4321lynx

Can you direct me to a How many Angels On a Pin thread? Seems as valid to me.

Mageth

If you have nothing relevant to contribute in a BC&H thread, in a forum (BC&H) with the stated intent of discussing Biblical topics, no mater how "invalid" they may seem to you, don't bother contributing. If you're not interested in the topic, don't bother reading it. If you're not interested in Biblical Criticism and History discussions, don't come to this forum!

Sheesh.

Gamera

Well you asked for God's "intent," which I take to mean the intent as implied by the narrative to the character depicted therein as God.

That character specially created Adam and Eve, according to the narrative. So whether there were "other people" on earth at the time is moot; in the narrative these are the people God wants to go forth and multiply. So not surprisingly, that's what he tells them.

Did God in the narrative intend for them to continue going forth and multiplying. There is no evidence of that. He told them, not subsequent characters. So it is perfectly relevant to discuss the parameters of the declamation.

So to answer your question, there is nothing in the narrative to suggest that God wanted the descendants of Adam and Eve to continue to go forth and multiple. The narrative only suggests that he wanted them to multiply. Nowhere is this proclamation applied to all mankind for all time.

Laurentius

Well, Mageth is right about the lack of rigor in my intervention.

All right. Let's analyze this.

Suppose the Bible names the same god differently.
First he urges Adam and Eve to fill the world with people.
Next he places them in the garden.

Since Adam and Eve were supposed to live in the garden, is it possible that their job was to commute to Earth and fill it with offspring?

gstafleu

I'm not sure how useful it is to assign an intent to god here. The creation myth as presented in Genesis is a fairly standard one where, with divine help, a proto-human is split into male and female parts. The bit about the tree, where they will "surely die" if they eat its fruit, represents an also pretty standard idea that sex and death are reciprocal: no death without having sex first, and sex (reproduction) without death doesn't work either: all (animal) life has to consume other (animal or plant) life in order to live. These themes were just copied whole hog into the bible, so it is not necessary to postulate any godly intent: all that is being done is explain the origin and cycle of life.

Gerard Stafleu

Gamera

Given the state of the manuscripts from classic culture, its quite possible, indeed likely the pagan texts borrow from Genesis rather than the other way round, and that you are retrojecting themes from Judaism into nonHebraic cultures. There is very little by way of pagan texts that haven't passed through the hands of Christian redacteurs, or in some other way fell under the influence of biblical narratives.

Mageth

What?

There are creation myths from India, Asia, Australia, and the Americas that are quite independent of the biblical creation myth. Similar themes of division (of dark and light, land and water, male and female, etc.) are found therein. The splitting of the world into opposites was quite apparent to all cultures. As are similar themes of "sex and death". (I'd just refer to this as the "death and rebirth" theme - a classic case is the moon, which dies and is reborn every month, and which is used as an archetype of the death/rebirth cycle that was quite apparent to all cultures.

Those core themes do not owe their origin to the Bible or to Judaism; they are themes that humans have observed, thought on, and invented myths to explain since the birth of observation and mythmaking.

gstafleu

Quite right Mageth. Plus I'm pretty sure, though I don't have any examples ready, that we find representations of these myths on things like seals and pottery, statues etc. These are a bit harder to retro-Christianize than texts.

Gerard Stafleu