The first sin, how is it possible?

[quickened1]

First, it is a lie that any created creature is capable of being "like God" in their knowledge of good and evil. They are finite in their understanding. God is perfect in His understanding.

If God had wanted Adam and Eve to know good and evil, and judge between them according to their human will, He would have told them to eat of the tree. So, apparently, God didn't want them to know good and evil.

God does want us to be like Christ, since He commands us to be llike Christ.

peace to youraying:

I should have been more clear with my post. I was pointing to the differences in the 2 translations. The NIV says “ be like God”. The KJV says “be as gods”. Do you see the difference? God is God where as gods is not God. The gods are fallen angels of which are Satan’s. Angels are called “sons of God”. They appear before God along with Satan in Job 1, 2 and in a few other places. I believe the sons of God in Gen. 6:2 are fallen angels. Regardless of whether or not you agree with me there, I think you would agree that “gods” is negative in scripture. We don’t know if this conversation between Satan and Eve was their first conversation. How would she know what ‘gods” were if she hadn’t seen any or at least heard of them? It seems God did not tell Adam and Eve of evil but only told them the right thing to do.

I think we have to keep in mind that we have a Father/son relationship here. The Father works and he has an inheritance (the earth and everything on it) in place for his son. He is not ready to give it to him yet because the son is not fully prepared at this point. The Father loves his son and raises him up in the way he should go, and the son is expected to walk accordingly. Even when he doesn’t understand why. That is the way it works with children. They know to do what their father tells them even if they don’t understand. A youngster who can’t handle that may run away. He is rebelling. He does not want to do the will of his father. God wants us to get us to the point where we will choose what is right, out of our own free will. Not just because it is commanded. He wants us to freely choose to do his will. When we love him that is exactly what we will do. “If you love me keep my commandments”. If you love him you will keep his commandments.

So Adam goes the way of the prodigal son and forfeits his inheritance. He made the choice. He didn’t want to do the will of his Father because he didn’t love him. He did love his wife. Jesus came to do the will of the Father because he loved him. That is the difference between the two. I don’t think God would have put Adam in that situation if he wasn’t ready for it. What I mean is he had what he needed to make the right choice. The deciding factor would be his will.

 

[OldRegular]

Some of the stuff Me4Him implies in his posts sounds a little like the Word of Faith nonsense.

 

[Marcia]

I should have been more clear with my post. I was pointing to the differences in the 2 translations. The NIV says “ be like God”. The KJV says “be as gods”. Do you see the difference? God is God where as gods is not God. The gods are fallen angels of which are Satan’s. Angels are called “sons of God”. .

This is a note on Gen. 3.11 from the NET Bible re the statement "you will be like God," which they translate "you will be like the divine beings." The term "gods" does not necessarily mean fallen angels. .

Or perhaps “like God, knowing.” It is unclear how the plural participle translated “knowing” is functioning. On the one hand, יֹדְעֵי (yodÿ’e) could be taken as a substantival participle functioning as a predicative adjective in the sentence. In this case one might translate: “You will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil.” On the other hand, it could be taken as an attributive adjective modifying אֱלֹהִים (’elohim). In this case אֱלֹהִים has to be taken as a numerical plural referring to “gods,” “divine beings,” for if the one true God were the intended referent, a singular form of the participle would almost certainly appear as a modifier. Following this line of interpretation, one could translate, “You will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” The following context may favor this translation, for in 3:22 God says to an unidentified group, “Look, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” It is probable that God is addressing his heavenly court (see the note on the word “make” in 1:26), the members of which can be called “gods” or “divine beings” from the ancient Israelite perspective. (We know some of these beings as messengers or “angels.”) An examination of parallel constructions shows that a predicative understanding (“you will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil,” cf. NIV, NRSV) is possible, but rare (see Gen 27:23, where “hairy” is predicative, complementing the verb “to be”). The statistical evidence strongly suggests that the participle is attributive, modifying “divine beings” (see Ps 31:12; Isa 1:30; 13:14; 16:2; 29:5; 58:11; Jer 14:9; 20:9; 23:9; 31:12; 48:41; 49:22; Hos 7:11; Amos 4:11). In all of these texts, where a comparative clause and accompanying adjective/participle follow a copulative (“to be”) verb, the adjective/participle is attributive after the noun in the comparative clause.

 

[Allan]

I am trying to understand what you are saying. Are you saying that there are periods of time (limited in their duration) in which God grants to sinners "free-will" (meaning free from all outside influence), thus enabling them to freely accept or reject the offer of grace?

JD, I have explained to you in at least 2 different threads in the past that you keep using 'free-will' in a way that practically no longer exists (I say practically because there is always one nut out there). Luther used it to refer to the Roman Catholic doctrine of which he was trying to reform or bring out of their misunderstanding which was/is modern day Semi-Pelegainism. Yet many Cals/Reformed use it when refering to the beliefs of anyone not Reformed.

Free-will is a term used by Arminians and non-Cals alike only to refer to God given opportunity and ability to choose when God gives us a choice.
But it never refers to the absense of outside influences, or inside for that matter.

Remember that the term free-will is used by many Reformed mainly as a perjoritive label or term and not as something that is what is actaully believed. Much like the term Calvinism, which some use to degenerate the view to the following of man and his ideas.

I'll think about this. I'm [not] sure exactly how it bears on the situation unless you're equating the choice to not consult God first to be a choice between good and evil.

Even if that were true, they couldn't have recognized it as a choice between good and evil because they had not yet ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Your seem to be equating the ability to choose to obey God or not as the same as knowing (having personal knowledge) of what evil is. They are not the same.

Does the term 'know' here mean refer to an intimate knowledge?
If it does how do we understand this realizing that God says they (Adam and Eve) will be like 'Us' knowing both godd and evil?
This can't be speaking of God having a personal and intimate knowledge of Evil/Sin but rather is refering to full knowledge of not only what it is but also entails.

God knows because it is the opposite of Himself thus His understanding of it is as expansive as His knowledge of Himself. Yet man only knows of it with regard to being what the assumption is of disobedience and nothing beyond that. Man (or woman for that matter) does not know what it entails nor its extent but only that it is wrong/evil to disobey God's command.

 

[OldRegular]

Concerning free will I like the explanation of John Dagg, a prominent Southern Baptist of the 19th century. He writes in Manual of Theology, page 322, on the natural man’s inability regarding salvation, as follows:

“Every proposed method of salvation that leaves the issue dependent on human volition is defective. It has always been found that men will not come to Christ for life. The Gospel is preached to every creature; but all, with one consent, ask to be excused. The will of man must be changed; and this change the will cannot itself effect. Divine grace must here interpose. Unless God works in the sinner to will and to do, salvation is impossible.”

 

[Allan]

Concerning free will I like the explanation of John Dagg, a prominent Southern Baptist of the 19th century. He writes in Manual of Theology, page 322, on the natural man’s inability regarding salvation, as follows:

“Every proposed method of salvation that leaves the issue dependent on human volition is defective. It has always been found that men will not come to Christ for life. The Gospel is preached to every creature; but all, with one consent, ask to be excused. The will of man must be changed; and this change the will cannot itself effect. Divine grace must here interpose. Unless God works in the sinner to will and to do, salvation is impossible.”

Not that the above defines what 'free-will' actaully is but instead gives a mans view of salvation is duely note.
However it is also noted that even god-fearing men are found to be wrong at times as he is in some particulars.

He also should know better theologically that the world was never offered the gospel and with one concent rejected it. Such a statement shows a devotion to one's theological ideas and not scriptures determining of one's theology. Regeneration before faith is a 'LOGICAL' conclusion and not one found in the scriptures. However the above as well as this post needs to stay here and not continue into a regeneration preceding faith thread.. there are already two threads created previously for such a topic to be discussed, (which I created) if there are any takers.

 

[Me4Him]

Concerning free will I like the explanation of John Dagg, a prominent Southern Baptist of the 19th century. He writes in Manual of Theology, page 322, on the natural man’s inability regarding salvation, as follows:

“Every proposed method of salvation that leaves the issue dependent on human volition is defective. It has always been found that men will not come to Christ for life. The Gospel is preached to every creature; but all, with one consent, ask to be excused. The will of man must be changed; and this change the will cannot itself effect. Divine grace must here interpose. Unless God works in the sinner to will and to do, salvation is impossible.”

Ro 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

God or no God, law or no law, man "knows" right from wrong. (good/evil)

Under "civil law" we have a choice to be a "model Citizen" or a "Criminal",

The "Gospel" is God's law being explained to people, "you sin, you die", and it's preached to be a "WITNESS" against those who heard/didn't obey,

and the end of the world won't come until it is preached to the whole world.

God placed himself under obligation to save when he said no one comes except he calls and it's not his will any perish, and Jesus dying for the sins of the whole world that it "MIGHT BE" saved.

God/Jesus has done/will do all that's possible on their part to save the whole world,

but the reason it's not saved is because men "LOVE" darkness, (criminals) rather than light. (Model citizens)

 

[zrs6v4]

interesting-

The view of the bible always seems to go back to the reformed thinker or not at some point... haha

 

[zrs6v4]

ME4HIM-"God placed himself under obligation to save when he said no one comes except he calls and it's not his will any perish, and Jesus dying for the sins of the whole world that it "MIGHT BE" saved.

God/Jesus has done/will do all that's possible on their part to save the whole world,

but the reason it's not saved is because men "LOVE" darkness, (criminals) rather than light. (Model citizens)"

I just finished a 150 page discussion over Calvinism, haha, but why not b/c Im still dealing with it....

Anyway, To say God made Himself obligated to save just doesnt sound right for one, Lets just say He knew those He would save to be safe.. and to say that it isnt his "will" for anyone to perish isnt correct or it would be universalism because God's will always happens. The proper word is "wish". God does want all to be saved, but it isnt His will. God is good and loves all of us.

I agree Jesus has done enough for everyone to be saved. But technically Im not sure He couldnt save everyone if He Willed it. This would go back to why did He allow sin in the first place.... It was His will to allow it and reveal evil to the world and save some while others are allowed to do what their nature requires- sin

Your last point is why I believe we need sovereign grace..

Not that I think you disagree or agree, but just to talk it out I guess, hah.

 

[quickened1]

This is a note on Gen. 3.11 from the NET Bible re the statement "you will be like God," which they translate "you will be like the divine beings." The term "gods" does not necessarily mean fallen angels. .

Marcia, "divine" is to broad of a term. It could include God or exclude him. The KJV excludes God and renders it "gods". It is true that "gods" can refer to idols like the molten calf, and other things made of materials. I believe the sons of God in Gen. 6:1-4 is refering to fallen angels.


1: And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2: That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3: And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4: There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. (KJV).

The text seems to distinguish between men and "sons of God". When the sons of God go in unto the daughters of men, the offspring consist of mighty men, famous men and giants. There is something different about these "sons". The "after that" in verse 4 refers to this side of the flood. This opens the door for some strange beings our day.

If the sons of God were ordinary men, verse 2 would read like this: "That the sons of men saw the daughters of men that they....". Reason being is because, among human beings, there are no "sons of God" present. A son of God has to be a man that was created or born in God's image and there are none on earth at the time. Adam's image was marred and his offspring were born in his image. No son of God shows up again until Jesus is born and of course he is "The Son of God". For the rest of us, its not until men become born again, that the "sons of God" (having been born in the image of God) show up. No lost man is a son of God. This is made clear in John 1:12.


12: But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: (KJV).

In Job 1:6 the "sons of God" have to be angels.


6: Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Psalm 82




1: God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2: How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3: Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4: Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5: They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6: I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7: But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8: Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

"all the foundations of the earth are out of course". This is the time of the flood. Prophetically it speaks of the second advent. These angels left their first estate (Jude 6). They did cohabit with the daughters of men (Gen 6)and were guilty of beastility. God destroyed all the animals in the flood.

 

[canadyjd]

Satan told them their eyes would be open, and they were, that wasn't a lie, he lied about the consequences of disobeying God's instructions not to eat, mainly you won't die in the day you sin.

Well, at least you now agree that Satan lied. We are making progress.

Eve was given a choice to go from sinless to sin, we're given a choice to go from sin back to sinless through Jesus.

Scripture does not say Eve was given a choice to go from sinless to sin. Eve did not know sin until after she ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Therefore, she could not be making a choice "to go from sinless to sin."

Scripture says Eve was deceived.

With the power to reason (as God) comes the responsibility and accountablilty for the choices we make.

You may have the power to "reason", but I can confidently say no created being has ever had the power to reason "as God". He is in a class by Himself that cannot be quantified.

peace to youraying:

 

[Allan]

interesting-

The view of the bible always seems to go back to the reformed thinker or not at some point... haha

True enough, to a point

Reason:
When discussing immutable truths we (both sides) agree but when discussing the mechanics of some of those truths we see distinquishing differences. Thus it goes back to the theological view in which one sees scripture best describing.

 

[Marcia]

Marcia, "divine" is to broad of a term. It could include God or exclude him. The KJV excludes God and renders it "gods". It is true that "gods" can refer to idols like the molten calf, and other things made of materials. I believe the sons of God in Gen. 6:1-4 is refering to fallen angels.

Sorry, I do not agree that Gen 6 is about fallen angels. This is only one view of this passage.

 

[Allan]

Sorry, I do not agree that Gen 6 is about fallen angels. This is only one view of this passage.

I agree Marcia. :thumbs:

 

[quickened1]

I agree Marcia. :thumbs:

Allan or Marcia, can one of you give your interpretaion of Gen 6:1-4 when you get time ?

 

[Me4Him]

Well, at least you now agree that Satan lied. We are making progress.Scripture does not say Eve was given a choice to go from sinless to sin. Eve did not know sin until after she ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Therefore, she could not be making a choice "to go from sinless to sin."

"Pride of the flesh", to be "as god", able to make your own decisions rather than "Trusting/obeying" God's instruction (laws) is the cause of man's sins.

As a result, "all flesh" is condemned to die from birth, (dust to dust) but that condemnation doesn't apply to "Souls" until they're of the age to know good from evil according to the law,

One "evil thought" (look/lust/covet) is sin, Eve's sin began when she "SAW" the apple was good.

Ge 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, (of the flesh)

Jas 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

In order to be saved the "old man", the "body of sin", (flesh) must be "crucified", (killed) but whether we're "WILLING" to make that sacrifice or not is a "decision" God leaves to "US",

God "allowed" Adam/Eve the freedom to chose between obedience/disobedience (good/evil), we still have that freedom/choice today.

Eve's "decision" to disobey God and obey the "lust of the flesh" brought man into sin, the "reverse" can take man out of sin,

Jesus fulfilled the law for the sins of the whole world that "all men"..."MIGHT BE" saved,

The only thing standing in the way, is "Pride of the flesh", man being his own god, making his own decisions/laws as to what is to be good/evil, abortion for instants.

Scripture says Eve was deceived.
You may have the power to "reason", but I can confidently say no created being has ever had the power to reason "as God". He is in a class by Himself that cannot be quantified.

peace to youraying:

Israel "Reasoned" that Jesus wasn't God, they don't believe God can become a "MAN" in "flesh",

And you don't believe "Man" can become "AS GOD" in the "flesh",

"Born again" makes one a "Son of God", in the flesh, same as Jesus was "son of God", in the flesh.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,

Question is, which God does man want to emulate, the god of this world (satan/flesh) or the God of Heaven???

The "carnal mind" doesn't understand "Spiritual concepts", Israel made the decision to "closed their eyes" to "spiritual understanding",

Jesus told Israel, "I would", and died that they "Might be" saved, but gave the reason "you wouldn't" as why they wasn't saved,

and that applies to "Everyone".

Mt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Jos 23:16 When ye have transgressed the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and have gone and served other gods, and bowed yourselves to them; then shall the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and ye shall perish quickly from off the good land which he hath given unto you.

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Mt 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,

3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.

Mt 22:7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. (Jerusalem 70 AD)

 

[zrs6v4]

True enough, to a point

Reason:
When discussing immutable truths we (both sides) agree but when discussing the mechanics of some of those truths we see distinquishing differences. Thus it goes back to the theological view in which one sees scripture best describing.

would you say this is a serious issue?

 

[canadyjd]

"Pride of the flesh", to be "as god", able to make your own decisions rather than "Trusting/obeying" God's instruction (laws) is the cause of man's sins.

As a result, "all flesh" is condemned to die from birth, (dust to dust) but that condemnation doesn't apply to "Souls" until they're of the age to know good from evil according to the law,

One "evil thought" (look/lust/covet) is sin, Eve's sin began when she "SAW" the apple was good.....

Your position is contrary to scripture. There was no sin until they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

In order to be saved the "old man", the "body of sin", (flesh) must be "crucified", (killed) but whether we're "WILLING" to make that sacrifice or not is a "decision" God leaves to "US",.....

Have you ever heard of a member named "skypair". You and he think a lot alike.

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

Free-will is a term used by Arminians and non-Cals alike only to refer to God given opportunity and ability to choose when God gives us a choice.
But it never refers to the absense of outside influences, or inside for that matter.

The word "free-will" may be the problem. I prefer to use the term "human will".

Thanks for the input.

peace to youraying:

 

[Me4Him]

Your position is contrary to scripture. There was no sin until they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

So if you look/lust it's not a sin until the sin is actually "literally/Physically" committed???

Ex 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Mt 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

"Evil thoughts" are sin.

Pr 15:26 The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the LORD:

Jesus didn't "purge" the flesh of sin but the "Consciousness", (heart) this is where sin is "conceived" that bring forth the "literal/physical" act.

Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

And it's the "HEART" God judges.

Mt 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart,

Have you ever heard of a member named "skypair". You and he think a lot alike.

peace to youraying:

I know a "skypair" from another board, if it's the same one.

We agree about 98%, but have some differences.