An honest look at "free-will" #1: Gen.3:4-6

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Candy:

"The deception of Satan was that Eve could use her own human will when "knowing" good and evil."

GE:

The deception of Satan was that Eve could use her own human will! Spot on!

After "knowing" good and evil, it was too late -- poor dead sinner! To what use had been her knowledge, wisdom or will?

 

[canadyjd]

Candy:

"The deception of Satan was that Eve could use her own human will when "knowing" good and evil."

GE:

The deception of Satan was that Eve could use her own human will! Spot on!

After "knowing" good and evil, it was too late -- poor dead sinner! To what use had been her knowledge, wisdom or will?

I don't know what "spot on" means, but I will assume you agree. And you are "spot on"---

After "knowing" good and evil, it was too late -- poor dead sinner! To what use had been her knowledge, wisdom or will?

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

Another thing. It is intellectually dishonest, and worse, to quote my posts, changing a word or two, as if they were your own posts.

Engage your own brain for a change. I'm beginning to feel like I'm arguing with myself.

peace to youraying:

the point is that when you make empty claims without proof - they can easily be turned back to you as the same claim for the other point of view.

It is instructive that empty claims of that form - are in fact empty. It is the EVIDENCE that supports them or fails to support that has substance.

Hopefully this is now obvious to you.

 

[BobRyan]

Gen 3:22 regarding the condition of "KNOWING BOTH good and evil" is the SAME term used in Gen 4 for Adam knowing Eve. It is a term for "knowing by experience".

That is where your position totally falls apart because EVERYONE can see that BEFORE the fall of man BEFORE sin -- the ONLY thing mankind knew "by experience" was OBEDIENCe - was God who is "Good".

You have not been able to refute this glaringly obvious point in all this time sir.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The point goes back to the original question of the thread. What was the deception of Satan? How does that effect our understanding of "free will"?

The deception of Satan was that Eve could use her own human will when "knowing" good and evil. Eve thought the tree "desirable to make one wise". The deception was directly connected with the human ability to "know" good and evil.

But that was a lie. When they "knew" good and evil, they were enslaved to sin because of their transgression of the command not to eat of the tree.

And so, the very first deception of Satan appealed to the idea of "free will". It was a lie then. It remains a lie today.

peace to youraying:

GE:

I can scarcely find fault with this. I think your "peace to you" quite apt after your explanation. What' Bob's problem then?

 

[canadyjd]

the point is that when you make empty claims without proof - they can easily be turned back to you as the same claim for the other point of view.

I told you the very words (Identified by # and from my Hebrew bible, not "Strong's") that are used in Gen. 3 and 4. One is "daath" and the other is "yada". I explained how "daath" is formed and what it means in context (knowledge) and what "yada" means. That is real substance, but you cannot see it.

You then use my words to claim that YOU gave me the words by #, which you most certainly did not, (and are even refusing to acknowledge they are different words), and that, sir, is intellectually dishonest, and worse.

It is instructive that empty claims of that form - are in fact empty. It is the EVIDENCE that supports them or fails to support that has substance. Hopefully this is now obvious to you.

Coming from someone who does not even know what his own quoted sources are saying; I don't think I will accept what you see as obvious.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

Gen 3:22 regarding the condition of "KNOWING BOTH good and evil" is the SAME term used in Gen 4 for Adam knowing Eve. It is a term for "knowing by experience".

You are simply wrong. I have explained in great detail. You reject the plain meaning of the text and insert your own belief in its place.

There is no sense in discussing this further with you. No amount of facts will sway you, I am confident.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

GE:

I can scarcely find fault with this. I think your "peace to you" quite apt after your explanation. What' Bob's problem then?

I'm not really sure.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

Gen 3:22 regarding the condition of "KNOWING BOTH good and evil" is the SAME term used in Gen 4 for Adam knowing Eve. It is a term for "knowing by experience".

That is where your position totally falls apart because EVERYONE can see that BEFORE the fall of man BEFORE sin -- the ONLY thing mankind knew "by experience" was OBEDIENCe - was God who is "Good".

You have not been able to refute this glaringly obvious point in all this time sir.

You have refuted your own argument with your own quoted scholar. Here he is again, YOUR SOURCE:

RobRyan: Robert Jamieson Gen 3
http://www.ccel.org/j/jfb/jfb/JFB01.htm#Chapter3

5. your eyes shall be opened--His words meant more than met the ear. In one sense her eyes were opened;for she acquired a direful experience of "good and evil"--of the happiness of a holy, and the misery of a sinful, condition.

I notice your quoted source, Mr. Jamieson, agrees with me. Eve acquired an "experience" of "good and evil" after her "eyes were opened".

What is even better, in terms of slaying your repeated assertions that they already "knew" good by experience, is that he clearly says she acquired the experience of the "happiness of a holy...condition", AFTER her "eyes were opened". That means AFTER she ate of the tree, which is AFTER the fall.

How embarrassing for you to be shown your error by the very scholar you quoted to support your position.

But on the bright side, you now know of a scholar that agrees with what I have been saying.

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

It never ceases to amaze me that this board leaves it up to ME to state the obvious!

God stated that "it was GOOD" after making Adam and Eve and ALL animal life on day 6. HE says it was GOOD you say "they did not even know WHAT GOOD WAS".

How obviously failed your logic is at that point is left as a simple exercise for the reader.

Your subsequent argument that only by REBELLION did man learn what it means to "be GOOD" is not even an argument that holds long enough for the reader to even investigate. It fails before it gets started.

SIN is not the means of knowing what Good is - not according to scripture. In God's Word what is GOOD comes about FIRST and THEN comes sin.

In Christ,

Bob

Proof of that is seen in Gen 1 where God makes mankind and says "it is good" THEN in Gen THREE we see the introduction of sin.

Jamiesson does NOT argue that man did not "know good until he sinned" NOR does the Bible make such a wild irrational claim.

As we saw in Gen 3 AND in Gen 4 the word for "KNOW" means to "KNOW experientially". Adam EXPERIENCED obedience and then Adam EXPERIENCED rebellion.

Obviously.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Jamieson on Gen 2 and the GOOD that Adam and Eve KNEW in the form of joyful "OBEDIENCE" and worship of the one True God BEFORE they rebelled against God.

Jamieson on Gen 2


8. Eden--was probably a very extensive region in Mesopotamia, distinguished for its natural beauty and the richness and variety of its produce. Hence its name, signifying "pleasantness." God planted a garden eastward, an extensive park, a paradise, in which the man was put to be trained under the paternal care of his Maker to piety and usefulness.
9. tree of life--so called from its symbolic character as a sign and seal of immortal life. Its prominent position where it must have been an object of daily observation and interest, was admirably fitted to keep man habitually in mind of God and futurity.
tree of the knowledge of good and evil--so called because it was a test of obedience by which our first parents were to be tried, whether they would be good or bad, obey God or break His commands.
15. put the man into the garden of Eden to dress it--not only to give him a pleasant employment, but to place him on his probation, and as the title of this garden, the garden of the Lord (Ge 13:10; Eze 28:13), indicates, it was in fact a temple in which he worshipped God, and was daily employed in offering the sacrifices of thanksgiving and praise.
17. thou shalt not eat of it . . . thou shalt surely die--no reason assigned for the prohibition, but death was to be the punishment of disobedience. A positive command like this was not only the simplest and easiest, but the only trial to which their fidelity could be exposed.

Jamieson NEVER argues "they had no clue what good and bad WERE"...

As we can clearly see from the text above. Twisting it around for the readers here as Canady has done does not reflect the clear point of Jamieson's writing.


In Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It's not of my concern, I know, yet still I don't understand what you two are fighting about. 'Much ado about nothing'?

 

[BobRyan]

If Adam was created without actually knowing what GOOD WAS -- AS is being claimed - then how can you blame him for doing evil? He is much like a monkey in a cave - not knowing good OR evil.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[canadyjd]

BobRyan

Like I have said previously, let's end this. I have no more to say to you, other than....

peace to youraying:

 

[BobRyan]

Agreed - I believe we have both stated our positions repeatedly and have given the reasons as to why we take them.

It is left for the reader to consider the evidence and choose.

God's blessings.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

BobRyan

Like I have said previously, let's end this. I have no more to say to you, other than....

peace to youraying:

And so with the consensus being that all that needs to be said has been said, let us deem the thread to be closed.