In The Mind's Eye

[Guest]

Did you ever wonder how those living before the flood visualized ”it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

 

I know there are some scriptures describing post-flood visualization but, I don’t want to muddy the pre-flood thought if possible.

 

If you care to comment on your thoughts, please feel welcome. Just a late evening thought which crossed my mind. I know the only source Biblically, may only be extrapolation of scripture which I know is also risky business. So, maybe just thoughts of your own are best.

[swathdiver]

My thought is, I never thought about it.

[heartstrings]

Who knows. We do know, from what Hebrews 11 says, that Abel knew enough to "offer a more excellent sacrifice than Cain" and Christ is called the Lamb "slain from the foundation of the world" in Revelation, and we know that men began to call upon "the name of the Lord" in Genesis 4. It seems that they may have had something in mind about Christ I would think.

[beameup]

The "calling on the name of the Lord" was not a good thing.  "Taunting" God might be more accurate. 

"Taking the Lord's name in vain" would also be accurate.  What led to the flood was horrific.

 

Is not this written in the book of Jasher?  Joshua 10:13b

[John81]

It seems as if Eve thought her firstborn son would be the One. I've heard some good sermons on this. After Cain murdered Able it was clear Cain wasn't the One so they would have to await the One to come.

 

JOB 19:25 might indicate that JOB perhaps had a better understanding of the promise.

[ASongOfDegrees]

Did you ever wonder how those living before the flood visualized ”it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

 

I know there are some scriptures describing post-flood visualization but, I don’t want to muddy the pre-flood thought if possible.

 

If you care to comment on your thoughts, please feel welcome. Just a late evening thought which crossed my mind. I know the only source Biblically, may only be extrapolation of scripture which I know is also risky business. So, maybe just thoughts of your own are best.

However they visualized it they eventually corrupted the promise into a lie (Romans 1:25). This is why you have so many different many religions and myths that seem to all spring from one source. 

[John81]

ASOD,

 

I would agree that MOST corrupted the promise, which led to many false religions and myths, but there were those who held to a more accurate understanding of the promise which we see passed along through the Jews.

 

Along these lines, I find it interesting that anytime a story in some culture is found to be similar to something in the Bible, the "experts" insist this is evidence the Bible is nothing more than a copycat retelling of various myths from other cultures. They adamantly refuse to consider the biblical accounts could have been the original source and the similar stories in other cultures around the world stem from there.

 

Even in the history of the Jews, who managed to pass on the promise most clearly, there are great examples of just how quickly people are to corrupt what God has said, and even done. We see how God showed many great signs and wonders bringing the Jews out of Egypt and across the Red Sea. Then, within a matter of days as Moses was on the mountain, many of the Jews willingly determined to create their own god and declare it was their newly created golden calf god that had done all God had done in bringing them out of Egypt. Were it not for Moses returning and resetting the Jews course, there would have been birthed another false religion with similarities to what really was.

 

But for the grace of God in preserving His promise, and His Word, through at least some of the Jews, it seems likely the truth would have been lost to all.

[heartstrings]

The "calling on the name of the Lord" was not a good thing.  "Taunting" God might be more accurate. 

"Taking the Lord's name in vain" would also be accurate.  What led to the flood was horrific.

 

Is not this written in the book of Jasher?  Joshua 10:13b

 

Genesis 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD. 

 

Seth, a believer, in the lineage of Christ,(Luke 3:23) named his boy Enos, then men began to "taunt" God?

The same words are used in Romans 10:13; an it certainly isn't taunting God.

 

Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 

[Ukulelemike]

The "calling on the name of the Lord" was not a good thing.  "Taunting" God might be more accurate. 

"Taking the Lord's name in vain" would also be accurate.  What led to the flood was horrific.

 

Is not this written in the book of Jasher?  Joshua 10:13b

I know everyone hates is anyone ever brings up the Hebrew or Greek, but one thing we CAN do is see how the same words are otherwise translated, and in no case is this term, or the individual words, in Hebrew OR English, ever used to indicate such a thought a taunting the Lord, or using His name in vain.  The English, as the Hebrew, indicates a clear calling to Jehovah in a positive manner, particularly in the instance of Seth's line, at least the early ones.

 

It may be that it was not until this time that His name was revealed to them by God, and thus they began to worship Him by name.

 

 

As far as the OP, to be honest I have never given it much thought. I think the idea of a redeemer was known through this prophecy. I think Eve may have believed that Seth would be that redeemer, when he was born. Or not-I could be wrong. But I am certain that all knew the story of how the serpent had tricked Eve into sin, and how Adam followed her, and all was lost, and that the Lord had promised someone who would come and step on the serpent's head, a clear picture of dominance and even death, even though in that victory, he himself would be injured, even in victory. Outside of that, I suppose maybe they spent a lot of time speculating on it, as we do today.

[beameup]

Of the roughly 130 instances of chalal in the Old Testament, חָלָה (H2470)

it has overwhelmingly been translated into profaned, polluted and defiled.

 

The Jewish tradition holds that this was the beginning of idolatry.

As usual, something gets oft-repeated and it becomes "fact".

This is another example of the influence of 4th Century Augustinian-Catholic "Replacement Theology"

and their "Godly line of Seth" theory to explain-away the whole "bene ha Elohim/Nephilim" incident.

[heartstrings]

Of the roughly 130 instances of chalal in the Old Testament, חָלָה (H2470)

it has overwhelmingly been translated into profaned, polluted and defiled.

 

The Jewish tradition holds that this was the beginning of idolatry.

As usual, something gets oft-repeated and it becomes "fact".

This is another example of the influence of 4th Century Augustinian-Catholic "Replacement Theology"

and their "Godly line of Seth" theory to explain-away the whole "bene ha Elohim/Nephilim" incident.

I was taught from the pulpit ,by a "Dr." so and so, that angels "cohabited with women" which was one of the first red flags for me because the King James says they "took WIVES". So I thought, "why is he saying this.... because a "wife" is a permanent relationship, not a "cohabit" partner?". So I studied it for myself long before I ever heard what St. Augustine taught (who was a heretic BTW) And though I don;t use the phrase "godly line of Seth", I did find that all of the men named in Genesis 5 like Seth, Enos, Mahaliel, Enoch, Lamech, Methuselah and Noah are in the genealogy of Christ: They were believers. If Augustine taught something similar, so what? If the biggest liar in the world says "the sky is blue and the grass is green" does it make it any less true? 

 

Chalal", according to Strongs, also translates as "to begin", which seems the case here since the King James says "then began men" to call upon........see for yourself....... http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H2490&t=KJV 

[Guest]

We have Enoch but, it doesn't give a clue of what he visualized looking forward to Christ...Genesis 5:22   "And Enoch walked with God..."

[Guest]

Of the roughly 130 instances of chalal in the Old Testament, חָלָה (H2470)

it has overwhelmingly been translated into profaned, polluted and defiled.

 

The Jewish tradition holds that this was the beginning of idolatry.

As usual, something gets oft-repeated and it becomes "fact".

This is another example of the influence of 4th Century Augustinian-Catholic "Replacement Theology"

and their "Godly line of Seth" theory to explain-away the whole "bene ha Elohim/Nephilim" incident.

In either case...your's in particular; do you think they were mocking the promise of the Savior?