Eve – La Vista Church of Christ

Were Adam and Eve saved?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 15 Apr 2023 15:54:49 +0000

Question:

Were Adam and Eve saved and or will they go to heaven on judgment day?

Answer:

Judgment belongs to God. "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad" (II Corinthians 5:10). Therefore, the decision is not yours or mine to make. We can only go by what God said. In this case, God doesn't tell us or give us a clue. I've seen people argue one way or the other, but each just comes down to guesswork.

Response:

Thanks for responding. I agree a hundred percent. I didn’t find any evidence in the Scripture indicating one way or the other, and I myself didn’t want to simply guess or try and explain what was not written. Thanks again.

Did eating from the forbidden tree give Adam and Eve intelligence?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 16 Oct 2021 02:31:25 +0000

Question:

After Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree, they realized they were naked. Is it not that some kind of intelligence that was revealed in their mind? I am saying this because chimpanzees and other animals move around nude without realizing they are naked.

Answer:

Intelligence was already shown in the complexity of the commands given to Adam and Eve.

"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die" (Genesis 2:16-17).

Rules like this would not make sense to an animal.

We can also see intelligence in Adam's speech. He named the animals (Genesis 2:20). And when Eve was presented to him, "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" (Genesis 2:23). Animals don't create poetry.

So what eating the fruit did to the man was more than just give him intelligence. In fact, if he had truly lacked intelligence, Adam and Eve could not be held responsible for their actions. It is because they knew God's law and broke it that they were held accountable.

How did Adam find Eve?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Thu, 03 Oct 2019 22:00:45 +0000

Question:

I hope you can answer these for me:

When Adam worked in the Garden, did he have to work and show he was worthy Eve for God to present her to him?
I understand the help meet part, but did God make Adam for Eve or Eve for Adam?
I know it was a marriage sermon God did. The Bible says a man who finds a wife finds a good thing. I didn't read where Adam had to go look for her.

Answer:

Adam did have to work (Genesis 2:15), but it was not for the purpose of earning Eve. It was his job to tend the garden. God created Eve because God noted that it wasn't good for man to be alone (Genesis 2:18). The naming of the animals that followed was to prove to Adam that he needed someone equivalent to him (Genesis 2:20).

Adam existed first and Eve was created for him.

You referred to "He who finds a wife finds a good thing, and obtains favor from the LORD" (Proverbs 18:22). The "find" is a general term. Adam found Eve when he awoke from his sleep (Genesis 2:22). Even though Eve was made to specifically be a companion for Adam, he still found in Eve a gift from God.

Response:

Thank you!

Was Cain conceived by Satan?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 00:48:00 +0000

Question:

[Since the author believes himself wise, I left the original note unedited.]

Who ever said that Cain is Adams' son and not the devil or Satan the Dragon or what ever name you want to use is out of there mind Very simply first check the Hebrew manuscripts and you'll find that Eve had twins one was Adam son. Who was able the other was Cain and further proof check Cains' genealogy you'll find Adam is not there why because he's not Cain's father

Answer:

"Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, "I have acquired a man from the LORD." Then she bore again, this time his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground" (Genesis 4:1-2). Notice the order: Adam had sex with his wife, as a result, she became pregnant and the son born as a result was named "Cain" because the couple realized that Cain was a gift to them from God. The New King James Version closely reflects the Hebrew in this verse. Every translation says basically the same thing, so I won't bother spelling out the Hebrew for you.

It is true that some assume that Abel was a twin to Cain because there was no mention of a second round of sex and conception, but you have to realize that this is an assumption and not a necessary inference.

While it is possible for a woman to conceive fraternal twins by two different men, the Bible is quite clear that Cain's father was Adam. Nowhere in the Bible is there any indication that Satan ever has sexual relations with any human.

Did God tell Eve not to touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:43:00 +0000

Question:

I have always loved your website, but I read an article that says that God never told Eve she was not to touch the tree of knowledge, but according to Genesis 3 that's not so.

Answer:

What God said:

"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die" (Genesis 2:16-17).

What Eve said to the serpent:

"And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die'" (Genesis 3:2-3).

What Eve remembered regarding what God said and what He actually said are different -- not a great deal different, but different enough to allow Satan to introduce doubt. When she touched the fruit and nothing happened, she would be emboldened to actually eat the fruit.

"And He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?"" (Genesis 3:11).

The only one who said not to touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is Eve. God never told them not to touch the fruit.

Was Eve formed from Adam’s rib or Adam’s side?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 05 Apr 2014 02:23:00 +0000

Question:

Was the word "rib" the correct translation in Genesis chapter 2? The NIV gives in their footnotes that it is a rib or he took a part from Adam's side. So which is right?

Answer:

The Hebrew word tsela, can mean a rib, or a part of the side. How you translate it doesn't matter. It is clear that it included both flesh and bone because 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" (Genesis 2:23).

Were Adam and Eve married?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Wed, 02 Apr 2014 23:54:00 +0000

Question:

Hello!

This might be a dumb question but someone brought it up today at school and it was a little confusing. If premarital sex is a sin, Adam and Eve weren't married, and they had sex. So is that why we are all born in sin?

Answer:

Actually, it is a very good question.

When discussing the duration of a marriage, Jesus quoted what happened when God created Adam and Eve. "And He answered and said to them, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' "and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? "So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate" (Matthew 19:4-6). Therefore, Jesus is saying that Adam and Eve were married. Notice in Genesis 2:24, which Jesus quoted, that there are three steps:

People leave their parents.
People are joined to their spouse -- in other words, married.
People begin the process of being one flesh -- they become a new family unit; of course, sex is one aspect of this.

Sex isn't directly mentioned until after the fall of man in Genesis 3. In Genesis 4:1, we read, "Now Adam knew Eve, his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, "I have acquired a man from the LORD." "

The concept that people are born in sin is a popular myth, one not found in the Scriptures. See:

Did God create other people besides Adam and Eve?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Wed, 11 Dec 2013 03:43:00 +0000

Question:

Mr. Hamilton,

I have a question: Were there any other people on Earth at the time of Cain and Abel or at the time of Adam and Eve were created? Because the Bible says Adam and Eve were the first two humans created. However, in Genesis, after Cain killed Abel, he was afraid of other people finding him, and God gave him a mark which admit that there were other people besides the four (Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel). Also, Cain went to the land of Nod and married a woman out of nowhere.

My cousin was arguing that God also created other people besides Adam and Eve. But I explained that the Bible specifically states that God only created Adam and Eve as the first two humans. Cain probably married his sister or niece or grandniece since the Bible doesn't specify his age and where his wife came from. Cain was afraid of his other brothers and sisters. So even though only Cain and Abel were mentioned at the time, there were also other brothers and sisters of them descended from Adam and Eve because they both lived really long and had numerous children, although the Bible mostly only mentioned the men and their sons.

Answer:

"And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters" (Genesis 5:3-4). Seth was born after Abel was killed (Genesis 4:25).

We don't know exactly how long it was before Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel. Let's assume that Cain was born the first year after Creation, then 128 years have gone by when Cain killed Abel. We don't know how many children Adam and Eve had or how far apart they were. And in 128 years those children could have married and had children themselves.

You are correct that Cain's wife would have been one of his sisters or one of his nieces. That was allowed at the beginning because there were no genetic defects then. After the flood, it was unusual to marry close siblings, which is why Pharaoh was surprised that Abram married his half-sister, Sara (Genesis 12:18-19). By the time of Moses, marrying close siblings was forbidden (Leviticus 18:6-18). Today, marrying even cousins is frowned on.

Did Adam and Eve have six fingers?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 02:42:00 +0000

Question:

In my genetics class today, my instructor said that the dominant gene for the number of fingers on a human is six, meaning five fingers is a recessive gene. This startled me because does that mean Adam and Eve had six fingers, and if that was dominant, then wouldn't everyone have six fingers? I'm sort of freaking out. I know it's so small in comparison to all the proof for Christianity, but I just don't like having that doubt. If the majority of people on earth have 5 fingers, how is the dominant number 6? In order for this to make sense wouldn't Adam and Eve had to have had 5 fingers? Is that possible if the dominant number is 6? I think I said that really confusingly but then again I'm terrible at genetics but this stuck to my head. Thanks once again, sorry if it's confusing. Oh and we are getting into evolution next, anything I should know before I get there?

Answer:

Everyone has two copies of each gene. A dominant gene means that it overrides the other gene when it is present. Since the vast majority of the world has five fingers, and if five fingers is a recessive gene, then that means Adam and Eve had two copies of the five fingers gene. Six fingers then is a mutation of the sort that it takes only one to make the characteristic show up. Dominant, however, doesn't mean that the gene is prevalent in society.

This particular mutation has been around for a while. "Yet again there was war at Gath, where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was born to the giant" (II Samuel 21:20).

In evolution, take note of how little actual proof there is for evolution. The case is built on assertions without many facts. Also take note that evolution, though only a theory, is often presented as a fact; yet if evolution were actually true, a number of scientific laws would have to be false. A "law" in science means there is no evidence, proof, or likely counter in the future that the law is false. For example, evolution claims increasing complexity. Thermodynamics has a law of increasing entropy (chaos). Both cannot be true. See the articles on evolution for more things to think about.

You can’t claim that men can eat meat because Adam and Eve did not exist!

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:38:00 +0000

Question:

I am not going to spend the time on pointing out the contradictions and major flaws in your 'bible-based' theories about why animals may be hunted,slaughtered and consumed at our peril, for the entire article and your reasoning is so deraged that it would probably be a waste of time.

Just for the record: Adam and Eve did not excist.It is a fable therefore God most certainly did not dress them in animal skins! If you accept Adam and Eve as real then you reject the Darwin theories about evolution I suppose.Only recently the Church of England apologised for rejecting these theories all these years! They had NO option for the evidence of evolution is just too overwhelming and made them look like fools rejecting it.

Accepting,like the Christian churches have,that man is an evolved animal ,then ,based on your arguments, humans are free for the taking aswell: to be murdered,consumed and skins used as clothing !

The only message that can be derived from your rediculous arguments is that you have no knowledge how man and other species have developed and are still developing.Evolution is a constant.

Did you know that the chimpanzees DNA is almost identical to that of human animals...96% the same as humans. You would argue it is fine to kill these beings for God gave you permission.

Your article is ill informed,irresponsible and promotes the murder of innocent souls.

If there is a God of love,he most certainly would not support you! Love is not selective.

PS: ACCORDING TO YOUR BIBLE,ADAM AND EVE COVERED THEMSELVES WITH LEAVES...NOT ANIMAL SKINS!!!

Answer:

Note: I left this note unedited.

An assertion is mere emptiness without evidence. Since you didn't back up your assertions, you made no point.

Evolution is an unproven theory that has been losing ground over the years. See: Science's Rejection of Evolution and The Evolutionist's Creation Story, Inspired by Naturalism. That a dying religion is trying to be accepted by the secular world wants to accept evolution does not mean evolution is true, it only means another group has been duped into believing a lie.

You are correct. Accepting the Bible as truth, including the account of Adam and Eve does mean a rejection of Evolution. You assert that it is a myth, but again offer no evidence that your assertion is true.

You do show repeatedly that you do not know what the Bible says. Acceptance of animals as food does not lead to acceptance of men as food because the Scriptures teach that man is not an animal. "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man's brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man" (Genesis 9:3-6).

The DNA argument between men and chimpanzees was disproven quite a while ago. There are people who claim that having similar chromosomes makes two creatures closely related to each other. But that is assuming that one thing evolves from another -- an assumption that has never been proven. Yet, what if two creatures came from the same designer, would you not expect things with similar functions to contain similar genetic codes? Here are some articles to consider:

Since you do not accept the Scriptures, your argument that using animals for food is a murder of innocent souls holds no water. You can't prove that animals have souls. You don't believe in souls. You don't believe in a prohibition against murder, since that comes from God's laws. And your argument condemns all the meat-eating animals in nature. Why do you attempt to impose a rule on men that you refuse to impose on all other animals if men are nothing more than animals as you wish to claim?

Finally, you reject the concept of God by wanting to claim that God supports your line of reasoning. You can't have it both ways.

Oh, and "The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them" (Genesis 3:21).