Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sometimes I have reservations about posting something which just occurred to me from daily Bible, during prayer, or from other Christian literature. God's disclosure to me I imagine is old hat to many of my brothers and sisters. Well God gave me the courage and I started typing (another arduous process for me). So, here it is a thread for the less than scholarly, less than immense, less than a doctrinal debate. Just a place to share and validate 1 John 4:1 those little whispers God gives to all of us as we actively and earnestly seek him.

I'll start it off as an example and others may have their own to post.

I was reading in Genesis 3 today. In particular, I was thinking about Eve's reply to the Serpent in Genesis 3:3. I have been told by many pastors that Eve's reply was because of what Adam would have told her because she wasn't created yet when God told Adam about the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil". So why was her reply different than what God told Adam in Genesis 2:17? I decided either Adam embellished God's command or Eve embellished the reply on her own. I believe it was Adam because he was with Eve during the discussion in Genesis 3:6 and gave no protest. I may be out to lunch on all of this, however it led to me to another thought below.

The possibility of embellishment, if true, caused me to think about the final chapter of Christ's Revelation and the command in Revelation 22:18-19 especially verse 18. Do you think there is any connection between embellished command in Genesis, the first canonical book and command with severe warning in the last canonical book of our Bible? After all, if embellished, the adding to God's Word in the garden led to a lot of difficulty for mankind. Another possibility occurred just now, it just may be a warning to the Mohammedans, etc. God knew would come around.

Edited by 1Timothy115
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 minutes ago, 1Timothy115 said:

After all, if embellished, the adding to God's Word in the garden led to a lot of difficulty for mankind. Another possibility occurred just now, it just may be a warning to the Mohammedans, etc. God knew would come around.

Good conclusion.

1Timothy 115,

As a word of encouragement; keep those thoughts coming.

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Alan said:

Good conclusion.

1Timothy 115,

As a word of encouragement; keep those thoughts coming.

Alan

Thanks for the encouragement. My question... Do you think there is any connection between embellished command in Genesis, the first canonical book and command with severe warning in the last canonical book of our Bible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Personally, I do not believe Eve really did add to God's word, I have often heard people preach that Eve added to the word of God. however if that were really true would not that be the first sin in the Garden and not the actual eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil? why did not God rebuke eve for "changing his word". Honestly I just think that in our zeal to defend the KJV, that we read something into Genesis about Eve's response to the serpent that just really is not there.

I will be the first to defend the KJV against other versions, but I do not believe that we need to stretch things to do so. Sadly to often I see the KJV defended with arguments and reasons that are sometimes weak and sometimes plain just wrong.

I would also like to say:

How do we know God did not further add that they should not even touch the tree? We certainly don't see anywhere that God commands an offering of a lamb, and yet in Genesis 4 we see Abel offering a sacrifice of a lamb to the Lord, Would my other brothers also contend that Abel added a religious tradition that was not from God based on the same type of reasoning applied to Eve's response to the serpent and her supposed "adding" to the word of God?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I recognize that this thread is NOT intended for depth of debate over "interesting" thoughts.  Thus I shall simply express a few points of disagreement with the above thoughts concerning Genesis 3:3 and Genesis 3:6.

I do NOT believe that Eve embellished God's Word in Genesis 3:3, nor do I believe that Adam miscommunicated the Word unto Eve.  Either case would require such to be the first sin, which is NOT how God's Word presents the case.  Furthermore, it appears that the Lord God regularly met with Adam and Eve for fellowship and communication.  If that is so, then what did they talk about?  Well, we do not exactly know since it is not recorded in Scripture.  However, I believe that Eve was being completely honest when she gave her record concerning God's Word in Genesis 3:3, and that the Lord God had INDEED communicated this unto both of them (as per the use of the pronoun "ye") during these fellowship times.

Furthermore, I do NOT believe that Adam was standing there "with her" when Eve was tempted by the devil.  Rather, I believe that Eve, after eating the fruit of the forbidden tree, then went to her husband so that he could eat the fruit "with her."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

But does not scripture saw where there is no law, there is no imputation of sin?

Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Is it possible that Eve, in her innocence, with all of the emotion, heart and drama often  inherent in a woman and a child, did embellish the Lord's word unintentionally, but since there had as yet been no command on it, the Lord winked at it and did not impute it as sin? Is it sin if we are not told by God that it is, and we do it innocently? I'm not speaking of being ignorant of what He has clearly told us today. I'm speaking of innocence. They were naked, remember, and we are told it was in innocence. Not sin. The sin came when they willingly disobeyed a clear command that they were aware of. It's not something I "hold" necessarily, but I just put it out there questioningly as a possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Can there not be error without sin?

Surely it is not sin for Eve to mis-state the command without intent?

Maybe she did not intentionally change the command of God, but rather just got it a little bit wrong?

The plain fact is that all we know is that what Adam was told and what Eve told the serpent were slightly different - we do not know why they were different, or if it was an intentional change - we just have the factual record that they were different.

Anything beyond that is speculation (including my speculation that it was a non-sinful "mistake" rather than a deliberate embellishment!)

The trick is to decide what is reasonable speculation and what is not.

We DO KNOW that neither Adam nor Eve were disciplined for the wrong recollection of the command (as far as is recorded in the Bible), and therefore we can be pretty certain that whatever the cause of of the mis-stating, it was not sinful in God's eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

As for myself --

Grammatically, in Genesis 3:3 Eve directly indicated that she was quoting God (as per the phrase, "God hath said").  I myself choose to take her at her word, that she really was quoting God.  (It is worthy of notice that her "change" in quotation from that which is recorded in Genesis 2:17 as God's command unto Adam not only includes the addition of the phrase "neither shall ye touch it," but also the change from singular personal pronouns to plural personal pronouns.)  Furthermore, I myself believe that God communicated this command unto both Adam and Eve, after Eve was created (as per the plural personal pronouns of Eve's quote), during His fellowship-visits with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

If I understand the purpose of this thread, other subjects may be brought up? If not, I apologize. I've been teaching the Life of Christ in the adult Sunday School class at church, and it has come out very apparent to us lately that Christ built the church on Family. What????

John the Baptist was Jesus' cousin

Peter and Andrew - brothers

James and John - brothers

Judas (not Iscariot) and James the Less - brothers

The above listed Judas and James also possible cousins of Jesus. It is indicated that the 2nd Mary,the wife of Alphaeus (aka Clopas or Cleopas), was possibly also sister to Mary, mother of Jesus. Indicated. Not proven.)

James, elder in Jerusalem in Acts, was Jesus' brother.

John Mark was Barnabas' nephew.

How many times does it say in scripture that a man got saved "and his house"?

I believe this country was built on godly churches, godly churches are built on godly families, godly families are built on godly marriages and godly marriages start with godly men. 

This, I believe, echo's God's plan when founding Israel. Abraham and his half-sister, who have a son that marries a cousin, they have a son who marries two cousins that are sisters ...

Family.

Anyhow, it has been a revelation...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, weary warrior said:

I believe this country was built on godly churches, godly churches are built on godly families, godly families are built on godly marriages and godly marriages start with godly men. 

AMEN!!!!

(Note: I am not just saying it. I am SHOUTING it.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
7 hours ago, weary warrior said:

If I understand the purpose of this thread, other subjects may be brought up? If not, I apologize. I've been teaching the Life of Christ in the adult Sunday School class at church, and it has come out very apparent to us lately that Christ built the church on Family. What????

John the Baptist was Jesus' cousin

Peter and Andrew - brothers

James and John - brothers

Judas (not Iscariot) and James the Less - brothers

The above listed Judas and James also possible cousins of Jesus. It is indicated that the 2nd Mary,the wife of Alphaeus (aka Clopas or Cleopas), was possibly also sister to Mary, mother of Jesus. Indicated. Not proven.)

James, elder in Jerusalem in Acts, was Jesus' brother.

John Mark was Barnabas' nephew.

How many times does it say in scripture that a man got saved "and his house"?

I believe this country was built on godly churches, godly churches are built on godly families, godly families are built on godly marriages and godly marriages start with godly men. 

This, I believe, echo's God's plan when founding Israel. Abraham and his half-sister, who have a son that marries a cousin, they have a son who marries two cousins that are sisters ...

Family.

Anyhow, it has been a revelation...

Yes, this thread is absolutely for those things we discover as God reveals it to us. For some it may be brand new and for others it may be something they've heard all their lives. Its a place for those of us who don't have some earth shattering great doctrinal debate in mind. I appreciate what you've posted here and I had never thought about the amount of family relationships Christ and His Apostles used. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
11 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

I recognize that this thread is NOT intended for depth of debate over "interesting" thoughts.  Thus I shall simply express a few points of disagreement with the above thoughts concerning Genesis 3:3 and Genesis 3:6.

I do NOT believe that Eve embellished God's Word in Genesis 3:3, nor do I believe that Adam miscommunicated the Word unto Eve.  Either case would require such to be the first sin, which is NOT how God's Word presents the case.  Furthermore, it appears that the Lord God regularly met with Adam and Eve for fellowship and communication.  If that is so, then what did they talk about?  Well, we do not exactly know since it is not recorded in Scripture.  However, I believe that Eve was being completely honest when she gave her record concerning God's Word in Genesis 3:3, and that the Lord God had INDEED communicated this unto both of them (as per the use of the pronoun "ye") during these fellowship times.

Furthermore, I do NOT believe that Adam was standing there "with her" when Eve was tempted by the devil.  Rather, I believe that Eve, after eating the fruit of the forbidden tree, then went to her husband so that he could eat the fruit "with her."

Scott, not to fear making comment, I asked for it. If when we feel the need to make one of the posted comments a point of in depth discussion maybe a spin-off thread by any member here at OB might allow for greater analysis. But, to reiterate, what you and others have posted thus far is just fine.

I just hope that no one in this thread thinks they have to guard their comments for fear of being wrong or formatting the question or comment wrong. This first example was just some thoughts which occurred during a daily reading. I know things just like this are occurring with others as they dive into the goodness and grace of our God's living Word. I hope they share their discoveries in accordance with scripture, 1 Corinthians 14:26 and Ephesians 4:12-15 .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

John 3 Verses 1 and 2
1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

1. “a ruler of the Jews”

Most of us know that either Nicodemus was part of the Sanhedrin, or possibly a temple priest, and/or at the very least a well to do and respected member of the Pharisees.

2. “we know that thou art a teacher come from God”

I had not noticed this part of verse 2  in reading John 3 before. Particularly the “we know” of this verse. However, these words piqued my interest enough to ask what the others may have found. I looked at a couple of commentaries but, they don’t expound sufficiently on this detail to suit me. Also, I looked in the ISBE for greater detail about Nicodemus, still I was not satisfied. Possibly there were more Pharisees with Nicodemus and he was just the primary “ruler” who spoke for them. It seems on the surface they had discussed Jesus at length when they came together during council meetings. We have other scriptures which hint to the Sanhedrin and/or the Pharisees knowing Jesus was sent of God. John 9:16 and John 11:49-52 for example.

So, possibly several and maybe even many of the Pharisees did know or at least have a very good idea Jesus was either the Christ or a prophet sent by God. They either rejected him outright or feared the upset of the status quo. By status quo I mean the calm and freedom to practice their religion permitted by the Romans. Anyone study the “we know that thou art a teacher come from God” part of that verse?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Another thought that occurred while reading and studying. We know things were different for man before they sinned and were turned out of the garden, no rain for example. It would appear communication between creatures was common too. Eve felt no restraint in talking with the serpent. Otherwise there should have been some type of apprehension in speaking with the serpent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
6 minutes ago, 1Timothy115 said:

Another thought that occurred while reading and studying. We know things were different for man before they sinned and were turned out of the garden, no rain for example. It would appear communication between creatures was common too. Eve felt no restraint in talking with the serpent. Otherwise there should have been some type of apprehension in speaking with the serpent.

People talk to animals all the time today - the strange thing is that when the serpent ANSWERED she was not shocked...... :15_1_63::laugh::4_6_100:

 

Sorry, couldn't help myself. :sorry:

I remember being surprised when I first noticed that Eve was not in the least bit fussed about having a conversation with a snake. Just took me by surprise when I realised it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It is also worthy of consideration that the whole creation was fairly new unto Adam and Eve.  Therefore, there was no real pattern of "normal," but rather a regular experience of new things. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

It is also worthy of consideration that the whole creation was fairly new unto Adam and Eve.  Therefore, there was no real pattern of "normal," but rather a regular experience of new things. 

Good point!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
9 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

It is also worthy of consideration that the whole creation was fairly new unto Adam and Eve.  Therefore, there was no real pattern of "normal," but rather a regular experience of new things. 

I'm developing a list :laugh: .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

This morning in my devotional reading I learned from Zechariah 8:5 that the Lord our God is comfortable with children engaging in play time.  (Note: I have often wondered whether it is just a human viewpoint, a cultural viewpoint, or a naturally-created viewpoint that children "need to have play time.")

Zechariah 8:5 -- "And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the streets thereof."

(Note: This verse is presented as one of the blessings upon Israel when the Lord God restores them.  Thus it would appear that this is something of which the Lord our God approves as a positive.)

Also, (sarcasm warning) it appears that the Lord God approves of children playing in the street, so then all those parents who forbid it . . . .

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
6 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Also, (sarcasm warning) it appears that the Lord God approves of children playing in the street, so then all those parents who forbid it . . . .

I knew it! When my big sister told me to go play in the street it was scriptural.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2017 at 11:32 PM, DaveW said:

People talk to animals all the time today - the strange thing is that when the serpent ANSWERED she was not shocked...... :15_1_63::laugh::4_6_100:

 

Sorry, couldn't help myself. :sorry:

I remember being surprised when I first noticed that Eve was not in the least bit fussed about having a conversation with a snake. Just took me by surprise when I realised it.

That's because the "serpent" was not a "snake". No more than Dan was one (Gen. 49:17) or leviathan is one (Isaiah 27:1).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, fastjav390 said:

That's because the "serpent" was not a "snake". No more than Dan was one (Gen. 49:17) or leviathan is one (Isaiah 27:1).

Yet the opening portion of Genesis 3:1 seems to indicates that the "serpent" was indeed a "beast [snake] of the field" -- "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made."

Furthermore, Genesis 3:14 indicates that the Lord God actually did curse the "serpent" as a "snake" of the field -- "And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 38 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...