Did Adam and Eve and animals have genitals before the fall?

[dybmh]

My apologies. I must not have understood the question.

Maybe if I clarify...

To suggest that the Tree of Life is something that must be partaken of on a continual basis means that the moment one does not partake, they will die or 'begin to age and eventually die'.

Therefore, a teaching like that implies that Death existed before the Fall. It also implies that Death still exists in the New Heavens and New Earth.

I believe Adam and his wife were immortal to begin with. They chose to become mortal by partaking of the Forbidden Fruit.

Sorry, I'm done. You said:

"If you believe that Death and the Tree of Life coexisted in the same Sacred Space, you are in contradiction with the rest of the Bible."

That ^^ is false. It's not even close to being true.

Also, you got the sequence of events wrong in the story of Eden, and there's still been no correction on your end for that.

There's this idea of eating a forbidden zygote, but that's not even close to what's written either.

And there's also the flip-flop on whether Gen 2:24-25 can have multiple meanings.

You brought a verse from Mark that's completely irrelevant.

I'm putting you on ignore. I cannot imagine having a *fruitful* discussion with you. And "they shall be known by their fruits".

If others want to converse with you, that's their choice.

Goodbye.

 

[Trailblazer]

@Trailblazer

I think I may have answered your question. Let me know if I did not.

Are you referring to these questions?

What do you think the Tree of Life is? Do you believe the Tree of Life was intended to confer physical life, so that everyone who was born would never die and instead they would live forever in a physical body on Earth?

No, I don't think you answered them directly to me.

 

[Yokefellow]

No. That's not what is written. My friend. The prohibition never says anything about eating the fruit. The word fruit does not exist in the law given in Gen 2:17.

וּמֵעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ כִּי בְּיוֹם אֲכָלְךָ מִמֶּנּוּ מוֹת תָּמֽוּת׃

Ah, I see. In other words, you believe that I assume there were fruit growing, correct?

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it; for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.

Where is this zygote in the prohibition?

The Zygote is here...

Revelation 17:4
"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication"

Yes, it is literal... as in Male Seed mixed with Female Seed. The Golden Cup is the Zygote from which we were all incarnated from. The Woman represents our biological Mother. Satan represents our biological Father.

When Jesus said, 'your Father the Devil', it was literal. Thus, the Forbidden Fruit had to have been the Egg Cell of the Woman fertilized by Satan, the so called 'Serpent'. How else could Satan be our biological Father? Lilith? Where is that written?

Thus, if God said that the First Adam would 'surely die' then that is exactly what happened. His wife Ishshah also died.

How can one be re-birthed from the dead without a Zygote to be conceived into?

Also....

Did Adam name his wife twice for no reason? One minute her name is Ishshah, the next it is Eve? No.

Whenever God creates a new lifeform, it must be named...

Genesis 2:19
"And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."

Adam 'called' his wife 'Ishshah' because she was newly created.

After Ishshah died, God re-created her. Therefore, Adam had to give this new creation a name.

Genesis 3:20
"And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."

She is now called 'The Mother of All Living' because she now has a reproductive organs... i.e., a Womb.

1). Now you've flip-flopped. First you're saying it can mean more than one thing. Now you seem to be flopping away from that. So which is it? Can the verse have more than 1 meaning or not?

Yes, however you are demanding that I interpret it in a way that does not fit the context.

2). This verse from Mark is completely irrelevant towards whether or not a couple is considered husband and wife *lacking* consummation.

I believe it is relevant. Again, I use the entire Bible as context, not just the Old Testament.

Why is New Jerusalem the 'Mother of us all', yet she is the Bride of the Lamb?

Is New Jerusalem both Mother and Wife at the same time? There is more going on here than meets the eye.

 

[Yokefellow]

Are you referring to these questions?

What do you think the Tree of Life is? Do you believe the Tree of Life was intended to confer physical life, so that everyone who was born would never die and instead they would live forever in a physical body on Earth?

No, I don't think you answered them directly to me.

Got it. I will answer your questions and post my research on the Tree of Life in a few minutes.

 

[Yokefellow]

What do you think the Tree of Life is?

Let us begin with New Jerusalem where the Tree of Life exists now...

Galatians 4:26
"But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."

New Jerusalem is our Mother. Yes, we have a Mom in Heaven too, not just a Father. The question is... how literal is the above verse?

Let us look at another verse...

Revelation 22:2
"In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations."

The Tree of Life is a 'her'. So far so good.

Note the deeper meaning. She has a new 'Fruit' every month. We call that a Menstrual Cycle. Get it? In other words, the Tree of Life is symbolic of a Woman's Ovary. The Fruit are her Egg Cells.

Who fertilizes said Egg Cells? The Lamb of course...

Revelation 22:1
"And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb."

The Lamb represents Abraham's Seed in the loins of the Father on the Masculine (phallic) throne. The 'Water of Life' represents fertilization and nourishment for the Egg Cells. It is euphemism, the Meat of the Word. Most Christians are still on the Milk. They cannot see any of this yet.

Note that the 'One' on the Throne represents Abraham, the 'Father of us all'...

Romans 4:16
"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all"

Long story short, the Saved become Abraham's Seed...

Galatians 3:29
"And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."

It is all a picture of Conception. New Jerusalem is the womb of Sarah (Feminine) that joins with Mount Zion (Masculine) as a picture of procreation and the Saved literally becoming Born Again.

Thus, when the Saved partake of the 'Fruit', they are conceived into the Glorified Body. It is a one-time only thing. Had Adam and Ishshah partaken, the story would have ended there. None of us would be here.

If you are still not convinced that New Jerusalem represents the womb of Sarah, take a look at what is being said here...

Isaiah 66:8 (New Living Translation)
"Who has ever seen anything as strange as this? Who ever heard of such a thing? Has a nation ever been born in a single day? Has a country ever come forth in a mere moment? But by the time Jerusalem’s birth pains begin, her children will be born."

The 'City' of Jerusalem is giving birth. Do you see it?

 

[Yokefellow]

The Garden of Eden was a foreshadow of both Earthly Jerusalem and Heavenly Jerusalem at the same time.

To put it into perspective, the two trees represented two Mothers...

• Hagar = Earthly Mother (Bondage)
• Sarah = Heavenly Mother (Freedom)

God gave Adam and Ishshah the choice of which Mom they would like to incarnate from. They chose Hagar/Bondage.

Two Trees = Two Covenants...

Galatians 4:24
"Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar."

 

[Yokefellow]

Goodbye.

Sorry you feel that way.

If you folks wish to believe that people in Heaven are having sex and making babies while partaking of the Tree of Life, that is on you. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

My Bible says there is no marriage in Heaven. Moreover, we are all SONS of God. No Male and Female.

So where does that leave us? Massive orgies while eating the Tree of Life where no one is married to one another and yet everyone is Male?

It makes no sense whatsoever to mix the Tree of Life in Heaven with sex and reproduction. That is Satanic.

Why do you think they took that option away?

Genesis 3:22
"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"

One cannot do both.

 

[blü 2]

A woman becomes a wife when there is consummation. Before that she is betrothed.

While I acknowledge that's a possibility, Eve is never pregnant in the Garden story, while she's immediately pregnant after Chapter 4.1. Still, I'll bear it in mind.

There's another fun word-play during Eve's confession. But this is lost on the English reader as well.

Did you know that "word-play" in the eden story is something form-critics notice as a departure in style from Chapter 1? There's an important lesson being taught here because there's also important word-play in the serpents' speech, and in Adam's confession. And even in the prohibtion given by God. That sort of consistency is signficant and intentional. That's how I know there is a lesson being taught using it.

Alas, I remain dependent on the translations and their respective reputations.

I don't believe you.

Heh! Thanks, anyway.

 

[blü 2]

The above is incorrect.

Please quote me the part of the Garden story that says it's incorrect.

The Tree of Life is not some sort of 'anti-aging' tree that has to be consumed on a regular basis, otherwise it would contradict Revelation.

Revelation is a Christian document. It has no bearing on the meaning of the Tanakh.

 

[dybmh]

While I acknowledge that's a possibility, Eve is never pregnant in the Garden story, while she's immediately pregnant after Chapter 4.1. Still, I'll bear it in mind.

Does every physical encounter produce a pregnancy? Come on.

I think you're doing some profound mental gymnastics to avoid admitting that interpretation lacking knowledge of the Hebrew language and Judaism is always incomplete in this context.

The consummation made Eve "his wife". "His", possessive is the operative word. It's in the Hebrew. It's in the RSV. Becoming "one flesh" is the definition of becoming "his" on the verse prior. The word "consummation", literally means the marriage has "begun". Where do you think this idea came from?

Alas, I remain dependent on the translations and their respective reputations.

Like I said, when it is shown the translation is lacking, and an individual has developed an interpretation which is missing details, or has scrambled the sequence of events, or is adding words that don't exist in the text...

It's interesting when the individual does not adjust their confidence in their own interpretation and resources.

Why does this happen? Any ideas?

For the religious person there is perhaps a religious explanation. Their strongly held belief in a god inspiring and directing their "discernment" might be prohibiting a justified sense of humility. But what about the non-religious person? What is happening with an atheist who behaves exactly the same way?

I've seen all three examples in this thread.

• Lacking information
• Scrambled sequence of events
• Adding to the text

This happened to me recently. I didn't add to the text. But, I botched the story. I didn't remember it correctly. My rendering was out of sequence and I was missing important details. I thanked the person who corrected me. And throughout the conversation I admitted that I needed to reread the stories to be sure of my conclusions.

I think that's the right thing to do. But, I can read Hebrew. And I have resources for linking up with Jewish law and Jewish commentary going back 1000s of years to aid my pursuit.

 

[Shaul]

You are assuming they ate the same types of food we do now.

Before the Fall, 'food' was information.

No, I didn't assume any such thing. Furthermore liquids come out of the genitals, not solid excrement. Also they didn't eat "information". According to the scripture they were given every seed bearing plant to eat as food. So my origin question remains unanswered by you, if they didn't have genitals how did they urinate?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Before Sin, there was no death. If Adam and Eve and the animals had genitals, it would only a matter of time before reproduction would cause Earth to became over populated had nobody sinned. Am I missing something here?

Yes, missing the instruction found at Genesis 1:28 to multiply and FILL the Earth.
In other words, reproduce until Earth was FULL or populated, Not over filled /over populated.
Reproduction was to cease at that fill or populated point.

Because of Adam's sin of breaking God's law we will have to wait until Jesus' 1,000 year reign over earth to find out more of God's purpose.
Perhaps intelligent life will continue on other planets once the ' sin issue ' is settled here on Earth, but not before.

 

[Yokefellow]

No, I didn't assume any such thing. Furthermore liquids come out of the genitals, not solid excrement. Also they didn't eat "information". According to the scripture they were given every seed bearing plant to eat as food. So my origin question remains unanswered by you, if they didn't have genitals how did they urinate?

The Garden of Eden before the Fall was not this physical corrupt world you are seeing now. It was a Spiritual realm similar to how Heaven will be.

Do Angels need to urinate or defecate? That would imply that something must die in order to be eaten. You do understand that plants and animals are living, correct?

If you wish to believe that God created a corrupt Universe with Death, that is on you. As already posted earlier, Death entered the world after the Fall.

Romans 5:12
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"

 

[Yokefellow]

Please quote me the part of the Garden story that says it's incorrect.

Where is your quote? All you did was give an opinion.

Revelation is a Christian document. It has no bearing on the meaning of the Tanakh.

If that is the case then we have some issues that need to be addressed.

How about we start with Genesis 2:17...

Genesis 2:17
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

A simple, literal interpretation teaches that Adam and his wife should have died on that very day, yet they did not.

How do you explain that? Did the verse just lie to us?

 

[Trailblazer]

Death entered the world after the Fall.

Romans 5:12
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"

Spiritual death entered the world after the fall, not physical death. Physical death has always existed and will always exist since God created man to be mortal.

 

[Yokefellow]

The consummation made Eve "his wife".

Lol. Mr. Legalist just assumed that Eve existed before she was even created.

 

[Shaul]

The Garden of Eden before the Fall was not this physical corrupt world you are seeing now. It was a Spiritual realm similar to how Heaven will be.

Irrelevant and assumes things not in evidence. There is no evidence people won't urinate in heaven too.

Do Angels need to urinate or defecate?

Maybe or maybe not. In either case that is not relevant as to whether humans and animals need to.

That would imply that something must die in order to be eaten.

No, it doesn't. The scripture says that in the Eden people and animals ate plants. That didn't require any animals to die.

You do understand that plants and animals are living, correct?

Yes, which is in harmony with my question. Because plants, animals (and people) are living they must eliminate waste. Most animals do this through urination. Urination through their genitals. Ergo, it is logical to suppose they had genitals in Eden.

If you wish to believe that God created a corrupt Universe with Death, that is on you. As already posted earlier, Death entered the world after the Fall.

Romans 5:12
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"

Of course Romans is part of the Christian New Testament and I don't accept it as authority. So there is that. Never mind that you are also misinterpreting this scripture. Furthermore you are equating having genitals with the existence of death without any basis. There is nothing in the creation account of בְּרֵאשִׁית‎ that supports your position.

 

[Yokefellow]

Spiritual death entered the world after the fall, not physical death. Physical death has always existed and will always exist since God created man to be mortal.

There is no such thing as 'Spiritual Death'... whatever that means.

There are only two kinds of death in the Bible...

1. First Death/Death of the Body
2. Second Death/Death of the Soul

Even Wikipedia states that there is no such thing as Spiritual Death...

"The phrase spiritual death is not found in Protestant scriptures, and definitions of the concept thus vary among Protestant Christians."

Spiritual death in Christianity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It is a made-up doctrine to hide what really happened in the Garden of Eden.

 

[Trailblazer]

Genesis 2:17
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

A simple, literal interpretation teaches that Adam and his wife should have died on that very day, yet they did not.

How do you explain that? Did the verse just lie to us?

The verse means that they would surely die spiritually, not die physically.
And they did die spiritually on that day.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Where is your quote? All you did was give an opinion.
If that is the case then we have some issues that need to be addressed.
How about we start with Genesis 2:17...
Genesis 2:17
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
A simple, literal interpretation teaches that Adam and his wife should have died on that very day, yet they did not.
How do you explain that? Did the verse just lie to us?

In the Bible the definition of the word ' day' does Not always mean a 24 hr. day.
Even in English we speak of grandfather's day and Noah's day and know that is Not about a literal 24 hr. day.
Please also notice that ALL of the creative days are summed up by the single word ' day ' at Genesis 2:4
So, that 'figure of speech' carries more than one literal 24 hr. day.
A thousand years in God's eyes are like a day. See Psalm 90:4 and 2nd Peter 3:8
Thus, Adam and Eve died within that time frame of a thousand-year day time period.
Notice too that No one lived past the age of one thousand years - Genesis 5:5; 5:27