:
Originally Posted by Dream
We know that the story of the Garden of Eden is a picture of marriage.
Thomas
Do we ... where is that taught? I would rather think the story of the Garden of Eden is the story of Innocence, which would preclude marriage ... marriage in a sense implies possession, a relation between two that excludes all others ... So it might well be that marriage is a post-Fall condition, that won't apply in Heaven, because marriage, like the Law, is a necessity for man bound in sin. That's why the Law allowed divorce, because man was incapable of keeping his word, and that's why so many divorce today ... because man is incapable of keeping his word.
Divorce is, yes, a protection for brides. In Romans 7, this is Paul's explanation for why Jews who are baptized into Jesus no longer are 'Wed' to Moses law or any Christian to any particular protocol, so we could be 'Wed' to another. Paul argues that Moses law of regulations was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ but that it could not accomplish what was done through Christ's death (and ours). Observe the serpent in the wilderness, which was a type of Jesus own body upon the cross. It is the serpent in humanity, but its head was crushed by Jesus' obedience (and ours if we are in him). This serpent must be removed, mankind transformed, before the relationship with God can be complete. Marriage is God's pursuit of his people in a relationship that started out dysfunctional but has improved over the centuries. He was faithful in his pursuit, and his bride tested him building faith in him.
John 3:14-15 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Hebrews 2:17-18 Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor(aid) them that are tempted.
Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
**************************************
:
Originally Posted by Dream
... It may seem strange, but for the early Christians who were Jews, Christianity began with divorce.
Thomas
Yes, that does seem strange ... I would have thought Christianity began with Baptism, the belief in Salvation, the Redemption, etc ... divorce would be very low on the scale of things ...
Baptism is the same idea -- a washing away of what a person once was and a death with Jesus upon the cross. Under the commission of the twelve, Jews were told they needed this very thing -- a new baptism.
Acts 2:40-41 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
**************************************
:
Originally Posted by Dream
They then are married to a new system. Paul is exactly shadowing Deuteronomy 24:1-4 in which a woman (the church in this case) must not return to the man who had divorced her once she remarries.
Thomas
Technically, that's wrong. If true, then by sin man would have separated himself from the Church, without the possibility of return, whereas the reality is that sin is forgiven, and man can and did return, so I'm not sure what evidence you're grounding your thesis on?
The idea is to divorce a life of rules and regulations in order to live by the spirit and never go back to living merely by rules. We are not talking about leaving the church. Leaving the church or the church leaving God is similar to when a woman leaves her husband. In many cases he will persuade her to come back to him, which is not the same as a reversed-divorce, which would be to her detriment. (In Moses' law if he divorces her and she remarries then he cannot remarry or pursue her, ever.)
**************************************
: Originally Posted by Dream
In his version of the story, sin is the serpent and the fruit of knowledge of good & evil is the commandment.
Thomas
But that's not Christians, is it? Sin is, by definition, the free choice of the will to choose something other than the good. The fruit of the knowledge of good and evil is death ... again ... I'm not sure where you're getting your exegesis from?
'A sin' is a freely made choice, however in Paul's discourse 'Sin' is also an inclination within mankind, which he calls the law of sin. He says it is proven to exist when we struggle to do right but wind up doing wrong instead! It is the serpent upon the brass pole and that which was condemned upon the cross.
Romans 7:20-21 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
**************************************
:
Originally Posted by Dream
On a personal level, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is a good tree with good fruit.
Thomas
If the fruit was good, then it would not have been forbidden to Adam and Eve, for God wills the good for all. The fruit is dangerous, indeed fatal ... so not good at all.
"I'm referring to Paul's statement " What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead." (
Romans 7:7-8)
So the fruit was, as Eve observed in Genesis, good for food. The problem was the serpent, which Paul visualizes as part of our internal humanity.
**************************************
:
Originally Posted by Dream
An angel would not be harmed by eating this fruit,
Thomas
Well, it depends whether the angel was allowed to eat the fruit, doesn't it? As you don't know, you can't say.
Yes, it was a mistake to say that.
**************************************
:
Originally Posted by Dream
however sin within mankind causes us to die when we eat this fruit.
Thomas
Choosing to eat the fruit, which is privation of the good (evil) is an evil act in itself as it defies the will of God ... too much focus on the fruit, not enough focus on the rejection and offence against God in eating the fruit.
Thomas
Very thoughtful. Paul internalizes the serpent as a law of sin within him, saying that it wars within his members and deceived him the moment the commandment came. He says the commandment is good, yet it kills us to receive it since we are sinful. So just taking clues from Paul, the fruit is a double-whammy, because Adam was told not to eat of it however the serpent told Eve that she should. The serpent who spoke and the fruit are visuals of what was happening inside of Adam, so there is both a visual and an internal story.
