Re: Vatican

From: <RFaussette@aol.com>
Date: Thu Nov 10 2005 - 20:09:04 EST

In a message dated 11/10/2005 6:38:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
panterragroup@mindspring.com writes:
Adam's does not realize anything and that error invalidates your argument.
Here is the relevant text.

"The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to till it and
care for it. He told the man,"You may eat from every tree in the garden, but
not from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for on the day that you eat
from it you will certainly die." Then the Lord God said, "It is not good for
the man to be alone."

The sequence here is God's doing, not Adam's and it supports my argument that
Adam (before Eve is created) was told not to eat of the tree of the knowledge
of good and evil and he did not. God then presents the animals to Adam and he
names the animals God brings him and when God realizes there is no
helper/mate for Adam, only then is Eve created, and only then is there a fall.
It is precisely the same in The New English Bible and in the Twenty Four
Books of the Scriptures translated by Isaac Leeser Hebrew Publishing Company of
New York. Even if Adam is happy to have Eve it is not because he realized
anything. In both of these translations it is God who wants a helper/mate for Adam.
It is God who presents the animals for Adam to name but among them he does
not find a helper/mate suitable for Adam. God initiates everything. There is no
indication in the text that Adam's desire had anything to do with this
sequence notwithstanding his exclamation happa'am.
I did a search on happa'am. The link is below and a snip from the text is
below that.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=427
In the final analysis, context determines the appropriate interpretation.
Grammatical and contextual considerations indicate that Adam simply was reacting
to the humanity of Eve, in contradistinction to the animals. The definite
article (ha), especially when prefixed to time words (e.g., pa‘am), carries a
demonstrative force (Seow, 1987, p. 35). Accordingly, Adam simply specified that “
this time” (happa‘am), unlike the other times when he observed mere animal
nature, he was confronted with his human female counterpart.

rich faussette
I am not Jewish, so I found it to be a very Novel approach.

Yes, but you don't have to be Jewish to see that the text syncs with Jewish
theology and the Ng Hammadi texts and enriches our understanding of Jesus as
the messiah and most particularly, the New Adam.

rich faussette
Received on Thu Nov 10 20:10:55 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 10 2005 - 20:10:55 EST