Genisis

[ewq1938]

So then, what it really boils down to, you believe in an 8th day man, so to speak? Would that be correct?

I believe in 7 day weeks, not 8 so that term is inaccurate to me. I believe Adam was creation in the next week, and he was created for a certain purpose, tilling the ground, tending the garden and was not originally intended to "dominate the earth" etc.

[chad]

(Gen 2:21 KJV) And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon (Adam - H121. The name of the first man), and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

(Gen 2:22 KJV) And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

(Gen 3:20 KJV) And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

(Gen 4:1 KJV) And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain (H7014-Qayin the name of the first child), and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

[Eyelog]

The Garden wasn't created on day 6.



Only because through her lineage would the Christ come. Not that she was literally the mother of all living literally.

Ok, EW, you are not among "the gappers and day-agers and other deceived individuals who can't just let God be God and the Bible be the Bible." I accuse you of the latter of the three because comments before this one above, and now this one above, make you sound like one who does not WANT the Bible to be clear. For that reason I have been employing the justification for making statements about people bc they are (a) true, even if they be name-calling categorizations of error, and (b) the only thing that seems to phase those who are so otherwise confident in their erroneous viewpoint. It's like an alarm clock saying, 'Hey, another sane, rational lover of the Lord thinks you are in error, time to check your watch.'

In that spirit, if you will accept it, I continue:

First you make the summary denial of Eden on day 6 without any explanation, then you contradict the plain read of Eve being the mother of ALL the living, implying all the living humans.

Genesis 3:20
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
20 Now the man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living.

New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Genesis 3:20
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)
20 Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica

Genesis 3:20
King James Version (KJV)
20And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

I don't have time to look up the Hebrew for 'all'.

Anyway, is Adam wrong or a liar? God let's the name stick.

The circumstances further support, not deny, that she was mother of all living human beings. i presented that evidence from the text of Ge2. i won't repeat it.

What it is is that you have a theory bifurcating humanity and adding creation days, contradicting not only Moses in Exodus, and any other Biblical author making any reference to it, and so you need these clear expressions to be false.

I think you are saying after there were hordes of male and female humans created, God created or formed Adam in particular, and put him in the Garden and did particular things with him, separate and AFTER, the 6 days of creation.

I appreciate the ingenuity with which you hypothesize such, but I completely disagree the text requires that read, implies it, or even leaves room for it.

Because it takes brains for you to do all the analyses I see you do all over this site, I am shocked at this willful denial of the obvious. Hence, my frustration, as these posts multiply in this thread. You are just plain wrong because the text is just plain clear and true.

If that continues to offend you, then know my intent is to help you, by being incredulously clear. For, in my honest opinion as a believer, I think you are a brother with a speck or greater in the eye I am obligated to try to help. I am doing this in love, tough love, because you don't get the hint.

So far as my desire to call names or feel superior or anything like that, I have none of that. I am only doing this out of obligation to a guy I was sincerely seeking to befriend all the while up to now.

God bless, and do with me as you feel is right. you will still be my brother in the Lord.

[ewq1938]

I accuse you of the latter of the three because comments before this one above, and now this one above, make you sound like one who does not WANT the Bible to be clear. For that reason I have been employing the justification for making statements about people bc they are (a) true, even if they be name-calling categorizations of error, and (b) the only thing that seems to phase those who are so otherwise confident in their erroneous viewpoint. It's like an alarm clock saying, 'Hey, another sane, rational lover of the Lord thinks you are in error, time to check your watch.'

I suggest you change your tactics since they are crude and offensive and will only serve to damage you and your reputation.

I suggest you change your tactics since they are crude and offensive and will only serve to damage you and your reputation.

So u r saying I'm deceived about the best tactic to help u see the light. Ill admit that when u admit u r deceived about the best tactic to read Genesis

[Sojourner55]

Mod hat on:
Getting a little personal here, guys. Play nice, or we close the thread down for a cool-off period. Try to keep it as "brotherly" as you can.
Mod hat off.

[Saved7]

Mod hat on:
Getting a little personal here, guys. Play nice, or we close the thread down for a cool-off period. Try to keep it as "brotherly" as you can.
Mod hat off.

oooh, that blue really brings out your eyes.

[Sojourner55]

oooh, that blue really brings out your eyes.

Why, heh heh...thank you.