Didn't Satan Give Us Freewill?

[idav]

That was more or less my point.

Free will is easy to test. For example you could offer a chimp a banana or one hundred dollar bill. A smart chimp would choose the bill.:yes:

 

[Pegg]

Actually, was it not God who ensured that all mankind would be born into sin by making it that the original sin was passed along the generations? After all, it was only 'sin' because God deemed it as such and it is God that determines the punishment and forgiveness of sin.

the 'consequences' and the 'sin' are entirely different. We do not get the sin from Adam, but we get the consequences because an imperfect man cannot produce anything perfect ever again.

So God did not give us the consequences, Adam did. God has the power to remove the consequences and that is exactly what he began working towards right from the beginning of sin.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Yet He chose NOT to do so though you claim He had the power, so we pay for a sin that was not ours but our forbears? That begs the question of why such a God would not do so, does He lack compassion? If He had compassion and the ability to remove the consequences of a sin that we did not commit then surely such a compassionate God would have done so, rather than waiting thousands of years and then sending His Son to die for that sin and still we are imperfect - which you say is because we face the consequences of that sin, which supposedly Jesus gave his life to forgive.

 

[Pegg]

Yet He chose NOT to do so though you claim He had the power, so we pay for a sin that was not ours but our forbears?

no. The bible even says that we do not sin in the likeness of Adam.... but we do commit our own sins and its only for those sins that we are held accountable.

That begs the question of why such a God would not do so, does He lack compassion? If He had compassion and the ability to remove the consequences of a sin that we did not commit then surely such a compassionate God would have done so, rather than waiting thousands of years and then sending His Son to die for that sin and still we are imperfect - which you say is because we face the consequences of that sin, which supposedly Jesus gave his life to forgive.

Gods sense of justice does not allow him to simply overide his own rules when he feels like it. He could have spared us the consequences of Adams punishement, but that would require that he bring Adam himself back to perfection by forcing Adam to become obedient.

he just doesnt work like that.

The most compassionate thing he could do was allow Adams children to be born so that he could offer them a way out.

 

[Daviso452]

Gods sense of justice does not allow him to simply overide his own rules when he feels like it. He could have spared us the consequences of Adams punishement, but that would require that he bring Adam himself back to perfection by forcing Adam to become obedient. G

he just doesnt work like that.

The most compassionate thing he could do was allow Adams children to be born so that he could offer them a way out.

And therein lies the paradox of God. God's sense of justice doesn't allow him to? I thought God was allowed to do anything and everything he wanted! An omnipotent being could easily defy his own rules. Otherwise those rules are more powerful than God. Is it even possible for God to create something even he cannot break?

Or put more simply as the famous quote goes, "Can god make a stone so big that not even he himself can move?" On one hand, if god cannot move it, then he is not omnipotent. On the other, if he can move it, then he cannot create such a stone.

I wish to hear your thoughts, Pegg.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

He could have spared us the consequences of Adams punishement, but that would require that he bring Adam himself back to perfection by forcing Adam to become obedient.

he just doesnt work like that.

The most compassionate thing he could do was allow Adams children to be born so that he could offer them a way out.

It is rather arrogant to assume (if you believe in an omnipotent God) that we limited humans have the capability to decide whether something is not within God's power - therefore God could have chosen to spare us the consequences of Adam's punishment without bringing Adam back to perfection and forcing his obedience.

However He chose not to. Why we do not know, perhaps it is part of His grand plan, but He chose not to though it was in His power.

Edit: I have never liked that sentence about the stone, I understand the reasoning, but it is poorly formulated there are several ways to skirt the issue the way it is written.

I prefer: "Can an omnipotent God create an entity it cannot ever (inside or outside of time) affect,"

 

[Pegg]

And therein lies the paradox of God. God's sense of justice doesn't allow him to? I thought God was allowed to do anything and everything he wanted! An omnipotent being could easily defy his own rules. Otherwise those rules are more powerful than God. Is it even possible for God to create something even he cannot break?

I think it shows that the laws that God sets out for us are a part of him. And by defying his laws we are in fact defying him personally which is why the consequences are inescapable.

He could never defy himself because his laws are based on his own standards and morals which come from his intrinsic qualities. They are his nature just as it is the nature of a fish to live in water.... a fish will never attempt to leave the water in an attempt to defy its own nature.

Or put more simply as the famous quote goes, "Can god make a stone so big that not even he himself can move?" On one hand, if god cannot move it, then he is not omnipotent. On the other, if he can move it, then he cannot create such a stone.

I wish to hear your thoughts, Pegg.

I've heard this argument and i dont believe that being almighty means he can do anything at all. God will always act in harmony with his own morals and standards which is why we can always trust that his decisions on any matter will always be the right decision. Omnipotent simply does not mean he can do anything.

 

[Pegg]

It is rather arrogant to assume (if you believe in an omnipotent God) that we limited humans have the capability to decide whether something is not within God's power - therefore God could have chosen to spare us the consequences of Adam's punishment without bringing Adam back to perfection and forcing his obedience.

As we get to know God, we begin to understand why he did what he did and not something completely different. Its not arrogance, its evidence which tells us that God could not break his own laws.

He would never do that because his intrinsic qualities are bound by his own moral standards of perfection. He cannot break them ever. It is not in his nature to break them.

However He chose not to. Why we do not know, perhaps it is part of His grand plan, but He chose not to though it was in His power.

He did give us a way out of the consequences....but he chose to do so in a way that would also solve the issue that was raised by Adams rebellion in the first place.

I prefer: "Can an omnipotent God create an entity it cannot ever (inside or outside of time) affect,"

thats an interesting one. I dont know the answer, but the scriptures may indicate that God could create a being who can be completely independent of him and so not rely on God for life. All of Gods creations basically need his spirit to exist... but there are a small few who have been granted immortality. This means that they have the power of 'life' within themselves and they can never be destroyed or corrupted. Im not sure if that means God could never destroy them, but it certainly means they do not require Gods spirit to exist.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

As we get to know God, we begin to understand why he did what he did and not something completely different. Its not arrogance, its evidence which tells us that God could not break his own laws.

Yet it IS arrogance to assume that our limited intellect is capable of understanding the evidence fully enough to determine the CONSTRAINTS on God.

He would never do that because his intrinsic qualities are bound by his own moral standards of perfection. He cannot break them ever. It is not in his nature to break them.

This is what I object to, to say that God would do this, or not do that - that one suggests that they are capable of understanding an Infinite Being to such an extent that they know His Intent, let alone to then prescribe boundaries for that Infinite Being, that it 'cannot' do something, because we do not think it would or could, because we think we know enough to say what an omnipotent entity is capable of.

He did give us a way out of the consequences....but he chose to do so in a way that would also solve the issue that was raised by Adams rebellion in the first place.

And what was that way out? To wait thousands of years, thus ensuring that the humans prior to Jesus lived their entire lives stained with Sin, thus imperfect and therefore fallible, to fall prey to MORE sin? For which - even after Jesus came - they would then remain imperfect?

thats an interesting one. I dont know the answer, but the scriptures may indicate that God could create a being who can be completely independent of him and so not rely on God for life. All of Gods creations basically need his spirit to exist... but there are a small few who have been granted immortality. This means that they have the power of 'life' within themselves and they can never be destroyed or corrupted. Im not sure if that means God could never destroy them, but it certainly means they do not require Gods spirit to exist.

I have always preferred my sentence over the rock one ^_- it is far tricker, with the rock you can get around it by altering its properties, or the nature of space and time... not so with my more abstract question.

 

[Pegg]

Yet it IS arrogance to assume that our limited intellect is capable of understanding the evidence fully enough to determine the CONSTRAINTS on God.

This is what I object to, to say that God would do this, or not do that - that one suggests that they are capable of understanding an Infinite Being to such an extent that they know His Intent, let alone to then prescribe boundaries for that Infinite Being, that it 'cannot' do something, because we do not think it would or could, because we think we know enough to say what an omnipotent entity is capable of.

we have the ability to understand whatever God allows us to understand.
And we he has provided us enough information in his holy word for us to use the minds he gave us to reason on these matters and be guided by his holy spirit to understand.

It is a mistake to assume we cannot know the things God wants us to know especially when he provides us with the means to know them.

And what was that way out? To wait thousands of years, thus ensuring that the humans prior to Jesus lived their entire lives stained with Sin, thus imperfect and therefore fallible, to fall prey to MORE sin? For which - even after Jesus came - they would then remain imperfect?

well for a start, he allowed us to come to birth even though he knew we would be born imperfect. And he purposes to bring all the dead back to life....the good and the bad, those who obeyed him and those who didnt.

So the fact is that everyone who has been born will live again and be given the choice to sin in the likeness of Adam, or choose to obey God and live forever.

Nothing that has been lost cannot be regained.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

we have the ability to understand whatever God allows us to understand.
And we he has provided us enough information in his holy word for us to use the minds he gave us to reason on these matters and be guided by his holy spirit to understand.

It is a mistake to assume we cannot know the things God wants us to know especially when he provides us with the means to know them.

Or we, in our fallibility merely assume that we have sufficient evidence and competence, rather than it being divine inspiration, how would we know the difference? It is reasonable to suggest that we cannot tell the difference; but it is never reasonable to assume that an Omnipotent Entity cannot do something He Intends.

well for a start, he allowed us to come to birth even though he knew we would be born imperfect. And he purposes to bring all the dead back to life....the good and the bad, those who obeyed him and those who didnt.

Yet He chooses to ensure the conditions that result in us being born are imperfect, though He could have ensured we were perfect.

So the fact is that everyone who has been born will live again and be given the choice to sin in the likeness of Adam, or choose to obey God and live forever.

Nothing that has been lost cannot be regained.

I am not sure what you are saying here I am sorry, is this a reference to heaven or reincarnation or a creation of a new existence after the end of time etc

 

[Desert Snake]

the 'consequences' and the 'sin' are entirely different. We do not get the sin from Adam, but we get the consequences because an imperfect man cannot produce anything perfect ever again.

So God did not give us the consequences, Adam did. God has the power to remove the consequences and that is exactly what he began working towards right from the beginning of sin.

Actually to be more exact it was Eve who disobeyed, then convinced Adam to do likewise.

 

[Pegg]

Or we, in our fallibility merely assume that we have sufficient evidence and competence, rather than it being divine inspiration, how would we know the difference?

all Gods ways are governed by his love and his purpose, therefore if an idea is in opposition to love or Gods purpose, it does not originate with God.

It is reasonable to suggest that we cannot tell the difference; but it is never reasonable to assume that an Omnipotent Entity cannot do something He Intends.

Jesus was of the opinion that his followers had the mental capability of identifying the things that issue from God and the things that dont. So if we take his word for it, then yes, we can tell the difference.

And if God intends on doing anything, he reveals the matter first:
Amos 3:7 For the Sovereign Lord Jehovah will not do a thing unless he has revealed his confidential matter to his servants the prophets. 8 There is a lion that has roared! Who will not be afraid? The Sovereign Lord Jehovah himself has spoken! Who will not prophesy?

Yet He chooses to ensure the conditions that result in us being born are imperfect, though He could have ensured we were perfect.

Not as offspring of Adam, an imperfect man. What he could have done was destroyed Adam and created a new man. But then we would not have been born at all because we are the genetic offspring of the combination of Adam and Eve.

So you see, God had all of us in mind when he allowed Adam and Eve to procreate. And this is why the bible says that God knew each one of us before we were even born. He knows the potential in all of us and he did not want that potential to be lost.

He saved us before we were even born in that sense. and he will save us again because he has already removed the consequences of Adams sin from us. Everyone who has been born will be recreated with life in view.

I am not sure what you are saying here I am sorry, is this a reference to heaven or reincarnation or a creation of a new existence after the end of time etc

this is a reference to the 'resurrection' which will occur during the 1000 year millenial reign of Christ. After armageddon, God will removal any who continue to oppose him in the final war...then afterward, all the people of earth who had already lived and died before Armageddon will be resurrected back to life to live under Gods direct rulership. They will have the opportunity to learn Gods laws properly under his guidance and he will give them 1000 years to grow to perfection.

So you see... he saved mankind from the consequences of Adams sin a very long time ago. Death is only temporary. Resurrection is assured for all people, the good and the bad.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

A number of well-thought responses here.

As in the Original Sin thread, I have a number of issues with the Eden tale; this thread's question highlights many, but the OP question seemed flawed in that, as I agree with others, the serpent was not Satan.

Despite errors saying it was present in the later New Testament, the Hebrew is clear: it's a snake.

So, a simple snake gave us the opportunity to acquire free will, by eating of the Tree?

So it seems, but how did the snake know? And, I mean, how was he even talking in the 1st place?

<.<
>.>

Both possible because he ate of the Tree of knowledge first.

How else would he have known?

Interesting, eh?

 

[Pegg]

Actually to be more exact it was Eve who disobeyed, then convinced Adam to do likewise.

its interesting that many religions put the blame for the fall of mankind on the woman because she did partake of the fruit first... however the bible does not.

The apostle Paul stated:

1Timothy 2:14 Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived

this tells us something about 'intent'. Eve ate because she was tricked so she would not have viewed her actions as defiance toward God because she didnt know she was defying him. Yet Adam was not tricked/deceived. He knew exactly what he was doing when he ate the fruit therefore his action was pure willful defiance of Gods law.

who knows what might have happened if Adam chose not to eat... its possible that Eve could have been corrected and the human race might never have even been born in sin... but i guess we'll never know.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

all Gods ways are governed by his love and his purpose, therefore if an idea is in opposition to love or Gods purpose, it does not originate with God.

Yet that itself is an assumption of the limits of God, an assumption that directly contradicts the notion of an omnipotent God. Are you suggesting that God is not omnipotent then? That, for example, if for some reason he so desired, he could not chose to do something 'evil'?

Jesus was of the opinion that his followers had the mental capability of identifying the things that issue from God and the things that dont. So if we take his word for it, then yes, we can tell the difference.

Then how do we deal with the issue that among his followers there are differences in interpretation? If we CAN tell the difference between that which originates from God and that which does not, then why are there different interpretations that people believe are legitimate? If people WERE able to tell the difference then there could only be one interpretation that could be perceived as being legitimate.

And if God intends on doing anything, he reveals the matter first: Amos 3:7

And yet the majority of the New Testament was not revealed to the faithful prior to Jesus' coming, yes, even the prophets who prophesied a messiah did not suggest most of what occurs in the new testament, certainly not that God had a Son or the like - this is a significant problem for the idea that God reveals his intent prior to his actions.

Not as offspring of Adam, an imperfect man. What he could have done was destroyed Adam and created a new man. But then we would not have been born at all because we are the genetic offspring of the combination of Adam and Eve.

Yet God, who is omnipotent could have interjected Himself into the process to ensure that the offspring was cleansed of any taint, yet He chose not to do so.

So you see, God had all of us in mind when he allowed Adam and Eve to procreate. And this is why the bible says that God knew each one of us before we were even born. He knows the potential in all of us and he did not want that potential to be lost.

That suggests that by cleansing the taint in us we would have lost at least some of our potential... would being free from Sin, 'perfect' as you stated, then be of less potential?

this tells us something about 'intent'. Eve ate because she was tricked so she would not have viewed her actions as defiance toward God because she didnt know she was defying him. Yet Adam was not tricked/deceived. He knew exactly what he was doing when he ate the fruit therefore his action was pure willful defiance of Gods law.

who knows what might have happened if Adam chose not to eat... its possible that Eve could have been corrected and the human race might never have even been born in sin... but i guess we'll never know.

I have never seen this interpretation before, it is appealing in many respects as it counteracts the common interpretation and bears a pearl of wisdom about sins being about making informed choices as opposed to uninformed ones.

 

[Pegg]

Yet that itself is an assumption of the limits of God, an assumption that directly contradicts the notion of an omnipotent God. Are you suggesting that God is not omnipotent then? That, for example, if for some reason he so desired, he could not chose to do something 'evil'?

Hebrews 6:18 '... it is impossible for God to lie"

Then how do we deal with the issue that among his followers there are differences in interpretation? If we CAN tell the difference between that which originates from God and that which does not, then why are there different interpretations that people believe are legitimate? If people WERE able to tell the difference then there could only be one interpretation that could be perceived as being legitimate.

because holy spirit is what inspires understanding, and not everyone has holy spirit.
John 15:26 When the helper arrives that I will send YOU from the Father, the spirit of the truth, which proceeds from the Father, that one will bear witness about me

And yet the majority of the New Testament was not revealed to the faithful prior to Jesus' coming, yes, even the prophets who prophesied a messiah did not suggest most of what occurs in the new testament, certainly not that God had a Son or the like - this is a significant problem for the idea that God reveals his intent prior to his actions.

The OT was for the purpose of identifying the Messiah when he arrived. That Messiah was identified and spoken of in the book of Genesis as the 'Seed' who would come and 'crush the serpent in the head' and bless 'all the nations'

That is all they needed to know. However, when Christ finally arrived, new information was given about the role of Jesus and Gods purposes and how those purposes would be achieved. The Isrealites did not need to know that information because they would not be the ones to live through it.... so the information was revealed to Jews living when the messiah arrived. They were the ones who would need to know about the heavenly kingdom because they would be the ones chosen to rule in that Kingdom.

Gods truth is revealed progressively for a reason. He does not reveal information before its due time....he reveals only what is needed at the time its needed.

Proverbs 4:. 18 But the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established

Yet God, who is omnipotent could have interjected Himself into the process to ensure that the offspring was cleansed of any taint, yet He chose not to do so.

That suggests that by cleansing the taint in us we would have lost at least some of our potential... would being free from Sin, 'perfect' as you stated, then be of less potential?

Being perfect means more then simply being free from sin, it also requires that we live our lives in harmony with Gods will. When a device is created for a certain purpose, it works perfectly if it fulfills its purpose....for example if your car is in good working order and drives when you want it to, its fulfilling its purpose and therefore it can said to be perfect. If it breaks down and doesnt move, its not so perfect anymore.

its the same with mankind. We were created for a purpose. When Adam sinned, he stopped being a part of that purpose and thus he actually lost all of his potential.
The way to regain our potential is to be perfect and live in harmony with Gods purpose and his will.

I have never seen this interpretation before, it is appealing in many respects as it counteracts the common interpretation and bears a pearl of wisdom about sins being about making informed choices as opposed to uninformed ones.

yes i agree. You know, God does not look at our sins....he looks at our hearts. And that is why he forgives sins. Sometimes the heart of a person is actually good even though his actions are bad.

Micah 7:18 Who is a God like you, one pardoning error and passing over transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? He will certainly not hold onto his anger forever, for he is delighting in loving-kindness

 

[9Westy9]

if you have the ability to 'choose', then you have 'free will'.

so free will is the ability to exercise your will rather than the ability to make a choice? Because I'd agree with that.

 

[Pegg]

so free will is the ability to exercise your will rather than the ability to make a choice? Because I'd agree with that.

i think its both

we have the ability to choose, and we tend to choose things according to our own will.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

The apostle Paul stated:

1Timothy 2:14 Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived

this tells us something about 'intent'. Eve ate because she was tricked so she would not have viewed her actions as defiance toward God because she didnt know she was defying him. Yet Adam was not tricked/deceived. He knew exactly what he was doing when he ate the fruit therefore his action was pure willful defiance of Gods law.

Despite his errors about teh serpent...

In context Paul is not saying it's Adam's fault and that he knew what he was doing; in this passage he essentially exonerates Adam and blames Eve. This is part of the 'famous' passage where Paul says women should stay quiet and never teach.