I had a minor revelation from today’s Watchtower study. This point was completely tangential to the study itself, but it opened up for me a whole new line of reasoning that I had never considered before. It started with the first sentence of paragraph 4:
“It was Jehovah’s purpose that the descendents of Adam and Eve fill the earth.” (w12 9/15 p. 18 par. 4)
From time to time in the field ministry we have all been called upon to explain why God has permitted suffering. Often in those circumstances, I have used a line of reasoning that goes like this: “Jehovah God could have destroyed Adam and Eve on the spot and started fresh by creating a new pair of perfect humans. However, that would not have answered the challenge that Satan raised.”
When I read paragraph 4 of this week’s study, I suddenly realized that what I have been saying all this time was not true. Jehovah could not have destroyed the first human pair until they had first produced children. His purpose wasn’t merely to fill the earth with perfect humans, but to fill it with perfect humans who were also descendents of the first human couple.
“…so my word that goes forth from my mouth will prove to be. It will not return to me without results…” (Isa. 55:11)
Satan, crafty devil that he is, waited for Jehovah to make his pronouncement at Ge. 1:28 before tempting Eve. Perhaps he reasoned that if he could just win over Adam and Eve, he could thwart God, frustrating his purpose. After all, some corrupted line of reasoning must have induced him into thinking he could come off the winner in this scheme. Whatever the case, it does appear that Jehovah’s unalterable purpose as it related to Adam and Eve would never have allowed him to put the pair away before they had first produced offspring; otherwise, his words would not have been fulfilled—an impossibility.
The devil could not have foreseen how Jehovah would resolve this problem. Even millennia later Jehovah’s perfect Angels were still trying to work it out. (1 Peter 1:12) Of course, given his knowledge of God he could simply have believed that Jehovah God would find a way. However, that would be an act of faith, and at that point in time, faith was something he was lacking.
Anyway, getting this understanding allowed me to finally put something to rest. For many years I have wondered why Jehovah God brought about a flood. The Bible explains that it was done because of the wickedness of man at the time. Fair enough, but men have been wicked throughout human history and have committed many atrocities. Jehovah doesn’t strike them down every time they get out of line. In fact, he has only done so on three occasions: 1) flood of Noah’s day; 2) Sodom and Gomorrah; 3) the elimination of the Canaanites.
However, the flood of Noah’s day stands out from the other two in that it was a worldwide destruction. Doing the math, it is very likely that after 1,600 years of human existence—with childbearing women living for centuries—the earth had been filled with millions, or possibly, billions of people. There are cave drawings in North America that appear to predate the flood. Of course, we really can’t say for sure because a global flood would pretty much wipe out all evidence of any civilization that predated it. Whatever the case, one has to ask why bring a worldwide destruction before Armageddon? Isn’t that what Armageddon is for? Why do it twice? What was achieved?
One might even claim that Jehovah was stacking the deck in his favor by eliminating all of the devil’s followers and leaving only eight faithful ones of his own to start over. Of course we know that cannot be true because Jehovah is the God of justice, and he doesn’t need ‘do-overs’. Up until now, I have been able to explain it away using the line of reasoning of a court case. While the judge must be impartial, there are still rules of conduct in the courtroom that he can enforce without compromising his impartiality. If the plaintiff or defendant misbehave and disrupt the decorum of the courtroom, he can be censured, restrained, and even evicted. The wicked conduct of the people of Noah’s day, it could be reasoned, were actually disrupting the proceedings of the millennia-long court case that is our lives.
However, I now see that there is another factor. Overriding any challenge the devil may have raised regarding the rightness of Jehovah’s rule, is the imperative that Jehovah’s word must be fulfilled. He will not allow anything to keep his purpose from reaching its completion. At the time of the flood, there were only eight individuals who are still loyal to God out of a world of millions, possibly billions. Jehovah’s purpose of populating the earth with the descendents of Adam and Eve was in jeopardy and that could never be; so he was well within his rights to act as he did.
The devil is free to make his case, but he is going outside the boundaries established by God if he tries to thwart Jehovah’s divine purpose.
Anyway, that’s my thought for the day for what it’s worth.
I was wondering if you might be able to shed some light on a question I was asked today. If there was only Adam and Eve and they had 2 children, Cain and Abel, how is it that Caine later married a woman from “another tribe”? Where did this other woman come from?
Hi Margaret
(Genesis 5:4) And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.
So this other woman came from Adam and Eve too. Either Cain’s sister or perhaps a niece.
Where does the idea of “another tribe” come from?
Apollos
Thank you very much for your quick response! I am amazed how quickly you were able to respond to my question. Is everyone on this site a Witness? Where are you from?
No, not everyone on this site is a witness. I’m guessing that you may not be either, but sorry if I’ve misunderstood that. Either way you are welcome to join any discussions. We all try to work within some guidelines that have been set down for the site. Many of us are Witnesses, and we have no desire to disrespect the beliefs of others. We simply wish to examine and discuss the scriptures openly as did the early Christians (Acts 17:11). However because of the problems that can result from disagreement with official doctrine we advise those who participate to… Read more »
Absolutely no disrespect taken at all. I was raised a Witness, my parents still are and my oldest son (14) has become very interested. He went to a meeting yesterday with my parents, it was their Circuit Overseer visit and he was very happy to be a part of such a wonderful meeting. A woman I work with had asked me the question I posted earlier. She converted religions many years ago (not sure what religion she is now) but that was a question that she had asked someone in her prior church and she could not get an answer.… Read more »
I just realized that you asked me the question “where does the idea of another tribe come from”. I am guessing that it was stated that way in whatever bible it is that she was brought up reading. I am not well versed in different bible translations so I guess the “tribe” she spoke of was the way that her bible worded who Cain married.
BTW, welcome to the site, and I didn’t mean to sound blunt with my question. I’ve just not heard that particular phrase proposed before.
4,500 ft. tall??? Nifty! They could move around and affect weather patterns. 🙂
With respect…
Just a little note on your comment of why Jehovah had to bring about the flood…
If you’ve ever read The Books of Jasher and Enoch – both used as reference in the scriptures (Josh 10:13/2 Sam 1:18/2 Tim 3:8) – they give a much more detailed account of the extent and manner of violence that had developed on the earth through the angel’s rebellion. The Nephilim were 4,500 ft tall… and the angels brought heavens hidden knowledge to mankind… A cocktail for disaster to Jehovah’s purpose…
I see your point. I do think that the context supports the notion that it was his purpose, but I can’t prove it, so it boils down to a matter of opinion.
It’s an interesting topic, but I also am not sure we can conclude that God’s stated purpose was to have offspring from Adam and Eve fill the earth. From Isa 45:18 we can conclude that God’s purpose is to have the earth inhabited, but not necessarily by the offspring of Adam and Eve. Gen 1:28 is Jehovah giving direction to Adam and Eve. It was their privilege to fulfill God’s purpose, but I don’t think that leads to the logical conclusion that his purpose in this respect was in any way dependent on them or their offspring. Now there may… Read more »
Just a few questions:
Where does it say that God’s stated intention was to have offspring from Adam and Eve populate the earth?
How does Satan come into this? In the story it’s a serpent, a snake.
And the dire consequence of eating the fruit doesn’t happen – instead of dying they are banished from the garden.
So isn’t the story an allegorical story of the harsh reality of growing up and leaving behind childhood innocence to face the brutal world of adult reality, with no going back?
Gen. 1:28 answers your first question. For the rest, please refer to http://www.jw.org for more information than I can provide here.
much that men believe about Jehovah is based on presumption. For instance, you say that Jehovah “could not” have destroyed Adam and Eve. That is incorrect. He most certainly could have. The point to be taken from Isa. 55:11, is that He did not have to, to achieve His will for them toward the earth. A subtle difference, but an important one. This bit of information, taking place prior to Satan’s interference, insured that everything would achieve God’s intended purpose, no matter what men, or angels, did. Gen. 2?Thus the heavens and the earth and all their army came to… Read more »
I appreciate your thoughts on this. The point I was trying to make is that Jehovah can never be false to his own word. That is the point of Isa. 55:11. Therefore, since his stated intention was to have offspring from Adam and Eve populate the Earth, he could not have killed them as that would be to go against his own purpose, to thwart the fulfillment of his own word.
I said it was a subtle difference. The presumption comes in the form of your saying that he “could” not do it. You put a restriction on God’s ability to do something, that you couldn’t possibly know. The reality is that God didn’t have to. His blessing would have been enough.
You make a good point. I am assuming something based on a premise. If the premise is correct, then the assumption is correct, but I have no way of knowing if the premise is correct. The premise is that it was Jehovah’s purpose to have children from Adam and Eve populate the earth. Given that, it would be safe to say that he could not kill them. This wouldn’t be putting a restriction on Jehovah, because “it is impossible for God to lie.” (Heb. 6:17)