Cindy K

Don said: There is a lot that is taught and if something is not taught that we wish were taught, then God is telling us we do not need that for our faith, instead, look at what is taught.

Ah, here is wisdom. It is so difficult to think apart from that which we were taught or how we first conceived of something.

Gen 1 and a good part of Gen 2 says “man” multiple times, but we know not if it means man as male or man as species. So we do add that to the text, probably interpreting gender because the distinction is soon made when female is introduced. Ah, so much to ponder.

The bottom line is that we don’t know any more than what we’re told, and we have a limited number of possibilities of what could have possibly happened based upon what we are clearly told. The creation order is problematic for evolution, because some creatures were made before their food would have been created, so they would have either have been divinely sustained if there was a long earth day versus 24 hours. I had not considered this morning also that ex nihilo could have been complete on day six with Eve created later as made from something as opposed to nothing. No?

I just (personally) do not agree that right about calling a particular group of JudeoChristian beliefs as pagan (that Adam was a “they” of male and female and then the flesh drawn out of him with an aspect of him that would have been notably Eve’s essence, equal in flesh and any other metaphysical property that was expressly Eve or just a portion of Adam). As I understand it, God would have to be greater than both male and female, so it would not necessarily be evil to say that viewing Adam this way (pre-split) necessarily violates God’s nature or other Scriptures. In what terms was Adam made in God’s image, exactly, and is this reflected in a gender expression? I guess that’s the real issue. (Maybe not?) And I could be entirely wrong.

Ken Copeland has another teaching that because God stretched out the heavens with the span of his hand, Copeland calculates that God, in the form of Jesus, was a certain height and would have been a certain stature. (Isaiah says God is 6’4″ or something like that.) It makes for interesting academic speculation and muse, but not doctrine as Copeland teaches it. And we get ourselves headed into error.

I don’t know. We hit a point where the poetic nature of the language gives us over to speculation. Hhmmm.