Contradictions and the soul of man

[Jim Parker]

I am not really sure exactly what you mean by this sentence, can you make it clearer please?

To my statement ; "Eternal life is a gift which no human being deserves because all have sinned"
you replied at your post no. 14; "What, even after a man has been made perfect and God remembers his sins no more?"
To that I replied, "Man will not be made perfect until enters the kingdom heaven in the age to come."
No one will be perfect in this life because all of mankind will struggle with sin until they die.
It is not until after the resurrection that the saints will be made perfect. At that time "we will be like him".

1John 3:2 (RSV)
Beloved, we are God's children now;
it does not yet appear what we shall be,
but we know that when he appears we shall be like him,
for we shall see him as he is.

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

Here you say no one is made perfect until he enters the Kingdom, but Jesus seems to imply that this is possible in Matthew 5:48.

The experience of the church for the past 2000 years in contrary to that possibility.

I believe this is explained in Romans 3:21-22. We are made perfect by Christ's perfection imputed upon us. I'm curious about your thoughts here.

Your understanding is reasonable as long as you adhere to the legal/judicial view of righteousness which arose from the teaching of the Roman Catholic scholastics and Archbishop Anselm of Canterbury, who, in his tract"Cur Deus Homo", taught that it was necessary for God to extract punishment on an infinitely valuable sacrifice in order to satisfy His infinitely offended ego.

I reject that view because God has always forgiven the sins of anyone who would repent. (Ps 32:1; 51:16-17)
I reject the idea that God acted because it was necessary for Him to satisfy the demands of justice. (Thus subordinating God to necessity)
I reject that legalistic view of atonement and hold to the view that God acted in Love to destroy the trap of sin and death in which the devil had ensnared mankind.

The idea that Christ's perfection is "imputed" to us has the unfortunate effect of creating the impression that our efforts to quit sinning and to acquire the virtues are unnecessary. (If I am saved, and nothing I do can change that, then I can just go about my business and not be too concerned with being holy because God is Holy.)

That's how I see it.

iakov the fool

 

[freewill]

Since you follow after Armstrong's doctrines, you are going to believe him. I have been to his gatherings, it is as dead as a graveyard. I followed the WWCG for several years and studied his teachings. Scripture is not the teachings of man. It is Spiritual and not subject to carnal interpretation. There will never be a compatibility between the carnal doctrines you push and almighty God, not with me, or any other Born again believer.

Just for the record, I have never been a member of the WWCG and I don't know much about Armstrong's doctrines either, from what little I have just read about this church it seems to be similar in some way to what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, and I hasten to add I am not a JW either, never have been and never will be. ...and can I just ask you now, what "carnal doctrine" is it that you believe I am "pushing" which you find to be the most offensive and why?

 

[freewill]

To my statement ; "Eternal life is a gift which no human being deserves because all have sinned"
you replied at your post no. 14; "What, even after a man has been made perfect and God remembers his sins no more?"
To that I replied, "Man will not be made perfect until enters the kingdom heaven in the age to come."

I may be wrong but I will assume what you meant to write was:

Man will not be made perfect until he enters the kingdom of heaven in the age to come.

In which case, surely man will not enter the kingdom of heaven in the age to come until he has been made perfect. There will be no imperfections allowed into the kingdom of heaven.

Anyway, I am not saying or implying that there are Christians living in the world today who are perfect. True perfection - (being as perfect as God is perfect) will, as Scripture tells me, only come to the Christian at the second coming. Then "in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet" all true Christians living on earth will change and be made perfect (like God is perfect) and then they shall be given the right to live in the paradise of God forever.

"To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God" Revelation 2:7.

Definition of deserve: "to have earned or to be given something because of the way you have behaved or because of the qualities you have." ...and I hasten to add that those qualities of the saved and changed Christians at the end of time will be purely the gift of God. In other words, salvation will not have been earned by what man's good works have done.

Do you then still believe it is wrong for me to believe God will give immortality to whoever He decides deserves immortality? Or to put it another way, do you believe it is wrong for me to believe God will give immortality to a man whom He decides His work has made that man worthy to deserve immortality in paradise?

 

[Douglas Summers]

Just for the record, I have never been a member of the WWCG and I don't know much about Armstrong's doctrines either, from what little I have just read about this church it seems to be similar in some way to what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, and I hasten to add I am not a JW either, never have been and never will be. ...and can I just ask you now, what "carnal doctrine" is it that you believe I am "pushing" which you find to be the most offensive and why?

JW and SDA are similar to Armstrong's WWCG doctrine of immortality, But you post is exactly the same doctrine that Armstrong pushed.

• Armstrong's Doctrine Of The Soul - Truth Magazine
  truthmagazine.com/archives/volume27/GOT027154.html
  
  Armstrong's Doctrine Of The Soul. Mike Willis Dayton, Ohio . ... Discussing the Adventist's doctrine of immortality, Hoekema continued:
  

 

[Sinthesis]

Mat 5:48 - Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
​

The word perfect in this instance means unbiased, and would have to be taken out of context to believe it means flawless.

 

[Jim Parker]

Man will not be made perfect until he enters the kingdom of heaven in the age to come.

that is correct

In which case, surely man will not enter the kingdom of heaven in the age to come until he has been made perfect.

That is a non sequitor, a logical fallacy.
It does not follow the case.

There will be no imperfections allowed into the kingdom of heaven.

The church IS the eschatological kingdom of heaven manifest on earth today since Pentecost though not in its full realization.
If we are 'in Christ" and all authority has been given to him in heaven and on earth and we are seated with him, (inhale) then we are, in fact, in the kingdom of heaven right now.

True perfection - (being as perfect as God is perfect) will, as Scripture tells me, only come to the Christian at the second coming. Then "in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet" all true Christians living on earth will change and be made perfect (like God is perfect) and then they shall be given the right to live in the paradise of God forever.

That is how I see it too.

Do you then still believe it is wrong for me to believe God will give immortality to whoever He decides deserves immortality?

I don't believe anyone "deserves" immortality because all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God and the wages of sin is death, not immortality.
But,I believe God does give immortality according to his will because Jesus said," the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation." John 5:28-29 (NKJV)


iakov the fool

 

[freewill]

JW and SDA are similar to Armstrong's WWCG doctrine of immortality, But you post is exactly the same doctrine that Armstrong pushed.

As far as I am aware the SDAs, the JWs and Armstrong's WWCG all believe there is no such thing as everlasting torment. I don't believe that, I believe Scripture tells us clearly there is such a thing as everlasting torment for the vilest of evil souls who know the truth and continually seek to bury the truth and to continually corrupt, torment and destroy who and what they know is good. But I also believe Scripture tells me that God alone is immortal 1 Timothy 6:15-16 and that man's soul therefore must have been made mortal. I also believe God will give immortality to whoever He decides will have immortality.

There are more ways to view Scripture and the condemnation of unsaved souls than Calvin and His followers did, for example, "the parable of the rich man and Lazarus"...

I have seen this parable used many times as a reason for believing Luke 16:19-31 NASB proves every condemned soul will be an immortal soul and will begin being tormented in hell ("Hades") as soon as they die. Let us then take a closer look at this parable and the context in which it was told.

First of all though, "Hades” which is the Greek term used to translate the Hebrew term Sheol, basically refers to the grave or the abode of the dead and clearly the parable of the rich man and Lazarus describes this intermediate state as being a place of consciousness. But sheol during the Old Testament period also describes a place devoid of consciousness, for example Ecclesiastes 9:5, Ecclesiastes 9:10, psalms 88:12 NIV. In other words the intermediate state proceeding the resurrection has more than one meaning.

This parable then, (a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson) although it quite clearly conveys a picture of consciousness and torment in Hades for the rich man immediately or certainly very soon after he dies, it doesn’t actually say how long that torment will last. But even if death (as in the general literal meaning) never comes and torment for the likes of that rich man continues forever, Jesus was speaking to Jews at the time, some were Pharisees, learned men who knew the Scriptures and the law and were well aware of what Jesus was teaching, and yet many of them had only hatred and contempt for Him. It is clear to me then that Jesus was referring to the arrogant contemptible and uncaring hateful minds of certain Jews in this parable, not least because verse 14 of this chapter along with verses 24-31 NASB make it clear who that warning was aimed at: Such men as this rich man and his brothers would have been made well aware of the God of their father Abraham and their duty under the moral law. Such men would have been taught the difference between good and evil. But the same cannot be said for everyone who will be condemned. There will be others condemned who would not have been given the same teaching as those Jews had, neither then would they have been given the same understanding of good and evil. In many cases they wouldn’t have anything like the same contempt for their sick and hungry like the rich man showed for Lazarus. Furthermore, not only did the rich man show absolute contempt for Lazarus (the name Lazarus indicates he was a fellow Jew) but in so doing showed the same contempt for God’s moral law (Leviticus 19:18 ESV) and therefore also for God Himself.

I do not see a good reason then to assume the agony described in this parable (whether it continues forever or not) reflects anything like the kind of suffering which the least knowledgeable and least offensive of the condemned will face, especially when Scripture also speaks clearly of soul death Ezekiel 18:4 ESV, KJV, NKJV and that God alone is immortal 1 Timothy 6:15-16 NKJV and that He can permanently and completely destroy-(apollumi) a man’s soul in Gehenna Matthew 10:28 NIV. Neither then do I see this parable as a worthy reason to believe like so many Roman Catholics and Reformed Christians have been continually indoctrinated to believe regarding the condemnation of the least knowledgeable and least offensive of those who die without Christ.

If a man can believe that all men were born with immortal souls and that our our senses and our awareness and our ability to reason and perceive will live forever, and at the same time also believes 1 Timothy 6:15-16 NIV tells us God alone is immortal, then the question I have to ask myself is what other nonsense does he believe in?

He can philosophise all he wants to reconcile these differing views to his concept of reality so that he can continue promoting and maintaining the grotesque and vile idea that God will condemn the least knowledgeable and least offensive of souls who die without Christ to be tortured, screaming in agony forever, but in the end he will see what he believes is in fact nothing other than the work of Satan… or to put it another way, it is a work of pure evil.

 

[Douglas Summers]

There are more ways to view Scripture and the condemnation of unsaved souls than Calvin and His followers did, for example, "the parable of the rich man and Lazarus"...

I have seen this parable used many times as a reason for believing Luke 16:19-31 NASB proves every condemned soul will be an immortal soul and will begin being tormented in hell ("Hades") as soon as they die. Let us then take a closer look at this parable and the context in which it was told.

First of all though, "Hades” which is the Greek term used to translate the Hebrew term Sheol, basically refers to the grave or the abode of the dead and clearly the parable of the rich man and Lazarus describes this intermediate state as being a place of consciousness. But sheol during the Old Testament period also describes a place devoid of consciousness, for example Ecclesiastes 9:5, Ecclesiastes 9:10, psalms 88:12 NIV. In other words the intermediate state proceeding the resurrection has more than one meaning.

I have heard the same from Armstrong from his Ambassador College course. After Armstrong passed, the WWCG broke up into several off shoots, But nevertheless, I have heard it all before from WWCG. It was not clear in the OT about what happened after the grave, and there was a reason for that. For it was left up to Christ to bring life and immortality 2 Tim. 1:10.

 

[WIP]

But I also believe Scripture tells me that God alone is immortal 1 Timothy 6:15-16 and that man's soul therefore must have been made mortal.

A couple things. When I read Genesis 1 and 2, I don't get the impression that man was made mortal. The reason I believe comes from Genesis 2:15-17 NKJV:

Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 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.”

It seems to indicate that dieing was not a part of living until after the fall and I also believe that dieing is not necessarily our physical death but our spiritual death as well.

I also believe God will give immortality to whoever He decides deserves immortality.

I think the last two words of this statement could be removed.

 

[chessman]

It seems to indicate that dieing was not a part of living until after the fall …

Genesis seems to me to indicate that dying was not a part of living in the Garden of Eden due specifically to Adam’s God given access to the Tree of Life:

Genesis 2:8-9 (LEB) And Yahweh God planted a garden in Eden in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed. And Yahweh God caused to grow every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food. And the tree of life was in the midst of the garden, along with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
…
Genesis 3:22-23What if he [Adam] stretches out his hand and takes also from the tree of life and eats, and lives forever?” And Yahweh God sent him out from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. So he drove the man out, and placed cherubim east of the Garden of Eden, and a flaming, turning sword to guard the way to the tree of life.
…
Genesis 5:4-5(LEB) And the days of Adam after he fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters. And all the days of Adam which he lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.​

When I read Genesis 1 and 2, I don't get the impression that man was made mortal.

When I read Genesis 2-5 (and the rest of Scripture, including Gen 2:15-17) I see that Adam was indeed made mortal (able to die). When Yahweh God told Adam: “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” I’m at a loss as to how that implies Adam was create immortal prior to the fall. What in the world is God doing telling Adam that he would die, if Adam was created immortal??? It makes no sense to me.

Furthermore, it was clearly (Biblically speaking) his God given access to the Tree of Life that would have allowed him to live forever (not his supposed innate immortality) had he never disobeyed God’s command. The Bible universally (from Genesis to Revelation) teaches that humans are/were (including Adam) created mortal (and all disobey God’s commands too). Only those humans who are found to be in Christ are rewarded with immortality. And yes, it’s called a “reward”:

Romans 2:5-7 (LEB) … the righteous judgment of God, who will reward each one according to his works: to those who, by perseverance in good work, seek glory and honor and immortality, eternal life,​

I also believe that dieing is not necessarily our physical death but our spiritual death as well.

From what Scripture(s) do you get a Biblical definition of “spiritual death”?

 

[smaller]

…
Genesis 3:22-23What if he [Adam] stretches out his hand and takes also from the tree of life and eats, and lives forever?” And Yahweh God sent him out from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. So he drove the man out, and placed cherubim east of the Garden of Eden, and a flaming, turning sword to guard the way to the tree of life.​

What should be obvious is that God Himself KEPT ADAM and EVE quite purposefully away from the "tree of LIFE."

Kind of runs opposite of what most people think. That Adam, or any of his flesh progeny, can in and of themselves, go back and eat of that tree. When God Himself quite purposefully locked them out and away from it.

 

[WIP]

Genesis seems to me to indicate that dying was not a part of living in the Garden of Eden due specifically to Adam’s God given access to the Tree of Life:

Genesis 2:8-9 (LEB) And Yahweh God planted a garden in Eden in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed. And Yahweh God caused to grow every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food. And the tree of life was in the midst of the garden, along with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
…
Genesis 3:22-23What if he [Adam] stretches out his hand and takes also from the tree of life and eats, and lives forever?” And Yahweh God sent him out from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. So he drove the man out, and placed cherubim east of the Garden of Eden, and a flaming, turning sword to guard the way to the tree of life.
…
Genesis 5:4-5(LEB) And the days of Adam after he fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters. And all the days of Adam which he lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.​

When I read Genesis 2-5 (and the rest of Scripture, including Gen 2:15-17) I see that Adam was indeed made mortal (able to die). When Yahweh God told Adam: “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” I’m at a loss as to how that implies Adam was create immortal prior to the fall. What in the world is God doing telling Adam that he would die, if Adam was created immortal??? It makes no sense to me.

Furthermore, it was clearly (Biblically speaking) his God given access to the Tree of Life that would have allowed him to live forever (not his supposed innate immortality) had he never disobeyed God’s command. The Bible universally (from Genesis to Revelation) teaches that humans are/were (including Adam) created mortal (and all disobey God’s commands too). Only those humans who are found to be in Christ are rewarded with immortality. And yes, it’s called a “reward”:

Romans 2:5-7 (LEB) … the righteous judgment of God, who will reward each one according to his works: to those who, by perseverance in good work, seek glory and honor and immortality, eternal life,​

From what Scripture(s) do you get a Biblical definition of “spiritual death”?

Good point about the tree of life. I missed that. But now that adds some confusion for me. If Adam had never disobeyed, would he have still died?

 

[chessman]

What should be obvious is that God Himself KEPT ADAM and EVE quite purposefully away from the "tree of LIFE."

Yep, it should be obvious to any Bible student.

A couple more points that should be obvious, but often are not:
1.

Genesis 2:9 (LEB) And Yahweh God caused to grow every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food. And the tree of life was in the midst of the garden, along with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Genesis 3:6Lexham English Bible (LEB)

Gen 3:6 LEB) When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes, and the tree was desirable to make one wise, then she took from its fruit and she ate. And she gave it also to her husband with her, and he ate.
​

Who caused every tree (including the tree of knowledge of good and evil) to grow in the Garden (which was called all very good, v1:31)? God did! What was the tree 'good' for then, for what purpose??? Umm, for the knowledge of good and evil. I'm pretty sure it's for God's good purposes that we are created to know good and evil. So that we can seek after good, shun evil, yet be rescued from evil by God Himself in Christ Jesus. It's all a part of God's good purpose, IMO.

Did God cause Adam/Eve to eat it's fruit? No. They did so by their choice.

Genesis 3:13 (LEB) Then Yahweh God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”​

2.

Genesis 1:31 (LEB)31 And God saw everything that he had made [heavens and earth (v1), light (v3), separation between light and darkness (v4, v18)] and, behold, it [everything that He made] was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning, a sixth day. ...
​

Did God create darkness or did He create light and separate it from darkness? The later, according to Gen 1:4 and 1:18.

Gen 3:3 (LEB) Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal which Yahweh God had made.​

Did God make the serpent? Yes.
Did God make the serpent tempt Eve to disobey God? No.

Genesis 3:14 (LEB) Then Yahweh God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, you will be cursed more than any domesticated animal and more than any wild animal.​

Did God make Adam and put Adam in the Garden without any other human complain (like Eve) and call it all very good? Yes (v1:31).
Did God then say that it is not good that Adam be alone? Yes.

Gen 2:18 (LEB) Then Yahweh God said, “it is not good that the man is alone". ​

Contradictions??? No. Why not? Because it was part of God's good purpose to make a woman (Eve) to solve Adam's not good aloneness problem.

Just as it is ultimately God's good purpose that we know evil yet be separated from it.

Revelation 21:24-25 (LEB) And the nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. 25 And its gates will never be shut by day (for there will be no night there),​

 

[chessman]

If Adam had never disobeyed, would he have still died?

I'm just reading the Scripture. We don't have any Scripture that tells us what would have happened if Adam had never disobeyed that I am aware of. So it would be speculation, I suppose. Evidently though, Scripturally speaking, Adam would not have been human (earthly) if he had never disobeyed (Rom 3:23). Plus, it seems foolish to me to think humans (Adam included) can be rewarded with immortality without first dying:

1 Cor 15:36 (LEB) Foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.​

1 Corinthians 15:45-49 (LEB) Thus also it is written (from Gen 2:7), “The first man, Adam, became a living soul”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47 The first man is from the earth, made of earth; the second man is from heaven. 48 As the one who is made of earth, so also are those who are made of earth, and as the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the one who is made of earth, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.​

Personally, I'm glad things worked out the way they did. That way, we can and will bear the image of the heavenly (Jesus Christ).

 

[smaller]

Yep, it should be obvious to any Bible student.

A couple more points that should be obvious, but often are not:
1.

Genesis 2:9 (LEB) And Yahweh God caused to grow every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food. And the tree of life was in the midst of the garden, along with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Genesis 3:6Lexham English Bible (LEB)

Gen 3:6 LEB) When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes, and the tree was desirable to make one wise, then she took from its fruit and she ate. And she gave it also to her husband with her, and he ate.
​

Who caused every tree (including the tree of knowledge of good and evil) to grow in the Garden (which was called all very good, v1:31)? God did! What was the tree 'good' for then, for what purpose??? Umm, for the knowledge of good and evil. I'm pretty sure it's for God's good purposes that we are created to know good and evil. So that we can seek after good, shun evil, yet be rescued from evil by God Himself in Christ Jesus. It's all a part of God's good purpose, IMO.

I agree. Gal. 4 identifies that we ARE put under adverse spiritual captivity, beyond any question. Did we create that situation? No, God did.

Romans 8:20
For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

Did God cause Adam/Eve to eat it's fruit? No. They did so by their choice.

I'd hardly call deception, temptation and lusts a "freewill" choice. What did happen in the Garden, to their FLESH? Mark 4:15. They were not "alone" in that sin, or anything that happened in the events. 1 John 3:8 shows us that sin is of the devil. Mark 4:15 shows us "where" the devil is, and that IS in the heart of man.

That is why we have scriptures that show us this fact:

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Are we to believe that "our heart" is more deceitful than Satan? No. That is only possible when Satan is 'involved.' Acts 26:18, 2 Cor. 4:4, Eph. 2:2 ALL show Satan's direct involvement with the human heart/mind. And it was God Himself who made this setup so.

Genesis 3:13 (LEB) Then Yahweh God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”​

2.

Genesis 1:31 (LEB)31 And God saw everything that he had made [heavens and earth (v1), light (v3), separation between light and darkness (v4, v18)] and, behold, it [everything that He made] was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning, a sixth day. ...
​

Did God create darkness or did He create light and separate it from darkness? The later, according to Gen 1:4 and 1:18.

There is a natural aspect to light and darkness. And there is also a spiritual aspect of same. Both created by God.

Was Satan, the serpent, involved with the sin of Adam and Eve? By Gods Own Mouth, this is so:

Genesis 3:14
And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

That "serpent" was made to do exactly what it did. There is no way around God being implicated by "making" that serpent.

Gen 3:3 (LEB) Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal which Yahweh God had made.​

Did God make the serpent? Yes.
Did God make the serpent tempt Eve to disobey God? No.

By sowing Gods Word on Adam, then Mark 4:15 transpired. Just as it still does today. Paul shows us how this "worked" on himself, in Romans 7:7-13. Shows us indwelling sin as "no longer I." Romans 7:17 & 20. Says "evil" was present with him. Romans 7:21. Shows "warring" between himself and his own members. Romans 7:23. Shows us that sin in his flesh still serves the "law of sin." What is that LAW?

Mark 4:15. And it's shown in all the other seed parables.

Paul even trotted out this fact, showing a "messenger of Satan" in his own flesh. 2 Cor. 12:7. This fact shows us what? THAT GODS GRACE IS SUFFICIENT FOR US. And also connected this same working in his flesh, to "temptation" in his flesh. Gal. 3:13-14. Does the tempter tempt? Assuredly so. Where does this 'temptation' transpire, but internally? There the culprit is located.

And Paul elaborates on this principle, here, in Gal. 4:

2 The heir is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father. 3 So also, when we were underage, we were in slavery under the elemental spiritual forces of the world.

8 Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods.

WHO were we 'slaves to?' Acts 26:18, 2 Cor. 4:4, Eph. 2:2 ALL pinpoint the "slave master." Satan. That we were "UNDER" as blinded unbelieving slaves.

9 But now that you know God—or rather are known by God how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?

Who is THEM? It should be rather obvious.

Did God make Adam and put Adam in the Garden without any other human complain (like Eve) and call it all very good? Yes (v1:31).
Did God then say that it is not good that Adam be alone? Yes.

Yes, so we can also see then that NOT GOOD was there, in the Garden. Contrary to everyone who only want to focus on "very good." That one sided sight doesn't cut the mustard UNLESS we SEE Gods Own Hands on the entirety of the events, as Paul show us, here:

Romans 8:28
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

The only way this is possible is for God to have been at work and working in the entirety of those things. NOT that any particular things/powers/principalities were in and of themselves very good. Satan, the serpent, was assuredly NOT very good. Where people get notions that the serpent in the Garden was "very good" from is simply bizarre. That is NOT the case.

2 Corinthians 9:8
And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:

Contradictions??? No. Why not? Because it was part of God's good purpose to make a woman (Eve) to solve Adam's not good aloneness problem.

Just as it is ultimately God's good purpose that we know evil yet be separated from it.

I again, totally agree. I do not see the "evil present" with Paul to BE PAUL.

As Gods children, we MIGHT recognize though, that our Divine Sovereign can and does "work" adversely with "evil present."

Revelation 3:19
As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

It is "not us" that is being rebuked and chastened. But "evil present" with us.

It's not all a nice little bed of roses, just because we 'believe.' I respect, totally, the "other side" of Gods Ledgers. I understand that it is a GOOD THING for God in Christ to be against 'evil present' with us and the "sin dwelling" in our own sorry hides, and for those workings to be under the rightful CONDEMNATION of Christ. Romans 8:3.

Just 'acting good' on the outside is not an adequate COVER UP for internal reality. God sees right through PHONY liars.

But you see, HONESTY does arise from this situation, doesn't it? So, did God use evil so that HONESTY comes forth?

Assuredly so. That is one way God 'uses' evil.

And also why Jesus detested hypocrites. Because it shows "spiritual captivity" is still in place, in such, reigning over them.

 

[chessman]

I'd hardly call deception, temptation and lusts a "freewill" choice.

Then your working definition of freewill is; the ability of choosing A or not A where no deception, temptation or lust is present?

 

[smaller]

Then your working definition of freewill is; the ability of choosing A or not A where no deception, temptation or lust is present?

The most obvious application of any kinds of choice OR action transpires with this fact in hand;

Romans 7:
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

This little bombshell wipes out any legitimate claims of "working" for salvation. Hebrews 10:22 shows the exact same thing. So does Hebrews 5:15.

Any honest believer knows this anyway. How in the world can we claim "works" salvation, knowing this to be a fact? Do our "good works" eliminate this fact? No. Never happens. That's why Paul's entire Gospel is founded on faith in Christ, by and through His Grace (unmerited, un-earnable) and His Divine Mercy.

Now, I wonder just why we need His MERCY? hmmmm? So hard to see, isn't it? (not saying this derogatorily to you or any believer for that matter)

But, I MIGHT suppose that "honesty" plays a role in these matters. Paul tells us quite plainly, that we ARE NO BETTER than any other sinner. Period. Romans 3:9. How many believers take this "honest fact" in hand? Very few, unfortunately. Paul even went so far in his emphasis on this point, he termed himself the "chief of sinners" after salvation. 1 Tim. 1:15. We can only "perceive this" to be a fact IF we see 'evil present' with Paul. And that "working" is adverse spiritual working. Evil is not forensic nor is it material. It is "spiritual disobedience" in the flesh via indwelling sin. Romans 7:17-20. Paul flat out tells us "I DO" things I hate (not did before salvation) and "I DO" evil (yes, after salvation.) Romans 7:15 & 19.

Here we are given a bit of light exposure on hypocrisy:

Luke 18:
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

I personally don't think God is all that much interested in hearing from liars, myself.

How does this relate to our 'souls?' I might say, we are all in a bit of a pickle. If we are honest, that is. Otherwise we just blind.

The man whom God hears is the man who knows he's a sinner, in need of Gods Mercy. Luke 18:13-14. That man knows where he's at, and what ONLY GOD has to give.

 

[chessman]

That "serpent" was made to do exactly what it did.

What Scripture makes this claim? It certainly is not Gen 3:14 which you and I both quoted. It literally says the serpent did it. Nothing whatsoever is stated or even implied that the "serpent" was made to do exactly what it did. Can you make a case from Scripture that the serpent was made to do it or not? You've made no case for it. In fact, Gen 3:14 implies the opposite of your claim in this particular case.

As for any choices being made under the duress of deception somehow disqualifying that choice as a "freewill" choice or not, what do we find???

Genesis 3:13 (LEB) Then Yahweh God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”​

Yet her curse was given right after the serpent's curse and they were quite different from each other as was Adam's. My point is that the serpent's deceiving Eve (and yes it was the serpent, not God that did the deceiving) was not an adequate excuse for her. Nor is deception an adequate disqualifier for there not being freewill choice creatures within Heaven and Earth.

Was Satan, the serpent, involved with the sin of Adam and Eve? By Gods Own Mouth, this is so

Correct, but that doesn't mean Adam and Eve didn't have freewill anymore that God being involved (by issuing the command not to eat of that tree does.

Just 'acting good' on the outside is not an adequate COVER UP for internal reality. God sees right through PHONY liars.

I agree. Take Eve for example. She paid a price. So did the serpent. Rather obviously, there were curses distributed to both parties. I would NOT say two curses 'on both sides of the equation/ledger', however

Equations are for Engineers to use, ledgers are for accountants. The Bible never uses the words equation or ledger. It's hard to thusly know what you mean by these terms at times.

 

[smaller]

What Scripture makes this claim?

God made "all things." Col. 1:16. Rev. 4:11. There are zero exceptions.

And, by rights, that includes these: Eph. 6:12.

It certainly is not Gen 3:14 which you and I both quoted. It literally says the serpent did it.

The "serpent" was made by God. "IT" does what "IT" was made to do.

Psalm 44:19
Though thou hast sore broken us in the place of dragons, and covered us with the shadow of death.