Wow, I guess anything's possible.

I have the same question, Sarah, and I just provided some basis for that question in my response to your "Eating Vegan with Allergies?" thread.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Because....

Genesis 3:18 "the herb <`eseb> of the field <sadeh>"

• `eseb - from an unused root meaning to glisten (or be green); grass (or any tender shoot):--grass, herb.
• sadeh - or saday {saw-dah'-ee}; from an unused root meaning to spread out; a field (as flat):--country, field, ground, land, soil, X wild.

In Genesis 1:11,12 God created the herb yielding seed and the fruit tree yielding fruit after their kind.

In Genesis 1:29 God said He gave man every herb yielding seed and tree yielding fruit after their kind.

In Genesis 1:30, He gave to the beasts and fowl every green herb.
(As opposed to brown herb? Not really sure there's a difference here, but adding the word, green, would be a difference between what man and the animals ate)

In Genesis 2:5 it speaks of plant in the field and herb of the field before they grew. This could mean before God created them. It could be before man created fields.

In Genesis 2:19,20 it says that God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air.

Then in Genesis 3:18, it talks about the curse, the thorns, and having to eat the herb of the field.


Question: If it's not herb of the field what is it? Herb of the forest? Herb of the wayside? An interesting side thought would be, what about herbs of the water?

Question: If in 2:19,20 it talks about God forming beasts of the field, what about the other beasts? Beasts of the forest, beasts of the .... where?

Genesis 4:8 Cain and Able were in the field. Would this be the field Cain was a tiller of?

Abraham and Jacob bought fields, Esau was a man of the field, hunter of the field(?), Isaac killed venison in the field, Reuben found mandrakes in the field, there is the field (translated country) of Edom, cows were in the field, people worked in the field, sowed seed in the field, hid in the field. And don't forget the trees of the field clapping their hands!


"Of the field" sounds like a location, but varies between what one sows and works in and with where one can hide and hunt. Now, one may see deer in a wheat field, but one doesn't normally think of it as a good hiding place.

Question: Where did the plain herb and tree yielding fruit grow?

Is the last part of Genesis 3:18, when taken in context with the rest of that verse and the ones preceding and following it, detailing the curse - the curse of pain and toilsome labor?

Otherwise, one needs to answer such questions as what happens when you plant an herb of the forest in a field? Or vice versa. Does that make one a vegetable and the other a.... well what? You have a fruit of the tree, an herb of the field (claimed to be vegetable) and a plain herb (which would be what?). If fruit, why didn't God use the word fruit like He did with the trees? Why does Genesis 1:11,12 not include vegetables as in the leaves, stems, and roots? Does using the phrase "herb of the field" suddenly imply and encompass leaves, stems, and roots whereas herb of the forest or just plain herb does not?

Sarah, I doubt it is possible to achieve a balanced diet based on what is left over after eliminating meat, dairy, legumes, nuts, and gluten.

kland,

We are drifting away from the original question, as Mike has reminded us. Nevertheless, it is simple to answer your questions.

There is but one observation lacking in your word study. The crucial words are not "herb of the...", but rather "yielding seed." It was the seed given as food, or the fruit which contained the seed.

In other words, man was given carrot seed for food, and the animals could have the carrot. If you don't eat carrot seed, the better example would be wheat versus straw. Man eats the wheat, animals eat the straw. When we look at the distinction between fruits and vegetables, the Bible's definition agrees with our modern one--fruit comes from the ripened flower, vegetable is any other part of the plant: leaf, root, stalk, or even the flower itself, I suppose.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I'm not sure one could say it was the seed. And I think it was said of Genesis 3:18 that the crucial words are "herb of the field" defining what vegetables are.

Genesis 1:29: "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.

It seems to me the subject or object is herb rather than seed and tree rather than fruit or seed. If we were to stay by the seed part, then likewise we would have to say it doesn't permit the peach but only the peach pit.

I'm not saying it says we are not to eat the fruit just that if you are defining what vegetables are and whether vegetables were given as food based on that verse, it may not be a wise approach. I agree several people repeat that vegetables were only permitted later, but that doesn't make it true nor does the text support it. Other people use it to say we are not to eat mushrooms or ferns. Others use it to say we are not to eat navel oranges (no seeds).

Either that or there would be something intrinsically evil about that which is called unclean, menstruating women for instance.Concluding that humans were not designed to drink milk leads to the necessary conclusion that the ability to non the less drink it possessed by large populations of humans is evidence of evolution.

I think allergy would not be a correct term for the problem with milk. Some people do not produce the enzymes to break down milk as adults. An allergy is caused by the immune system backfiering and attacking the body. The evidence suggests that the increase of allergies we now experience are caused by us being designed to have dirt under our fingernails. Largely lacking buggs to fight increases the risk of an allergy developing.

For a short while.

kland, God gave explicit instructions. The text is clear. The subject of the sentence is not "herb," but "I." But no one needs a grammar lesson here. Words are used to convey meaning, and very frequently they do so without being the subject of the sentence. In this case we have a qualifying phrase. God did not say "I have given you every herb." He said "I have given you every herb that yields seed." That specification is important. If you want to strip non-subject/object portions of sentences out (like prepositional phrases), and understand God's meaning that way, I suppose Adam and Eve had permission to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil too (all in prepositional phrases).

My view on the matter is that the vegetables were second-class compared with the fruits, nuts, and grains. Who wants to eat straw? How about roots? You have to get under the dirt to get to them, and they sure aren't that pretty. God gave us the best. The rest was intended for the animals. After sin, things did change. We now have briers and thorns too. Here in Asia, there are thorny plants that people eat. Of course, in North America, such plants as stinging nettles are edible too--just cook before eating (collect them with gloves and long sleeves, and take care not to have them touch your face). Obviously, we eat things that are less than the ideal these days.

Mushrooms and ferns were not part of the original diet. As I've already mentioned, and most people agree, we no longer eat the original diet. I eat mushrooms and ferns (Asians like them), but I don't try to claim they were part of the original specification.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.