Bible Study Free will

[RevSRE]

Here's the problem I have with this line of reasoning. God didn't want us to choose between good and evil. That's why He made the knowledge of good and evil off limits.

Or is it that God put the tree in place to TEST man. Did He want to see if a truly free creature would choose to obey Him or not.
I am not so sure what God wanted. But I think we were made to choose to fellowship with Him and obey Him.
I wonder if this whole thing we call life is not a test to see just who will obey HIM! The ones that choose to obey will spend eternity with HIM!

So if we are to call freewill the ability to choose between good and evil, then it would be honest to say, that Satan gave us freewill not God. God is a Higher power. He precedes us as our Creator. This cannot be disputed. We therefore began as He made us, free in our wills because we were innocent, and not the lie that we are free in our wills because we know good and evil and choose freely between the two.

Again you are assuming what God wanted. We were made to fellowship with God. The logic of making evil so prominent seems to me to be lacking. You are making evil an item it does not deserve. God is good ( that is an attribute of God.) The opposite of good is evil. Evil exist because there is an elemental opposite to good. Love/ hate; Holy/ impious; infinite/ finite; just/ biased; and so on.,
To say, 'He made us, free in our wills because we were innocent, and not the lie that we are free in our wills because we know good and evil, is I think missing the point. We were made to Know God and fellowship with Him. Where do you find scripture that says we were less and "INNOCENT" Adam had as much free will before eating as after, Before Adam knew what God had said he must do, he choose not too.

People don't choose to be righteous. People who have Love, do act righteously, so as to not hurt others. Spare me the choose Life scripture as proof of freewill. Anyone who believes they can choose life through the law, as the law states, cannot be under grace.

Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
I do not know how LOVE got involved in righteousness But that point sure failed.

I will not go on point for point. Study some more!!

 

[smaller]

The doctrine of "total depravity" as taught by those who hold to that teaching is essentially false. The Bible tells us that men can and do operate by the dictates of their conscience, even though unsaved.

Let's not rubber stamp all forms of determinism with a faulted TULIP.

There are many a fine believing determinists who do NOT hold to TULIP, in total.

Let's picture total depravity in the scriptural sights:

Mark 4:
15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

Can you see where Mr. Calvin missed that part? Is it conceivable to (any) who the totally depraved one is in the above equation?

Let's look some more, shall we?

Ephesians 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

I just wonder who that could be? hmm? Total depravity, anyone?

Let's look some more:

Galatians 5:17
For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

Let's look some more:

2 Corinthians 12:7
And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

I wonder if ONE of the above was totally depraved? hmm?

I could go on but will finish this post with this one showing that total depravity IS a scriptural reality IF we happen to be able to read who is totally depraved.

Romans 11:32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Does that sound FREE to anyone?

I could go on at length, from the scriptures, showing the BINDING of the flesh/mind/heart with lusts, deceptions, disobedience, temptations, contrariness to the Spirit, against the Spirit, sin being of the DEVIL, having an EVIL CONSCIENCE, etc etc.

IF we are so "free" then what in the world do we need salvation for?

 

[smaller]

Or is it that God put the tree in place to TEST man. Did He want to see if a truly free creature would choose to obey Him or not.

As if God "needs" us to prove something to Him in order to save us?

God in not in need of anything of man. As if HE is forced into anything by "our choices." That's ludicrous.

I noted earlier, from Paul, the utter fallacy of choice as Paul spells out in Romans 7, showing he lusted in mind. He did things he hated. He did evil. He even said he "I am" the chief of sinners, after salvation! 1 Tim. 1:15

Didn't sound like Paul did too good in the "choice" arena. He was however HONEST, which is a FRUIT of the SPIRIT.

 

[childeye]

Or is it that God put the tree in place to TEST man.

Scripture indicates the tree was already in the Garden when we were put there.

Did He want to see if a truly free creature would choose to obey Him or not.

This is not a debate forum. So I suggest that if you really want to get into this topic, we should probably talk elsewhere so as not to be misconstrued as debating. I call it suggesting. You suggest that we are truly free creatures, so that God could test us if we would obey Him. The problem for me with freewill, is that the term is used as an equivocation. To define freedom of will as having in some measure the ability to trust our Maker, while also having in some measure, the disability to distrust our Maker, just doesn't make sense to me. What exactly would God be testing? Our blind obedience or our blind disobedience? For we know that mankind was obedient in faith up until the episode with the serpent. Did God send the serpent to test us? No, I don't believe that God sent the serpent, the most cunning of all God's creatures to test us through subtlety. Otherwise, God would be unjust in punishing the serpent for doing his job. So God wasn't testing us by telling us not to eat of that tree. I believe He was simply warning us in all forthrightness. Just as if I told my daughter not to text while driving.

I am not so sure what God wanted. But I think we were made to choose to fellowship with Him and obey Him.
I wonder if this whole thing we call life is not a test to see just who will obey HIM! The ones that choose to obey will spend eternity with HIM!

I've wondered that too before. It's why I'm here writing in response to the issue. I don't believe God is testing us. But what you call freewill in this scenario, I call a corruptible soul. Adam was made a corruptible soul for a reason. It is also said the lamb was slain before the foundation of the world. Therefore God knew there would be vanity in the creation. I just don't see any way around that. And such vanity, according to scripture, began in the highest angel, known as Satan, God's enemy, our adversary, the planter of the tares next to the wheat in our Lord's parable., and the same serpent that deceived mankind, the same entity who Jesus came to destroy the works of. Therefore God had to know.

Again you are assuming what God wanted. We were made to fellowship with God.

Respectfully, I am deducing from what we do know. I am not assuming. I know that God wants fellowship. How do I know this? Because fellowship requires faith/trust. From faith to faith. Faith in God is a prerequisite for fellowship. And obviously without faith in God, we cannot please God. If it matters to God what we think of Him, then He desires fellowship.

The freedom to choose back and forth whether God can be trusted or not, is therefore not necessary for fellowship. In fact, to be in a state of mind and soul, where one is left deciding for himself whether God is trustworthy or not, is to already be in a state of corruption through unbelief. Such a freewill, would actually be an impediment to fellowship, since it is essentially the same as always wondering if God is trustworthy. I therefore can't believe that in heaven, we would have these types of so called free wills that could choose to trust God or not. We would know He is trustworthy, even as the dear sacrifice of our Lord and Savior proves beyond any conceivable doubt.

The logic of making evil so prominent seems to me to be lacking. You are making evil an item it does not deserve. God is good ( that is an attribute of God.) The opposite of good is evil. Evil exist because there is an elemental opposite to good. Love/ hate; Holy/ impious; infinite/ finite; just/ biased; and so on.,

You are describing those things that spiritually amount to light and dark., wherein between are shades of gray. I note that God does not have any darkness, yet His will I would consider as free. The truth is, Light is all we actually see, but it is also light that is taken for granted in vanity. Darkness is the absence of light, wherein one sees less and less as he travels into darkness farther away from the light that is God. They are not equal powers. One power is higher than the other. And this we know because, the Truth of God preceded the lie which subverts the Truth. Therefore, a lie needs the Truth to exist. The Truth does not need the lie so as to exist.

To say, 'He made us, free in our wills because we were innocent, and not the lie that we are free in our wills because we know good and evil, is I think missing the point. We were made to Know God and fellowship with Him. Where do you find scripture that says we were less and "INNOCENT" Adam had as much free will before eating as after, Before Adam knew what God had said he must do, he choose not too.

I'm not saying we were less in freewill when we were innocent. I'm saying we lost our innocence when we were duped into believing God was a liar, which led to our eating the fruit, which led to the slavery of sin. The term 'free' before 'will' is rather subjective. But still I would argue that Adam didn't have as free of a will after eating. He now sees nakedness. He now knows shame, pride, guilt, death, disease, hardship, scrutiny of others, distrust, cynicism. The knowledge of good and evil is knowledge. But knowledge passes away, while Love endures. Knowledge puffs up, but Love edifies. I think Love is all that actually matters.

Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

This scripture is saying that no one ever obeyed these commandments, which is how we know we are unrighteous and have sin.

Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

This reiterates that righteousness is apprehended by faith and not by the ability to choose freely. Above, I have already demonstrated that faith/trust is a prerequisite for fellowship, while the freedom to choose back and forth whether God is trustworthy or not, is an impediment to fellowship. One cannot be on the fence concerning this. He who has faith in God is righteous, He who does not have faith in God is unrighteous. It's the same as saying, He who doesn't trust God, is calling God a liar.

I do not know how LOVE got involved in righteousness But that point sure failed.

How so? Love is the impetus in the will that moves men in righteousness, because Love feels others feelings. The ability to reason cannot even navigate properly without Love as a reference. Love God with all your heart mind and soul and Love your neighbor as yourself. This is righteousness as far as I know, and it requires Love. Love is what matters. Love is the Light, and the absence of Love is the darkness. God is Love/Light/Truth. God knew there would be vanity in the creation, so I believe it is safe to conclude, that we are here as living examples before all of heaven and earth, to prove that God is all that matters. Or in other Words, to glorify God alone. Romans 8:20.

 

[JCitoL]

Free will. It seems to be limited to choose the sin and lust you freely desire, as all fall short, trapped in the worlds bondage under sin, and not one is good but the Most High.

Sorry got no scripture to back me up, so you must correct me if im wrong so I can repent as I dont want to be no false prophet, im a philosipher

Dang I cant even get the word right. Philosepher, philosofer, I give up, yea anyhow, im just one of those thinkers type people.

on the one hand, the free will in the beginning did not include the choice to commit unrighteousness/do evil (in itself) (because God made the human righteous), so the unrighteous/bad choice turned out to be rather a human invention/introduction - actually satan was its primary cause, on the other hand, it would be better that the people under sin be careful not to sin (great sin)

Ecclesiastes 7:29 "this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions."

Blessings

 

[Corn Pop]

This thread is still going. Lol. I gave up on it long ago. By the time I read everyones opinions I could read the entire bible ten times over twice in five different languages.

 

[GodsGrace]

This thread is still going. Lol. I gave up on it long ago. By the time I read everyones opinions I could read the entire bible ten times over twice in five different languages.

Kiwidan
You've created a monster and it's taken on a life of its own.
Isn't it wonderful?
BTW, we're all waiting with baited breath for you to give your personal response to each and every opinion posted!!


W

 

[smaller]

This thread is still going. Lol. I gave up on it long ago. By the time I read everyones opinions I could read the entire bible ten times over twice in five different languages.

The spirit of Yogi Berra!

 

[childeye]

on the one hand, the free will in the beginning did not include the choice to commit unrighteousness/do evil (in itself) (because God made the human righteous), so the unrighteous/bad choice turned out to be rather a human invention/introduction - actually satan was its primary cause, on the other hand, it would be better that the people under sin be careful not to sin (great sin)

Ecclesiastes 7:29 "this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions."

Blessings

A good example of vanity at work in these inventions. Others label this vanity as free will.

 

[JCitoL]

A good example of vanity at work in these inventions. Others label this vanity as free will.

the spiritual iniquity in the form of human religion/spirituality is the vanity of all vanities, and it is also the first human invention that was the cause of the fall

Blessings

 

[reba]

Reba is looking for the Bible Study ,,,,

 

[childeye]

the spiritual iniquity in the form of human religion/spirituality is the vanity of all vanities, and it is also the first human invention that was the cause of the fall

Blessings

What you are referring to does fall under the umbrella of vanity. Presuming out of ignorance is like planting in the darkness or guessing. Satan is who first subtly expressed the false imagery of god to mankind. Man didn't invent it. It is only fitting that vanity manifested at the top down. But all creatures are subject to vanity before coming unto the knowledge of God. 2 Corinthians 4:4. Ultimately, I see vanity as taking Light/God for granted in some form or measure. For vanity does wonder in the darkness. Hence vanity precedes iniquity. Isaiah 5:18.

 

[JCitoL]

What you are referring to does fall under the umbrella of vanity. Presuming out of ignorance is like planting in the darkness or guessing. Satan is who first subtly expressed the false imagery of god to mankind. Man didn't invent it. It is only fitting that vanity manifested at the top down. But all creatures are subject to vanity before coming unto the knowledge of God. 2 Corinthians 4:4. Ultimately, I see vanity as taking Light/God for granted in some form or measure. For vanity does wonder in the darkness. Hence vanity precedes iniquity. Isaiah 5:18.

the humans sinned and fell from grace by "eating" of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", otherwise, if they did not "eat" of "it", they would not sin and there would be no fall, and "it" was a "tree" that could make the human wise, in other words, "it" could convert the human into a wise man, and there was some third "eye" that appeared in them only after they "ate" of the forbidden "tree", because they had no such "eye" before that, but satan promised them that they ostensibly have such an innate one and that it will ostensibly be opened if they "eat" of the forbidden "tree", and that ostensibly they will thus become all-knowing like God Himself, but actually the result of that turned out to be detrimental for them, and there appeared not only that third "eye" in them, but even a whole different consciousness, with which they began to perceive the things differently, because from that moment on they began to be ashamed of their sexuality and of all physical sense activities as well as of all their physical nature as a whole thinking they are kind of prejudiced in this physical world like some primitive mouses in a maze of a giant master, so, which science studies, or/and tries to explain the difference between, the good and the evil?!, we know that exactly the esoterism, the occultism, the theistic philosophy and the theology are such sciences, and that exactly the religion is the main one that tries to explain the truth between the good and the evil, so we already explained the nature of the so-called "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" on the human part (note: the nature of that "tree" may not be the same for God), and when they felt so "naked", they felt the need of some "covering", because they had to continue living in this world somehow, but this time with the premise to become divine like God Himself, so they found many "fig leaves"(the "leaves" of the forbidden "tree") - their "inventions" from Ecclesiastes 7:29, which means they found many religious/spiritual doctrines that they used as a "covering" (in order) to be able to continue living by "walking" in the direction of the great self-deification, and thus they made their own religion - a religion/spirituality of errors...

Matthew 15:8-9 "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

Blessings

 

[JCitoL]

Reba is looking for the Bible Study ,,,,

Matthew 24:4-27 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall(i.e. because many may) come in my name, saying, I am Christ(also: the Lord sent/sends me); and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars(i.e. and you may hear from them exhortations about hostility/aggression against humans/souls and whole such creeds/doctrines): see that ye be not troubled(i.e. but do not believe them): for all these things must come to pass(i.e. for all these things may come inevitably), but the end is not yet(i.e. but the end may not be thereupon). For nation(i.e. because religion) shall rise against nation(i.e. against religion), and kingdom(i.e. and spiritual kingdom) against kingdom(i.e. against spiritual kingdom): and there shall be famines(i.e. crises), and pestilences(or: and scourges/ruins), and earthquakes(i.e. and shocks), in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they(i.e. then the spiritual lawbreakers/offenders will try to) deliver you up to be afflicted(or: to be badly affected), and shall kill(or: and to ruin) you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall many be offended(i.e. and then many may be offended on the part of the system of (the) spiritual iniquity), and shall betray one another(i.e. and many believers/worshipers will betray one another), and shall hate one another(i.e. and will judge/vilify/curse/doom one another). And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity(i.e. and because the spiritual iniquity) shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold... When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: ) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains(i.e. then let those who turn out to be concerned with the human religion flee from there to the direction of the right exercise of faith):... Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert(i.e. in the physical/bodily denials); go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers(i.e. in the (inside) processes of yoga/transcendental meditation); believe it not. For as the lightning(i.e. the sun) cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be(i.e. the coming of the true Lord, Who is Jesus Christ, i.e. He first takes care of the true Saints and then He takes good care of the irreligious/non-occult people together with/through the true Saints, furthermore, this may happen with the speed of lightning)."

Blessings

 

[childeye]

the humans sinned and fell from grace by "eating" of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", otherwise, if they did not "eat" of "it", they would not sin and there would be no fall, and "it" was a "tree" that could make the human wise, in other words, "it" could convert the human into a wise man, and there was some third "eye" that appeared in them only after they "ate" of the forbidden "tree", because they had no such "eye" before that, but satan promised them that they ostensibly have such an innate one and that it will ostensibly be opened if they "eat" of the forbidden "tree", and that ostensibly they will thus become all-knowing like God Himself, but actually the result of that turned out to be detrimental for them, and there appeared not only that third "eye" in them, but even a whole different consciousness, with which they began to perceive the things differently, because from that moment on they began to be ashamed of their sexuality and of all physical sense activities as well as of all their physical nature as a whole thinking they are kind of prejudiced in this physical world like some primitive mouses in a maze of a giant master, so, which science studies, or/and tries to explain the difference between, the good and the evil?!, we know that exactly the esoterism, the occultism, the theistic philosophy and the theology are such sciences, and that exactly the religion is the main one that tries to explain the truth between the good and the evil, so we already explained the nature of the so-called "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" on the human part (note: the nature of that "tree" may not be the same for God), and when they felt so "naked", they felt the need of some "covering", because they had to continue living in this world somehow, but this time with the premise to become divine like God Himself, so they found many "fig leaves"(the "leaves" of the forbidden "tree") - their "inventions" from Ecclesiastes 7:29, which means they found many religious/spiritual doctrines that they used as a "covering" (in order) to be able to continue living by "walking" in the direction of the great self-deification, and thus they made their own religion - a religion/spirituality of errors...

Matthew 15:8-9 "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

Blessings

For what it's worth, I like this post. It's kind of one big sentence which makes it harder to process, but your choice of scriptures, were really helpful for me in understanding the main sentiment.

However, respectfully and in all forthrightness, I feel that your first line of reasoning is missing this aspect. You say this: "the humans sinned and fell from grace by "eating" of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", otherwise, if they did not "eat" of "it", they would not sin and there would be no fall,"

To be precise, mankind first had to doubt God's integrity before they ever ate. And this doubt in God's Character, I would describe as unbelief or unfaith. So as to say, that mankind fell from grace, by not believing God when they disobeyed and ate. How such doubt entered in, was of course through the cunning and subtle suggestion presented to the innocent and gullible.

For what it's worth, I think you are absolutely correct about a change of consciousness as an adverse effect of eating the tree. As pertains to whether man has a free-will in a moral purview, it is therefore scripturally clear that mankind's will was altered. For example, the fig leaves as a metaphor for false religion, I take to mean as a superficial form of righteousness.

In regards to what you have mentioned as esotericism, I feel moved to say this scripture.
1 Corinthians 8:1-3King James Version (KJV)
8 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

 

[JCitoL]

For what it's worth, I like this post. It's kind of one big sentence which makes it harder to process, but your choice of scriptures, were really helpful for me in understanding the main sentiment.

However, respectfully and in all forthrightness, I feel that your first line of reasoning is missing this aspect. You say this: "the humans sinned and fell from grace by "eating" of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", otherwise, if they did not "eat" of "it", they would not sin and there would be no fall,"

To be precise, mankind first had to doubt God's integrity before they ever ate. And this doubt in God's Character, I would describe as unbelief or unfaith. So as to say, that mankind fell from grace, by not believing God when they disobeyed and ate. How such doubt entered in, was of course through the cunning and subtle suggestion presented to the innocent and gullible.

didn't God command them not to "eat" of the "fig tree"?!, and didn't the woman(eve) know that God commanded them not to "eat" of that "tree"?!, so they were righteous and aware enough, but satan had the power to entice and seduce them, so if satan had no power to do that, they would not sin and fall from grace, that is why it was said and written: "He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much."(Luke 16:10), because the amount of knowledge is not such a crucial factor as the faithfulness is, or as it is also explained in 1 Cor 8 that you quoted below

For what it's worth, I think you are absolutely correct about a change of consciousness as an adverse effect of eating the tree. As pertains to whether man has a free-will in a moral purview, it is therefore scripturally clear that mankind's will was altered. For example, the fig leaves as a metaphor for false religion, I take to mean as a superficial form of righteousness.

In regards to what you have mentioned as esotericism, I feel moved to say this scripture.
1 Corinthians 8:1-3King James Version (KJV)
8 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

in short and simple words it can be and is explained so, but practically speaking, it may be much more complicated, because the potential of the kingdom of "darkness" is also very great

Blessings

 

[Malachi]

didn't God command them not to "eat" of the "fig tree"?!,

That was neither a fig tree nor an apple tree. It was simply the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And yes, they were forbidden to eat of that tree upon pain of death.

 

[JCitoL]

That was neither a fig tree nor an apple tree. It was simply the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And yes, they were forbidden to eat of that tree upon pain of death.

it is represented as a "fig tree" (not in the literal sense) - there are special spiritual terms that are rather figurative than literal

Blessings

 

[childeye]

didn't God command them not to "eat" of the "fig tree"?!,

Oh they were commanded alright, and properly warned of bad things. But it really doesn't matter that they knew what God said, if they don't believe God. The beguiling however, was obviously beyond their comprehension, since they did eat.

in short and simple words it can be and is explained so, but practically speaking, it may be much more complicated, because the potential of the kingdom of "darkness" is also very great

These are some thoughts I have. I believe the Kingdom of Darkness is built on one single subtle lie that has been unknowingly accepted as true, and it resides in the subconscious. Other lies have been built upon this accepted premise, which makes it hard to see.

And this is my sincere concern regarding freewill doctrine. Many people still don't see the lie Satan said. Ask someone, "What is the mistake that Adam and Eve made?" The answer given is predominantly, "They disobeyed God and ate of the forbidden fruit."... Notice that few will ever say, "They believed God was a lying tyrant who subjugates those under him by keeping them ignorant through fear of death". Nobody even answers to any effect that acknowledges, that Adam and Eve were deceived into believing something that was not true, other than Paul. 2 Corinthians 11:3.

Now I find it true, that there is no true repentance if you're not actually sorry for what you did. Moreover, if you don't even know what you did wrong, you can't be sorry for it. Of course it is easy to now say that we are sorry for disobeying God, since we were removed from paradise, and now experience hardship and death. But it's kind of like saying it's wrong to steal because you go to jail. So if I were to put my self in God's shoes, I feel that I would much rather hear someone say, "We are sorry we ever doubted your Loving Faithful Character, wherein you have always looked out for us without fail"... That, to me, would be a true repentance from the original sin.

Freewill doctrine instead focuses on our taking responsibility for our actions, based on the assertion that we choose freely. It sounds nice, but it draws attention away from the real issue of being blinded through deception. For one thing, it seems that no one considers that we cannot choose correctly when we are deceived. Consquently in that mindset, any attempt to excuse Adam and Eve as deceived, is seen as an attempt to escape responsibility for one's sinful actions. I can see how the hypocritical self righteous spirit is based on this. And I believe this mirrors what Paul called righteousness through the works of the law.

So it is that we can excuse and accuse. Freewill doctrine tends to frown on excusing peoples actions on any pretense of being deceived and weak in the flesh. Freewill doesn't approve of blaming Satan, seeing that as an excuse and giving power to Satan, who is ironically the accuser. Freewill belief is so adamant of a closed mind, that it concludes that we are just robots if we can't choose freely to sin or not. The lie of darkness is it pretends to be the light. I must stop now. This post is already too long and I could go on and on. Matthew 7:1.

Blessings back to you!

 

[Malachi]

... that Adam and Eve were deceived into believing something that was not true,..

According to Scripture, only Eve was deceived, but that was a welcome deception, since she responded according to the three lusts. The question that never gets asked is what business did Eve have in dialoguing with the Devil? Why did she not run to Adam immediately and tell him "You deal with this Serpent, since he is casting doubt on what God has said"? And Adam simply disobeyed.

To deny the free will of these two, and thus deny the free will of humanity, simply will not wash. Please note these Scriptures carefully.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food [the lust of the flesh], and that it was pleasant to the eyes [the lust of the eyes], and a tree to be desired to make one wise [the pride of life], she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. (Gen 3:6).

And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (1 Tim 2:14).

Adam was fully aware of the truth and the consequences, but chose to disobey regardless. The whole point of making human beings free moral agents is for people to freely turn to God and to Christ upon hearing the Gospel. The Holy Spirit convicts and convinces, but it is the sinner who must repent and believe the Gospel. If all would repent, all would be saved. Many do not repent because they prefer darkness over light (Jn 3:19-21).