If I were to put myself in Adam and Eve's shoes, knowing what I know today, I'd be afraid that it was possible to sin. To know that there was a way to mar my relationship with Him, thereby never being able to go back except by exigent, severe sacrifices.

I think it all goes back to free will. God is love and he wants us to Love him. This means allowing us a choice. God knew from beginning how it will all Turn out, that Adam and Eve would mess it up. That we humans would make bad choices.

No worries God is still in control and sets things right in the next life.

Reason I Love history - see every generation does some things right and some things wrong. In grand scheme- God still in control, life goes on with out us.

booboo91 said:

---

I think it all goes back to free will. God is love and he wants us to Love him. This means allowing us a choice. God knew from beginning how it will all Turn out, that Adam and Eve would mess it up. That we humans would make bad choices.

No worries God is still in control and sets things right in the next life.

Reason I Love history - see every generation does some things right and some things wrong. In grand scheme- God still in control, life goes on with out us.

---

Spot on. God does everything for a reason, including planting the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden and telling Adam and Eve not to eat from it. He could have just not put the tree there or not prevented them from eating of it. But God wants love above all else, and love is a choice.

So if you were in the Garden you had a choice, but it's the same choice we have now. You could say that Adam and Eve's choice brought suffering on mankind, and therefore place blame on them. However, each of us ratifies their choice with each sin, so we really have no room to blame them.

Can you expand on your second paragraph?

I'm not sure I agree with you on it, but want to understand more what you're trying to say?

Sure. So you could say that our deaths were unfairly brought upon us by the sins of Adam and Eve. We didn't know them and had no control over the issue, but we all die anyway. You could say that making us bear the consequences of Adam and Eve's sins is unjust, as Ezekiel says we bear responsibility only for our own sins. However, we all sin. So we are not blameless and don't get to claim our mortality as unfair.

Here's a metaphor. Let's say the head of a town is caught stealing, so the whole town is cordoned off and no one can enter or leave. Then all the townspeople start constantly stealing from each other, every one from another round and round. The townspeople may cry foul over being sequestered due to their chiefs wrongdoing, but none of them are innocent. Their further actions show they deserve to be isolated just as much as their leader. None if them deserve to be free.

Same as us in regard to Adam and Eve. We didn't commit the first sin and bring mortality, but that doesn't mean we deserve immortality. We're just as bad as they were.

Agree with rambling - Adam gets blame to start for being first and we follow in right behind him.

1- as you know the Bible is timeless, it speaks to past events and it still speaks to us today. because our human nature does not change! We have the same temptations ( 7 deadly sins) successes and failures today as they Did thousands of years ago.

2- Interesting tidbit Adam got to choose from ALL / EVERY tree in garden, except 1 and that is what we in our human condition focus on.

-Also devil temps us, But we get to choose. Same with today.

-God is very reasonable, he placed us in garden with countless good choices, warns us in the bad choices. And then we choose.

Gen 16-17 But the LORD God warned him, "You may freely eat the fruit of EVERY tree in the garden 17except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die."

Thanks for the detail. I have some challenges to it.

If we look at what the scriptures say, I don't think it agrees with your metaphor.

For example:

Psalm 51:5 - "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me."

Psalm 19:12 - "Who can discern his errors? Declare me innocent from hidden faults

Romans 6:20 - "For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness

Ephesians: 2:3 - "among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind."

Romans 7:15 - "For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very things I hate."

So, when I think to your example, I think Scripture would call for it to look like this:

"Here's a metaphor. Let's say the head of a town is caught stealing, so he and his wife are cordoned off and no one can enter or leave. Then as they have children who all also have a desire to steal/commit other crimes against each other. The townspeople may cry foul over being sequestered due to their chiefs wrongdoing, but none of them are innocent. Their further actions show they deserve to be isolated just as much as their leader. None if them deserve to be free."

This is why, at least in the west, the term of Original Sin was developed to describe the sin that seems to follow all of mankind.

Quote:

---

I think it all goes back to free will. God is love and he wants us to Love him. This means allowing us a choice. God knew from beginning how it will all Turn out, that Adam and Eve would mess it up. That we humans would make bad choices.

No worries God is still in control and sets things right in the next life.

---

I always think it's cute how you free willers bring it up and completely undermine it in the same sentence.

Your point of view makes sense, but I guess I don't view original sin in the same way. In my reading, original sin made our bodies perishable and everything that comes along with that, ie disease, deformity, childbirth, and procuring food.

I don't so much believe that original sin corrupted our spirit. You don't need a corrupted spirit to sin. In other words, the ability to sin is part of what makes us human, but the proclivity to sin is our own fault

How do you reconcile that with Paul calling us slaves to sin?

That kind of language would seem to say that our decision making isn't purely free and untainted, but that we have a master forcing his will on us?

AgLiving06 said:

---

How do you reconcile that with Paul calling us slaves to sin?

That kind of language would seem to say that our decision making isn't purely free and untainted, but that we have a master forcing his will on us?

---

I think we have to take Paul's "slave to sin" comments as a bit of hyperbole. If he literally meant that we are slaves to sin, then so much of the rest of the Bible doesn't make any sense. Start with Deut 30:11. God gives us the Law and immediately says it is not too difficult to follow. When you break it down, He's right (because of course He is). It's not difficult to not steal, not murder, set aside tithes, etc. No single commandment of the Law is exceptionally difficult. God isn't asking us to dunk a basketball, swim the English channel or play a violin Mozart recital. Those are things most people would never be able to do. Even then, God gives us an out. Basically, as long as you don't kill someone or ruin their life, then here's how you make the situation right. If we literally couldn't do anything but sin, the entire OT makes no sense. Why would God give people commands and then issue righteous judgement if the people were completely incapable of following them? That would be unjust.

Let's look in the NT. Jesus often heals people and then says "go and sin no more". If these people are literal slaves to sin and have no choice, then is Jesus just mocking them? Like telling a frog "leap no more?"

Or on a daily, practical level. No one constantly sins. We are all a mix of righteousness and sin, love and selfishness. Great leaders can accomplish a lot and also be prolific sinners. MLK is a great example of this. If we were all slaves to sin, then we would be entirely unable to do anything righteous or loving.

The idea that we are slaves to either sin or righteousness also takes away our own responsibility and culpability. If we have no choice, then we are not ultimately responsible for our sins. It's not our fault; we're just programmed to sin. Like programming a superadvanced robot to be depressed and suicidal. You can't fault the robot. He's just running his programming. It certainly wouldn't make sense to punish him for it. So how can we make sense of God punishing us for sin? For that to work, it must mean that at every moment we sin we had the option to not sin, and we personally chose to sin anyway. That's the only circumstance that imparts guilt on us.

I had a lot typed out about Law and Gospel, but then I realized, where we truly differ is right her

Quote:

---

The idea that we are slaves to either sin or righteousness also takes away our own responsibility and culpability. If we have no choice, then we are not ultimately responsible for our sins.

---

I think we have choices and we are responsible for our sins, but we need to square up Paul's anguish above about his flesh doing things he doesn't want it to do and with death itself.

We have free will, when it comes to our daily actions.

But the Law demands perfection and our decisions or works will never be perfect. There's always a flaw in the works we do. So while the Law sound simple, we start off failing.

But this is why the Gospel exists. If we could do it on our own, we wouldn't need Christ.

So as diehard pointed out above, it's tough to reconcile that God's in complete control, yet we want to be responsible for (some) of our actions (generally the good ones). I don't think it works to say that your actions or works are yours, yet you believe solely in Jesus is the only way to heaven. I really look at this and see the slavery that you're trying to avoid.

Paul responded to your question this way:

Romans 6:1-4
"What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life."

Paul found real freedom in know that Jesus gave him the freedom to live his life. It's important to note that this comes before his acknowledgement above that his flesh is still causing him to sin. So he's finding the freedom in God's grace, while knowing he is going to continue to sin.

diehard03 said:

---

Quote:

---

I think it all goes back to free will. God is love and he wants us to Love him. This means allowing us a choice. God knew from beginning how it will all Turn out, that Adam and Eve would mess it up. That we humans would make bad choices.

No worries God is still in control and sets things right in the next life.

---

I always think it's cute how you free willers bring it up and completely undermine it in the same sentence.

---

Good catch, to clarify. God is in control. He allows us to make a mess of things in this world with free will(as we try to learn to love one another) and he will set it right in the next world (Heaven/Hell).

My favorite analogy is kids making a mess in the kitchen. The parents delight when their children try and make them breakfast in bed. The kids burn the eggs and toast, and spill the OJ everywhere, but the parents are happy in their children's participation. In their children's wanting to give " love" for their parents that they try and serve them. Note: the parents have to help in cleaning up the mess in the kitchen, also the parents could of made a much better breakfast. God is same way. He delights in our participation, even though he does not need our help at all.

But aren't you just mixing things together to get the desired outcome you want? You seem to treat the Law as a suggestion, not the standard.

If I take your example and put it to scripture terms then,

You're implying that somehow trying hard to be good delights our Father and He loves us. But Scripture does not say that. It says the wages of sin are death (not life). As rambling_ag said, we are not to sin.

So God does not "delight" in our mistakes. If that were the case, we wouldn't need Christ's death. We wouldn't a need a God to sacrifice His Son to die for our mistakes.

And that's the point. We aren't good. Our desires are never good enough for God, but He forgives us, not for what we do (or don't do), but because of Jesus' sacrifice for us.

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

So as diehard pointed out above, it's tough to reconcile that God's in complete control, yet we want to be responsible for (some) of our actions (generally the good ones). I don't think it works to say that your actions or works are yours, yet you believe solely in Jesus is the only way to heaven. I really look at this and see the slavery that you're trying to avoid.

---

---

It is both! We get to choose, Participate and we also absolutely need God's help. In the end, no matter what we do regarding our choices God is in control.

1) Our choices and actions are our own. We definitely own our sin. God does not want us to sin, but he does allow us to be tempted and choose- Free Will. See Adam and Eve. Why did God let the Devil in the garden?

2) But God also gives us his Mercy and Grace. Regarding St. Paul thorn in side 2 Corinthians 12 9 "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me

John 15 5 I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing

3) Wisdom of St. Teresa of Avila (Stud saint 1500s) she echoes the John 15 5 verse from book The Fulfillment of All Desire: A Guidebook to God Based on the wisdom of the saints by Ralph Martin

This self-reliance was what destroyed me. One of the most common reasons why people begin the spiritual journey but then turn back is because they find themselves failing, wearing out, or getting tired or discouraged as a result of relying on their own strength or intellect rather than on the Lord.

Teresa points out the discernible difference between the demeanor of someone who is approaching the spiritual journey as a matter of one's own effort, and that of someone approaching it as a matter of trusting in the mercy of God. When we are more determined we are less confident of ourselves, for confidence must be placed in God. When we understand this . . . there will be no need to go about so tense and constrained. . . . [We will] go about with a holy freedom.

AgLiving06 said:

---

But the Law demands perfection and our decisions or works will never be perfect. There's always a flaw in the works we do. So while the Law sound simple, we start off failing.

But this is why the Gospel exists. If we could do it on our own, we wouldn't need Christ.

---

I think this statement points out where we differ. I don't the Gospel has anything to do with living a sinless life. Even if a person lived a completely sinless life, that person would still need Christ. Christ grants us eternity by leading us to be adopted members of the divine family. God took immortality from Adam and Eve, and only God can give it back to us.

I'd put it this way. We don't need Christ's sacrifice to choose to love goodness over sin, but we need his sacrifice to make that choice matter

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

But the Law demands perfection and our decisions or works will never be perfect. There's always a flaw in the works we do. So while the Law sound simple, we start off failing.

But this is why the Gospel exists. If we could do it on our own, we wouldn't need Christ.

---

I think this statement points out where we differ. I don't the Gospel has anything to do with living a sinless life. Even if a person lived a completely sinless life, that person would still need Christ. Christ grants us eternity by leading us to be adopted members of the divine family. God took immortality from Adam and Eve, and only God can give it back to us.

I'd put it this way. We don't need Christ's sacrifice to choose to love goodness over sin, but we need his sacrifice to make that choice matter

---

This is an interesting answer.

Because under this premise nothing we do matters. God choses and we don't. Sin or sinless life is life.

It's important to show where you quote scripture and where you don't. Only premise 2 tries to show scripture.

On points 1 and 3, you don't. I can only take those as opinions.

But further:

Point 1: No basis in scripture provided. Even you're question around the snake is not relevant given that he knew man would fall.

Point 3; Seems to avoid the fact that our works are not our own but that of the vine, not the branch. Yet you would presume the branch created life.

In my mind it means that we have free will and total unencumbered control of our own choices and God has complete control over the eternal consequences of those choices. Mercy or justice is His call, but the guilt is fully ours

Quote:

---

Because under this premise nothing we do matters. God choses and we don't. Sin or sinless life is life.

---

I don't agree with how Rambling got there, but I do think this is reality. We can do nothing apart from God. Things only "matter" because God says they matter (or not).

The kicker is that God doesn't allow us to see this "lack of free will", so we get to experience life as if we do. Thus, the commands and teachings.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

In my mind it means that we have free will and total unencumbered control of our own choices and God has complete control over the eternal consequences of those choices. Mercy or justice is His call, but the guilt is fully ours

---

I can agree to a certain extent with what you've written.

What I'm adding to it, is from Paul's perspective, the corruption within our flesh is so great that we don't just sin. Our flesh actually desires and wills us towards sin.

AgLiving06 said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

In my mind it means that we have free will and total unencumbered control of our own choices and God has complete control over the eternal consequences of those choices. Mercy or justice is His call, but the guilt is fully ours

---

I can agree to a certain extent with what you've written.

What I'm adding to it, is from Paul's perspective, the corruption within our flesh is so great that we don't just sin. Our flesh actually desires and wills us towards sin.

---

I'd buy that. In the Bible we went from Adam and Eve's theft of the apple to Cain murdering Able pretty fast. That's a 0 to 100 escalation if ever there was one.

When this world comes to an end and God makes a new earth, will there be a forbidden tree in it as well (or something equivalent)?

Edit: As great of a place as Heaven seems to be, Satan sure got a hold of something forbidden.

I cannot possibly know God's thinking on things, but when he designed the earth, it sure needed a forbidden tree in it.

Which all leads to the question, does the formula for free will hinge on something forbidden being present?

Here's something I find most interesting about all this: what exactly did Adam and Eve gain from eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?
Or more importantly, what did they not know/have before eating from it? Without eating from the tree, did they have the ability to comprehend the consequences of their actions? Did they know what sin was before eating? They certainly didn't feel shame, and feeling shame is a pretty important part of sin. Did they have the ability to comprehend their choice?

By the way, I also find all the theories and translations that say the fruit wasn't an apple, but closer to a grape or pomegranate.

First off, the story is incredibly allegorical in tone and has been interpreted in that way since even before Jesus. So whether it's an apple specifically or whether the fruit was magic in some way really isn't as important as the overall themes of the story. That said, I tend to think the fruit was just a regular fruit, and the knowledge of good and evil came from the consequences of disobedience. Adam and Eve had only ever done good and had no knowledge of evil, or more accurately no firsthand experience of evil. Once they committed an evil act they felt guilt and shame for the first time ever and had experiential knowledge of both good and evil.

Sort of like me calling my thermostat "the thermostat of the knowledge of the loss of Wifi privileges". Touch the thermostat and you'll get firsthand knowledge of that

So they were punished (thrown out of Eden) for making a choice they didn't have the capability to understand? They weren't aware of the consequences, did they even understand the concept of a consequence? No second chances?

Quad Dog said:

---

So they were punished (thrown out of Eden) for making a choice they didn't have the capability to understand? They weren't aware of the consequences, did they even understand the concept of a consequence? No second chances?

---

You could also say knowledge of good and evil includes experiencing the consequences of good and evil. So the punishment was still part of it. They may not have understood everything, but that doesn't absolve them. We don't give murders second chances just because they didn't realize how harsh the punishment would be. Adam and Eve knew they were not supposed to eat the fruit.

As far as second chances, that sort of the whole point of the Gospel. Jesus' sacrifice gave everyone a second chance

Quad Dog said:

---

So they were punished (thrown out of Eden) for making a choice they didn't have the capability to understand? They weren't aware of the consequences, did they even understand the concept of a consequence? No second chances?

---

Lets look at the actual Scripture because when I read it, I do not come to the same conclusion as you:

NKJV Version:

Genesis 2:15-17

Quote:

---

15 Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

---

This appears to be pretty clear that the consequences (at least to Adam) were explicitly clear. Death.

Eve (or Adam) tweaked it a bit (Genesis 3:2-3)

Quote:

---

And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.' "

---

So she was also aware of the consequences, at least as explained by Adam.

But further, when Adam is caught, what does he do? Genesis 3:9-13

Quote:

---

9 Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, "Where are you?"
10 So he said, "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself."
11 And He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?"
12 Then the man said, "The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate."
13 And the Lord God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?"
The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."

---

Both hide in shame.

Adam blames both God and Eve (who he would have taught himself).


So when I read Genesis, I walk away saying that both Adam and Eve understood that death would come should they eat of the tree.