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.

Views: 239

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Dawn,

While you are waiting for a reply from Pastor Darby, I would like to remind you of the previous reply from Trevor Greene:

1) Genesis 3:16 is misunderstood. GOD did not punish per say the females because of the fall, rather, HE announced the punishment that the women placed upon themselves for the lust of being wiser and bypassing GOD.

2) People tend to forget or even overlook the fact/truth that when JESUS redeemed us from the curse of the law, the curse mentioned in Genesis 3:16 was ALSO apart of the redemption.


The "Equality" that was lost because of the Fall has been redeemed by JESUS. So, when you give credit to Eve for this redeemed status because of what you say is the result of her so-called confession, you are taking away a portion of the credit and truth of what Jesus did on the Cross. That, my dear, is a serious error one should never make.

Secondly, you have stated more than once to each of us who have replied to this blog and the previous blogs that we are afraid. What on earth gives you the impression that we are afraid? If this was the case, do you think we would sit here and spend countless minutes/hours rebuking the false doctrine that you speak? Please keep in mind, I personally am not attacking you as a person, but I will attack any and all false doctrines and the spirit that is behind them.

I think most of us will agree that your response to our comments has been nothing short of double talk with no substance, no validity, and most assuredly no truth. You tend to answer questions with a question. You have yet to respond directly to our questions with a straight answer such as the ones I have repeated above. So, Ms. Davidson, it appears that you are the one who is afraid; and rightly so since you cannot back up anything you have said with other scriptures to support it. The only reason I have not referred to other scriptures because everyone else has already done so and since you haven't taken heed to any of them thus far (by not addressing any of them specifically), what would be the point of me repeating what has already been stated. So, I chose to respond precept upon precept of which you have not even attempted this approach. Maybe if you can get pass Genesis 3, then maybe we can have some type of productive dialogue. Otherwise, we will continue doing exactly what we've been doing in the beginning . . . . repeating ourselves, over and over and over and over and over again. Aren't you tired of traveling in circles within the Garden? Or, have you decided in your mind to make this your abode?
Sis. Dawn, please embrace what the Lord is doing for you right now and know that you are loved by Him and all of us as well.

I meant you no harm my sister. I really do love you in Christ Jesus. From this point on, please feel assured that I am here for you in confidence should you need a shoulder to cry on, to vent, or to just talk. And whatever is said between us, will stay between us.

May the Lord move in you like never before; renewing your mind in His truth and righteousness while embracing you with His agape love.

With Peace & Harmony,
Pat
Pastor Stephen Darby,

Much love coming right back at you. Thank you for your heart felt affection and compassion in Christ Jesus. However, yes I have faced my issues due to the subjugation of the female, but no, I do not hate men. I just happen to see something in word that you don’t. The question is, what is the true validity of it and that is the very purpose for conversations such as this. It’s that simple as I see it and perhaps you keep returning to this post, although as I can tell it pains you to do so, because there is something here for you. I would never assume to tell you what. There is something you stated in your first post that I greatly appreciated and it was something akin to that we ought not be timid about discussing hard issues honestly.

I don’t know where or how you believe I am manipulatively operating in the dark. My only source is the King James and The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. I think most would agree, I don’t hold back much about what I think, otherwise the process is not even real. I have increased in my own love walk throughout this process, and I have grown also in my trust of God. He got me into this mess and it will be up to him to get me out (you would have to know my full walk to appreciate that, I just need a little humor of my own right now).

What if God is asking us to grow beyond what division according to gender can afford us? For what reason did He choose to allow such a word as the garden word if not purposed to effectively accomplish something according to the actual truth of the word and not the tradition? That is a question I am asking of you.

Ultimately, as the wisdom of Tracy has led me to emphasize a greater connection with, is that the curse has been broken and we have the Good News of the Gospel - we are all free in Christ Jesus. My only caveat is the cessation of the subjugation of the female according to an OT word by the leadership of the Church. We cannot teach freedom in Christ Jesus and subjugate the female at the same time. It breeds hypocrisy and makes God into a liar. So with the same vehement voice you have spoken to me with, make coordinated demand too upon the Church for the full freedom, according to the creation and call of the female. Otherwise as I see it, it all still comes up empty.

Let me too give you this analogy. As an African-American man I hardly doubt that you stand against black empowerment, particularly a black empowerment movement winning your equality as a person in this country, the right to vote, access to fair housing and equal public education. There are however those in the black empowerment movement who, based upon past wrong, prove sheer hatred of white people. Now are we too, as I am in that number as well, guilty of spewing or harboring such hatred and venom because we also thought it was a good idea to be free and have equal rights in America?

I am not a feminist, but if you think I am going to speak against the full equality of the female think again. Do I agree with the philosophy of women who hate men and who would rather completely marginalize their existence rendering it to naught? Absolutely not, that is completely ridiculous. You are making assumptions about me based upon whatever have been your experiences with other people, but never me. I have forgiven it, but it bothered me deeply when you called me a heretic, but what I don’t understand is your need to control my thinking. All we are working to do here is to prove whatever is the interpretation of word that we believe and receive as truth. But as I said before, if we can get to the point where we can stop subjugating the female, even teaching it, all of these issues, and particularly those issues surrounding the truth of an Adam, go away. We will be back to where and how God created us to be, equal.

What I am actually saying too, is that while I appreciate the apology, I do not want your apologies, what I want is for that weapon still aimed and fired at me from the misinterpretation of the garden word to bow down to what we know are the greater truths.

Peace and love and thanks for coming back to the post. (By the way, I didn’t even consider any misspellings, I felt your heart).

*Signing off. I have been preparing other answers to post to various other people but I am done. I clearly see there is no point to this. I harbor no ill will against anyone. God bless you.
Tracy,

It would help if you gave me a direct quote, and yes I have positioned the word against an Adam who has himself been exalted by the male leadership of the Church based upon what I believe is false interpretation. With all due respect, why is the female expected to take so much and yet the minute the male whimpers, even when based upon the actual word of God and not the tradition, the world stop? If you have it in you to subjugate a female based upon a word that you don't even understand, then you should yourself be prepared for what you might very well have coming back at you but this time, even as it really is in word. I have never said that Eve was better than an Adam as a person, but only that within the garden she did better according to her actions before God. The word proves that in her name and in her title (or whatever it is) as "mother of all living." I didn't write this stuff.

Having said that, I greatly respect your opinion and the fact that you disagree, but please don't think that this is about any hatred of men. I don't speak about men, I speak about an Adam who fell and did not prove a willingness to get back up again in the garden.

God bless you.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service