Is the story of Adam, Eve, the Garden of Eden and the snake to be taken as literell?

[JoelG]

When the serpent lost his legs, was this suppose to be a punishment?
The snake has been very successful in its present form. Why would God punish an animal?
Off the subject a little bit. Where did the different races come from? Does the bible mention races?
Everything is the bible could have really happened. And, if it isn't true; to this day it has not been proven false.

 

[Tintin]

When the serpent lost his legs, was this suppose to be a punishment.
The snake has been very successful in its present form. Why would God punish an animal?
Off the subject a little bit. Where did the different races come from? Does the bible mention races?
Everything is the bible could have really happened. And, if it isn't; to this day it has not been proven false.

There is only one human race. We all go back to Shem, Ham and Japheth and their wives, and before that Noah and his wife and before that, Adam and Eve. All of the peoples of the world find their ancestors in Adam and Eve.

 

[tanach]

There had to be a first fully human man and Woman, whether you believe the Bible or not. Logic demands it. Where else could the human race come from? Even if you buy into Evolution there had to be a point when Homo Sapiens could start to reproduce.
The Genesis story can be understood at different levels. There is actually more information outside the cannon of scripture but I
wont elaborate here for fear of being labelled a heretic by the more conservative members.

 

[valiant]

When the serpent lost his legs, was this suppose to be a punishment?
The snake has been very successful in its present form. Why would God punish an animal?
Off the subject a little bit. Where did the different races come from? Does the bible mention races?
Everything is the bible could have really happened. And, if it isn't true; to this day it has not been proven false.

Actually the Bible says nothing about the snake having legs. That is our assumption. 'On your belly you shall go and dust shall you eat' was a description of degradation and defeat. To eat the dust always means defeat. The snake had no need to be ashamed of the graceful way in which it moved until it became a fallen creature. What changed was not the snake's make up, but the interpretation put upon it.

Just as the significance of nakedness changed for the man, so the significance of ground movement changed for the snake.

Did the snake talk? Probably not literally. It may have been demonic voices speaking through it, or it may be that it 'spoke' through its sinuous movements andc enchanting gaze. Just as we might say, 'God said to me' or 'Satan said to me' when what we mean is that we gained the impression

 

[tanach]

There was a recent report that a fossil snake with legs had been discovered in China. Its believed it probably used them for burrowing rather than walking. I also remember seeing something about modern snakes still having the remains of what might be legs in their bone structure. just thought Id mention this.

 

[valiant]

There was a recent report that a fossil snake with legs had been discovered in China. Its believed it probably used them for burrowing rather than walking. I also remember seeing something about modern snakes still having the remains of what might be legs in their bone structure. just thought Id mention this.

I am aware of both ideas. But Scripture does not demand that the snake had legs, I notice the 'might be' LOL They also might not be The latter is the most probable. Legs would actually diminish the snake. Indeed it is difficult to see what it would have lost by losing cumbersome legs.

 

[JoelG]

Boa Constrictors have two finger nail looking things toward its rear end, which could be a sign that it had appendages.

 

[mpaper345]

Is the story of Adam and Eve to be taken as truth or a parable?

The story of Adam and Eve is literal,because the Bible says that Eve is the mother of all living,and shows their genealogy up to Noah,which then shows his genealogy from there on.

Adam and Eve started the human race.

Adam and Eve were created knowing God and because of that they got to dwell in a beautiful place called the garden of Eden.

There were trees in the garden that they could eat from,but God told them not to eat one tree,the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,and that is because God gave them a choice to obey Him or do their own thing.Without a choice it is not true love but robotic love,which is not love.

I do not believe that it would of entered Adam and Eve's mind to sin if an outside source did not tempt them,so God allowed Satan to tempt Eve,which then Eve tempted Adam.Satan was already kicked out of heaven before God laid down the foundation of the world,and I believe if Lucifer would of not rebelled against God,God would of not created humans.

When Adam and Eve sinned by eating that fruit they then had a choice whether to do good or evil,where when they did not eat that tree they only knew to do good,so everyone that is born from then on would have a choice when they are born,and are therefore sinners,because we are born not knowing God,and we will do wrong before we come to God.

The account of Adam and Eve in the Bible is literal.God created Adam and Eve,which they were created knowing God,and they dwelt in the garden of Eden,and could touch any tree in the garden,but one tree,because God gave them a choice.That choice would not be effective unless an outside source tempted them,so God allowed Satan to tempt Eve,and Eve tempt Adam,to see if they would make the choice to obey God or do their own thing,because without a choice it is not true love.
Adam and Eve sinned so all that is born from them do not know God but have to make the choice later on to love God.

Some people might think that God created Lucifer,and Adam and Eve,to go against God,but the Bible says Lucifer was made perfect in his ways until inquity was found in him,and God made man upright,to do good,but they sought out many inventions.

 

[JoelG]

The bible says that the animals were created on one day and man on other. Scientist tell us that we share 99 percent identical DNA with primates.
The bible does not tell us how God made animals. The bible tells us he made man from dust.
The bible tells us that God just says , let there be and it was done. That's how he did everything including making man in Genesis:1. After he made man he say let them be fruitful and multiply. Yet in Genesis:2, he tells us how he created man from dust. And then woman later from a rib.
Are we talking about the same man creation in Genesis 1 & 2?
Why would animals share the same DNA with man, if man was created later out of dust?
And, to have dominion over animals, that means Adam might be eating the animals also. Which means killing to eat them.
Brings to mind, do you think there were penguins on the Ark?

 

[resurrection33]

Is the story of Adam and Eve to be taken as truth or a parable?

I've always taken it literally, though now that you bring it up, maybe it was a parable. It doesn't matter. What matters is that we learn what we're supposed to learn from the story.

 

[Budman]

Scientist tell us that we share 99 percent identical DNA with primates.

We share over 50% of our DNA with bananas as well. And almost 40% with fruit flies. It doesn't prove much.

 

[Tintin]

The bible says that the animals were created on one day and man on other. Scientist tell us that we share 99 percent identical DNA with primates.
The bible does not tell us how God made animals. The bible tells us he made man from dust.
The bible tells us that God just says , let there be and it was done. That's how he did everything including making man in Genesis:1. After he made man he say let them be fruitful and multiply. Yet in Genesis:2, he tells us how he created man from dust. And then woman later from a rib.
Are we talking about the same man creation in Genesis 1 & 2?
Why would animals share the same DNA with man, if man was created later out of dust?
And, to have dominion over animals, that means Adam might be eating the animals also. Which means killing to eat them.
Brings to mind, do you think there were penguins on the Ark?

The 99 percent statistic is a lie, dude. Get your facts straight first.
"it is safe to conclude that human-chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%.”
1 percent myth! - creation.com
Adam had dominion over the animals, but he wasn't to eat them. Yes, there were penguin-kinds on the ark, as we have penguins today.

 

[Tintin]

I've always taken it literally, though now that you bring it up, maybe it was a parable. It doesn't matter. What matters is that we learn what we're supposed to learn from the story.

Except that Jesus' life and death, the whole gospel, has no meaning if Adam is a parable.

 

[JoelG]

Adam had dominion over the animals, but he wasn't to eat them. Yes, there were penguin-kinds on the ark, as we have penguins today.[/QUOTE]

Hummm, where was the ark built, again?

When did humans start to eat meat?

 

[Tintin]

Adam had dominion over the animals, but he wasn't to eat them. Yes, there were penguin-kinds on the ark, as we have penguins today.

Hummm, where was the ark built, again?

When did humans start to eat meat?[/QUOTE]

We don't know specifically when humans started eating meat, but it would have been some time after the Fall. And then only by those who didn't follow God.

As for where the ark was built? We don't know. The world was completely restructured during the Great Flood (after all, that's when the continental drift occurred). The post-Flood world would look very different to the pre-Flood world.

 

[royalscot]

yes, all that water would have to go some ware. why would animals that can swim or live under water, be on the ark.
why do the north and south poles freeze. so is there, any way to prove speculation, of simple things, like animals and water.
the air never stopped,so for animals living under water , would not make a difference to them, things that could not live under water, died. so some logical thinking could prove, fish would not need to be on the boat, if air was still present at the time of the flood.

the only question would be sea water v fresh water. lol

 

[JoelG]

Now we have Penguins on the Ark. And, Walrus, Dodo Birds, Gila Monsters, Seals, Dinosaurs, black widows, bats, bed bugs, ticks, fleas, Galapagos Turtles, Sloth, thousands of different snakes, Koala Bears, Panda Bears, Hummingbirds, Flamingos, Buzzards (All types) and you name it. Do you think that a Walrus can hop all the way to the Middle East? The Ark had to be in the middle east because that is where the people in the Bible lived. So, yes the Walrus did have to cross deserts and mountain ranges to get to the Ark. They are here today aren't they. I don't think that Noah went over to pick them up. Then after the flood the animals that can only live in freezing weather went back to where they belong.
The Noah and the Ark story is harder to believe than the virgin birth but, it is true.



The mountains were covered over with water, even Mt Everest. Trees survived even after being under water, and that includes cactus, Redwood, and fruit trees.

Everything in the bible has to be believed by faith only. If you stop to analyze the bible you will find yourself digging for reasons and excuses of how it happen which are totally opinion. And, you will find that it is impossible for that story to be true. Nobody can answer these questions.

Sloths barely move and they made it to the Ark? "Well, we have Sloth today; so yes they were on the Ark. Yes, we have bones that prove that Dino's existed , so yes they were on the Ark. We have Chupa Cabras today, so yes they were on the Ark. We have whales today so the flood did not kill them, They were still breathing air up there on the mountain tops.

God said it, so I believe it? Why bother to read the bible? Why bother to bible bash on this web site when we don't have all the answers? The bible is not simple and clear. Different interpretations. We divide amongst ourselves into groups of worship in completely different manners. I was a Mormon, and the reverence to God is comparable to any other church on Earth. I was a Catholic and I find the exact strong reverence to God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit. And, the Jehovah witness; God bless their determination for trying to share what they believe is true with others (right or wrong, they are trying. I don't see very many Christians going door to door in the hot sun to share a message.

But, in the Christian world if are not in the right church you risk Hell. Nobody alive can prove that the bible is for real the word of God. I have talked to people that think that God is talking to them.

So, should the Adam and Eve story to be taken literally? If you believe the first part of this post is true, then yes.

God said, "I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren't ready for anything stronger. And you still aren't ready".

So , don't tell me any Christian knows it all.

Faith, Faith, Faith; that's all we have.

 

[Jimbone]

Now we have Penguins on the Ark. And, Walrus, Dodo Birds, Gila Monsters, Seals, Dinosaurs, black widows, bats, bed bugs, ticks, fleas, Galapagos Turtles, Sloth, thousands of different snakes, Koala Bears, Panda Bears, Hummingbirds, Flamingos, Buzzards (All types) and you name it. Do you think that a Walrus can hop all the way to the Middle East? The Ark had to be in the middle east because that is where the people in the Bible lived. So, yes the Walrus did have to cross deserts and mountain ranges to get to the Ark. They are here today aren't they. I don't think that Noah went over to pick them up. Then after the flood the animals that can only live in freezing weather went back to where they belong.
The Noah and the Ark story is harder to believe than the virgin birth but, it is true.



The mountains were covered over with water, even Mt Everest. Trees survived even after being under water, and that includes cactus, Redwood, and fruit trees.

Everything in the bible has to be believed by faith only. If you stop to analyze the bible you will find yourself digging for reasons and excuses of how it happen which are totally opinion. And, you will find that it is impossible for that story to be true. Nobody can answer these questions.

Sloths barely move and they made it to the Ark? "Well, we have Sloth today; so yes they were on the Ark. Yes, we have bones that prove that Dino's existed , so yes they were on the Ark. We have Chupa Cabras today, so yes they were on the Ark. We have whales today so the flood did not kill them, They were still breathing air up there on the mountain tops.

God said it, so I believe it? Why bother to read the bible? Why bother to bible bash on this web site when we don't have all the answers? The bible is not simple and clear. Different interpretations. We divide amongst ourselves into groups of worship in completely different manners. I was a Mormon, and the reverence to God is comparable to any other church on Earth. I was a Catholic and I find the exact strong reverence to God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit. And, the Jehovah witness; God bless their determination for trying to share what they believe is true with others (right or wrong, they are trying. I don't see very many Christians going door to door in the hot sun to share a message.

But, in the Christian world if are not in the right church you risk Hell. Nobody alive can prove that the bible is for real the word of God. I have talked to people that think that God is talking to them.

So, should the Adam and Eve story to be taken literally? If you believe the first part of this post is true, then yes.

God said, "I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren't ready for anything stronger. And you still aren't ready".

So , don't tell me any Christian knows it all.

Faith, Faith, Faith; that's all we have.

Don't worry man I thought is was all "story" too, and just "faith", that is until God filled me with His Spirit revealing Himself to me and proving to "me" that He is real, Jesus IS His son, the only way we can be reconciled to Him, and that the Bible IS His word. I never cared enough to really think or consider these things before due to me being way too busy with "real life" and paying my bills, raising my kids, cutting my grass, what new video game was coming out soon, whatever this world threw at me like most of us do. Even called myself a Christian due to my limited understanding of what truly makes one a Christian. It's not just a social club with a set of rules to follow, and a set of made up myths we can get comfort and a fuzzy feeling from sometimes, like I had thought. I really liked the "idea" of Jesus but knew Him not. Well now I do KNOW Him and KNOW the creator of the whole universe, and I KNOW His word is truth, and what I have been shown is not based on blind belief at all. Faith as you're making it sound is just as silly as what you're saying and I agree that kind of blind faith isn't good, but disagree that is what a true regenerated, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, born again child of God is at all. I have much more than "just faith", I have Jesus Christ brother, and everyone should try to submit to Him too, for their own good and peace of mind and understanding of His word.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Is the story of Adam and Eve to be taken as truth or a parable?

Truth, absolute and literal. Next question, please.

 

[Tintin]

Now we have Penguins on the Ark. And, Walrus, Dodo Birds, Gila Monsters, Seals, Dinosaurs, black widows, bats, bed bugs, ticks, fleas, Galapagos Turtles, Sloth, thousands of different snakes, Koala Bears, Panda Bears, Hummingbirds, Flamingos, Buzzards (All types) and you name it. Do you think that a Walrus can hop all the way to the Middle East? The Ark had to be in the middle east because that is where the people in the Bible lived. So, yes the Walrus did have to cross deserts and mountain ranges to get to the Ark. They are here today aren't they. I don't think that Noah went over to pick them up. Then after the flood the animals that can only live in freezing weather went back to where they belong.
The Noah and the Ark story is harder to believe than the virgin birth but, it is true.

The mountains were covered over with water, even Mt Everest. Trees survived even after being under water, and that includes cactus, Redwood, and fruit trees.

Everything in the bible has to be believed by faith only. If you stop to analyze the bible you will find yourself digging for reasons and excuses of how it happen which are totally opinion. And, you will find that it is impossible for that story to be true. Nobody can answer these questions.

Sloths barely move and they made it to the Ark? "Well, we have Sloth today; so yes they were on the Ark. Yes, we have bones that prove that Dino's existed , so yes they were on the Ark. We have Chupa Cabras today, so yes they were on the Ark. We have whales today so the flood did not kill them, They were still breathing air up there on the mountain tops.

God said it, so I believe it? Why bother to read the bible? Why bother to bible bash on this web site when we don't have all the answers? The bible is not simple and clear. Different interpretations. We divide amongst ourselves into groups of worship in completely different manners. I was a Mormon, and the reverence to God is comparable to any other church on Earth. I was a Catholic and I find the exact strong reverence to God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit. And, the Jehovah witness; God bless their determination for trying to share what they believe is true with others (right or wrong, they are trying. I don't see very many Christians going door to door in the hot sun to share a message.

But, in the Christian world if are not in the right church you risk Hell. Nobody alive can prove that the bible is for real the word of God. I have talked to people that think that God is talking to them.

So, should the Adam and Eve story to be taken literally? If you believe the first part of this post is true, then yes.

God said, "I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren't ready for anything stronger. And you still aren't ready".

So , don't tell me any Christian knows it all.

Faith, Faith, Faith; that's all we have.

Joel, what makes you think Noah and his family and the ark and animals were located in the Middle-East pre-Flood? We know there was a continental drift sometime in the past. Evolutionists and 'progressive' creationists would put say that event took place 100+ million years ago. But if we go from the Bible, that's not possible. Therefore, the only time the continental drift could have happened, without killing all people and every land-dwelling animal, is during the Great Flood of Noah's time.

As for the animals, God brought them to Noah and this could have been over some time. The Ice Age was a result of the Great Flood. Biblical creationists believe a 200 year period was needed to reach the requirements necessary for an Ice Age. The Ice Age lasted roughly 500 years. Therefore animals had to adapt to those conditions to survive. Those animals that couldn't, would have died off.

Yes, the mountains were covered to 15 cubits, but many mountain ranges we have today are the result of the continental drift. By way of inference, we tie this to the extreme violence of the Great Flood completely restructuring the earth's surface. So, Mount Everest etc. didn't exist prior to the Flood.

You say nobody can answer these questions, but there are answers. Also. Faith isn't worth much if it can't be well-reasoned. The Bible says as well-reasoned faith is very important. Reason by way of revelation, that's the way to go. Working out from the Bible, not bringing in outside ideas and reinterpreting God's Word to match evolutionary ideals.

Much sea-life became extinct during the Great Flood. We know this because many of the fossils we find today are of marine life and most of these are extinct kinds. It's very likely then, that they died during the Flood. The kinds we have today survived and adapted.

Why bother to read the Bible? Are you serious? Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses aren't Christian and the only reason JW's do what they do is because their salvation is believed to be works-based. They do what they do because they don't want to fry! I know people from many different denominations and I've never been called a non-believer for attending a Lutheran/Uniting/Pentecostal etc. church. We just don't say those kinds of things to each other, nor do we believe such things. Unfortunately, online is altogether a different experience. Yes, it's partly a matter of faith, but the Bible really does have so much evidence backing it up. People just choose not to believe the evidence.

Your quote from God is woefully out of context, but anyway. No-one here is saying they know it all, but where we have answers and can infer things, we should believe. Faith is great, but faith informed by reason is even better.