social psychology Psychology – A Warning

[David1701]

2 minutes ago, Kelly2363 said:

 

arom (עָרוֹם, 6174), “naked.” This word occurs 16 times. The first occurrence is in Gen. 2:25: “And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.”

To the second of your comments to naked 

עֵירֹם [ʿeyrom, ʿerom /ay·rome/] adj n m. From 6191; TWOT 1588b; GK 6567; 10 occurrences; AV translates as “naked” nine times, and “nakedness” once. 1 naked. 2 nakedness.

Expresses the Lemma 

The Greek reference 6557 is from Goodrick-Kohlenberger and in the Septuagint the manuscript says:

καὶ διηνοίχθησαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ τῶν δύο, καὶ ἔγνωσαν ὅτι γυμνοὶ ἦσαν· καὶ ἔρραψαν φύλλα συκῆς καὶ ἐποίησαν ἑαυτοῖς περιζώματα.

gumnos (γυμνός) Lexical Bare

Your meaning regarding a glory of God precept may be a curious and perhaps even a spiritual precept - but the claim would have to be grounded in more than a claim to a spiritual or even lexical definition - especially seeing that:

 Cites the manuscript and expresses a naked person עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם

וַתִּפָּקַ֙חְנָה֙ עֵינֵ֣י שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיֵּ֣דְע֔וּ כִּ֥י עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם הֵ֑ם וַֽיִּתְפְּרוּ֙ עֲלֵ֣ה תְאֵנָ֔ה וַיַּעֲשׂ֥וּ לָהֶ֖ם חֲגֹרֹֽת׃

I would need to look at the etymology a little closer to find your meaning.

Do you know where it comes from?

I'll explain my reasoning if you can.

Thanks

Gen. 2:25 (KJV) And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. 

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary

H6174 עָרוֹם עָרוֹם `arowm (aw-rome') (or marom {aw-rome'}) adj.
1. nude, either partially or totally

Gen. 3:7 (KJV) And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary

H5903 עֵירוֹם עֵרוֹם `eyrom (ay-rome') (or merom {ay-rome'}) adj.
1. nudity

I cannot prove it, but, given the different words used, I strongly suspect that Adam and Eve realised that they were now totally naked, as contrasted with their previous condition of being partially clothed.  There is nothing to indicate that they had physical clothing previously, hence my supposition that their partial covering was the glory of God.

I won't take a stand on this, since it's impossible to prove, but it does seem quite possible, and would explain why highly intelligent people (Adam named all the animals in one day) only now realised that they were naked (because they were not completely naked before the Fall).

[Kelly2363]

21 minutes ago, David1701 said:

Gen. 2:25 (KJV) And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. 

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary

H6174 עָרוֹם עָרוֹם `arowm (aw-rome') (or marom {aw-rome'}) adj.
1. nude, either partially or totally

Gen. 3:7 (KJV) And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary

H5903 עֵירוֹם עֵרוֹם `eyrom (ay-rome') (or merom {ay-rome'}) adj.
1. nudity

I cannot prove it, but, given the different words used, I strongly suspect that Adam and Eve realised that they were now totally naked, as contrasted with their previous condition of being partially clothed.  There is nothing to indicate that they had physical clothing previously, hence my supposition that their partial covering was the glory of God.

I won't take a stand on this, since it's impossible to prove, but it does seem quite possible, and would explain why highly intelligent people (Adam named all the animals in one day) only now realised that they were naked (because they were not completely naked before the Fall).

 

His stated ambition was to update and improve on the Strong's concordance but he does use received texts and so I will give him a look over.

An interesting linguist at first glance. The Plough Share Mission. I will do some research and reply back. 

Edited October 10, 2021 by Kelly2363

[missmuffet]

4 hours ago, Kelly2363 said:

 

Probably not - but the underlying direction is expressed here:

“He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?”” (Genesis 3:10–11).

This verse reveals something very basic about fear. Firstly it is a thing to be experienced in the body because Adam said: “I hid myself.” As far as Adam is concerned his fear came about because he was naked. So the second thing which we see about fear is that it is also linked to knowledge. We can see this because God said: “who told you that you were naked?”. Right from the first moment of sin entering into Adam, there are two consequences outside of the one which God Himself warned about (death). These are that sin affects the body and the mind. When we read about Adam’s sin, we see that this was the case.

“Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.” (Genesis 3:7)

In this verse, we see clearly these two aspects to the effect of sin in Adam and Eve. The words “the eyes of both of them were opened” does not mean that they were blind beforehand. It means that they now understood that they were naked. It is a reference to the mind. Before sin entered into Adam and Eve, we read “And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.” (Genesis 2:25). This verse also cannot mean anything less than that they could see one another (naked) yet clearly were not affected in any way. In their minds nakedness was not a challenge before they sinned. Afterwards, it was. The act of sewing together a means to cover that nakedness is an emotional response, albeit a reasonable one.

The key precept to my own work is expressed in:

It is certain that Adam and Eve knew that they had disobeyed God, and therefore even before God called out to them, they had this understanding in their minds. In basic psychological parlance, this is called anticipation and forms a pre- experiential basis for explaining why fear occurs. It is a blind use of the idea of stimulus and response. In other fields of psychology, Adam and Eve’s fear would be said to be no more than the sum of its chemical respondents to external stimuli. In this view learned behaviour arises from evolved physiological mechanisms, and amounts to no more than a survival response. Although it may seem implausible, most psychological theories would ignore disobedience, and instead emphasise acquired knowledge, as a positive step forward in evolutionary development. I have to say that such a view is Satanic. And herein lies a serious problem with psychology in general. At its root is a denial of the existence of God, and the whole of its concern is pathological, in the sense that modern psychology is concerned with developmental or learned experience, and not with original causality. In the world of neurology, the concern is with disorders of the nervous system, both central as well as peripheral, including all visceral elements of the sympathetic, parasympathetic, enteric as well muscle systems. The neurologist can opine (give an opinion) on psychiatry, and due to the neurophysiological emphasis of neurology, much of the research that informs psychobiology feeds into generalised psychology and psychoanalytical theories. It is for this reason principally that psychology is limited and eclectic.

And the spiritual warning:

Whereas, The Lord says, “Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and men will not see his shame.” Revelation 16:15

This is about psychology? It all depends on what kind of psychology a person chooses. There is secular psychology and their is Christian psychology. 

[Kelly2363]

30 minutes ago, David1701 said:

Gen. 2:25 (KJV) And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. 

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary

H6174 עָרוֹם עָרוֹם `arowm (aw-rome') (or marom {aw-rome'}) adj.
1. nude, either partially or totally

Gen. 3:7 (KJV) And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary

H5903 עֵירוֹם עֵרוֹם `eyrom (ay-rome') (or merom {ay-rome'}) adj.
1. nudity

I cannot prove it, but, given the different words used, I strongly suspect that Adam and Eve realised that they were now totally naked, as contrasted with their previous condition of being partially clothed.  There is nothing to indicate that they had physical clothing previously, hence my supposition that their partial covering was the glory of God.

I won't take a stand on this, since it's impossible to prove, but it does seem quite possible, and would explain why highly intelligent people (Adam named all the animals in one day) only now realised that they were naked (because they were not completely naked before the Fall).

 

Right so the precept in its morphological usage/meaning comes from a Chaldean root.

4636.  מַעֲרֹם maʿărôm, mah-ar-ome´; from 6191, in the sense of stripping; bare:—naked.

6191.  עָרַם ʿâram, aw-ram´; a prim. root; prop. to be (or make) bare; but used only in the der. sense (through the idea perh. of smoothness) to be cunning (usually in a bad sense):—× very, beware, take crafty [counsel], be prudent, deal subtilly.

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, with Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek Dictionaries. January 1, 1980

That speaks to the deception issue and its effect of producing nakedness in naked or bare and may explain the direction of Mickelson's usage. I will need to do some more research to establish if that is the case. I could even email him. 

 

[Kelly2363]

7 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

This is about psychology? It all depends on what kind of psychology a person chooses. There is secular psychology and their is Christian psychology. 

 

And both are profoundly flawed - But I agree. 

[David1701]

51 minutes ago, Kelly2363 said:

 

His stated ambition was to update and improve on the Strong's concordance but he does use received texts and so I will give him a look over.

An interesting linguist at first glance. The Plough Share Mission. I will do some research and reply back. 

No problem.

[missmuffet]

46 minutes ago, Kelly2363 said:

 

And both are profoundly flawed - But I agree. 

It all depends on the perspective. Is it worldly oriented or is it Godly oriented?

[Kelly2363]

5 hours ago, missmuffet said:

It all depends on the perspective. Is it worldly oriented or is it Godly oriented?

So Miss Muffet - let me ask you an abstract and wilfully meaningless question.

Was Adam naked when he ran in fear and hid from God?

[Kelly2363]

17 hours ago, David1701 said:

No problem.

 

1. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed. Genesis 2:25
2. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings Genesis 3:7
3. He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” Genesis 3:10

 

1. וַיִּֽהְי֤וּ שְׁנֵיהֶם֙ עֲרוּמִּ֔ים הָֽאָדָ֖ם וְאִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וְלֹ֖א יִתְבֹּשָֽׁשׁוּ׃ Genesis 2:25
2. וַתִּפָּקַ֙חְנָה֙ עֵינֵ֣י שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיֵּ֣דְע֔וּ כִּ֥י עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם הֵ֑ם וַֽיִּתְפְּרוּ֙ עֲלֵ֣ה תְאֵנָ֔ה וַיַּעֲשׂ֥וּ לָהֶ֖ם חֲגֹרֹֽת׃ Genesis 3:7
3. וַיֹּ֕אמֶר אֶת־קֹלְךָ֥ שָׁמַ֖עְתִּי בַּגָּ֑ן וָאִירָ֛א כִּֽי־עֵירֹ֥ם אָנֹ֖כִי וָאֵחָבֵֽא׃ Genesis 3:10

 

1. καὶ ἦσαν οἱ δύο γυμνοί, ὅ τε Ἀδὰμ καὶ ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ, καὶ οὐκ ᾐσχύνοντο Genesis 2:25 (Manuscript Genesis 3:1)
2. καὶ διηνοίχθησαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ τῶν δύο, καὶ ἔγνωσαν ὅτι γυμνοὶ ἦσαν· καὶ ἔρραψαν φύλλα συκῆς καὶ ἐποίησαν ἑαυτοῖς περιζώματα. Genesis 3:7
3. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Τὴν φωνήν σου ἤκουσα περιπατοῦντος ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ, καὶ ἐφοβήθην, ὅτι γυμνός εἰμι, καὶ ἐκρύβην Genesis 3:10

 

1. Genesis 2:25 naked         עֲרוּמִּ֔ים
2. Genesis 3:7 naked           עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם
3. Genesis 3:10  naked         עֵירֹ֥ם                 

 

1. Genesis 2:25 naked   γυμνοί
2. Genesis 3:7 naked     γυμνοὶ
3. Genesis 3:10 naked    γυμνός

 

To this:

מַעֲרֹם maʿărôm, mah-ar-ome´; from 6191, in the sense of stripping; bare:—naked.

עָרַם ʿâram, aw-ram´; a prim. root; prop. to be (or make) bare; but used only in the derived. sense (through the idea perhaps. of smoothness) to be cunning (usually in a bad sense):—× very, beware, take crafty [counsel], be prudent, deal subtilely.

I found this:

“Besides all your abominations and harlotries you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare and squirming in your blood.

Here are the two expressions idiomatically implicit in the references in Genesis 2:25, Genesis 3:7 and Genesis 3:10

I am sure that it would be possible to derive further idiomatic and cognate equivalencies  but at what point does that endeavour become vain? I do agree that it is difficult to resist the sense that there may have been a spiritual cloche or veil over their eyes - not seeing nakedness  - that may transcend the precept of innocence as a child cannot see their own nakedness in the first few years. It seems rather as Israel who to this day have a veil over their minds.

Of course what I am drawing attention to in this OP has to do with a psychological fact - albeit your point doesn’t remove that and may strengthen it.

[missmuffet]

11 hours ago, Kelly2363 said:

So Miss Muffet - let me ask you an abstract and wilfully meaningless question.

Was Adam naked when he ran in fear and hid from God?

First tell me what that has to do with psychologists.