The Trees of Eden

[weepingforloman]

I came upon an interesting section tonight in John Calvin's The Institutes of the Christian Religion, in which he mentions an idea he attributes to Augustine and Eucherius. The idea is this: the Tree of Life prefigures Christ, in that it provides life to those who take of it, and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil prefigures man's reliance on his own will, in that it causes death by separating man from God. This sheds new light for me on Genesis 3:22, which Prince Myshkin had brought up in a different thread: it is bad that man became more like God, in that man took on an aspect of God that he never should have. God always relies upon Himself, upon His own will, because it is sufficient. Man should not do this, because he is meant to be "fueled" by God. If, by taking from the Tree of the Knowledge, Adam and Eve tried to depend on their own will, this is adopting one of the features of God that is not meant for mankind (among the others are utterly uninterested love, judgment, and punishment). Man is meant to be dependent on God, but tried to make himself independent, and thus caused himself to die. Any thoughts?

[motherhubbard]

Wow, I have never considered that. I do see how you can make a connection there. I'll need to study on that.

[Gorilla King]

Now you've gone and made me even more eager to read that book!

It's a very astute observation. Now that I have nearly a dozen classes under my belt for theology I'm really starting to see just how much of Christ is contained in the Old Testament. It's funny and yet in a way completely absurd, but when Jesus said seek and you shall find He wasn't joking. The deeper I get into the Bible, the more of Him I find.

As to the trees specifically, I agree with what you've said. The sufficiency of God unto Himself was never meant to be a trait which man could possess. We were designed to need God. Post-fall that manifests itself in many different ways. For the faithful person, they return to God as the source of their need. For the secular person, they often turn to a cause or an organization or even something as base as pleasure. For the despairing person, they despair because they lack a source to fill their need (whether authentic as in God or imagined as in the offerings of the world).

[Orionsbelt]

I don't see the tree of life link. I do see the link in the bible story between the tree of knowlege to self awareness. God's question to Adam was "who told you that you were naked?" In my mind the implication is that Adam is now able to place himself in the perspective of another. Once this is possible, it is possible to choose compassion or not. Hence giving birth to the ability chose to do wrong. Death ... only a being aware of himself and another can be aware of and speculate/fear his own end and so death enters the world. Very good stuff.

[weepingforloman]

Christ provides spiritual life, just as the Tree provides physical life. The other, the Tree of Knowledge, makes it so that Adam can distinguish between good and evil, thus making him dependent on himself instead of on God, and thus introduces sin, causing even the newfound ability to see good and evil crippled (consider how many children think it's perfectly fine to hit, steal, bully, etc. until they are taught otherwise).

[PrinceMyshkin]

Christ provides spiritual life, just as the Tree provides physical life.

No. If you are drawing upon the Bible, draw accurately on it, see Genesis 2:7.

[Gorilla King]

No. If you are drawing upon the Bible, draw accurately on it, see Genesis 2:7.

I think he's talking of life in terms of nourishment and not in terms of creation.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I think he's talking of life in terms of nourishment and not in terms of creation.

Gen 2:7 "and man became a living soul."

You may think what you like but surely it behooves you to give at least a moment's contemplation to the plain, apparent meaning of the words? It seems like a very wilfull stretch from "soul" to e.g, broccoli & steak...

[weepingforloman]

We are spiritually dead, due to sin, until we are made regenerate in Christ. Plus, I think you use a KJV? Don't trust that translation.

[Gorilla King]

yeah the KJV is one of the least accurate. The TNIV is considered one of the better ones.

[PrinceMyshkin]

We are spiritually dead, due to sin, until we are made regenerate in Christ. Plus, I think you use a KJV? Don't trust that translation.

We will each of us use the translation that best suits what we want or have chosen to believe. Bear in mind that the Hebrew of the Old Testament is itself a translation from earlier texts. And that the Gospels are based on oral accounts that may/must have been altered bit by bit as they were handed on. And that the meanings of these various texts have been interopreted and reinterpreted by how many councils and theologians?


yeah the KJV is one of the least accurate. The TNIV is considered one of the better ones.

Considered by contemporary wisdom, but surely you have read Karen Armstrong on how the concept of God has changed from period to period?

And please see my prior response to Weeping (above).

[motherhubbard]

Gen 2:7 "and man became a living soul."

You may think what you like but surely it behooves you to give at least a moment's contemplation to the plain, apparent meaning of the words? It seems like a very wilfull stretch from "soul" to e.g, broccoli & steak...

Did you mean to sound condescending?

I think we all see what you are saying, Prince. But, you are misunderstanding what is being said about life coming from Christ. Physical life comes from God as well as our souls, as you mentioned. But there are dozens and dozens of references about Christ being the source of eternal life. If you’ll read the Gospel of John, especially maybe the sixth chapter you’ll see the connection.

Here are a few examples, please feel free to give at least a moment's contemplation to the plain, apparent meaning of the words. Broccoli doesn't live forever.

Joh 6:48 I am that bread of life.

Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

Joh 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Joh 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

Joh 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Joh 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Did you mean to sound condescending?

Yes, I did. When someone professes to believe in Scripture and to live his life by it, and when I point out to him that scripture itself contradicts something he has just said, and he retorts that I was using a faulty translation and offers me what he considers to be a better one, then I have no recourse other than to sarcasm or condescension, as one would when dealing with a child who will defend himself with one excuse or fabrication when the first has been exposed.


I think we all see what you are saying, Prince. But, you are misunderstanding what is being said about life coming from Christ. Physical life comes from God as well as our souls, as you mentioned. But there are dozens and dozens of references about Christ being the source of eternal life. If you’ll read the Gospel of John, especially maybe the sixth chapter you’ll see the connection.

Here are a few examples, please feel free to give at least a moment's contemplation to the plain, apparent meaning of the words. Broccoli doesn't live forever.

Joh 6:48 I am that bread of life.

Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

Joh 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Joh 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

Joh 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Joh 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

"Broccoli doesn't live forever. " Very witty, and I think I would like you for that. And yet all that you suggest above are nothing but the words of men, fallible men, who no doubt believed sincerely - according to their understanding - what they wrote and whose words have been sanctified over the ages by other believers. There is a German word "lebensluge," which means the lie that we need in order to survive. These are if not lies, then fairy-tales, myths, noble ones in some case, but the danger is that they blind us to the hard material realities that must be faced if we are to survive. God will not, apparently, help us. He has already failed so many...

Bear in mind that I am a Jew and that the shadow of the 5,100,000 hangs over me, many of whom, no doubt believed as sincerely as you do in God and died with their appeals to Him on their tongues.

[weepingforloman]

Please don't resort to insults and to questioning the accuracy of the text. Christ is the source of salvation- and that includes eternal life. Thus, He is the source of life. I don't see what the Holocaust has to do with this issue... It was terrible, but so are other things. It is not God who fails when wrong is done, it is humanity. And death is not the end, nor is it the ultimate evil.

God bless.

[Gorilla King]

Prince, I'm a theology major. I've studied the translations. There's three categories basically. There's the poetical translations which sacrifice accuracy for a better flow of words(where the KJV falls), the open translations (such as the message) and the literal translations (which is closer to where the TNIV falls). You can protest all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that your chosen text is one of the least accurate.

What's more, your claims about the old and new testament texts and the processes of transmission are utter nonsense and I would encourage you to read "The Historical Jesus by Habermas.

[motherhubbard]

Prince,

You’re very articulate. I have always been horrified by the Holocaust. I remember a program on PBS when I was really too young to have been exposed to such horrors and I still can’t understand how such a tremendous atrocity can happen. Sadly, it happens all the time. But there is no reason to blame God for the suffering experienced on Earth. While it is terrible to have to suffer it is temporal. You make me think about the Israelites suffering 400 years of bondage in Egypt. It is beyond my understanding, but was part of God’s plan.

I don’t know a single Jew. This is not a diverse area. There are so many questions I would love, love, love to ask you. Would you mind if I PMed you sometime? I will have to study more to be able to really talk about the tree of life with you. You will surely have a greater knowledge of the Old Testament as well as much of the symbolism, tradition and history . I understand that Jewish people (at least of the time of Christ) used a lot of metaphors. I'm sure you would have a lot of insight. I just read Proverbs and in Chapter 3 I believe that references are made to the church established by Christ on the day of Pentecost in the third chapter of Acts. The church is the bride of Christ, but of course we are working with two very different beliefs here.

Pr 3:18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retaineth her.

You are right, even if Christ were a myth, I would want to believe that God loves me and that I would be able to spend eternity in his presence. However, I think it would be much easier (less work and guilt, and more naughty kind of fun) to just believe that and leave the New Testament (or the law for that matter) out of it.

I really hope that none of this sounded offensive. It really worries me that I will inadvertently offend someone who is of a different race or religion. It’s easy to do when you are ignorant about others, but it is not my intention.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Prince,

You’re very articulate. I have always been horrified by the Holocaust. I remember a program on PBS when I was really too young to have been exposed to such horrors and I still can’t understand how such a tremendous atrocity can happen. Sadly, it happens all the time. But there is no reason to blame God for the suffering experienced on Earth.

How not to blame Him? Besides, you yourself say below "You make me think about the Israelites suffering 400 years of bondage in Egypt. It is beyond my understanding, but was part of God’s plan. (empasis added).


I don’t know a single Jew.

Alas, the very orthodox Jews who live in my neighbourhood would say that if you came to know me, you would still not know a single Jew! I'm non-practicing and as antipathetic to the Jewish religion as to all others.

My children, having been born of a non-Jew, would not berecognized by any Rabbis as Jews, although my daughter has chosen to consider herself one and any Rabbi who tried to deny her would have to do battle with me.


There are so many questions I would love, love, love to ask you. Would you mind if I PMed you sometime?

I would be honoured if you did but need to assure you again that I am FAR from expert on Judaism.


I really hope that none of this sounded offensive. It really worries me that I will inadvertently offend someone who is of a different race or religion. It’s easy to do when you are ignorant about others, but it is not my intention.

Is there offense in your heart? And am I a stupid man?

If the answer to both of these is No, and I am sure that is the answer to the first question, then how might you have offended me?

[Gorilla King]

For the record, God warned the Hebrews not to go to Egypt but they didn't listen. That was the reason for their captivity.

[PrinceMyshkin]

For the record, God warned the Hebrews not to go to Egypt but they didn't listen. That was the reason for their captivity.

Silly, silly Hebrews! God also commanded Abraham to offer Isaac in lieu of an animal sacrifice but stayed his hand at the last moment. Of course it may be argued that Abraham, having faith in God, could undertake to kill his son without any qualms, and equally that Isaac, having faith, could suffer his father to lay him on a sacrificial rock, cover him with flammable material and raise his dagger, without experiencing mortal terror...

But I don't know. What a practical joker, that God fellow, eh?

[NikolaiI]

We are spiritually dead, due to sin, until we are made regenerate in Christ. Plus, I think you use a KJV? Don't trust that translation.

I'm sorry, I don't think people are made that way.

As Nietzsche would say, it's anti-nature. Spiritually dead? So all other religions' adherents are spiritually dead? But more importantly, adherents to no religion are spiritually dead? Sorry, I don't mean to sound condescending, but this is so antinature. What if you were raised in a village, and had a wonderful life, and got to live free in nature - away from technology - a pure life, full of love and goodness, close to the land; you got to experience nature, streams, spring, grass, trees, winter, everything in all its freshness, and again, you lived in a village that loved you, but nothing about Christ or God or Christianity - no religion of any kind - this would be bad? I'm not sure if I said this eloquently, I said it somewhere else, and was ignored, lol. None of my arguments get through. :(

Ah, that was completely off-topic, wasn't it?

[PrinceMyshkin]

I'm sorry, I don't think people are made that way.

As Nietzsche would say, it's anti-nature. Spiritually dead? So all other religions' adherents are spiritually dead? But more importantly, adherents to no religion are spiritually dead? Sorry, I don't mean to sound condescending, but this is so antinature. What if you were raised in a village, and had a wonderful life, and got to live free in nature - away from technology - a pure life, full of love and goodness, close to the land; you got to experience nature, streams, spring, grass, trees, winter, everything in all its freshness, and again, you lived in a village that loved you, but nothing about Christ or God or Christianity - no religion of any kind - this would be bad? I'm not sure if I said this eloquently, I said it somewhere else, and was ignored, lol. None of my arguments get through. :(

Ah, that was completely off-topic, wasn't it?

Yes, of course, we are spiritualy dead. We cannot get to the Father except by way of the Son. You probably can't even get into a moderately good restaurant except by way of the Son.

[Gorilla King]

Silly, silly Hebrews! God also commanded Abraham to offer Isaac in lieu of an animal sacrifice but stayed his hand at the last moment. Of course it may be argued that Abraham, having faith in God, could undertake to kill his son without any qualms, and equally that Isaac, having faith, could suffer his father to lay him on a sacrificial rock, cover him with flammable material and raise his dagger, without experiencing mortal terror...

But I don't know. What a practical joker, that God fellow, eh?

Abraham also said "God Himself will provide the lamb"....and He did....twice.

[weepingforloman]

I'm sorry, I don't think people are made that way.

As Nietzsche would say, it's anti-nature. Spiritually dead? So all other religions' adherents are spiritually dead? But more importantly, adherents to no religion are spiritually dead? Sorry, I don't mean to sound condescending, but this is so antinature. What if you were raised in a village, and had a wonderful life, and got to live free in nature - away from technology - a pure life, full of love and goodness, close to the land; you got to experience nature, streams, spring, grass, trees, winter, everything in all its freshness, and again, you lived in a village that loved you, but nothing about Christ or God or Christianity - no religion of any kind - this would be bad? I'm not sure if I said this eloquently, I said it somewhere else, and was ignored, lol. None of my arguments get through. :(

Ah, that was completely off-topic, wasn't it?

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you. And I am reasonably sure that no one is perfectly happy, not even someone in the scenario you describe.

[NikolaiI]

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you. And I am reasonably sure that no one is perfectly happy, not even someone in the scenario you describe.

Suicides are perfectly happy...as are millions of others.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Abraham also said "God Himself will provide the lamb"....and He did....twice.

W cannot fully enter the mindset of a person of Abraham's time; but those of us who have and have loved children can perhaps imagine that no matter how great Abraham's faith must, there may have been at least a sliver of anguish at the thought that he was about to slit Isaac's throat. Why did not God provide the lamb or the ram beforehand? What was the need to test Abraham's faith? What sort of God is that who constantly requires proof of our adulation, our blind, unthinking faith? Did God, perhaps, suffer from low self-esteem?

[Gorilla King]

W cannot fully enter the mindset of a person of Abraham's time; but those of us who have and have loved children can perhaps imagine that no matter how great Abraham's faith must, there may have been at least a sliver of anguish at the thought that he was about to slit Isaac's throat. Why did not God provide the lamb or the ram beforehand? What was the need to test Abraham's faith? What sort of God is that who constantly requires proof of our adulation, our blind, unthinking faith? Did God, perhaps, suffer from low self-esteem?

Don't you see it? God was showing Abraham that He would do with His own son what He would not have Abraham do with Isaac. The lamb sacrificed in Isaac's stead was the symbol of the sacrifice which Christ Himself would make, and on that very spot no less. The site of the sacrifice of the lamb was the very spot where Jesus was crucified.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Don't you see it? God was showing Abraham that He would do with His own son what He would not have Abraham do with Isaac. The lamb sacrificed in Isaac's stead was the symbol of the sacrifice which Christ Himself would make, and on that very spot no less. The site of the sacrifice of the lamb was the very spot where Jesus was crucified.


What? Is that a well authenticated fact? It's awfully pat! And furthermore an illustration that God's mind works as our own does. But since you have ventured thus far into the ingenuities of God's mind, perhaps you'd conjecture what the heck was the point of His doing that? What does it gain you in respect for God that he staged this preview of the crucifixion? And your argument that he was showing this to Abraham makes no sense unless Abraham was going to be around at the time of the crucifixion!

[Gorilla King]

What? Is that a well authenticated fact? It's awfully pat! And furthermore an illustration that God's mind works as our own does. But since you have ventured thus far into the ingenuities of God's mind, perhaps you'd conjecture what the heck was the point of His doing that? What does it gain you in respect for God that he staged this preview of the crucifixion? And your argument that he was showing this to Abraham makes no sense unless Abraham was going to be around at the time of the crucifixion!

This is where it becomes essential to leave behind this myth nonsense and see this as history. The tomb of Abraham and Sarah can still be visited to this day in a cave just outside Hebron. The place of Jesus' crucification was Calvary, formerly called Golgotha (place of the skull). Who's skull? Adam's. When the Hebrews left Egypt they weren't going to conquer the Canaanites, they were going to take back the land of Abraham.

And think about this now....why would God leave Messianic symbolism throughout the old testament? So people would recognize the messiah when He came! You take the small pieces and it seems cryptic and unimportant. If you take it as a whole you can clearly see Christ revealed in the Old Testament.

[PrinceMyshkin]

This is where it becomes essential to leave behind this myth nonsense and see this as history. The tomb of Abraham and Sarah can still be visited to this day in a cave just outside Hebron. The place of Jesus' crucification was Calvary, formerly called Golgotha (place of the skull). Who's skull? Adam's.

This where history is turned into mythology! Adam's skull! Do you have this on the basis of paleontological evidence? This is so far out that unless you can provide hard scientific fact I for one give up any illusion that there is anything like a debate going on here. Not, at least, one that I want any part of!


And think about this now....why would God leave Messianic symbolism throughout the old testament?

God did NOT do that! You are treading a little behind the Cabbalists who believe that the whole of the OT is written in code which can be deciphered by some form of numerology.

[motherhubbard]

This is where it becomes essential to leave behind this myth nonsense and see this as history. The tomb of Abraham and Sarah can still be visited to this day in a cave just outside Hebron. The place of Jesus' crucification was Calvary, formerly called Golgotha (place of the skull). Who's skull? Adam's. When the Hebrews left Egypt they weren't going to conquer the Canaanites, they were going to take back the land of Abraham.

And think about this now....why would God leave Messianic symbolism throughout the old testament? So people would recognize the messiah when He came! You take the small pieces and it seems cryptic and unimportant. If you take it as a whole you can clearly see Christ revealed in the Old Testament.

I have never read or even heard anything about Adam’s skull. But, my father-in-law was lucky enough to take a trip to Jerusalem and tour the surrounding areas. Golgotha looks like a skull. The shape of the mountain resembles a skull and I thought that was where the name came from.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I have never read or even heard anything about Adam’s skull. But, my father-in-law was lucky enough to take a trip to Jerusalem and tour the surrounding areas. Golgotha looks like a skull. The shape of the mountain resembles a skull and I thought that was where the name came from.

See, this is is one of the (1,435,237) places where I stand and look on in amazement, sometimes in horror or dismay, at the people who live in a mythopoeic fog. From the perfectly naturalistic fact that Golgotha resembles a human skull, they extract the fact that Adam's skull is buried there and they then wave that skull around in triumph!

[Gorilla King]

Well while you're looking on in horror and dismay, people are equally perplexed about why this even matters to you. You're an atheist. Shouldn't you be out living while you still have the chance? What does it matter to you if Golgotha is the traditional resting place of Adam? My guess is it doesn't make one lick of difference. Therefore, all of this nonsense is very irrational and given the source, I'm surprised you've allowed yourself to be that way. Or is irrationality only bad when it comes from a source you dislike?

[PrinceMyshkin]

Well while you're looking on in horror and dismay, people are equally perplexed about why this even matters to you. You're an atheist. Shouldn't you be out living while you still have the chance? What does it matter to you if Golgotha is the traditional resting place of Adam? My guess is it doesn't make one lick of difference. Therefore, all of this nonsense is very irrational and given the source, I'm surprised you've allowed yourself to be that way. Or is irrationality only bad when it comes from a source you dislike?

Doesn't it matter to you if one of your neighbours proclaims falsehoods to the neighborhood - even if he believes he is doing so with the most benevolent of intentions?

I asked if you could provide me the paleontological (or any other evidence) that there is a skull buried at Golgotha, and that it is none other than that of the Adam of Genesis. As you decline to or cannot do so, I'm withdrawing from participation in this farrago of iterations from dogma.

[Pendragon]

A point. Can't you see what is going on? A topic is started, people are lead away from said topic, some begin to question other's mindset, and boom, another thread bites the dust. The subject of this thread was The Trees of Eden. Now I will postulate this: what if the trees were symbolic? See, there is no name for the "forbidden fruit", it has be subjectively called an "apple." Does eating an apple bring one to awareness of shame or of sin? No. This did.
What I actually believe would not matter to most, but I will say this: The Serpent said it would make them like gods. God creates. Now man procreates. Man realized now he was naked. From that time on, man could die. To be born is to enter the cycle of life, which is always fatal. Draw from this what you will.

If they could have taken the Tree of Life, they would have gained Eternal Life. That was forbidden by the Angel with the Flaming Sword.

God Bless

Pen

[Logos]

Thanks for getting this back on topic Pen :)

[Gorilla King]

Just as a side note, the fruit of the tree wasn't actually an apple. It was something altogether different and unique to the tree. It was just symbolized as an apple in early Christian art and came to be accepted as such over the years.

[weepingforloman]

A point. Can't you see what is going on? A topic is started, people are lead away from said topic, some begin to question other's mindset, and boom, another thread bites the dust. The subject of this thread was The Trees of Eden. Now I will postulate this: what if the trees were symbolic? See, there is no name for the "forbidden fruit", it has be subjectively called an "apple." Does eating an apple bring one to awareness of shame or of sin? No. This did.
What I actually believe would not matter to most, but I will say this: The Serpent said it would make them like gods. God creates. Now man procreates. Man realized now he was naked. From that time on, man could die. To be born is to enter the cycle of life, which is always fatal. Draw from this what you will.

If they could have taken the Tree of Life, they would have gained Eternal Life. That was forbidden by the Angel with the Flaming Sword.

God Bless

Pen

The tradition of the apple arose during the rise of the Roman church, because in Latin, malum is the word for both apple and bad. Thus, to reinforce that it was a bad action, they taught that Adam and Eve ate an apple.

Now. I will try to return this thread to what I intended it to be. Given that the Tree of Life was a prefigurement of Christ, what other OT instances do you think refer to Christ? I can think of a couple: Melchizidek the King of Salem and, of course, the enmity of the snake and the woman ("you will strike his heel, he will crush your head"). Any others?

[Gorilla King]

Every book of the OT is a reflection of Christ in some way. I mean the story of Ruth and Boaz, though an actual story, is symbolical of Christ as the kinsman redeemer of all mankind.

[weepingforloman]

That's true, and, at my church, we just finished a series of sermons on Ruth. Of course, Moses and David are closely tied to Christ, and Daniel and Isaiah's prophecies as well. The episode with Isaac as discussed before, even the death of the firstborn in Egypt (Christ is described as "firstborn over all creation"). The OT is rife with prophecies and individuals who in some way mirror or prefigure Christ. Noah as well, I suppose, redeeming the life of the earth.

[Gorilla King]

And one thing I didn't know until very recently was that Rahab was the 27th (I think it was 27th anyway) generation grandmother of Jesus.

[Pendragon]

And one thing I didn't know until very recently was that Rahab was the 27th (I think it was 27th anyway) generation grandmother of Jesus.There are five named women given in the linage of Joseph, the husband of Mary, chosen to raise Jesus. Tamar, the daughter-in-law of Judah, whose husband died, and his brother refused to do his duty of "raising up seed to his brother." For this refusal, he died. Judah promised his younger son, but dragged feet, so she tricked Judah himself into the deed. Rahab the Harlot of Jericho, as you mention, married Salmon the General. Ruth was a Moabite and married Boaz. David stole Bathsheba from her husband, got her pregnant, and tried to cover it up by having her husband called in from battle, and when that didn't work, had him murdered. Then there is Mary, who was the mother of Jesus, who got so bad a reputation, that Joseph almost didn't marry her at all.

Summing up, we see a tricky lady forgiven, a harlot forgiven, Isrealites forbidden to marry Moabites forgiven, a two-timing person and a murderer forgiven, and one with a bad reputation forgiven. Sounds like Christ to me. All but Mary are Old Testement.