What if Adam had not sinned ?

[childeye]

It always seems futile to me to try and discuss infinite and eternal purpose created in a temporal environment. For what is not God's will if it is all purposed and ignorance and knowledge are the same since they serve a common end? It is always easy to say it was meant to be after the fact, but still we all struggle with what shall I do next? To not care about it is indifference. Yet indifference may be what's needed when sleeping through the storm.

I have written on this thread mentioning the prodigal son. This analogy was given to us by our Lord. It appears to describe the sentiments of a man who must learn the value of what he did not properly esteem. Also Romans 1 claims men did not esteem God as God when we knew Him. Also Satan was one who desired to ascend his throne above the stars of heaven, and he is who suggested that Adam and Eves horrible living conditions in the Garden of Eden should be improved upon.

It is therefore very likely that mankind disrespected God unknowingly when he gave credence to the subtle slander of Satan by eating the fruit.

It is therefore all about reverance for the One True God and consideration of what the word Holiness means. So in the big picture it seems to me that God has sown the seed of His offspring in the midst of corruption so that they will grow unto him with all purity of heart. We see this in the generation of Israelites that came out of walking the dessert for forty years into the land of milk and honey. They had the capacity to say Thank You. But first all those who murmered and complained coming out of Egypt into the dessert had to die away. God's plan is to give us the proper perspective through all that has transpired, so that all who inherit the Kingdom have the right attitude.

 

[Levi]

It always seems futile to me to try and discuss infinite and eternal purpose created in a temporal environment. For what is not God's will if it is all purposed and ignorance and knowledge are the same since they serve a common end? It is always easy to say it was meant to be after the fact, but still we all struggle with what shall I do next? To not care about it is indifference. Yet indifference may be what's needed when sleeping through the storm.

I have written on this thread mentioning the prodigal son. This analogy was given to us by our Lord. It appears to describe the sentiments of a man who must learn the value of what he did not properly esteem. Also Romans 1 claims men did not esteem God as God when we knew Him. Also Satan was one who desired to ascend his throne above the stars of heaven, and he is who suggested that Adam and Eves horrible living conditions in the Garden of Eden should be improved upon.

It is therefore very likely that mankind disrespected God unknowingly when he gave credence to the subtle slander of Satan by eating the fruit.

It is therefore all about reverance for the One True God and consideration of what the word Holiness means. So in the big picture it seems to me that God has sown the seed of His offspring in the midst of corruption so that they will grow unto him with all purity of heart. We see this in the generation of Israelites that came out of walking the dessert for forty years into the land of milk and honey. They had the capacity to say Thank You. But first all those who murmered and complained coming out of Egypt into the dessert had to die away. God's plan is to give us the proper perspective through all that has transpired, so that all who inherit the Kingdom have the right attitude.

The reminds me of the old adage:

'you don't know what you've got until you loose it!'

or

'you wont appreciate anything unless you know what it is to not have it'

But in terms of Eve doing something unknowingly I think the Bible puts paid to that idea when eve made this statement :

"But God told us not to eat from the tree of knowledge" So she knew because Adam must have told her. The line that Satan used on her: "did God really tell you not to eat..." Legalism, There is no record that God had directly spoken to Eve about this issue. We see evidence of this by their eyes not opening until after Adam eats.

Eve was deceived into disrespecting God via her husband and she was 'desirous' of the fruit and the 'power' it would give her.

Adam evidently ate for another reason, I'm still working on that one but he was the one who disobeyed the direct commandment, he even complained to God about the women He had placed there in the garden with him, after the event.

They all had knowledge of what was going on there. Satan had his end (obviously he had figured out a way to bring the creation under his control) Eve disrespected Adam for material gain and Adam directly disobeyed the command: "thou shalt not eat..." I have heard several commentaries on the 'why' but am currently still undecided on that.

There are three different things going on there.

Satan knew what he was doing and Jesus said this about him:

John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it


So as far as unwittingly disrespecting God, I'm not so sure. But one thing I do know is Eve knowingly disobeyed God via Adam and Adam knowingly disobeyed a direct command! That is clear and evident.

 

[childeye]

The reminds me of the old adage:

'you don't know what you've got until you loose it!'

or

'you wont appreciate anything unless you know what it is to not have it'

But in terms of Eve doing something unknowingly I think the Bible puts paid to that idea when eve made this statement :

"But God told us not to eat from the tree of knowledge" So she knew because Adam must have told her. The line that Satan used on her: "did God really tell you not to eat..." Legalism, There is no record that God had directly spoken to Eve about this issue. We see evidence of this by their eyes not opening until after Adam eats.

Eve was deceived into disrespecting God via her husband and she was 'desirous' of the fruit and the 'power' it would give her.

Adam evidently ate for another reason, I'm still working on that one but he was the one who disobeyed the direct commandment, he even complained to God about the women He had placed there in the garden with him, after the event.

They all had knowledge of what was going on there. Satan had his end (obviously he had figured out a way to bring the creation under his control) Eve disrespected Adam for material gain and Adam directly disobeyed the command: "thou shalt not eat..." I have heard several commentaries on the 'why' but am currently still undecided on that.

There are three different things going on there.

Satan knew what he was doing and Jesus said this about him:

John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it


So as far as unwittingly disrespecting God, I'm not so sure. But one thing I do know is Eve knowingly disobeyed God via Adam and Adam knowingly disobeyed a direct command! That is clear and evident.

I've heard much conjecture over all of this scripture and have my own also. Ultimately to me, they tried to fix what was not broken and broke it. Distrust in what is ever Holy is the foundation of unrighteousness even as faith is the foundation of righteousness. This is what we must learn, that God is holy.

 

[Levi]

I've heard much conjecture over all of this scripture and have my own also. Ultimately to me, they tried to fix what was not broken and broke it. Distrust in what is ever Holy is the foundation of unrighteousness even as faith is the foundation of righteousness. This is what we must learn, that God is holy.

If you using the word 'fix' like the mob bosses and the bookies try to 'fix' a race I will agree with you.

 

[childeye]

If you using the word 'fix' like the mob bosses and the bookies try to 'fix' a race I will agree with you.

I think I can see why you say that. If I'm correct, you believe they believed they could make gain for themselves by cheating. But what I am saying is that the desire to cheat itself is based on an ignorance of the fact that all things are as they should be and no gain can be produced by cheating, because no such gain exists to be had. No reason to cheat. Nothing to gain by stealing. No need to distrust or doubt that God has already given us all that is perfectly appropriate and necessary for our best interests. We would only be stealing from ourselves.

 

[Rageprophet]

everything was fine in the garden until Sauron made those stupid rings.

 

[Levi]

I think I can see why you say that. If I'm correct, you believe they believed they could make gain for themselves by cheating. But what I am saying is that the desire to cheat itself is based on an ignorance of the fact that all things are as they should be and no gain can be produced by cheating, because no such gain exists to be had. No reason to cheat. Nothing to gain by stealing. No need to distrust or doubt that God has already given us all that is perfectly appropriate and necessary for our best interests. We would only be stealing from ourselves.

The verse says "she saw it was desirable for gaining knowledge"

It was a direct disobedient act against a command of God and it involved a dynamic that started with Lucifer, went through the weakness that was in the woman (refer Paul's synopsis) and was only fully completed when Adam directly disobeyed that which had been directly given to him.

They all evidently had something to gain, I'm still undecided on Adam but I have heard some commentary and I am still investigating.

I take your point though and it is a good one but we do need to be careful there because the possibilities that God laid into the initial creation state does tend to indicate that there where options and that the process was not fully complete.

He had left it open so to speak and this is evident in the two commands that he gave Adam, one 'thou shalt' and one 'thou shalt not' one leading to life and one to death.

The law was there in the garden from the beginning. And there was an 'out' option provided, so an 'everything as it should be' viewpoint may not in fact be correct.

 

[childeye]

=Levi;569538]The verse says "she saw it was desirable for gaining knowledge"

Yes, and being ignorant of such things she was tempted to improve upon herself, when she was better off in her ignorance as God had already determined. For God said not to eat because such knowledge of spiritual things were poison to the carnal nature of man, bringing death as the result. Even as Paul said, the law is spiritual, but I am carnal. The prospects for improvement under such a misbegotten perspective that had been presented by Satan, can only inspire one to never be content till one has ascended their throne above all other stations even unto the throne of God. This is the consequence of being under a Godhead that one secretly despises being under.

They all evidently had something to gain,

You state this so definitively and I am not sure whether it is meant as a fact to counter my statement that there was nothing to gain or you are simply saying they only thought they had something to gain. My statement that they had nothing to gain is already 20\20 hindsight and not open to speculation, unless death is preferable to Life.

I take your point though and it is a good one but we do need to be careful there because the possibilities that God laid into the initial creation state does tend to indicate that there where options and that the process was not fully complete.

Options? what options? Instructions are for those who need instructions.

He had left it open so to speak and this is evident in the two commands that he gave Adam, one 'thou shalt' and one 'thou shalt not' one leading to life and one to death.

Left what open? I see nothing left open in God's commands. To me they appear quite clear.

The law was there in the garden from the beginning. And there was an 'out' option provided, so an 'everything as it should be' viewpoint may not in fact be correct.

I think I get what you're saying albeit this is semantics. I would say for Satan all was not as it should be, but then again if God foreknew Satan's inevitable fall perhaps all is as it should be. Semantics can be confusing for as any seafarer knows one must have three points to navigate and one must be fixed.

I understand your reasoning, and I had wondered if you were going to address my post. I thank you for your attention to the matter and your forthright perspective.

Yes there was disobedience and yet there also was obedience. Disobedience to God's commands and obedience to Satan's implying God was a liar and need not be trusted nor obeyed. To cut to the chase the option presented by Satan is whether God should be trusted or not. For God gave man no option to disobey Him and live.

 

[childeye]

everything was fine in the garden until Sauron made those stupid rings.

What can one say to this? Thank God for Frodo or thank God for Gollum or thank God for both?

 

[jasoncran]

What can one say to this? Thank God for Frodo or thank God for Gollum or thank God for both?

your forgot bilbo and sauron didnt make any rings! sheesh if we are going to quote jrr tolkeins ideas and books lets get it right!

 

[childeye]

your forgot bilbo and sauron didnt make any rings! sheesh if we are going to quote jrr tolkeins ideas and books lets get it right!

To be true, you are correct. Oh my, Mr. Tolkien please forgive my unclean lips.

 

[Levi]

Yes, and being ignorant of such things she was tempted to improve upon herself, when she was better off in her ignorance as God had already determined. For God said not to eat because such knowledge of spiritual things were poison to the carnal nature of man, bringing death as the result. Even as Paul said, the law is spiritual, but I am carnal. The prospects for improvement under such a misbegotten perspective that had been presented by Satan, can only inspire one to never be content till one has ascended their throne above all other stations even unto the throne of God. This is the consequence of being under a Godhead that one secretly despises being under.



You state this so definitively and I am not sure whether it is meant as a fact to counter my statement that there was nothing to gain or you are simply saying they only thought they had something to gain. My statement that they had nothing to gain is already 20\20 hindsight and not open to speculation, unless death is preferable to Life.


Options? what options? Instructions are for those who need instructions.


Left what open? I see nothing left open in God's commands. To me they appear quite clear.

I think I get what you're saying albeit this is semantics. I would say for Satan all was not as it should be, but then again if God foreknew Satan's inevitable fall perhaps all is as it should be. Semantics can be confusing for as any seafarer knows one must have three points to navigate and one must be fixed.

I understand your reasoning, and I had wondered if you were going to address my post. I thank you for your attention to the matter and your forthright perspective.

Yes there was disobedience and yet there also was obedience. Disobedience to God's commands and obedience to Satan's implying God was a liar and need not be trusted nor obeyed. To cut to the chase the option presented by Satan is whether God should be trusted or not. For God gave man no option to disobey Him and live.

I don't think these are semantics! These are fundamental principles that shape the way that people view freewill and God's omnipotence.

The left open part to which I was referring I was the fact that God had clearly given two options to Adam, one that lead to eternal life and one that lead to death!

So in actual fact , it was not finished.

Jesus finished it for us in the cross and He made this statement: "It is finished!"

I think that it is important that we do get it right because of what it cost God to finish it. I find that the Calvinist perspective is rather insulting.

Adam needed to eat from the tree of life to finish it without a fall. That was the life giving option of freewill that God had given.

We know why Satan tempted and tricked eve into partaking through legalism, because he sought control of the creation.

and he got it. Evident here: Luke 4:5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to."

We know why Eve did it because she wanted to be like God and she bought into Satan's justification through his twisting of Gods Word.

and she got it, evident in God's statement here: Gen3:22 "And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.â€

But what is somewhat more cryptic in this whole affair is why Adam did it.

He disobeyed a direct command and he didn't blame Satan he referenced the woman when explaining his actions to God!

and again Paul says this thousands of years later: 1 Tim 2:14 "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, because she was fully deceived, fell into transgression."

You see Paul says that Adam was not deceived! That's a statement that has huge ramifications, seemingly semantic as it may be. What it tells us is that Adam;

knowingly and willfully disobeyed a direct commandment while having his wits about him he knew what he was doing, the question here is

Why?

 

[jasoncran]

probably because he found eve to be too important to be let go. its hard to say we only know what is told to us.

 

[Eventide]

probably because he found eve to be too important to be let go. its hard to say we only know what is told to us.

AMEN... Adam in his desire to be with 'a help made meet' for him.. his wife Eve.. can be seen as the grand theme of all scripture.. and perhaps the greatest climax in scripture seems to be the forthcoming marriage of the Lamb.. the Lord Jesus Christ to his wife, the church of God.

It's staggering to meditate upon.. and I think that it's an infinitely wonderous picture of that.. Adam's love for Eve being a type of Christ's love for the church, His wife.

 

[Levi]

probably because he found eve to be too important to be let go. its hard to say we only know what is told to us.

Yes that's the immediate thought that does spring to mind.

I don't think we should get into a whole conjecture game here as you rightly point out we can only know what is revealed, but we should put away any thought that the fall happened as a result of ignorance or of a divine preordained plan by God.

It was evidently as a result of an informed decision made by Adam under a set of circumstances brought about by Satan and the actions of Eve.

He was not deceived and he knew what the consequences of his actions would be. It's interesting that Paul refers to Jesus a number of times as the 'second Adam'.

 

[Levi]

And I feel its also significant that we find this in scripture:

Ephesians 5:25

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her"

 

[jasoncran]

i have debated agaisnt thesitic evolutionism(the christian one) that God didnt make creation to die. would you think God was just if you didnt sin and your child was to die from say cancer or other slow killing disease and you pray and God says sorry i'm perfecting the gene pool.

i dont see God like that.yes he foreknew adam and eve would sin but he had to allow it , well i will through this out here to childeye.

if God is like that.. proclaiming by the determince council that adam and eve would sin, why then isnt it preached in calvinism that there are babies in hell that were aborted? yes i have heard of that being said.

 

[tessiewebb]

Nice thought. A perfect world with free access to walk and talk with God?? I need a ticket to that world!

I read a book a long time ago called "No Man in Eden" that showed what that kind of world might be like. Forget the author's name. It was a story actually. I know the book was written a long time ago but if anyone is interested, I know one of the big booksellers online had copies available a few years back at least.

 

[childeye]

=jasoncran;569805]i have debated agaisnt thesitic evolutionism(the christian one) that God didnt make creation to die. would you think God was just if you didnt sin and your child was to die from say cancer or other slow killing disease and you pray and God says sorry i'm perfecting the gene pool.

This question is a trick question. It is proposed on a premise that is only sustainable in a human carnal reasoning. If God said we would die if we disobey Him and foresaw we would disobey Him, how is it He is unjust because we die? Moreover, if God allowed such things to transpire for the sake of proving He is infallable so as to end all debate, then He has been found trustworthy by our disobedience. Hence scripture says let all men be liars so that God be true.

i dont see God like that.yes he foreknew adam and eve would sin but he had to allow it , well i will through this out here to childeye.


if God is like that.. proclaiming by the determince council that adam and eve would sin, why then isnt it preached in calvinism that there are babies in hell that were aborted? yes i have heard of that being said.

To answer this I would have to understand Calvinism. Also I would need to know what definition of hell you are using for even Abraham was in Sheol. But I would think that God Who gave life can do whatever He wants with it, and He is just no matter what He does. I do not presume to correct God and I think you would agree, but only to worship Him as such. For this I must learn how to do through the knowledge of Who He is. And I am all for that. SBG57, one time told me that what I see doesn't matter. There is some Truth in that. Although it matters to me, it does not change what is purposed to be although it may play a part in it.

Why do I always find myself defending Calvinism for you and Eventide?

 

[childeye]

=Levi;569715]I don't think these are semantics! These are fundamental principles that shape the way that people view freewill and God's omnipotence.

If this is not semantics, then to what is free being in front of will meant to mean? Look up the meaning of freewill in the dictionary and it can mean several things. Every dictionary has it's own take on it. Ultimately I have a hard time believing men are in control of their destiny when all we seem able to do is kill ourselves. Semantics certainly come into play as we find we must lose ourselves to save ourselves. We must die so that we may live.
Freewill does not even factor in since only the word will is necessary to identify a sentient being.

The left open part to which I was referring I was the fact that God had clearly given two options to Adam, one that lead to eternal life and one that lead to death!

The tree of Life was an option in the garden. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was not presented as a viable option. Moreover after partaking of the forbidden tree so also was the option of Life taken away.

So in actual fact , it was not finished.

Jesus finished it for us in the cross and He made this statement: "It is finished!"

I think that it is important that we do get it right because of what it cost God to finish it. I find that the Calvinist perspective is rather insulting.

What did Calvin say that insulted you and me and himself for that matter?

Adam needed to eat from the tree of life to finish it without a fall. That was the life giving option of freewill that God had given.

I don't get this. God barred the way to the tree of life yet you say it was an option?

We know why Satan tempted and tricked eve into partaking through legalism, because he sought control of the creation.

I agree Satan tempted Eve, how you apply legalism is unclear. Also unclear is if Satan wanted control of creation or whether he had a personal problem with pride so that he secretly despised the Godhead.

and he got it. Evident here: Luke 4:5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to."

I do not put credence into anything Satan says. I would agree he rules certain elements of mankind but only through deception. So this brings into question if he got anything.

We know why Eve did it because she wanted to be like God and she bought into Satan's justification through his twisting of Gods Word.

I would say Eve did it because she bought into Satan's deception who himself has no Truth, and so she also bought the notion that she should want to be like God counting herself lacking.

and she got it, evident in God's statement here: Gen3:22 "And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

Got What? She may have attained the knowledge of Good and Evil but this does not make one Good like God. God does not choose between good and evil as if these spiritual identities preexist Him. He planted the Tree. He is the Light that by which Good and Evil are discerned. He is what all is relative to as the absolute. Hence He is goodness.

But what is somewhat more cryptic in this whole affair is why Adam did it.

The scripture says Adam ate because he was persuaded by the woman who was persuaded by the serpent.

He disobeyed a direct command and he didn't blame Satan he referenced the woman when explaining his actions to God!

Yes this is true.

and again Paul says this thousands of years later: 1 Tim 2:14 "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, because she was fully deceived, fell into transgression."

You see Paul says that Adam was not deceived! That's a statement that has huge ramifications, seemingly semantic as it may be.

"seemingly semantic as it may be". What does this statement mean? Is it meant to say this appears obscure but is clear? For before you say it is cryptic.

What it tells us is that Adam;

knowingly and willfully disobeyed a direct commandment while having his wits about him he knew what he was doing, the question here is

Why?

I do not think it can be applied definitively as saying it means he knew perfectly well what he was doing. For the context Paul is saying this in was not being applied to draw such a conclusion. But I will grant that why Adam believed the woman and ate is a valid question. I think we are all romantics and may want to read into this accordingly. Perhaps God is a romantic also. One thing I therefore would agree with you on, is that we should seek to understand the depth of a Love that would endure such suffering for us. And here is semantics. For if I was worth dying for to God is one thing, and if I were worth dying for for His Name's sake is another.