Re: [asa] E.O. Wilson "Baptist No More"

As I was growing up, I heard and understood "the Garden of Eden" to be a
garden named Eden. However, I have since also encountered the notion of
"the Garden of Eden" being a garden that is only a part of a larger
Eden. In that sensibility, it is easier to understand the Edenic story
as making reference to Eden as the residence of God, and the garden
portion of it being a setting for illustrating how free will puts man at
odds with a perfect garden plan.

I am sort of amazed at how long I managed to miss the possible
alternative implication of "of"! Any observations from the Biblical
scholars on this?

JimA [Friend of ASA]

David Opderbeck wrote:

> Merv said: Or, rather, if there is a hint of mockery or critical
> self-questioning, it is directed at our modern way regarding truth.
> The cherub with the flaming sword, the reappearance of the tree of
> life in Rev. 22, have always fascinated me. Clearly, Rev. 22 is
> representing a recapitulation of Eden. IMHO, this is a major
> challenge to a thorough-going TE position -- not just in terms of the
> doctrine of scripture, but also theologically. What is the hope of
> Rev. 22 if the heavenly city recapitulates the hardscrabble existence
> of a tribe of neolithic farmers?
>
> We could think of the Genesis cherub as symbolic of humanity's broken
> relationship with God. Usually, however, angels in scripture don't
> seem to be presented as symbols. I've often wondered whether there's
> something even deeper and more mysterious going on here. Is Eden,
> like heaven, a "place" that is accessible to angels but dimensionally
> inaccessible to us? Does the fall represent a rending of planes of
> existence that were once unified and that are to be unified again?
> Strange ideas, but there are stranger ideas both in modern theoretical
> physics and in ancient near eastern and second-temple Jewish
> apocalyptic thought.
>
> On Nov 28, 2007 10:43 PM, Merv <mrb22667@kansas.net
> <mailto:mrb22667@kansas.net>> wrote:
>
> Jon Tandy wrote:
>
>> Wasn't the tree of life (Rev 22:19) in the Garden of Eden? Where
>> did it go after that? Or was that scripture a non-scientific
>> (non-biological) statement about two trees in the garden?
>>
>> Jon Tandy
>
> And for that matter, how long did the cherubim stand guard with
> the flaming sword? Presumably the tree of life was eventually
> transplanted (without apparent fanfare) to a less accessible local
> (like ... not on this planet), or maybe it was destroyed, and the
> cherubim released from his mundane guard duty? At least nobody
> in later history attempted any encounters with any stubborn
> angelic swordsman that we've heard about.
>
> These are the types of questions where the mismatch between the
> truth of Scripture and the method of modern "factual" analysis
> seems so obvious as to sound like a mockery when it is applied.
> But I don't mean it that way. Or, rather, if there is a hint of
> mockery or critical self-questioning, it is directed at our modern
> way regarding truth.
>
> --Merv
>
>
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 29 10:43:30 2007