• Welcome to White Horse Forums. We ask that you would please take a moment to introduce yourself in the New Members section. Tell us a bit about yourself and dive in!

The Genealogical Adam and Eve

Waiting on Him said:
I don’t see myself as a bride of Christ. I can’t find any scripture supporting this concept.

In my mind this first century garden also has a tree in the midst, upon which hangs the fruit of the

knowledge of good and evil.

God also caused a deep sleep to fall on him.
Click to expand...

The 'bride of Christ' isn't really a bride at all, but a city-- described in Rev 21 like this>>> "like a bride adorned for her husband" It's an image of that new Jerusalem (city of peace).

And I saw the holy city—the new Jerusalem—descending out of heaven from God, made ready like a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying: “Look! The residence of God is among human beings. He will live among them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them.

This is what I was getting at--

If you understand Jesus to be the groom, then his followers are the stones that build this 'city' --- living stones, upon the foundation laid by his disciples, with Jesus that cornerstone. The city is presented like a bride-- the body, the church, the city of Christ that he awaits. Since you are one of his followers, you are part of this bride reference.
 
Mr E said:
The 'bride of Christ' isn't really a bride at all, but a city-- described in Rev 21 like this>>> "like a bride adorned for her husband" It's an image of that new Jerusalem (city of peace).

And I saw the holy city—the new Jerusalem—descending out of heaven from God, made ready like a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying: “Look! The residence of God is among human beings. He will live among them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them.

This is what I was getting at--

If you understand Jesus to be the groom, then his followers are the stones that build this 'city' --- living stones, upon the foundation laid by his disciples, with Jesus that cornerstone. The city is presented like a bride-- the body, the church, the city of Christ that he awaits. Since you are one of his followers, you are part of this bride reference.
Click to expand...
He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
— John 3:29
He that has the bride is the bridegroom.
 
Waiting on Him said:
He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
— John 3:29
He that has the bride is the bridegroom.
Click to expand...

To be a friend of the Bridegroom is to be the best man, with the best friend. :)
 
The_H_C said:
IMO, many of these concepts involve way too much overthinking.

Occam’s Razor should be applied.
Click to expand...

Right. Why let things like science and research and thinking get in the way of understanding. ;)
 
Mr E said:
I'm okay with any claim. Now go prove it. That's the science part.
Click to expand...
What has science proven? Much of their conclusions are derived from inference, based on natural methodologies. Always natural.

(Actually scientists say they never “prove” anything)
 
The_H_C said:
What has science proven? Much of their conclusions are derived from inference, based on natural methodologies. Always natural.

(Actually scientists say they never “prove” anything)
Click to expand...

Agreed in principle. Science is the art of inquiry. It is the path of skeptics, who question everything. They answer questions by questioning answers.
 
SteVen said:
Oh... I like that.

'
Click to expand...

I have a dear cowboy buddy who throws gold as easy as skipping stones. Whenever I would remark about something clever or wise he had said, complimenting him— he’d always say the same thing.

‘Thanks. My coffee still cost a buck.’

Obviously he wasn’t buying his coffee in California.
 
I am very familiar with the work of Joshua Swamidass. I bought his book when it first came out. His theory is scientifically impeccable in the sense that even secular scientists admit it "works." All of modern humanity, including all of humanity alive at the time of Jesus, could indeed be the genealogical (not genetic) progeny of a single couple created or engineered by God some 20,000 to 6,000 years ago. Swamidass doesn't deal with how the humans existing contemporaneously with or prior to the First Couple fit into God's plan - i.e., were they simply animals, not accountable for sin, etc.? As far as interbreeding, he suggests that if this occurred it would have been part of God's plan and God would have made the genomes virtually identical.

It seems to me mostly a clever thought experiment, a way to mesh Darwinian evolutionary theory with a literal understanding of Genesis. Swamidass' original text was published just about the same time as William Lane Craig's massive tome in which he argues for Darwinian evolution with Adam and Eve evolving to "fully human" status roughly 500,000 years ago. Swamidass' work struck me as far more interesting. I personally have always been intrigued by the explosion in human sophistication and achievement that occurred around the globe roughly 15,000 to 5,000 years ago. The Egyptians went from living in mud huts along the Nile to building the Pyramids in a staggeringly short period of time.

I believe for reasons sufficient to myself that the Genesis account is entirely mythical, an attempt to explain why human nature seems so mysteriously flawed. The notion that we "need" a literal Adam and Eve to account for the fallen state of humanity and the effects of "original sin" is a mostly Augustinian one and, in my opinion, pretty much nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top