It is NOT good for man to live alone.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
25,909
7,081
113
#21
And it was NOT Jesus who said that it was not good to marry. He would have been contradicting Himself had He said that.

That was what the disciples said when they discovered that divorce was strictly limited (rather than the way it was being abused by the Pharisees and others).
he did say it was what the disciples thought -

Then in Matthew 19:11 the disciples seem to believe that Jesus is teaching them: "It is better not to marry".
it was what they took the implication of Jesus' words to them to be. doesn't mean they were right. Jesus replied that for the one who could accept remaining unmarried, it is good for them to receive it, but that it isn't so for everyone ((vv. 11-12)).
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
25,909
7,081
113
#22
Have you ever heard of humans being tested? That tree was not simply a tree of knowledge. It was the tree of the knowledge and good and evil. And it was there to test the first pair of humans. As we know they failed miserably.

The opposite scenario would have been for Adam to quickly erect a high fence around that tree and post a warning sign saying VERBOTEN (or the Hebrew equivalent). It is really quite puzzling how the first man was so careless and lackadaisical. Especially when he had every reason to be the sharpest man who ever lived, as well as the most obedient.
Adam was incredibly wise and was undeceived throughout what we know of him.
i am not so sure that his best course of action would have been to construct a defensive barrier implicating his wife as an untrustworthy, feral beast & God as a dangerously careless Creator.

you suggest Adam was stupid not to do this - that he obviously should have known, so he must have been uncaring, lazy & foolish.
what do you suppose was the evidence he was oblivious to, that plainly should have told Him God's word wasn't enough, & that the wife He had made for him had a wicked, unruly & disobedient nature? why should Adam have believed that God had ineptly made things & created situations which were not good? that Adam should step in and correct His creator's mistakes?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
25,909
7,081
113
#23
Adam should have been her constant companion.
should Adam not have ever trusted her to be alone, without his supervision?

what is it you imagine should have been obvious to Adam about her that he ought not let her out of his sight?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
25,909
7,081
113
#24
Is this the same as the freedom of choice? That God tests us to see if we will make the right choice? According to Rabbi Friedman there is something else going on here: "If you see what needs to be repaired and how to repair it, then we have found a piece of the world that G-d has left for you to complete. But if you only see what is ugly in the world, then it is you yourself that needs repair." If we are co heirs with Christ are we also co creators with God? Does HE leave things for us to do? First we fix ourselves and then we fix a small part of the world (cosmos) that we find ourselves a part of.
Jews so often have such an interesting perspective. :)

God took Adam and placed him in the garden to tend it. it's a natural inference that God created the garden in need of tending - that the man is an integral, symbiotic part of the creation of Eden, for he also was to eat of its fruit. it is good that the garden have a living soul in it.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
25,909
7,081
113
#25
How can one be alone if God is present everywhere at the same time? A man without truth is the most miserable of all so wouldn't it be better to be alone than with someone who believes in an omnipresent God wouldn't you say?
so when God says that it isn't good for Adam to be alone, that He will make a help for him, is God saying that Adam is out of His presence? is that what is meant by alone here? what is meant by 'alone' here?
 

Aerials1978

Well-known member
Dec 10, 2019
850
442
63
#26
Not exactly. Creation came under a curse. See Romans 8.
To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat from it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.
Genesis 3:17
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
2,551
642
113
#27
maybe they did, before they ate of the second tree. what we know is that they didn't afterwards.
Based on The Lord's statement in Genesis 3:22, it sounds very much like they had never eaten the tree of life.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
25,909
7,081
113
#28
Based on The Lord's statement in Genesis 3:22, it sounds very much like they had never eaten the tree of life.

it says "
now" lest he also eat of the tree of life. to me that doesn't preclude that he didn't eat before - it places emphasis on time.


we know he wasn't barred from it before he ate of the second tree, but only afterwards. so something is significant about eating of the tree of life after eating of the tree that brings death - of eating from the tree of life while 'now' in a poisoned state.

nothing about that tells me he did not eat from it before being poisoned. it tells me something would happen if a person dead in sin ate from the tree of life which is God's will to prevent: a fate He saves Adam & Eve from the possibility of falling into.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
2,551
642
113
#29
it says "now" lest he also eat of the tree of life. to me that doesn't preclude that he didn't eat before - it places emphasis on time.

we know he wasn't barred from it before he ate of the second tree, but only afterwards. so something is significant about eating of the tree of life after eating of the tree that brings death - of eating from the tree of life while 'now' in a poisoned state.

nothing about that tells me he did not eat from it before being poisoned. it tells me something would happen if a person dead in sin ate from the tree of life which is God's will to prevent: a fate He saves Adam & Eve from the possibility of falling into.
Well we see it differently.
 

JohnR7

Active member
Dec 30, 2019
434
103
43
#31
he also was to eat of its fruit.
When people eat the fruit then they spit out the seed. It sprouts, takes root and grows so they have more food to eat. If they did not eat the fruit then the seed would rot with the fruit and there would be no new tree.
 

JohnR7

Active member
Dec 30, 2019
434
103
43
#32
The opposite scenario would have been for Adam to quickly erect a high fence around that tree and post a warning sign saying VERBOTEN (or the Hebrew equivalent).
The Hebrew letter for fense is Chet made up of a Vov and a Zion. This is the last letter of the first word in the Bible: Beginning. Chet is the first letter in the word Hoopa: the wedding canopy. The first word to use the letter Chet in the Bible is the word: formless.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
2,551
642
113
#33
how do you see why God didn't want it to occur that they eat of the tree of life?
I'm talking about before the fall.
I just don't think they did. The text doesn't say they ever ate from the tree of life. God said the tree of life would make them live forever. They didn't live forever. They went for the knowledge of good & evil instead. After that - it was too late to have the tree of life without irrevocable eternal consequences so he cut them off from it for their own good.

I'm not arguing that I KNOW this as fact or that your thoughts are wrong. It's just how I read it.
 

JohnR7

Active member
Dec 30, 2019
434
103
43
#34
They went for the knowledge of good & evil instead.
Usually the word "EVIL" is made up of two letters in the Hebrew one represents a DOOR and the other letter represents the EYES. We can see this in the letter Y where we have two eyes connected to one optical nerve. The idea of a door is we can control what goes in and out of that door. That would suggest that we can control what we see with our eyes. We are told that "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye" (Genesis 6). Usually beauty is pleasing to our eye. This maybe a good time to talk about: the & between the good and evil in English. In the Hebrew this is the letter Vav. The VAV can connect the VAV can divide & the VAV can reverse the tense of a word. The VAV can reverse time from past to future or future to past. As we learn from Science that time is relative. We have a lot to work with if we study the Hebrew letters and their meaning.

Again here we are looking at the &. We have husband & wife, man & women, good & evil. In the beginning we have Heaven & Earth. The question of this post is: Why is it not good for man to be alone? Why does the man need a women? We are told the answer is so simple a child can understand. So we should have learned this in kindergarten. Yet the PhD people do not seem to be able to understand. Yet there is nothing new about that. There are lots of PhD people that do not have a Kindergarten understanding of the Bible. If you were to test them for a third grade level of understanding of the Bible they would most likely flunk the test and not be qualified for that class until they test out of the class before it.
 

Adstar

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2016
5,651
2,334
113
#35
I didn't say they didn't have access. I said THE OPPOSITE.
You said::
I always wonder why they didn't eat from the tree of life which was also in the garden.
They were stopped from having it after the fall but why didn't they want it before that?
I could only conclude from the quote above that you believed Adam and eve never ate from the tree of life..

No where in the Bible does it say that Adam and Eve did not eat from the tree of life..
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
2,429
2,014
113
#36
As Dorothy might say; "I have a feeling we aren't in the Garden of Eden any more."
 

Adstar

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2016
5,651
2,334
113
#37
Based on The Lord's statement in Genesis 3:22, it sounds very much like they had never eaten the tree of life.
Genesis 3: KJV
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:"

This statement can be interpreted as God stopping them from having access to the tree of life so that they would die.. This verse must be interpreted to conform it to another verse in which God declared to Adam and Eve that they could eat from any tree in the garden except one.. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil..

Genesis 2: KJV

16 "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: {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."
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
2,429
2,014
113
#38
No man or woman needs to be alone anymore.

John 14
14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
14:17 [Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
2,551
642
113
#39
You said::


I could only conclude from the quote above that you believed Adam and eve never ate from the tree of life..

No where in the Bible does it say that Adam and Eve did not eat from the tree of life..


Nowhere does it say they DID eat from it either. It isn't unreasonable to get the impression that they failed to take from the tree of life whilst it was available to them. It's just a minor observation. Something I noticed a long time ago in the text which you have probably never considered. Move on and get over it. You're making an issue out of a minor thing.

I suggested they CHOSE not to eat it while they had access to it. I didn't state they didn't have access to it.
It can be very difficult to have a simple conversation with some people. :geek:
 

Adstar

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2016
5,651
2,334
113
#40
Nowhere does it say they DID eat from it either. It isn't unreasonable to get the impression that they failed to take from the tree of life whilst it was available to them. It's just a minor observation. Something I noticed a long time ago in the text which you have probably never considered. Move on and get over it. You're making an issue out of a minor thing.

I suggested they CHOSE not to eat it while they had access to it. I didn't state they didn't have access to it.
It can be very difficult to have a simple conversation with some people. :geek:
Why would you come to such a conclusion when God had given them the right to eat freely of the tree of Life?? If there is no scripture saying that they did not eat from the tree of life and scripture states that God gave them access to eat of the tree of life.. Then the balance of scripture is in support that they had access to and ate from the tree of life before they where finally cast out and lost access to the tree of life....