YHWH "walking" in Eden

Post by **_Ely** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:58 am

Sean wrote:
Ely wrote: Sean, I didn't understand what you said. Are you saying you take these passages literally or not?
I don't see it being about taking it literally or figuratively. I see it being about God appearing in a human form (like in the garden) when He wants to. He did this when He wrestled with Jacob and when He spoke with Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

So, do understand that this is what is being described in Deuteronomy 23:9-14?

Post by **_Sean** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:35 pm

Ely wrote: So, do understand that this is what is being described in Deuteronomy 23:9-14?

I would say that it could be one of a few possibilities:
-God could have taken bodily form and walked among them (As He did with Abraham)
-God could be watching what they are doing while not in a physical form.
-God dwells with his people, no matter where they are (Acts 7) so that if one of his people were defiled or would defile the camp, this would reflect on God's character, especially as viewed by other nations. Idol worship was mentioned as being like adultery. Paul mentions that a Christian becoming one with a harlot (1 Cor 6:15) is like joining Christ to that harlot. So this could actually be in reference to the people themselves, having God with them.

I don't know that it could be narrowed to any one in particular. I guess I'm not sure why you are asking. If God wasn't physically walking in the camp (Deuteronomy 23:9-14) does that mean He couldn't take physical form in the garden? I don't see that following logically, just because the language is similar when we read of places where God did take physical form.

Sean wrote:He did this when He wrestled with Jacob and when He spoke with Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

djeaton wrote:Were those Theophanies or Christophanies?
D.

Which one is God?

Post by **_Ely** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 2:52 am

Sean, do you see a similar range of possible meanings in the Eden account?

Post by **_Sean** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:24 am

Ely wrote:Sean, do you see a similar range of possible meanings in the Eden account?

Would it matter if I did?

I mean, since you are basically saying that it might be possible that God didn't physically walk in the garden but can't prove it, what difference does it make? I guess what I'm asking is, what are you getting at?

Post by **_Ely** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 8:22 am

Sean, I'm not really getting at anything sir! I'm just wandering you guys (those who believe that God literally took on physical form) dilineate between the different texts in question. What elements in a text lead you to conclude a literal theophany is certainly being described?

Post by **_djeaton** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:34 am

Ely wrote:Sean, I'm not really getting at anything sir! I'm just wandering you guys (those who believe that God literally took on physical form) dilineate between the different texts in question. What elements in a text lead you to conclude a literal theophany is certainly being described?

I don't know if I am one of "you guys", but I have no problem in seeing the text as either literal or anthropomorphic in either case. I believe it is more likely literal in Genesis because we have indications that God planted a garden, formed animals and man from the dirt, took a rib from Adam, and so forth that more likely indicate a physical presence doing physical things. I believe that in Deut. that God was "literally" there, just like He was in the burning bush, whether he was "literally" walking or that is figurative speech is something that I cannot tell from the text. If He *was* physically walking around the camp in physical form, I believe it was a Christophany as opposed to the Father taking on physical form. I believe that is probably the case in other Old Testament Theophanies as well.
D.