Didn't Satan Give Us Freewill?

[Pegg]

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.

the point is that Adam took the fruit knowingly... Eve didnt.
Hebrews 10:26 Forif we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, 27 but [there is] a certain fearful expectation of judgment and [there is] a fiery jealousy that is going to consume those in opposition

thats the point.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

the point is that Adam took the fruit knowingly... Eve didnt.
Hebrews 10:26 Forif we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, 27 but [there is] a certain fearful expectation of judgment and [there is] a fiery jealousy that is going to consume those in opposition

thats the point.

the point is he didn't take it knowingly; he didn't know Good or Evil. He was listening to th word of someone he had no reason not to trust. His wife.

And I wasn't the one saying this, Paul was, is my point. I thought you had to listen to him?

But I agree that Eve didn't know either. They were both purposefully [God's purpose, mind you] ignorant.

 

[Pegg]

the point is he didn't take it knowingly; he didn't know Good or Evil. He was listening to th word of someone he had no reason not to trust. His wife.

And I wasn't the one saying this, Paul was, is my point. I thought you had to listen to him?

But I agree that Eve didn't know either. They were both purposefully [God's purpose, mind you] ignorant.

well i beg to differ because the account in Genesis shows that Eve knew full well what the consequences of eating the tree would be. She even repeated Gods warning to the serpent so she was not ignorant.

I think people confuse the 'knowledge of good and evil' with general knowledge as if their minds were completely blank to what was right and what was wrong.

The way we explain it is that they always had the 'knowledge of good and evil' because it issued from God....he set the rules for what was good and evil and he had told them that it was evil to eat from the tree. He also told them what the consequences would be . But along came Satan and he prompted Eve to reject what God had told her and make the decision herself. In this way she became the decider of what was good and evil....she had rejected the knowledge she previously had from God. When she chose, she became 'like' God in setting standards and rules.

in effect, it was Gods rulership that she rejected. He was the lawmaker, now she was her own law maker.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

well i beg to differ because the account in Genesis shows that Eve knew full well what the consequences of eating the tree would be. She even repeated Gods warning to the serpent so she was not ignorant.

Well, I understand why you would differ. But her repeating the words does not indicate a grasp of the implications. In fact it also lends itself to my conclusion: she is repeating what the serpent said as an indicator that she believed it was all right. 'Well the snake said it was ok'.

I think people confuse the 'knowledge of good and evil' with general knowledge as if their minds were completely blank to what was right and what was wrong.

I think that you are confusing our general knowledge with the general knowledge Adam and Eve could have possibly possessed. They were not developed adults. they had no education nor cultural knowledge and as we both know.. they were prevented from knowing good from evil and thus the idea of disobedience was not within their grasp.

The way we explain it is that they always had the 'knowledge of good and evil' because it issued from God

Explained where?

....he set the rules for what was good and evil and he had told them that it was evil to eat from the tree.

Nnnnnnno, no he never said anything like that. He simply told them not to eat of it. but then the serpent said they could.

You should remember that the ONLY demonstration of Adam and Eve's capacity to do anything, was God allowing them to name furry animals. Our 4 year olds can do that. There's zero reason to believe they were any smarter than our children.

He also told them what the consequences would be.

Actually he never told them ALL the consequences, but be that as it may, he told them they would die that day [a blatant lie], and, since there was no death, they didn't even know what that meant either.

But along came Satan

It wasn't Satan

and he prompted Eve to reject what God had told her and make the decision herself. In this way she became the decider of what was good and evil....she had rejected the knowledge she previously had from God. When she chose, she became 'like' God in setting standards and rules.

She did no such thing, she simply followed the suggestion of a free-ranging creature in the garden whom she had ZERO reason to distrust.

in effect, it was Gods rulership that she rejected. He was the lawmaker, now she was her own law maker.

lol, nothing of the kind.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

One does not make responsible decisions without knowledge of the facts of the outcomes. Adam and Eve did not possess this information. To hold them morally responsible is reprehensible. It's akin to putting a 4 year old in adult prison for murder, even if they pulled a trigger.

 

[9Westy9]

i think its both

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

But the will almost always, if not always, overpowers a choice free from bias.

 

[arcanum]

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.

Didn't god tell them both beforehand not to eat of the tree? Didn't they both clearly hear and know god's command on this? Weren't they both equally complicit in this whole debacle? I guess I'm not really understanding your point.

 

[idav]

Didn't god tell them both beforehand not to eat of the tree? Didn't they both clearly hear and know god's command on this? Weren't they both equally complicit in this whole debacle? I guess I'm not really understanding your point.

Last I checked Eve wasn't created when Adam got the warning. I am not sure Eve got warned before she got blind sided by the serpent.

 

[Pegg]

One does not make responsible decisions without knowledge of the facts of the outcomes. Adam and Eve did not possess this information.

what makes you say they didnt have this knowledge?

the bible account shows that they did have that knowledge so i dont believe that this is a valid argument to make.

perhaps if the bible account did state that they had no knowledge, then i might agree with you, but if i take the account as the basis of the story, then i cant agree.

 

[Pegg]

Didn't god tell them both beforehand not to eat of the tree? Didn't they both clearly hear and know god's command on this? Weren't they both equally complicit in this whole debacle? I guess I'm not really understanding your point.

they did both know, yes.

But Eve was deceived into eating it, Adam wasnt.

One committed the crime because she was deceived, the other committed the crime deliberately.

To illustrate this point we could use the example of a child who has been given a the rule to never get into a car with a stranger. Most children are taught this very strict rule at a young age and they know not to do it. However, some children still get into the car with a stranger because they can be deceived by the stranger. Often the tactic of a 'false friend' is used by the kidnapper. They tell the child that they are a friend of their parents and there has been an accident and the stranger is there to take them to the hospital to see their parents or to take them back home urgently. Some children fall for this ploy and they get into the care knowing that it is against the rules. But they do so thinking that it will be to their benefit.

and so it was with Eve. While she knew she shouldnt eat the fruit, she thought that it would be beneficial to do so. Adam on other hand knew it was wrong and he knew it would be detrimental to them both.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Hebrews 6:18

Now this statement, if you believe in the God of this Bible may be seen as a legitimate truth - however it only refers to lies; given that it is contained in the central religious text deemed to be the truth inspired by that Deity, followers of the Religions that follow it may deem it Truth; however that does not mean that it could be loosely interpreted to be that God cannot do anything wrong other than lying - it is grossly arrogant to assume that humans have the capacity to interpret this in such a way as to expand the restraints on God to include other actions not explicitly stated by their central sacred text.

because holy spirit is what inspires understanding, and not everyone has holy spirit. John 15:26

Once again, this relies upon us being able to determine IF we have the holy spirit - and that is assuming that supposing we have the holy spirit that we can then tell if that understanding originated from that holy spirit.

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.

So its on a need to know basis rather than God telling us before acting?

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 God concealed both the holy spirit and His Son from those who worshipped him because they would not be alive during the time Jesus was on Earth? Why should those that preceded Jesus be blinkered in such a way by God? Nor to have the opportunity to know about the heavenly kingdom or rule it (until the time when you say everyone will be reincarnated and they get ONE chance where everyone else has had two)?

And to be honest the next section down to and including the proverb is very abstract, to the point that it is difficult to understand what you are attempting to describe;

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.

So rather than actually being people, we are tools or objects - a hammer, a nail, a widget... that seems rather dehumanising, not the characteristic of a benevolent being.

Given you suggest that God wants to preserve our potential which was lost because of the consequences of Adam and Eve's sin, we can assume that God wants our potential to increase - An omnipotent god (who can act in such a way as to remove those consequences without any negative outcome since He is all powerful) would have removed those consequences, thereby restoring that 'potential' and our 'perfection' (whatever those two terms mean).

He chose not to. Instead, you suggest that potential is reacquired by living in harmony with Gods purpose and will; despite the fact that it was Adam and Eve who lost that potential, we then face the consequences of that - which includes the propensity for later sins. My question boils down to this:

Given that God was capable of removing the consequences of those Sins, why did he not?

He determined what constitutes sin, He determines how sins are punished and forgiven, he chose not to forgive - he chose to punish. Is it simply a case of God's 'freewill' in action, a bit of retribution since he was mad and those he created perhaps?

-

In either case however, to suggest that God then wishes us to use our free will is a dubious claim at best - perhaps it might be argued that God wishes to use our 'free' will to do His will; yet it is obvious the Abrahamic God punishes when we use free will against His will... hardly 'free' then is it?

 

[Heathen Hammer]

what makes you say they didnt have this knowledge?

The scripture itself says so.

the bible account shows that they did have that knowledge so i dont believe that this is a valid argument to make.

the Bible does not show this at all. There is no account whatsoever of this knowledge being possessed by them. If they already possessed this knowledge, why did the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil exist? Look at the name. Your statement makes no sense. Having the Knowledge of Good and Evil, embodied in the fruit of a specific tree, and having Adam and Eve specifically forbidden to eat this fruit because it would confer upon them this knowledge against God's wishes, makes it illogical to imagine they already had this knowledge.

perhaps if the bible account did state that they had no knowledge, then i might agree with you, but if i take the account as the basis of the story, then i cant agree.

then you need to actually read the story.

 

[Pegg]

Now this statement, if you believe in the God of this Bible may be seen as a legitimate truth - however it only refers to lies; given that it is contained in the central religious text deemed to be the truth inspired by that Deity, followers of the Religions that follow it may deem it Truth; however that does not mean that it could be loosely interpreted to be that God cannot do anything wrong other than lying - it is grossly arrogant to assume that humans have the capacity to interpret this in such a way as to expand the restraints on God to include other actions not explicitly stated by their central sacred text.

If it is impossible for God do lie, then omnipotence cannot mean that God can do anything. He can only do what his own morals and standards will allow him to do. That is really the point.

God himself explains the things he cannot or will not do.
1 Samuel 15:29 And, besides, the Excellency of Israel will not prove false, and He will not feel regrets, for He is not an earthling man so as to feel regrets.”

james 1:13 When under trial, let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone

Malachi 3:6 “For I am Jehovah; I have not changed

So he will never lie, he will never put us through hardship/trials, he will never regret his decisions and he will never change his standards or moral laws. He is completely and totally trustworthy in every respect due to these 4 things that he will never do.

Once again, this relies upon us being able to determine IF we have the holy spirit - and that is assuming that supposing we have the holy spirit that we can then tell if that understanding originated from that holy spirit.

Yep, and the bible tells us what to expect from someone who has holy spirit...they will bear the fruits of the spirit.
Galatians5:22 On the other hand, the fruitage of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, 23 mildness, self-control
And of course a person who is in harmony with the spirit will be able to determine teachings which are in harmony with the spirit and rule out those which are not.

So its on a need to know basis rather than God telling us before acting?

He always tells us whats going to happen before he acts. there are many examples during Isreals history when he sent prophets to the nation to warn them time and time again. So they always had warning if judgment was coming.

and yes, it is on a need to know basis. We are here for him, not the other way around....he's not at our beck and call. Sometimes we have to wait for it.

So God concealed both the holy spirit and His Son from those who worshipped him because they would not be alive during the time Jesus was on Earth? Why should those that preceded Jesus be blinkered in such a way by God? Nor to have the opportunity to know about the heavenly kingdom or rule it (until the time when you say everyone will be reincarnated and they get ONE chance where everyone else has had two)?

Moses had holy spirit. He also had miraculous powers given him by God. And Moses was the one who wrote about the messiah who was coming who would redeem all mankind. So they knew Gods purpose and had the privileged of seeing Gods power and having his temple and seeing his presence in the temple. They had the privelege of walking with the prophets and seeing miracles. Dont think for a moment that they resented their position...they didnt. They knew those things would be far into the future and they still rejoiced in them because they believed in the 'resurrection' They knew they would awake in Gods new world and so they were satisfied to go to their graves....to them they went to 'rest' until they were remembered by God and brought back from the grave.

Genesis 25:. 8 Then Abraham expired and died in a good old age, old and satisfied, and was gathered to his people

Job 14:14 If an able-bodied man dies can he live again?All the days of my compulsory service I shall wait, Until my relief comes.
15 You will call, and I myself shall answer you Job 42:17 And gradually Job died, old and satisfied with days

Hebrews 11:13 In faith all these died (Abraham,Isaac, Jacob, Noah), although they did not get the [fulfillment of the] promises, but they saw them afar off and welcomed them

Given that God was capable of removing the consequences of those Sins, why did he not?

there are many reasons.

God does everything by the book. He does not pass-by his own universal laws to fix a problem, rather he addresses issues in such a way that his laws are maintained. God had already decided that corruption would bring forth death...that was a consequence set in stone. Remember that Gods said "so my word that goes forth from my mouth will have results' and he also said 'i will not feel regrets' so he will never regret any judicial decision he has made as if it was wrong because all Gods decisions are perfect.

Also, sin put Adam out of harmony with God. It damaged not only his relationship with God but also his relationship with the rest of God’s creation, with his wife, and even with his own self in his mind, heart, and body....he became corrupted much like a computer file which becomes corrupted....any copies of that file produce the same corruptions. That is the law of cause and effect.
This is just a glimps, there is obviously a little more too it then what i've stated here, but i'll leave it at this for now.

He determined what constitutes sin, He determines how sins are punished and forgiven, he chose not to forgive - he chose to punish. Is it simply a case of God's 'freewill' in action, a bit of retribution since he was mad and those he created perhaps?

Ask a parent how it feels to have their child reject them and you'll have an inkling of the pain Adams actions caused God. He allowed the consequences of their actions to come upon them because his justice required it.

Sin is actually failing to live by Gods law or standards. That is what sin is. The hebrew word literally means to 'miss the mark'
The 'mark' in this case is Gods perfect standards in all things.

In either case however, to suggest that God then wishes us to use our free will is a dubious claim at best - perhaps it might be argued that God wishes to use our 'free' will to do His will; yet it is obvious the Abrahamic God punishes when we use free will against His will... hardly 'free' then is it?

God wants us to be perfect.
Matthew 5:48 YOU must accordingly be perfect, as YOUR heavenly Father is perfect
To be perfect is to be free of sin... it means to hit the target by our standards, conduct, attitudes, morals, justice, righteousness, kindness etc etc etc. When we fully reflect the qualities of God, then we will be perfect and death will be no more.

Romans 6:23 For the wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life by Christ Jesus our Lord

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I was attempting to steer the conversation back to the concept of God/Satan and free will in that point (im willing to discuss in a different thread though by all means!).

"God wants us to be perfect. To be perfect is to be free of sin... it means to hit the target by our standards, conduct, attitudes, morals, justice, righteousness, kindness etc etc etc. When we fully reflect the qualities of God, then we will be perfect and death will be no more."

So, to enforce a certain standard of behaviour and yes, even thought (because there are sins that relate to our mere thoughts); god punishes and withholds in an attempt to modify our use of free will until we reach such a stage that even our THOUGHTS do not contradict God's will.

That goes beyond mere physical slavery to complete and utter subjugation and deformation (yes deFORM, because it is being altered to conFORM to God's will) of the soul? That would suggest a God is inimical to free will; and to those that favour free will God is a threat... You are suggesting a model of God which desires not only our behaviour but our minds to act in a certain way and will punish, cajole and withhold from those who deviate; such a God sound a lot like a dog trainer, where we are the dogs... I am not sure many people would find such a God palatable.

 

[idav]

God wants us to be perfect.

Does this mean giving us freewill or giving an angel that torments us freewill?

 

[Pegg]

I was attempting to steer the conversation back to the concept of God/Satan and free will in that point (im willing to discuss in a different thread though by all means!).

"God wants us to be perfect. To be perfect is to be free of sin... it means to hit the target by our standards, conduct, attitudes, morals, justice, righteousness, kindness etc etc etc. When we fully reflect the qualities of God, then we will be perfect and death will be no more."

So, to enforce a certain standard of behaviour and yes, even thought (because there are sins that relate to our mere thoughts); god punishes and withholds in an attempt to modify our use of free will until we reach such a stage that even our THOUGHTS do not contradict God's will.

That goes beyond mere physical slavery to complete and utter subjugation and deformation (yes deFORM, because it is being altered to conFORM to God's will) of the soul? That would suggest a God is inimical to free will; and to those that favour free will God is a threat... You are suggesting a model of God which desires not only our behaviour but our minds to act in a certain way and will punish, cajole and withhold from those who deviate; such a God sound a lot like a dog trainer, where we are the dogs... I am not sure many people would find such a God palatable.

freewill never did, and never will mean that we can do anything. We are bound by the laws of nature for example. The law of gravity means we cannot walk off the edge of a cliff without consequences. It is the same with Gods universal laws and standards. They run through the fabric of our existence and if we break them, there will be consequences.

To avoid the consequences, we need to keep within the framework of the natural laws...that includes the physical and moral laws that govern us. If we step outside of any of those laws, we will die because Gods spirit cannot & will not exist outside of the universal laws....and it is Gods spirit that keeps us alive.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 says: “Then the dust returns to the earth just as it happened to be and the spirit itself returns to the true God who gave it.”

Psalm 104:29 If you conceal your face, they get disturbed.
If you take away their spirit, they expire, And back to their dust they go

So if our behavior turns against the spirit, then the spirit will leave us and we will die. That is why God wants us to obey his laws. We cannot live without them.

 

[Pegg]

Does this mean giving us freewill or giving an angel that torments us freewill?

it means giving us laws to obey

 

[Heathen Hammer]

'Perfection' [aside that it doesn't exist formally] is a ridiculous 'standard' to hold us to since God knows we cannot attain it.

God just looks worse and worse the more you speak of him, Pegg.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Pegg my point was this: Can we still have 'free will' in an end state God desires where He wants even our thoughts to conform to His Will? Our 'free will' there would merely be 'God's Will', not ours at all.

 

[Pegg]

Pegg my point was this: Can we still have 'free will' in an end state God desires where He wants even our thoughts to conform to His Will? Our 'free will' there would merely be 'God's Will', not ours at all.

yes we can. The reason is because it would be our choice to conform ourselves to his will in the first place.

If we dont want to, then we have the freedom to choose not to. That is free will.

The consequences of our choices will either be good or bad depending on what we choose. Nonetheless, we still have the choice.