Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bible Study Help, please! So confused…

How am I to know what’s time limited and what isn’t? Does that only come with decades of being a Christian?
When the Bible speaks of how people are, I am pretty sure that is not time limited. I cannot think of any. People have not changed over the ages as a species. Different people behave and are therefore different, but those are individuals or maybe groups influenced by the culture. But the descriptions of how bad or how good people can be has not changed. Since the rebellion in the garden, man is the same, just what each man does with what he is changes or can change.
 
Bible truth is only communicated by the Spirit of God, as the natural man does not understand. It is not wisdom or Logic or Philosophy.

Here is what you are oblivious of;
9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.


14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
There are those who think that because they "accepted Jesus" that the are smarter and better informed than anyone else who has not despite the fact that the still go to atheist specialists in their field (doctors, etc.) I hate to the be the one who smashes your idol of who is really wise and intelligent, but your position does not match real life. (For those who do not get why I worded it that way, look up what Iconoclast means.)
 
I don't know Greek or Hebrew but I would guess that a literal word-for-word translation from either of those languages into English would leave the reader unable to make heads or tails of what he/she is reading. Sentence structure and word tense and so forth would be too different. That's my guess.
Actually it’s not at all like that. It’s awkward but leaves the translator less personal freedom.
 
I see here you do not have a clear understanding of salvation, and sanctification.
You do not understand the Great Commission, or have a Biblical worldview.

Other than that your post is just fine.
I am working but later on I will explain.
It’s a mistake to think just because I don’t see that believers in Christ possess superior education or even wisdom as compared to atheists as a group doesn’t mean I’m not a follower of Jesus.
 
I’m a fairly recent believer and I’ve been taking the time to really read through the Bible and meditate on certain passages, but I have a couple questions about a verse that’s really perplexing me!

Genesis Ch.1
15 The LORD God put the man in the Garden of Eden to take care of it and to look after it. 16 But the LORD told him, “You may eat fruit from any tree in the garden, 17 except the one that has the power to let you know the difference between right and wrong. If you eat any fruit from that tree, you will die before the day is over!”

Firstly, why doesn’t God wish them to know right from wrong? And, how is Adam to understand it’s wrong to eat from the tree if he lacks the power of knowing right from wrong? How is he to understand that disobeying God is wrong?

God would have preferred if Adam and Eve had remained in the state of innocence in which He had created them. Their innocence was integral to their direct, unhindered fellowship with God in Eden. But God wanted Adam and Eve able to genuinely love Him, which they could not do in a situation where they had no real opportunity to choose to love Him (which they would demonstrate in their obedience to Him). Love, after all, must be freely given; it can't be coerced. And so, God placed in Eden just such an opportunity: the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. So long as the Tree existed in Eden, Adam and Eve had a real choice between God's will and their own, between showing they loved Him and showing they loved themselves.

Adam was not a child; he was created a man with all the intellectual capacities of one. He also had regular, direct, personal contact with God Almighty who had expressly told Adam not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit. Even if Adam had no clear concept of moral right and wrong, he understood he had been given a command by his Creator that he ought to follow - just as he had followed other commands his Maker had given him. And so, God had not unfairly "stacked the deck" against Adam, setting him up to fall.
 
God would have preferred if Adam and Eve had remained in the state of innocence in which He had created them. Their innocence was integral to their direct, unhindered fellowship with God in Eden. But God wanted Adam and Eve able to genuinely love Him, which they could not do in a situation where they had no real opportunity to choose to love Him (which they would demonstrate in their obedience to Him). Love, after all, must be freely given; it can't be coerced. And so, God placed in Eden just such an opportunity: the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. So long as the Tree existed in Eden, Adam and Eve had a real choice between God's will and their own, between showing they loved Him and showing they loved themselves.

Adam was not a child; he was created a man with all the intellectual capacities of one. He also had regular, direct, personal contact with God Almighty who had expressly told Adam not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit. Even if Adam had no clear concept of moral right and wrong, he understood he had been given a command by his Creator that he ought to follow - just as he had followed other commands his Maker had given him. And so, God had not unfairly "stacked the deck" against Adam, setting him up to fall.
God would have preferred if Adam and Eve had learned the difference between good and evil by choosing good. What you say is in line with what the serpent said who accused God of wishing them to remain in a state of innocence or ignorance.

However I agree with the choice to love God is seen in obedience to him. That is well said. Those who love Him obey Him. This is seldom heard in church today but instead those who would claim to love God just need to feel warm and gooey when modern "worship" music is played and their heart is stirred again. Remember all the good God gave to you (like at Christmas) and stir up warmth and appreciation for all you GOT. That is how the church decides it loves God today. Obedience? No thank you, sir. I prefer basking in his presence which I summon with the right tunes.
 
This post makes no sense
What are you posting about?
I see here you do not have a clear understanding of salvation, and sanctification.
You do not understand the Great Commission, or have a Biblical worldview.

Other than that your post is just fine.
I am working but later on I will explain.
You need to remember what YOU say and you will see it makes perfect sense. But let me make it more simple.

You:
“I see here you do not have a clear understanding of salvation and sanctification.”

Do you see that you falsely assume if someone disagrees with you that they (poor wretches) just don’t UNDERSTAND SALVATION at all. This was because I SEE that doctors actually do have knowledge even if atheists.

You said:
You do not understand the Great Commission, or have a Biblical worldview.
Another false accusation lobbed because I don’t think that becoming a believer makes one automatically educated, wise, informed or mentally superior to atheists. That is your response to that obvious truth. I mean, there are posters here whose apparent educational level is around grade 5 judging by their writing and language skills. You insist they’re superior to atheists because they’re believers!

You:
I am working but later on I will explain.

2No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you.” Job
 
God would have preferred if Adam and Eve had learned the difference between good and evil by choosing good. What you say is in line with what the serpent said who accused God of wishing them to remain in a state of innocence or ignorance.

Genesis 3:1-8 (NASB)
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?"
2 The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;
3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
4 The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die!
5 "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
8 They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.


The "serpent" (a figure of Satan, the devil) was a liar - in fact, the "Father of Lies" (John 8:44). What then, should you make of the serpent's insinuation that God wanted to keep divine knowledge of good and evil from Adam and Eve? What was their condition in Eden prior to the Fall? As I pointed out, they enjoyed direct, personal, unhindered communion with their Maker. Nothing in the Creation narrative suggests that God wanted to alter this circumstance by giving Adam and Eve a moral understanding beyond what they possessed right from the start.

However I agree with the choice to love God is seen in obedience to him.

Yes, love is expressed in obedience. But obedience isn't actually itself the love that produces it; love precedes and produces obedience. Far too many Christians get this mixed up. They think that obedience to God's commands is loving God. But these same believers have hearts far from God - just like the Pharisees of Jesus' time who were professionally-obedient to His law (Matthew 15:8). It's quite common for Christians to be obeying God in externals - no swearing, no drinking alcohol, no gambling, no going to strip clubs, etc. - but neglecting entirely the First and Great Commandment upon which all obedience to God rests. (Matthew 22:36-38)

This is the state-of-affairs of the people in the terrible story Jesus told in Matthew 7:21-23. In defense of themselves to Christ, they point to good things they'd done in his name - prophesying, miracles, exorcisms - but they never mention obeying the First and Great Commandment. This is a strange approach for those trying to make a case for entrance into God's kingdom on the basis of their obedience to God's will. And Jesus calls them out on it, rejecting them despite their good deeds.

Paul the apostle emphasized this need for love as the ground of our good deeds in his letter to the believers at Corinth. He wrote to them that, no matter what they said, or knew, or did, if these things were not arising from love, first for God and then for others, it was all useless.

1 Corinthians 13:1-3 (NASB)
1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
3 And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.


Obedience is important - but only as a reflection, or expression, of the love a person has in their heart for God. If there is obedience without love, it's all for nothing. God doesn't accept our obedience except it arises from a desire, a longing and passion, for Him. But it's a deeper, impossible-to-counterfeit matter to truly love God with one's heart, to obey His First and Great Commandment, because where we might deceive others about the motive for our obedience to God's other commands, there is no deception possible concerning the First and Great Commandment, which is about our attitude, our desire for, God. He looks upon our hearts and is never deceived about what is in them.

This is seldom heard in church today but instead those who would claim to love God just need to feel warm and gooey when modern "worship" music is played and their heart is stirred again.

Yes, sentimentality, semi-romantic feelings of affection, for God do not necessarily have anything to do with actually loving Him. Such feelings, as you point out, can be aroused merely by poignant music and the influence of crowds. Gratefulness, too, is often confused with loving God. But no man would marry a woman who was merely grateful to him. He would want a woman who desired him above all other men, who loved him. So, too, with God. He wants us to desire Him, to thirst after Him, above all else. And when we do, we find in that desire, that love, for God a joyful motivation for obedience to Him that is more powerful than fear, or duty, or religious pride can ever be!
 
This thread is about Adelaide asking a question in her OP about a portion of Genesis she does not understand. Please go back and read her OP as this thread has gone off topic and other members attacking other members. If this continues I will have to close this thread and my apologies to Adelaide for having to do so. Please bring this topic back to the OP as it is not about salvation, sanctification or are the other off topics that have developed. Adelaide said she is a new Christian and let us respect that in how we reply to her.
 
Edited by me to reflect the OP as requested...
Genesis 3:1-8 (NASB)
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?"
2 The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;
3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
4 The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die!
5 "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
8 They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.


The "serpent" (a figure of Satan, the devil) was a liar - in fact, the "Father of Lies" (John 8:44). What then, should you make of the serpent's insinuation that God wanted to keep divine knowledge of good and evil from Adam and Eve?
He tells half truths half lies. You know he quoted scripture to Jesus. Was he lying or telling the truth?
What was their condition in Eden prior to the Fall? As I pointed out, they enjoyed direct, personal, unhindered communion with their Maker. Nothing in the Creation narrative suggests that God wanted to alter this circumstance by giving Adam and Eve a moral understanding beyond what they possessed right from the start.
Why did he put that tree there if not to offer them the chance to learn by choosing good? Why put it there AT ALL if he wanted that knowledge withheld from them? Why not forbid a different tree? He could have forbidden the banana tree. I would have no trouble at all obeying that one.
Yes, love is expressed in obedience. But obedience isn't actually itself the love that produces it; love precedes and produces obedience.
That’s hard to divide. In the moments of choice, lines are fuzzy. There are many occasions where a choice to love forces the self to obey.
Far too many Christians get this mixed up. They think that obedience to God's commands is loving God.
Jesus said it is. “IIf ye love me, keep my commandments." Jesus think obedience to Gods commands is loving God. What else? Hands lifted in worship with eyes closed and feeling surging?
Yes, sentimentality, semi-romantic feelings of affection, for God do not necessarily have anything to do with actually loving Him. Such feelings, as you point out, can be aroused merely by poignant music and the influence of crowds. Gratefulness, too, is often confused with loving God. But no man would marry a woman who was merely grateful to him. He would want a woman who desired him above all other men, who loved him. So, too, with God. He wants us to desire Him, to thirst after Him, above all else. And when we do, we find in that desire, that love, for God a joyful motivation for obedience to Him that is more powerful than fear, or duty, or religious pride can ever be!
Well, most of this is good but I have to ask how often you have denied yourself and obeyed the living God speaking to you. I have and that last sentence does not at all describe the experience often. Much of the time it is like feeding my children in the middle of the night, or like Jesus obeying God in the garden of G. He was not experiencing a joyful motivation at all. And that is reality. Deny yourself and take up your cross not refusing it and it hurts. It isn't at all joyful at the time. Peter described suffering in certain places and he did not sound joyful. Sometimes it is but sometimes it is not at all.

And obeying God has reasons and it isn't just to obey. A and E were given the choice to obey God so that they could learn right from wrong by doing right. That is my position and it speaks highly of God instead of him desiring that they fail. It means He wanted the best for them AND wanted to give to them what they desire, understanding. But that understanding the truth, same as Jesus said, come of keeping his commands. It is the way it is. If they had obeyed they would have come to understand good. And so it is today. It is the man who obeys God who understands whereas the man who disobeys God has less and less understanding.
 
Last edited:
God would have preferred if Adam and Eve had learned the difference between good and evil by choosing good. What you say is in line with what the serpent said who accused God of wishing them to remain in a state of innocence or ignorance.

However I agree with the choice to love God is seen in obedience to him. That is well said. Those who love Him obey Him. This is seldom heard in church today but instead those who would claim to love God just need to feel warm and gooey when modern "worship" music is played and their heart is stirred again. Remember all the good God gave to you (like at Christmas) and stir up warmth and appreciation for all you GOT. That is how the church decides it loves God today. Obedience? No thank you, sir. I prefer basking in his presence which I summon with the right tunes.
Why do you write something like "This is seldom heard in church today but instead those who would claim to love God just need to feel warm and gooey when modern "worship" music is played and their heart is stirred again." How many churches have you attended to make this claim? How do you know what "those who would claim to love God" think or feel? Or are you just setting yourself above them and judging them, i.e., playing God?
 
Jesus said it is. “IIf ye love me, keep my commandments." Jesus think obedience to Gods commands is loving God. What else? Hands lifted in worship with eyes closed and feeling surging?
I think Jesus is saying that keeping His commandments is the outward result of loving God. I don't believe we prove we love God by keeping His commandments. We keep His commandments because we want to out of our love for Him.
 
I think Jesus is saying that keeping His commandments is the outward result of loving God. I don't believe we prove we love God by keeping His commandments. We keep His commandments because we want to out of our love for Him.
Except love is sometimes a raw emotionless choice. You make yourself do something or refrain from doing something because you’ve chosen to love,

The problem with the “loving God demonstrated in obedience as a RESULT” theory is it gives a man an excuse to refuse to obey.

I think of the story Jesus told of two sons. One had the perfect attitude of love but didn’t obey and the other the wrong attitude but obeyed. Jesus said the one who obeyed despite the lack of love who received approval.
 
Why do you write something like "This is seldom heard in church today but instead those who would claim to love God just need to feel warm and gooey when modern "worship" music is played and their heart is stirred again." How many churches have you attended to make this claim?
Look at what songs are popular. Look at clips musicians display of themselves. But I can ask you, does your church talk more about obeying God or entering „his presence?”
How do you know what "those who would claim to love God" think or feel?
From what they’re told and what they say. What are the options?
Or are you just setting yourself above them and judging them, i.e., playing God?
Were the Bereans setting themselves above Paul and judging him, i.e., playing God?
 
He tells half truths half lies. You know he quoted scripture to Jesus. Was he lying or telling the truth?

And he also tells outright lies. Was God keeping something important and good from Adam and Eve? The only one who said this was the serpent, the devil. God never even hinted that He wanted Adam and Eve to eat of the Forbidden Fruit. Why would it have been forbidden if this had been His desire?

Why did he put that tree there if not to offer them the chance to learn by choosing good?

I already answered this in my earlier post.

Why not forbid a different tree? He could have forbidden the banana tree. I would have no trouble at all obeying that one.

Obviously, because the choice had to be a real and significant one. God did not want Adam and Eve's obedience to be trivial, as it would have been choosing whether or not to eat a banana. No, the choice to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil touched upon the fundamental nature of Adam and Eve's relationship with their God.

That’s hard to divide. In the moments of choice, lines are fuzzy. There are many occasions where a choice to love forces the self to obey.

??? This may be your experience but it isn't, therefore, necessarily anyone else's. I find as I learn to live more and more in a place of submission before God, giving Him control of me all throughout each day, that the choice to yield to God's will and way is becoming easier and easier in tandem with a burgeoning delight in Him. And this experience increases my desire for - my love of - God. There is no forcing Self to obey, but an entering, by faith, into the death of Self already accomplished by God for me in Christ (Romans 6:1-11) and an ever-enlarging experience of the power of the Holy Spirit that doesn't leave me cold and exhausted but surprised, and excited, and joyful.

Jesus said it is. “IIf ye love me, keep my commandments." Jesus think obedience to Gods commands is loving God. What else? Hands lifted in worship with eyes closed and feeling surging?

There's that word "if," though, isn't there. It indicates that the keeping of God's commandments is conditioned upon the love of the individual. That is, if the person already loves - desires - God, then, as a result, they will keep His commandments. Jesus does NOT say, "Keep my commandments and so love me." No, instead, there is a clear distinction Jesus made between love and the obedience it engenders. For the reason demonstrated by the Pharisees, its vitally important to love God first and then keep His other commandments. And, as I pointed out from God's word, both Jesus and Paul emphasize this order of things, too. It is not enough merely to obey God - any hypocrite can do that - what God wants from us above and before all is our love.

Well, most of this is good but I have to ask how often you have denied yourself and obeyed the living God speaking to you.

Every day, many times a day. How about you?

This happens as a consequence, not of my power to suppress and deny myself, but of the power of the Spirit altering my desires, conforming me to the love of God that he is (Romans 5:5; Galatians 5:22).

Much of the time it is like feeding my children in the middle of the night, or like Jesus obeying God in the garden of G.

Oh? You might read Hebrews 12:2. Or, here, I'll quote it for you:

Hebrews 12:2 (NASB)
2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.


It was joy that motivated Jesus to endure the cross. Joy? In what? In fulfilling the will of the Father. And reconciling the lost to their holy Maker. This is how love works. Instead of onerous, unhappy conformity to God's commands, doing His will even when the physical consequences of doing so are painful can be a joy. I hope one day God will bring you into a full experience of this truth.

If they had obeyed they would have come to understand good.

No, Adam and Eve already well understood good. They walked in Eden in the cool of the day with the Source of all good, talking with Him freely, fulfilling His will in the abundance and beauty of the Garden.

It is the man who obeys God who understands whereas the man who disobeys God has less and less understanding.

Amen. Obedience to God brings wisdom. But that obedience begins with the state of one's heart toward God, not some moral action we take. The First and Great Commandment isn't about doing something, it's about being someone: a lover of God.
 
And he also tells outright lies. Was God keeping something important and good from Adam and Eve? The only one who said this was the serpent, the devil. God never even hinted that He wanted Adam and Eve to eat of the Forbidden Fruit. Why would it have been forbidden if this had been His desire?
He desired them NOT to eat of it, that is to choose not to eat of it. That is what He said and there is a reason. The reason is refusing to do wrong teaches a man more about right and wrong than doing wrong. That is still true today.
Obviously, because the choice had to be a real and significant one. God did not want Adam and Eve's obedience to be trivial, as it would have been choosing whether or not to eat a banana. No, the choice to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil touched upon the fundamental nature of Adam and Eve's relationship with their God.
But why does that exclude learning the difference between right and wrong?
??? This may be your experience but it isn't, therefore, necessarily anyone else's. I find as I learn to live more and more in a place of submission before God, giving Him control of me all throughout each day, that the choice to yield to God's will and way is becoming easier and easier in tandem with a burgeoning delight in Him. And this experience increases my desire for - my love of - God. There is no forcing Self to obey, but an entering, by faith, into the death of Self already accomplished by God for me in Christ (Romans 6:1-11) and an ever-enlarging experience of the power of the Holy Spirit that doesn't leave me cold and exhausted but surprised, and excited, and joyful.
Jesus struggled to obey at the Garden. He did not thank God for an ever-enlarging experience of the power of the Holy Spirit. Peter's descriptions of his sufferings were ones of enduring unpleasantness that did not become pleasant. Paul listed the things he had suffered by obedience and they were obviously sufferings. Jesus actually told us to DENY ourselves. Denying is not pleasant. It is unpleasant. He did not say that we will love God and so we won't have to deny ourselves but will do our desire too.

But let me ask you, do those around you find that you are loving them as you love yourself without any effort as the self is dead (already accomplished by God for you) and you are therefore NEVER EVER selfish? Do years go by and there is no sin found in what you did or said? If your obedience is as delightful and easy as you say, you ought to be rather sinless obeying God each day in each encounter with people.
There's that word "if," though, isn't there. It indicates that the keeping of God's commandments is conditioned upon the love of the individual. That is, if the person already loves - desires - God, then, as a result, they will keep His commandments. Jesus does NOT say, "Keep my commandments and so love me." No, instead, there is a clear distinction Jesus made between love and the obedience it engenders. For the reason demonstrated by the Pharisees, its vitally important to love God first and then keep His other commandments. And, as I pointed out from God's word, both Jesus and Paul emphasize this order of things, too. It is not enough merely to obey God - any hypocrite can do that - what God wants from us above and before all is our love.
Not sure what you mean but the "if" is definitely there. In Greek it is "eau." If ye love me, keep my commandments. The alternatively is also true, if we do not keep his commands, we do not love Him or not much. To the degree we obey, to that same degree we love.

So in your view does a believer WAIT until they love God to obey? If they don't feel love do they then needs not obey? The thing is this, we see that a person loves us by the way they treat us. When a man loves a woman, he acts in a certain way differently towards her than other women. He does things to ease her way that he does not do for all women. And if he really loves her, he might do these things even though he does not FEEL like it at the moment. It is a stronger love that has determined to please the beloved than the love that waits until it is also pleasant for the doer to please the beloved at the moment. You seem to want believers to wait until they feel love for God to obey him.
Every day, many times a day. How about you?
Can you give examples please.
This happens as a consequence, not of my power to suppress and deny myself, but of the power of the Spirit altering my desires, conforming me to the love of God that he is (Romans 5:5; Galatians 5:22).



Oh? You might read Hebrews 12:2. Or, here, I'll quote it for you:

Hebrews 12:2 (NASB)
2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
In the garden, he was not joyful. Despising is not a joyful experience. You can read about the experience and it was NOT marked by Jesus being joyful.
It was joy that motivated Jesus to endure the cross. Joy? In what? In fulfilling the will of the Father. And reconciling the lost to their holy Maker. This is how love works. Instead of onerous, unhappy conformity to God's commands, doing His will even when the physical consequences of doing so are painful can be a joy. I hope one day God will bring you into a full experience of this truth.
Perhaps you mean well. Perhaps you are being condescending. But I will take the first and comfort you by telling you that I have experienced more than once, the thrill (and "thrill" is an understating the experience but the best English can offer) of God being pleased with my obedience. That is easy to understand as we know a person loves another by the choices they make to deny themselves and the greater the denial, the greater the love. Someone who travels many hours at some expense to see a suffering friend loves more than the one who sends a text message and the friend knows this.

Now, it needs to be said clearly, that they were always clear choices of doing what God himself told me personally to do. None of these were ever my own thinking or deciding. And I always knew for certain God was telling me to do something, which is not always the case. I knew it was God asking me for this and the choice was clearly to obey or not.
No, Adam and Eve already well understood good. They walked in Eden in the cool of the day with the Source of all good, talking with Him freely, fulfilling His will in the abundance and beauty of the Garden.
It says they did not even know they were naked. Now here is see a difficulty. You say you obey God easily and that is never a struggle but you are comfortable with changing what the text says. The Devil himself did not tell them they already knew good so why not experience bad. He did not think they knew good. Why would they eat it if they knew good already? Makes no sense. What you are trying to do is think of how it would be if you were there but we do not know the mental state of a grown man and woman who, like small children, have no understanding of more right and wrong. We cannot imagine it. We do not even remember how that was for us as small children.
Amen. Obedience to God brings wisdom. But that obedience begins with the state of one's heart toward God, not some moral action we take. The First and Great Commandment isn't about doing something, it's about being someone: a lover of God.
So, does a believer WAIT until they feel love for God overwhelming their other desires so that obedience is easy and pleasant and costs them nothing? Until obedience becomes easy, they needs not obey?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top