WAS THE RIB FLESH?
Genesis 2:21 “And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof: 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (KJ)
Word says in two places that God used “rib” only to create the female. In the Hebrew “rib” is defined as (from “The Strong‘s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible“):
“a rib (as curved), lit. (of the body) or fig. (of a door, i.e. leaf); hence, a side, lit. (of a person) or fig. (of an object or the sky, i.e. quartet); arch. A (espec. Floor or ceiling) timber or plank (single or collect., I.e. a flooring):- beam, board, chamber, corner, leaf, plank, rib, side (chamber).
As a further point of reference, this use of the word “flesh,” is based upon a primary root word meaning “to be fresh, i.e. (rosy (fig.) cheerful); to announce (glad news):- messenger, preach, publish, shew forth, (bear, bring, carry, preach, good, tell good) tidings." The word ”flesh” itself means: "flesh (from it’s freshness), by extension body, person; also (by euphem.) the pudenda of man:-body, (fat, lean) flesh (-ed), kin, (man -) kind, + nakedness, self, skin.”
Within the whole of the Bible the word “rib” is used a total of five (5) times, and “ribs” a total of two (2) times. In each instance the same Hebrew definition as given above applies whether it be “rib“ or “ribs.” With exception of Genesis 2:22, in every other four (4) instances, the word “rib” is used in direct reference to stabbing a person in the rib, hence even the “side” as defined in the Hebrew. Of the two (2) uses of the word “ribs,” one is in Genesis 2:21 and the other is found in Daniel 7:5. In Daniel 7:5 it says:
“And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.”
Here reference made to “ribs” also, I believe, may very well include that of flesh. Yet the issues surrounding the use of “ribs” in Genesis 2:21, and then “rib,” in Genesis 2:22 is a different matter.
In Genesis 2:21-22, the word is symbolically speaking within the realm of Creation, about a specific action taken by God, as completed upon a specific person, and within the life of one man. As such, as a Creative action and though while also symbolic, it is literal.
That is, the word states in Genesis 2:21-22, that God used “rib” alone from the man, yet in Genesis 2:24 we learn that it was the actual desire of God to create the male and the female as “one flesh.” But what did God do with the “flesh” of Adam? In Genesis 2:21 word records that he “closed up the flesh instead thereof.”
The word “instead” indicates that God had a will, a will even confirmed in Genesis 2:24, to use the “flesh” of Adam but did not, he made a choice “instead,” against what was his own highest desire, to reject the use of this man’s flesh by closing “up the flesh instead thereof.” And unless we believe now that God is unable to separate the flesh from the bone, what is twice stated in Genesis 2:21-22 is literally what he used, bone alone (and not the “side” and therefore also the “flesh”). If God proved able to create according to his highest desire for the male and female in his use of an Adam as a man exercising free-will, then word would certainly have recorded it and even to the delight and glory of God. Instead we have word in Genesis 2:24 speaking about what was (is) the highest desire of God in marriage for the male and the female but we know this is not inclusive of an Adam, for reasons already stated, but also because Adam had no parents to leave.
God speaks in this manner about a man leaving his father and his mother in Genesis 2:24 (parents which an Adam had not), because due to the flesh his foreknowledge was compelled to reject, he could not use an Adam along with a freshly created Eve as a model in word of marriage for believers. The only action left that He could take was to speak his desire for marriage purposed for future hearers and readers of his word, in the stark absence of the garden model he actually desired to use in an Adam and a freshly created Eve of “one flesh.” But a garden Adam and Eve were never of one flesh, they only shared a bone which God by the way did not otherwise symbolically purpose for anything between this man and woman as husband and wife.
The "flesh" of an Adam and an Eve, even as proven by the foreknowledge of God, were in fact opposite one from another. This act of God, in refusing the use of an Adam’s flesh (and having already called this man an “Adam,” meaning to be ashamed, mean man of low degree, a hypocrite) only further serves to confirm what was the foreknowledge of God about what and who this man would prove to be in the garden. It was a reality for an Adam not so, according to the foreknowledge and proven actions of God, for a fallen but righteously confessed and honored Eve (an “Eve“ with name meaning “life-giver“ and title won from God as “mother of all living” and that even as a virgin, childless female).
Given what is proven about the mind of God, we also cannot allow Adam to interpret Scripture for us when he in error says in Genesis 2:23: “And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of “Man.” God rejected his flesh.
But how do you interpret this?
*PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THERE ARE THOSE ON THE BPN UNABLE TO DIGEST THE LIGHT OF THE HEBREW AND EVEN FEAR THE VERY DISCUSSION OF IT. LIKE THE GESTAPO, THEY FOLLOW ME FROM PAGE TO PAGE SPEAKING NOT TO THE WORD BUT ONLY IN LAUNCHING CHARACTER ASSAULTS DEVOID OF SOUND WORD ITSELF IN AN EFFORT TO EXTINGUISH AND BY-PASS THE THINKING OF THE INDIVIDUAL MIND BASED UPON THE TRUTH OF WORD AND NOT TRADITION. YET IF THE TRADITIONAL TEACHING REGARDING AN ADAM IS TRUE, THEN WHAT IS THERE TO FEAR? PROVE THE WORD WITHIN THE FULL CONTEXT OF THE WORD AND EVEN IN RIGHT ALIGNMENT OF THE HEBREW. COMMENTS INCLUSIVE OF PERSONAL ASSAULT WILL BE IDENTIFIED AS SUCH AND OTHERWISE IGNORED. I HAVE BEEN ADVISED TO DELETE THEIR COMMENTS BUT HAVE YET TO DETERMINE HOW TO DO SO ON THE EDIT PAGE OF A POST. IF YOU KNOW, PLEASE ADVISE.
If we believe God is Truth and Truth is Word, then why can’t we talk about it? If God is his Truth, then whatever truth we believe we have, if of God, ought to be strong enough to stand up to the test in the absence of finding need to resort to character assault. If what you believe in word cannot be credibly proven in the absence of character assault, then take a second look at what and how you believe. For any part I have ever allowed myself to be dragged into this, again I apologize, yet it has no place.
Word says in two places that God used “rib” only to create the female. In the Hebrew “rib” is defined as (from “The Strong‘s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible“):
“a rib (as curved), lit. (of the body) or fig. (of a door, i.e. leaf); hence, a side, lit. (of a person) or fig. (of an object or the sky, i.e. quartet); arch. A (espec. Floor or ceiling) timber or plank (single or collect., I.e. a flooring):- beam, board, chamber, corner, leaf, plank, rib, side (chamber).
As a further point of reference, this use of the word “flesh,” is based upon a primary root word meaning “to be fresh, i.e. (rosy (fig.) cheerful); to announce (glad news):- messenger, preach, publish, shew forth, (bear, bring, carry, preach, good, tell good) tidings." The word ”flesh” itself means: "flesh (from it’s freshness), by extension body, person; also (by euphem.) the pudenda of man:-body, (fat, lean) flesh (-ed), kin, (man -) kind, + nakedness, self, skin.”
Within the whole of the Bible the word “rib” is used a total of five (5) times, and “ribs” a total of two (2) times. In each instance the same Hebrew definition as given above applies whether it be “rib“ or “ribs.” With exception of Genesis 2:22, in every other four (4) instances, the word “rib” is used in direct reference to stabbing a person in the rib, hence even the “side” as defined in the Hebrew. Of the two (2) uses of the word “ribs,” one is in Genesis 2:21 and the other is found in Daniel 7:5. In Daniel 7:5 it says:
“And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.”
Here reference made to “ribs” also, I believe, may very well include that of flesh. Yet the issues surrounding the use of “ribs” in Genesis 2:21, and then “rib,” in Genesis 2:22 is a different matter.
In Genesis 2:21-22, the word is symbolically speaking within the realm of Creation, about a specific action taken by God, as completed upon a specific person, and within the life of one man. As such, as a Creative action and though while also symbolic, it is literal.
That is, the word states in Genesis 2:21-22, that God used “rib” alone from the man, yet in Genesis 2:24 we learn that it was the actual desire of God to create the male and the female as “one flesh.” But what did God do with the “flesh” of Adam? In Genesis 2:21 word records that he “closed up the flesh instead thereof.”
The word “instead” indicates that God had a will, a will even confirmed in Genesis 2:24, to use the “flesh” of Adam but did not, he made a choice “instead,” against what was his own highest desire, to reject the use of this man’s flesh by closing “up the flesh instead thereof.” And unless we believe now that God is unable to separate the flesh from the bone, what is twice stated in Genesis 2:21-22 is literally what he used, bone alone (and not the “side” and therefore also the “flesh”). If God proved able to create according to his highest desire for the male and female in his use of an Adam as a man exercising free-will, then word would certainly have recorded it and even to the delight and glory of God. Instead we have word in Genesis 2:24 speaking about what was (is) the highest desire of God in marriage for the male and the female but we know this is not inclusive of an Adam, for reasons already stated, but also because Adam had no parents to leave.
God speaks in this manner about a man leaving his father and his mother in Genesis 2:24 (parents which an Adam had not), because due to the flesh his foreknowledge was compelled to reject, he could not use an Adam along with a freshly created Eve as a model in word of marriage for believers. The only action left that He could take was to speak his desire for marriage purposed for future hearers and readers of his word, in the stark absence of the garden model he actually desired to use in an Adam and a freshly created Eve of “one flesh.” But a garden Adam and Eve were never of one flesh, they only shared a bone which God by the way did not otherwise symbolically purpose for anything between this man and woman as husband and wife.
The "flesh" of an Adam and an Eve, even as proven by the foreknowledge of God, were in fact opposite one from another. This act of God, in refusing the use of an Adam’s flesh (and having already called this man an “Adam,” meaning to be ashamed, mean man of low degree, a hypocrite) only further serves to confirm what was the foreknowledge of God about what and who this man would prove to be in the garden. It was a reality for an Adam not so, according to the foreknowledge and proven actions of God, for a fallen but righteously confessed and honored Eve (an “Eve“ with name meaning “life-giver“ and title won from God as “mother of all living” and that even as a virgin, childless female).
Given what is proven about the mind of God, we also cannot allow Adam to interpret Scripture for us when he in error says in Genesis 2:23: “And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of “Man.” God rejected his flesh.
But how do you interpret this?
*PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THERE ARE THOSE ON THE BPN UNABLE TO DIGEST THE LIGHT OF THE HEBREW AND EVEN FEAR THE VERY DISCUSSION OF IT. LIKE THE GESTAPO, THEY FOLLOW ME FROM PAGE TO PAGE SPEAKING NOT TO THE WORD BUT ONLY IN LAUNCHING CHARACTER ASSAULTS DEVOID OF SOUND WORD ITSELF IN AN EFFORT TO EXTINGUISH AND BY-PASS THE THINKING OF THE INDIVIDUAL MIND BASED UPON THE TRUTH OF WORD AND NOT TRADITION. YET IF THE TRADITIONAL TEACHING REGARDING AN ADAM IS TRUE, THEN WHAT IS THERE TO FEAR? PROVE THE WORD WITHIN THE FULL CONTEXT OF THE WORD AND EVEN IN RIGHT ALIGNMENT OF THE HEBREW. COMMENTS INCLUSIVE OF PERSONAL ASSAULT WILL BE IDENTIFIED AS SUCH AND OTHERWISE IGNORED. I HAVE BEEN ADVISED TO DELETE THEIR COMMENTS BUT HAVE YET TO DETERMINE HOW TO DO SO ON THE EDIT PAGE OF A POST. IF YOU KNOW, PLEASE ADVISE.
If we believe God is Truth and Truth is Word, then why can’t we talk about it? If God is his Truth, then whatever truth we believe we have, if of God, ought to be strong enough to stand up to the test in the absence of finding need to resort to character assault. If what you believe in word cannot be credibly proven in the absence of character assault, then take a second look at what and how you believe. For any part I have ever allowed myself to be dragged into this, again I apologize, yet it has no place.
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ms. Elaine Johnson on
-
'All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God'. The discussion as I see it, centers around the differences in the male versus female confession to God.
Yes, the salvation plan is for BOTH as BOTH equally sinned in the garden both just didn't equally repent. That's the discussion as I see it. It seems a given that that has always been the gist of the convo. As it is a given, my questions then proceed into the meat of the convo.
Now, that said, where else can we go with this convo on the 'rib vs. flesh.' I wasn't following what exactly are you saying about 'her flesh' not being of 'his flesh?' -
-
Permalink Reply by newview on
-
Wow!
I think there are a lot of abused and hurt women on the board.
Maybe thats what everybody is speaking from. Not so much the holy scriptures but from a broken heart. -
-
Permalink Reply by Chaplain Pat Harris on
-
If I may speak for both HOPE and myself, we're not here to attack anyone, especially a sister in the Lord. We are here to share our testimonies as led by the Holy Spirit, and to sow/teach the Word of truth with the Love of Christ in our hearts.
-
-
-
If I may speak for both HOPE and myself, we're not here to attack anyone, especially a sister in the Lord. We are here to share our testimonies as led by the Holy Spirit, and to sow/teach the Word of truth with the Love of Christ in our hearts.
Sis,
I am not attacking either. Its just my observation. Nothing more or less.
There is alot of analysis coming form past hurts and hauntings.
And its just not this 'thread/discussion' that I am picking this up.
I think sometimes if a person is hurt they see out of different eyes than people that have not walked in their shoes.
But we have to be careful not to mold the scriptures into what we want them to say than what they do say. -
-
-
Newview, I didn't mean to give the impression that you were launching attacks; I was making a general statement.
And you are so right, we do need to be careful not to mold the scriptures into what we want them to say than what they do say. That was the first lesson I learned in How To Study The Bible. -
-
Permalink Reply by HOPE - Psalm 43:5 on
-
There are more abused and hurt women in ministry than you can imagine.... but of that "more" only a few will admit it, allow God to identify the area of hurt, and heal them of it. And a big part of healing the hurt it also showing us our own sin.
The sin of a woman that has been raped, or abused in any way would be unforgiveness and bitterness. But not many will tell that woman that nor would they expect her to change from her victim mentality. She will only obtain victory if she forgives the rapist and does not embrace the bitterness. She will only be able to do that THRU Jesus... apart from Him we can do nothing.
My testimony is that I thought myself as so righteous, that I did't seek God to unravel the mystery of the wounds in me. I just reacted....
Bill Purvis said that most people have decided how they want to leave and are looking for scriptures to fit their theology.
The body was perfectly designed to produce symptoms whenever something is not functioning correctly in it or there is some parasite invader or a disease brewing....there are also congenital conditions that are present at birth that do not show themselves until puberty activates it.
Some things in us are so deep that it takes the Spirit of God to reveal it either by discerning the symptoms or by a situation or circumstance that will bring that issue to the surface.
What does that look like in the scriptures?
Hebrews 4:12
12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
God's Word will go to the heart of any issue you are dealing with. We can chose to accept or reject it and will have to live with the result of our decision either way we choose. -
-
-
Ah! HOPE, good Word! If I may, I would like to quote you in my bible study sessions that I conduct in the state jail where I minister to the female inmates. No doubt, all of them need this reinforced Word of truth.
God bless you sister. -
-
-
CORRECTION:
Bill Purvis said that most people have decided how they want to LIVE and are looking for scriptures to fit their theology. -
-
-
Honestly, I hadn't heard of the "garden word" theology until here on BPN within the last few weeks. I'm not associated with it other than pointing out some things about what is said about it.
I should have probably kept my two cents in my pocket LOL -
-
-
Yep.
But being wounded or a victim of abuse of any sort is NEVER an acceptable biblical excuse for negative, aggressive, and controlling attitudes.
A lesson I learned AFTER years of crazy relationships (friends, ministry, romantic). It was a progressive lesson ....
And even some things I am currently experiencing have shed light on more and more.
You see Bro. Watson, I've not said that the people I encountered weren't wrong. But what I am saying and will continue to say is that God does not hold YOU responsible for what OTHERS do to you. When you stand praying to Him, the first thing that happens is He checks YOUR heart.
Mark 11:25, Heb 4:12
But when we are so hurt by what others have done to us or what we have witnessed happening to others that we empathize or sympathize with, then we hold on to the offense and Mark 11:25 goes out the window.
"Pain makes us make bad decisions, fear of pain is almost as big a motivator"
Believers can be so easily distracted into waring against the wrong thing...
We can so easily fight the wrong foe....
It is never a good idea to fight evil with evil.
A lot of women will go after men like the crusaders or the Salem witch trials. But it is a finely tuned craft. And others are quiet contenders. You wouldn't know that is what they were doing if you hadn't done it yourself or if you don't have discernment. -
-
-
Bro Watson,
I'm a victim of a gang rape. And you are right, the LAST thing a rape victim wants to hear is that they need to forgive their attackers. My incident happened when I was a child and I didnt deal with it until my 30's. It was at that age that I could even REMEMBER it let alone deal with it. I hid it from my mother and everyone else. I didnt want anyone to know it happened because I thought it was my fault for letting in people I KNEW in our home after school when I knew the house rules were that no one was allowed in the house.
But part of my healing was when I was told that I needed to forgive them.
So, you are right but at some point, any victim will need to not harbor unforgiveness towards their violater. And they may never know that if someone doesn't tell them that liberating and healing biblical truth. -
-
-
It is personal but not private. It is something that I dont mind talking about because their is no pain associated with the memory of it. I've forgiven them and all is well.
But I know other women who have experienced less and yet still walk in unforgiveness masked by much knowledge. Not all women, not even most... but a lot.
all of them are either dead from years of drug addiction or in jail from other crimes they committed later in life. -
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
