What if Adam knew his wife, before the sin?

by Nambo 21 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Nambo

    I sometimes wonder how things would have been if Adam and Eve had procreated before eating from the tree of knowledge, and the ramifications of such.

    If any children didnt also eat of the tree, would we now have two groups of Humans on Earth, one perfect and living forever, and us.

    Would God have split the two classes of Human, putting Eden on another planet or dimension or such?

    Does this indicate that its all deliberate, that God knew Satans plan so let the play unfold before letting Adam and Eve know each other?

    Or does it just mean that Satan was allready corrupted and wanted to get his deed done at the very beggining to ensuer he had everyone?

  • Morbidzbaby

    Considering it's all just a fable, it doesn't really matter. However, I'll humor the idea for the sake of argument.

    The fact of the matter is, this "god" is supposedly omniscient. He knows all, or can CHOOSE to know all (as was brought out at a bookstudy years ago). Therefore, knowing his creation, knowing Satan's disposition, there's enough evidence to show he KNEW this would all happen and therefore that he was party to it and allowed it to happen without stopping it. Why not just destroy Satan before creating Adam and Eve? This would have shown that he WAS all-powerful, and if you screw with him you get the ax. However, we're given the excuse of "He had to PROVE his sovereignty". Huh. Ego much? "Well, he had myriads of angels watching how this would play out!". So, in other words, this almighty being who created all had to prove himself to his kids, is that what you're saying? Doesn't make much sense to me.

    At any rate, if Adam and Eve had children before the "original sin", those kids would have to be raised by someone... So I figure god would have let them stay in Eden until the kids could survive on their own and then they'd have to deal with their parents being "disfellowshipped". Or possibly even killed outright since there was a law in Mosaic times prohibiting stoning of those who "fell short". Then the human race could have been continued through the incestuous relationships of Adam and Eve's kids without the interference of their "apostate" parents.

    But as I said, it's all a fable and doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep

    Adam names all of the animals that are busily smootching and copulating and filling the earth for god knows how long then he realises that he hasn't got someone for him to smootch and copulate with and god thinks "Oh, Jesus, I forgot to make the opposite sex so my ultimate creation can breed!" so he makes Eve and they prance off into the garden looking for fruit and inventing poetry and songs and putting flowers in each other's hair .....

    How long do you think it would take?

    1950 This Means Everlasting Life Page 29

  • Knowsnothing

    You make a good point, Black Sheep. To begin, if I had a smoking-hot woman materialize out of nowhere, and it was declared she was my spouse, I wouldn't exactly spend my time naming the animals. I would get down to business!

  • OldGenerationDude

    We were speaking about the critical theory approach to Bible interpretation in another thread, and what it teaches about Adam and Eve and this story may be apropos here.

    The story about Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden is not an historical account of how sin can into the world. It is, instead, an explanation of why God has to call people--his own creation--back into union with their Creator. Again, mainstream theology as well as first-century Christian exegesis states that this is a story about "why,' and not about "how" as the Watchtower teaches.

    The first 11 chapters of Genesis are allegories--parables, like Jesus of Nazareth used, to explain truths regarding humanity and its origins. Now it's not about origins, in the sense of giving a scientific or even popular superstitious view (even though, as critical Biblical theology points out, much superstition can be seen in the details offered, such as in Genesis 1 where the sun, moon, and stars are described as being stuck into a "firmament," meaning a dome that had an inner vault in which rain water could be stored). Like the parables Jesus used, these tales are purposely written with a style that readers of the past understood were allegory or religious stories with a moral to them. Instead of marking the writings with numbers of the Dewy decimal system or words such as "Fable," the way we do with modern books, all ancient Mesopotamian writings of the time used narrative devices or indicators to make the stories impossible to be confused with literal reports (such as telling one creation story in Genesis 1 and then suddenly telling a conflicting one right afterwards; it's not a mistake, but a common earmark that says: The details are not where the truth lies, so look for a moral).

    The following stories in Genesis are more historical with less allegory, but mythos nonetheless (again, not to be confused with the vernacular use of "myth" meaning "falsehood;" the literary meaning of "myth" is here meant, an "origin" story, usually wrapped in a religious lesson or view of the meaning behind historical events). The story centers around Abraham, then Moses (as Genesis is one book with the four that follow it in the Tanakh, a combination known as simply as Torah, "Law").

    The critical approach teaches that the main thrust behind this book is not what the Adam and Eve story tells us about history but what that story has to do with why God called Abraham to follow him, and why later God sent Moses to call Abraham's children to freedom. The reason? Simple: Humans have a tendency to throw God out of the picture, even when it is evident that to do so is to their detriment.

    The Adam and Eve story is not a story of how sin came about, but that we are subject to concupiscence, a desire to do things based on our limited experience and even deifying that experience, often comparing it to that of God's knowledge and wisdom, or supplanting the need for it.

    In the story, Adam and Eve lose paradise because of this. But we never really are told exactly what they did, besides eating fruit, that introduced this concupiscence in the first place. As the apostle Paul later stated in one his letters, eating doesn't cause a person to get closer or further from God. Only doing something with the full knowledge that it will displease God and even cause harm to another, even their neighbor's conscience, is considered sinful when Paul discusses food. (Romans 14) Therefore it is would mean even throwing away the logic of an apostle to teach that Adam and Eve's eating of fruit was literal, since there is no power in food itself, for good or evil.

    So the question as to when Adam has sexual intercourse with Eve is moot. The story is merely saying that Adam and Eve passed on this condition we seem to be unable to conquer on our own, and that God intervened by befriending Abraham and then freeing them through Moses because people cannot follow God's law if left to themselves, even if it were offered to them via theophany like a burning mountain, a loud horn, and the thundering voice of God himself.

    An interesting note: Both Adam and Eve and the newly freed nation of Israel get to hear God's voice, and then both are said to replace God, one by throwing him aside for their own wisdom and the other for making God into something God is not.

    Of course, I'm not saying this is the only accepted understanding or there aren't other details offered by critical theory used in Biblical study. Neither am I trying to insult those who are atheists or agnostic and claim another set of convictions. I am merely stating that the Watchtower view is nothing like that held by the majority of Jews, Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestant Christians outside of the ignorance offered by the Governing Body as "food at the proper time."

    The food of the Governing Body is like a stale candy bar compared to what "Christendom" feasts upon via the use of critical analysis.

  • tec

    Perhaps they did not have flesh with which to procreate WITH, until they were given long garments of skin and placed outside the garden of eden?

    Consider the garden of eden a spiritual realm. Flesh is not within the spiritual realm, so Adam/Eve are not yet flesh. As far as I can recall, they do not step outside the garden at any time, and so are together as spirit. It is only when they are given the long garments of skin that they are outside the garden, subject to all the physical suffering that comes with the physical realm.

    Just some things to mull over. I know that I mull them over :)



  • tootired2care

    OldGenerationDude - Interesting info, question: how is that belief of Genesis 1-11 being a parable reconciled with these NT scriptures below?

    2 Cor 11:1-3 (NIV)

    I hope you will put up with me in a little foolishness. Yes, please put up with me! 2 I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. 3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.

    Rev 12:7-9 (NIV)

    Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

  • NewChapter

    I wanna play. WHAT IF it had not been a FRUIT that led to the downfall but a vegetable? I mean, would broccoli have gotten us into as much trouble? I think not!

    Carry on.

  • tootired2care

    You would have at least lost your right hand for stealing the broccol!

  • tec

    Broccoli is the devil.

    Everyone knows this. Sheesh.

Share this