disobedience allowed for all of us to live and have a chance to experience God. While Adam and Eve's obedience would have meant that only they would have lived - and none of us would be here.
The first thing that happens after they eat the fruit, is that Adam and Eve realize their nakedness. But why is nakedness a problem? Aren't they married? Hadn't they already slept together? If they are already married and had previously slept together, then their nakedness should not have mattered since being married and naked together is not shameful or sinful. If they had not already been married and were not already sleeping together - then what do we do with all of this talk in the previous chapter about the two becoming one flesh, and about Adam having a help-meet? And why were Adam and Eve - in their perfected state - not obeying God's command to 'be fruitful and multiply?'
I'm also wondering about two other things -the conversation between Eve and the serpent seems to end rather abruptly. After she ate the fruit and gave some to Adam, did the serpent just disappear? Was there any more to the exchange between the two of them? And, did all the animals in the garden talk? Why didn't Eve find it odd that a snake was talking to her?
Adam and Eve sew leaves to cover themselves, and I guess they just wait. God comes, as normal, in 'the cool of the day.' God didn't rush down to punish them or anything, He just waited for his normal time when He usually came to visit them. And Adam and Eve are hiding because they are naked - perhaps their shame in being naked wasn't about each other, but about how they would appear before God?
God asks them "Who told you that you were naked. Have you eaten from the tree...?" And then, the blame game commences. Adam blames Eve, Eve blames the serpent, and God curses them all.
Genesis 3 relays the story of the "fall of man." And, as usual, there are some things in this chapter of the Bible that I have some questions about. The first is the issue of whether or not eating from the tree is really the first sin. In my last post, I mentioned the fact that Adam was the only one who was given the instruction not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil - Eve had not yet been created. And yet in Genesis 3:2-3, after the serpent asks Eve - "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden?' Eve replies, "...from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said 'You shall not eat from it, or touch it, or you will die.'"
Actually, though, what God said was "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely, but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17). God never mentioned anything about not touching the tree. This implies to me that either Adam added to God's instruction, or Eve added to the instructions that Adam had given her. Why does the narrator consider this inconsistency important enough to include in the Bible? Or, did the narrator not even notice it? Or, if God dictated each and every word of the Bible to man - as some believe - why did God consider this inconsistency important enough to include? It seems, here, that the first sin of man was not disobedience concerning the tree - but lying and/or adding onto God's words. Then again, if no law concerning lying or adding onto God's words had yet been given - perhaps it cannot be considered a sin.
After this, the serpent convinces Eve and Adam to eat the fruit. Adam, according to the Hebrew word for "with her," was standing right next to Eve as she conversed with the serpent -and did nothing to interject and keep Eve from sinning. And I want to talk a little bit about Yetzer Tov and Yetzer Hara here.
Yetzer Tov (or Yetzer Hatov) can be translated into "good inclination," while Yetzer Hara can be translated into "bad inclination." If you're Jewish and you're reading, feel free to correct any mistakes I make in explaining these. From what I understand, Jews believe that God breathed into us both the good and bad inclinations. The good inclination is just what it sounds - our desire to please God, to make good choices, to be kind to and care for others, etc. The bad inclination, however, is not exactly what it sounds. When the Jews think of a 'bad inclination,' they are not thinking necessarily of people who steal, murder, and hurt others. They are thinking of our natural desire for self-preservation. If we had no 'yetzer hara,' we wouldn't eat, we wouldn't procreate, we wouldn't start businesses, we wouldn't do anything -really. We would have no ambition. It is believed that God gave us the 'yetzer hara' so that we would have ambition. But we always have to remember to keep our yetzer hara in check. It's okay to eat when you're hungry - but should you eat so much that no one else gets any? It's okay to start a business and make money - but should you make large amounts of money at others' expense? It's okay to have sex and reproduce - but should you sleep with every woman you meet, get her pregnant, and leave her? This is the difference between yetzer hara that is in check, and yetzer hara that has gone unchecked.
And, since Adam and Eve are believed to have been immortal before the fall (to which I question - if they were immortal, why was there also a 'tree of eternal life?') there would have been no need for procreation (to which I question why God commanded them to reproduce?). If this is the case, none of us would be here if Eve had not eaten from the tree. So, from that perspective - Adam and Eve's disobedience allowed for all of us to live and have a chance to experience God. While Adam and Eve's obedience would have meant that only they would have lived - and none of us would be here.
The first thing that happens after they eat the fruit, is that Adam and Eve realize their nakedness. But why is nakedness a problem? Aren't they married? Hadn't they already slept together? If they are already married and had previously slept together, then their nakedness should not have mattered since being married and naked together is not shameful or sinful. If they had not already been married and were not already sleeping together - then what do we do with all of this talk in the previous chapter about the two becoming one flesh, and about Adam having a help-meet? And why were Adam and Eve - in their perfected state - not obeying God's command to 'be fruitful and multiply?'
I'm also wondering about two other things -the conversation between Eve and the serpent seems to end rather abruptly. After she ate the fruit and gave some to Adam, did the serpent just disappear? Was there any more to the exchange between the two of them? And, did all the animals in the garden talk? Why didn't Eve find it odd that a snake was talking to her?
Adam and Eve sew leaves to cover themselves, and I guess they just wait. God comes, as normal, in 'the cool of the day.' God didn't rush down to punish them or anything, He just waited for his normal time when He usually came to visit them. And Adam and Eve are hiding because they are naked - perhaps their shame in being naked wasn't about each other, but about how they would appear before God?
God asks them "Who told you that you were naked. Have you eaten from the tree...?" And then, the blame game commences. Adam blames Eve, Eve blames the serpent, and God curses them all.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Genesis 2:15-25
Genesis 2:15-25 begins with God taking Adam ("the man," at this point) and putting him in the garden in order to "cultivate and keep it." God gives Adam the instruction that he can eat from any tree in the garden except from the "tree of knowledge of good and evil." God says that Adam will "surely die" if ever Adam eats from this tree.
I want to insert the observation that Eve was not yet created when Adam received this instruction. I also want to insert the observation that the only command God gave, according to the Bible, was that Adam could not eat from the tree. God did not tell him not to go near it, He did not tell Adam not to touch it, He did not tell Adam not to sit under it - nothing of the sort. He only said that Adam cannot eat from the tree. And, the fact that a "Tree of the knowledge of good and evil" existed before the fall of man implies to me that evil existed before this whole fiasco with Adam and Eve that unravels in Genesis 3.
I'm reading a book called "The Orthodox Way," which discusses how evil is not a real substance within itself, but is simply the absence of good. But I'm not so sure that God creates things by "default," when He is God and could have decided not to allow evil to exist at all. And what about the fact that darkness pre-existed light? If light and darkness are true metaphors/symbols for good and evil, then the existence of darkness before light would certainly mean that evil was actually here first. So that instead of evil being the absence of good, good is the absence of evil. Perhaps we lived in a fallen world before we fell.
On the flip side, if good existed before evil, then it means that God actively and with full knowledge created evil.
After God gives Adam his instructions concerning the trees in the garden, He decides that Adam shouldn't be alone and that He needs a "helper." At this point the Bible says that God begins to form beasts out of the ground and birds for the sky, and brought them to the man "to see what he would call them." There are two things I don't understand, here. (1) Why would God declare that Adam needs a partner, and then start forming animals? Didn't God already know that animals would not be the type of partner that a human needed? (2) In Genesis 1, God created all the animals before he created man. Now, only one chapter later, the Bible has God creating all the animals after he created man. Why? Or is it that God created animals before man - but those animals were outside of the garden, and these new animals are inside of the garden? Of course, we don't really know which day humans were created, either - the Bible implies that humans were created on Day 6, but then turns around to imply that humans were created on Day 2. So, I really don't know.
After being unable to find a suitable helper among the animals, God caused Adam to fall into a deep sleep and took a part of Adam's rib to form another human - a woman. Adam says his famous line: "This is now bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman (Ishshah) because she was taken out of Man (Ish)."
And the Bible goes on to narrate that it is for this reason (what reason? Because woman was taken out of man?) a man will leave his mother and father and cling to his wife. The Bible has a kind of 'circle of life' thing going here: The woman is taken out of man, and only by man re-entering woman can a new man (or woman) be made. And so the Bible says that the man and woman "shall become one flesh," which I assume refers to sex. The last verse in chapter two states that the man and woman were naked and not ashamed. I think this will be an important statement to refer to in Genesis 3.
And, I haven't forgotten about Yetzer Tov and Yetzer Hara, which I will be discussing next post!
I want to insert the observation that Eve was not yet created when Adam received this instruction. I also want to insert the observation that the only command God gave, according to the Bible, was that Adam could not eat from the tree. God did not tell him not to go near it, He did not tell Adam not to touch it, He did not tell Adam not to sit under it - nothing of the sort. He only said that Adam cannot eat from the tree. And, the fact that a "Tree of the knowledge of good and evil" existed before the fall of man implies to me that evil existed before this whole fiasco with Adam and Eve that unravels in Genesis 3.
I'm reading a book called "The Orthodox Way," which discusses how evil is not a real substance within itself, but is simply the absence of good. But I'm not so sure that God creates things by "default," when He is God and could have decided not to allow evil to exist at all. And what about the fact that darkness pre-existed light? If light and darkness are true metaphors/symbols for good and evil, then the existence of darkness before light would certainly mean that evil was actually here first. So that instead of evil being the absence of good, good is the absence of evil. Perhaps we lived in a fallen world before we fell.
On the flip side, if good existed before evil, then it means that God actively and with full knowledge created evil.
After God gives Adam his instructions concerning the trees in the garden, He decides that Adam shouldn't be alone and that He needs a "helper." At this point the Bible says that God begins to form beasts out of the ground and birds for the sky, and brought them to the man "to see what he would call them." There are two things I don't understand, here. (1) Why would God declare that Adam needs a partner, and then start forming animals? Didn't God already know that animals would not be the type of partner that a human needed? (2) In Genesis 1, God created all the animals before he created man. Now, only one chapter later, the Bible has God creating all the animals after he created man. Why? Or is it that God created animals before man - but those animals were outside of the garden, and these new animals are inside of the garden? Of course, we don't really know which day humans were created, either - the Bible implies that humans were created on Day 6, but then turns around to imply that humans were created on Day 2. So, I really don't know.
After being unable to find a suitable helper among the animals, God caused Adam to fall into a deep sleep and took a part of Adam's rib to form another human - a woman. Adam says his famous line: "This is now bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman (Ishshah) because she was taken out of Man (Ish)."
And the Bible goes on to narrate that it is for this reason (what reason? Because woman was taken out of man?) a man will leave his mother and father and cling to his wife. The Bible has a kind of 'circle of life' thing going here: The woman is taken out of man, and only by man re-entering woman can a new man (or woman) be made. And so the Bible says that the man and woman "shall become one flesh," which I assume refers to sex. The last verse in chapter two states that the man and woman were naked and not ashamed. I think this will be an important statement to refer to in Genesis 3.
And, I haven't forgotten about Yetzer Tov and Yetzer Hara, which I will be discussing next post!
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Genesis 2:1-14
By the looks of it, it seems as though God has been doing all His creative work on a schedule that looks sort of like this:
Today, we deal with Genesis 2:1-14 (click on the link to read the passage on Bible Gateway). God is in his seventh day, He has finished creation, and He "rests" from his work and sanctifies the day. Assuming that God does not need literal rest, I have always taken the word "rest" to mean simply that God "stopped" creating. And the fact that God sanctifies the day that He stopped creating implies (to me) that this was a permanent stop. Or, in other words, the prototype or original version of everything that would ever exist was created in these first "seven days" (which may or may not be a literal seven days). If this is true, I wonder if there could be an implication here for the theory of evolution? Perhaps God created everything's origin and just allowed nature to run its course from there? Or perhaps my ideas are all wrong and God went right back to creating on "Day 8."
After pausing to talk about the Sabbath, the Bible gives a more detailed account of the creation of humanity. Geneses 2:4-7 talks about how God formed man out of dust in the day when "No shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not sent rain upon the earth..." This is kind of a contradiction, since chapter one says that vegetation was created and commanded to reproduce on Day 2, and humans are not formed until Day 6. The only way for this to not be a contradiction would be if vegetation did not grow right away when God commanded it.
God creates man out of dust and breathes life into his nostrils. As a sidenote, I've read somewhere that the word for life in Hebrew is "Chai" or "Chay," but in any case looks like this:
, and that this word in the Bible is actually in the plural, "Chayim," which is to say that God breathed more than one life into Adam - His spirit and His soul. This is the reason that Jews believe in yetzer tov and yezter hara - which I will talk about later.
Something I think Christians always overlook or forget about is that "Eden" is not a garden in and of itself. Eden is a place in which there is a garden called "The Garden of Eden." Adam was created in Eden, and after Adam's creation (Gen 2:7-8) God created the 'garden' and placed Adam in it. God caused trees to grow in this garden. But what about the vegetation outside of the garden? Had it begun growing yet? Could this be a clue that the earth was "fallen" before the actual "fall"? Why would God command something to grow (on day 2) that didn't grow until at least day 6? And if things were growing as intended, why does the Bible say that no shrubs were on the earth when Adam was created - although Adam was created after the creation of shrubs? And, if things were growing as intended, why did God need to create another garden on day 6? Wouldn't there have already been one?
In the garden of Eden are two trees: (1) The Tree of Life. (2) The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I think this is another detail that Christians tend to overlook. The Bible then describes a river flowing out of Eden to water the Garden. The river breaks off into four separate rivers - Pishon, Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. And the land surrounding these four rivers is described - there's Havilah, Cush, and Assyria. I wonder if anyone was living in these lands? Did God really only create Adam and Eve when He first created humans? Or did He create hundreds of humans at the same time, and the Bible only follows the story of Adam and Eve?
Day 0 - Water/Air/Emptiness
Day 1 - Sky/Light
Day 2 - Land/Sea/Vegetation
Day 3 - Sun/Moon/Starts
Day 4 - Sea Creatures/Air Creatures
Day 5 - Land Creatures
Day 6 - Humans
Today, we deal with Genesis 2:1-14 (click on the link to read the passage on Bible Gateway). God is in his seventh day, He has finished creation, and He "rests" from his work and sanctifies the day. Assuming that God does not need literal rest, I have always taken the word "rest" to mean simply that God "stopped" creating. And the fact that God sanctifies the day that He stopped creating implies (to me) that this was a permanent stop. Or, in other words, the prototype or original version of everything that would ever exist was created in these first "seven days" (which may or may not be a literal seven days). If this is true, I wonder if there could be an implication here for the theory of evolution? Perhaps God created everything's origin and just allowed nature to run its course from there? Or perhaps my ideas are all wrong and God went right back to creating on "Day 8."
After pausing to talk about the Sabbath, the Bible gives a more detailed account of the creation of humanity. Geneses 2:4-7 talks about how God formed man out of dust in the day when "No shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not sent rain upon the earth..." This is kind of a contradiction, since chapter one says that vegetation was created and commanded to reproduce on Day 2, and humans are not formed until Day 6. The only way for this to not be a contradiction would be if vegetation did not grow right away when God commanded it.
God creates man out of dust and breathes life into his nostrils. As a sidenote, I've read somewhere that the word for life in Hebrew is "Chai" or "Chay," but in any case looks like this:
Something I think Christians always overlook or forget about is that "Eden" is not a garden in and of itself. Eden is a place in which there is a garden called "The Garden of Eden." Adam was created in Eden, and after Adam's creation (Gen 2:7-8) God created the 'garden' and placed Adam in it. God caused trees to grow in this garden. But what about the vegetation outside of the garden? Had it begun growing yet? Could this be a clue that the earth was "fallen" before the actual "fall"? Why would God command something to grow (on day 2) that didn't grow until at least day 6? And if things were growing as intended, why does the Bible say that no shrubs were on the earth when Adam was created - although Adam was created after the creation of shrubs? And, if things were growing as intended, why did God need to create another garden on day 6? Wouldn't there have already been one?
In the garden of Eden are two trees: (1) The Tree of Life. (2) The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I think this is another detail that Christians tend to overlook. The Bible then describes a river flowing out of Eden to water the Garden. The river breaks off into four separate rivers - Pishon, Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. And the land surrounding these four rivers is described - there's Havilah, Cush, and Assyria. I wonder if anyone was living in these lands? Did God really only create Adam and Eve when He first created humans? Or did He create hundreds of humans at the same time, and the Bible only follows the story of Adam and Eve?
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Good.
I wrapped up my last post with the observation that God is continuously calling His creations 'good,' and wondering if there is something tangibly good about creation that causes Him to keep affirming the fact that everything He has made is good. This blog is primarily about Christianity, so I don't want to get off topic too frequently, but I am also studying the scriptures of about nine other religions/spiritual practices, one of which is the Zhuan Falun - the primary text of Falun Gong. And I find it so interesting that the texts of all the different religions - while they disagree about certain details - seem to support each other in many ways and make what I consider to be a kind of comprehensive whole.
One example of this comes from the teaching in Falun Gong that the universe is made up of the principles of Zhen, Shan, Ren - or Truthfulness, Compassion, and Forbearance. Could these characteristics (or something similar) be what God is referring to as He consistently calls His creation 'good' and 'exceedingly good' in some translations? Practicioners of Falun Gong feel that we have fallen, somehow, from our natural state of Zhen, Shan, Ren, and into this current state of disrepair. The ultimate goal of the Falun Gong spiritual practice is to assimilate ourselves back to truthfulness, compassion, and forbearance - which are three of the fruits of the spirit (if we put truthfulness into the category of 'goodness' and compassion into the category of 'kindness'). I find that this teaching from Falun Gong really resonates with the Christian teaching that mankind was once 'good,' but has fallen.
Perhaps, through the lens of the Zhuan Falun, we can speculate about what God meant as He continuously called His creations good.
One example of this comes from the teaching in Falun Gong that the universe is made up of the principles of Zhen, Shan, Ren - or Truthfulness, Compassion, and Forbearance. Could these characteristics (or something similar) be what God is referring to as He consistently calls His creation 'good' and 'exceedingly good' in some translations? Practicioners of Falun Gong feel that we have fallen, somehow, from our natural state of Zhen, Shan, Ren, and into this current state of disrepair. The ultimate goal of the Falun Gong spiritual practice is to assimilate ourselves back to truthfulness, compassion, and forbearance - which are three of the fruits of the spirit (if we put truthfulness into the category of 'goodness' and compassion into the category of 'kindness'). I find that this teaching from Falun Gong really resonates with the Christian teaching that mankind was once 'good,' but has fallen.
Perhaps, through the lens of the Zhuan Falun, we can speculate about what God meant as He continuously called His creations good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)