The Gospel - Is it only that Jesus died or is it that we celebrate The Resurrection?

[Kenny]

' We' but just as 1st John 1:7 says " if " we ........... ( life style)
Thus, Jesus' ransom covers MANY - Matt. 20:28, but Not all because the wicked are 'destroyed forever' - Psalms 92:7; 104:35; 145:20
Resurrection is for both the righteous and unrighteous ( KJV just and unjust - Acts 24:15 ) Not for the unrepentant wicked - 2nd Peter 3:9
At Jesus' coming Glory Time (Matt. 25:31-34,37,40) the stubborn rebellious 'goats' come to a final end - Proverbs 2:21-22

In my mind I made the distinction of those who when they said “Lord” actually meant it.

 

[blü 2]

I find at 1st Corinthians 15:26 that 'death' is our 'enemy' and Not a friend

Death has a purpose. It makes renewal possible. It makes evolution possible.

The temple was Not to be a marketplace of illegal business.

Perhaps you can quote me some part of the Tanakh that says so.

Meanwhile as I pointed out, what the traders were doing was NOT illegal.

AND if there was fault, that fault lay with the priests who administered the Temple, and NOT the traders.

AND it was pointless of Jesus to attack the traders for that reason.0

Please notice John 2:16 because if the moneychangers would have been innocent they would Not have turned themselves -> greedy
- John 2:16; Matt. 21:13; Mark 11:17 and Luke 19:46

Irrelevant. In all four cases IF there was fault, it was the fault of the Temple administration and NOT the traders.

 

[blü 2]

Never know, or will know because after the 1000 years we will know more ( 1st Corinthians 15:24-26; Isaiah 25:8)

There is NOTHING in the Tanakh about "the Fall of Man". Adam and Eve are NOT accused of any sin in Genesis. It would be outrageous to do so, since at the time each ate the fruit, they were incapable of distinguishing good from evil BECAUSE God had deliberately made them so. Therefore each was incapable of sin at that time, and NOTHING in the Tanakh says different.

Moreover, Ezekiel 18 (throughout, but not least 18:20) makes it plain that sin can NOT be inherited.

According to my reading, the notion of the Fall (which Paul but none of the gospels briefly mentions) is earliest found among the Jews of Alexandria late in the 2nd century CE, arising out their practice of the midrash tradition. That is, it arises as a flight of fancy, of imagination, which midrash encourages. It may as well be Christian "truth" as that the cow jumped over the moon.

 

[GoodAttention]

There is NOTHING in the Tanakh about "the Fall of Man". Adam and Eve are NOT accused of any sin in Genesis. It would be outrageous to do so, since at the time each ate the fruit, they were incapable of distinguishing good from evil BECAUSE God had deliberately made them so. Therefore each was incapable of sin at that time, and NOTHING in the Tanakh says different.

Taking sin out of the equation, are you saying Adam and Eve were incapable of disobedience? In which case were they capable of obedience?

Moreover, Ezekiel 18 (throughout, but not least 18:20) makes it plain that sin can NOT be inherited.

Sin cannot be inherited, however being Jewish, or "chosen" to be God's obedient people, is inherited.
Such that those that are born "unchosen" could rightfully consider themselves to be born of disobedience, which is argued to be a sin.

According to my reading, the notion of the Fall (which Paul but none of the gospels briefly mentions) is earliest found among the Jews of Alexandria late in the 2nd century CE, arising out their practice of the midrash tradition. That is, it arises as a flight of fancy, of imagination, which midrash encourages. It may as well be Christian "truth" as that the cow jumped over the moon.

It seems even some Jews, though considered chosen by birth, considered themselves to be "unchosen" or disobedient. In the context of the destruction of the Temple this is understandable. Tracing the existence of how and why back to Adam and Eve allows understanding and acceptance of "sin", and that it is for both the chosen and unchosen to acknowledge.

But yes, the truly obedient don't waver in the face of any reality.

 

[blü 2]

Taking sin out of the equation, are you saying Adam and Eve were incapable of disobedience? In which case were they capable of obedience?

God (in that story) had made them incapable of knowing good and evil. Therefore, if we take it that 'disobedience' is evil, God had made sure they were incapable of knowing that.

Sin cannot be inherited, however being Jewish, or "chosen" to be God's obedient people, is inherited.
Such that those that are born "unchosen" could rightfully consider themselves to be born of disobedience, which is argued to be a sin.

Same again. God had created Adam and Eve as incapable of knowing good and evil.

(You'll also have noticed how in the story God lies ─ I think 'misspeaks' is the political euphemism ─ when [he] says Adam and Eve will die the same day they eat the fruit, whereas the Snake speaks only the truth throughout.)

 

[GoodAttention]

God (in that story) had made them incapable of knowing good and evil. Therefore, if we take it that 'disobedience' is evil, God had made sure they were incapable of knowing that.

The question is, were Adam and Eve capable of obedience? I am not discussing good and evil, I am asking if they had the capacity to be obedient.

Same again. God had created Adam and Eve as incapable of knowing good and evil.

Again, I am not discussing good and evil. I am discussing capacity for obedience.

(You'll also have noticed how in the story God lies ─ I think 'misspeaks' is the political euphemism ─ when [he] says Adam and Eve will die the same day they eat the fruit, whereas the Snake speaks only the truth throughout.)

Does this "misspeak" relate in any way to the "do not" or "must not" command he gives Adam?

 

[blü 2]

The question is, were Adam and Eve capable of obedience? I am not discussing good and evil, I am asking if they had the capacity to be obedient.

I dare say they had the capacity to be both obedient and disobedient, just as they had the capacity to be naked or clad, silent or speaking, still or moving, and so on.

What God had expressly denied them in the story was the capacity to know if and when one choice was morally preferable to the other.

Does this "misspeak" relate in any way to the "do not" or "must not" command he gives Adam?

No. It relates to God's personal morality, and [his] capacity to lie. God makes no secret of the fact that [he] lies eg

1 Kings 22:23 Now, therefore, behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has spoken evil concerning you.

2 Chronicles 18:22 Now therefore, behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of these your prophets; the Lord has spoken evil concerning you.

Jeremiah 4:10 ... “Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem ...”

Jeremiah 20:7 O Lord, thou hast deceived me, / and I was deceived;

Ezekiel 14:9 And if the prophet be deceived and speak a word, I, the Lord, have deceived that prophet

2 Thessalonians 2:11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false.​

 

[GoodAttention]

I dare say they had the capacity to be both obedient and disobedient, just as they had the capacity to be naked or clad, silent or speaking, still or moving, and so on.

To be obedient is to take instruction and direction. You can argue Adam was obedient given he was instructed to name all of the animals. You can also argue that Adam was aware he was subordinate to God, given that he was created by him, and also created Eve from him. There is no "moral" requirement to understand obedience and subordination, it is an primal characteristic you could say we share with animals.

What God had expressly denied them in the story was the capacity to know if and when one choice was morally preferable to the other.

This is saying Adam and Eve did not have the capacity to know the difference between God and the serpent.

No. It relates to God's personal morality, and [his] capacity to lie. God makes no secret of the fact that [he] lies eg

1 Kings 22:23 Now, therefore, behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has spoken evil concerning you.​

​

2 Chronicles 18:22 Now therefore, behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of these your prophets; the Lord has spoken evil concerning you.​

​

Jeremiah 4:10 ... “Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem ...”​

​

Jeremiah 20:7 O Lord, thou hast deceived me, / and I was deceived;​

​

Ezekiel 14:9 And if the prophet be deceived and speak a word, I, the Lord, have deceived that prophet​

​

2 Thessalonians 2:11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false.​

So, if the misspeak does not relate to the command "do not eat", and Adam had the capacity to be obedient, then Adam chose to be disobedient.

 

[blü 2]

To be obedient is to take instruction and direction. You can argue Adam was obedient given he was instructed to name all of the animals. You can also argue that Adam was aware he was subordinate to God, given that he was created by him, and also created Eve from him. There is no "moral" requirement to understand obedience and subordination, it is an primal characteristic you could say we share with animals.

This is saying Adam and Eve did not have the capacity to know the difference between God and the serpent.

In the story they know who God is and they know who the snake is. I dare say it was a bit like knowing the difference between a rabbit and a beaver, considering that Adam had named them.

So, if the misspeak does not relate to the command "do not eat", and Adam had the capacity to be obedient, then Adam chose to be disobedient.

Yes, but no moral element was involved, because God had denied him and Eve the knowledge of good and evil. For that reason, neither Eve nor Adam knew that obedience or disobedience had any moral element. Hence not only were they incapable of sin, but sin is never mentioned in the story ─ not once, not anywhere.

So if you want to know why they got pitched out of the Garden, God states [his] only reasons loud and clear at Genesis 3:22-23.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

.
Peace to all,

To me, the logic in The Knowledge of good and evil is created love. From Adam, became Eve, all Spirit and Life. Eve was told by Adam as authority that before Eve's creation, Adam was told not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge or they will surely die. When Eve partaked of the Tree of Knowledge, Adam now had the choice to live forever without her, stay with the tree of life without Eve? stay in the garden, without Eve or eat of the friut and die with the love of Eve. Choice and internal tempters as Original Sin are now present in the spirit through the flesh to the Soul of the defiled being. It is now man's choice to manifest in the spirit through the flesh to the soul of the being through the selected spirit by man, now with choice. Adam's only sin was to not wanting to live forever alone. Logically disobedience is Adam and he also gives up on authority and chooses spirit and life, Eve over death and now for both Adam and Eve are together. The logic of love created in man and is love of Eve over death and death reconciled, resurrected as fulfilled eternal Divine love. And the Logic of fulfilled eternal love is through the Creator's Son is through the New Eve.

Peace always,
Stephen andrew

 

[GoodAttention]

In the story they know who God is and they know who the snake is. I dare say it was a bit like knowing the difference between a rabbit and a beaver, considering that Adam had named them.
Yes, but no moral element was involved, because God had denied him and Eve the knowledge of good and evil. For that reason, neither Eve nor Adam knew that obedience or disobedience had any moral element. Hence not only were they incapable of sin, but sin is never mentioned in the story ─ not once, not anywhere.

So if you want to know why they got pitched out of the Garden, God states [his] only reasons loud and clear at Genesis 3:22-23.

I agree "sin" is not mentioned in Genesis, but I disagree that obedience requires a moral element.
Obedience requires a fear of only God and nothing else, including death.

There is no lie from God. Adam willingly ate in both disobedience but also subordination, showing he feared God more than he did death.

God punishes his disobedience with toil and suffering, but rewards his subordination with an eventual death.


Hence why I describe humans to be both "chosen" and "unchosen", going back to post #264.

 

[blü 2]

I agree "sin" is not mentioned in Genesis, but I disagree that obedience requires a moral element.
Obedience requires a fear of only God and nothing else, including death.

There is no lie from God. Adam willingly ate in both disobedience but also subordination, showing he feared God more than he did death.

Of course God lies. God says so. I gave you the quotes.

[He} also says

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I the Lord do all these things.​

And of course sin has nothing to do with the Garden story ─ since obviously you haven't read it, I'll underline that nowhere does it mention sin, and refer you to God's sole reason for kicking Adam and Eve out ─

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" ─ 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.​

The other thing to bear in mind is that it isn't history, it's merely a folktale.

If you want to know how humans evolved, I set out a brief rough outline at >Darwin's Illusion<.

 

[blü 2]

.To me, the logic in The Knowledge of good and evil is created love. From Adam, became Eve, all Spirit and Life.

Not quite in that order ─ in the story the humans are the last things created.

Eve was told by Adam as authority that before Eve's creation, Adam was told not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge or they will surely die.

But being denied (by God) knowledge of good and evil, neither Eve nor Adam had any concept that there was anything morally wrong with disobedience.

When Eve partaked of the Tree of Knowledge, Adam now had the choice to live forever without her, stay with the tree of life without Eve?

There's no mention in the story that Adam ─ or anyone else ─ was going to live forever. Indeed it's plain, from the existence of a Tree of Life in the
Garden, that he was never going to live forever. And God makes this plain in Genesis 3:22-23 where [he] states that the (only) reason [he]'s booting them out is to stop them from living forever.

stay in the garden, without Eve or eat of the friut and die with the love of Eve.

Nothing in the text supports that rather romantic interpretation.

Choice and internal tempters as Original Sin are now present in the spirit through the flesh to the Soul of the defiled being.

With all due respect, no, nothing of the kind is found in the text of the Garden story. The word 'sin' is not found anywhere, never mentioned. Nor is 'soul', . Nor is the entry of death into the world (see my reference to the Tree of Life above).

I emphasize again that in the story ─ and it IS only a story, a folktale ─ God has deprived Adam and Eve of the knowledge of good and evil and therefore they're incapable of, have no concept of, immorality, of sin of any kind.

 

[GoodAttention]

Of course God lies. God says so. I gave you the quotes.

[He} also says

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I the Lord do all these things.​

And of course sin has nothing to do with the Garden story ─ since obviously you haven't read it, I'll underline that nowhere does it mention sin, and refer you to God's sole reason for kicking Adam and Eve out ─

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" ─ 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.​

God fears man will become God, says man.

The other thing to bear in mind is that it isn't history, it's merely a folktale.

If you want to know how humans evolved, I set out a brief rough outline at >Darwin's Illusion<.

We are our own God, says another man.

 

[blü 2]

God fears man will become God, says man.

I didn't write any of the Tanakh or the NT. I'm simply telling you what it says.

We are our own God, says another man.

I've never met anyone who actively holds that notion. I have, I think, heard it from pulpits by way of admonition, of course.

My own main problem with God is that [he] has no definition appropriate to a real being, and never appears, says or does. The only way [he]'s known to exist, as far as I can tell, is as a concept, notion, thing imagined in an individual brain.

 

[Kenny]

Death has a purpose. It makes renewal possible. It makes evolution possible.

Maybe in a different application

Perhaps you can quote me some part of the Tanakh that says so.

It is historically know as the place for prayer for Gentiles.

Court of the Gentiles - Bible History

Bible History Images and Resources for Biblical History. Resources, Free Bible Software, Bible Art, Biblical History Topics and Study, and ancient Bible maps of Rome, Greece, and ancient Near East.

bible-history.com

Jesus was referencing Jeremiah 7:11 Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of robbers in your sight? Behold, I Myself have seen it,” declares the Lord.

AND if there was fault, that fault lay with the priests who administered the Temple, and NOT the traders.

Actually both were at fault. The Temple priests would not receive any monies except Jewish coinage. The money changers were changing it at exchange rates that were highway robbery.

Who were the money changers in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

Who were the money changers in the Bible? Why was Jesus so angry at the money changers near the temple?

www.gotquestions.org

AND it was pointless of Jesus to attack the traders for that reason.0

Not really as explained above

Irrelevant. In all four cases IF there was fault, it was the fault of the Temple administration and NOT the traders.

No… it was both and Jesus had problems with both of them.

 

[GoodAttention]

I didn't write any of the Tanakh or the NT. I'm simply telling you what it says.

I am more fascinated with why you bother, but then I've never lived in the Evangelical United States.

I've never met anyone who actively holds that notion. I have, I think, heard it from pulpits by way of admonition, of course.

My own main problem with God is that [he] has no definition appropriate to a real being, and never appears, says or does. The only way [he]'s known to exist, as far as I can tell, is as a concept, notion, thing imagined in an individual brain.

Yes, but I can agree with you on that definition since I also accept God is unknowable.

Now you can share with me what you believe, know, or imagine, to be God, but that is as far as any rationalization can go, if you can even call it that.

 

[Kenny]

Of course God lies. God says so. I gave you the quotes.

[He} also says

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I the Lord do all these things.​

And of course sin has nothing to do with the Garden story ─ since obviously you haven't read it, I'll underline that nowhere does it mention sin, and refer you to God's sole reason for kicking Adam and Eve out ─

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" ─ 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.​

The other thing to bear in mind is that it isn't history, it's merely a folktale.

If you want to know how humans evolved, I set out a brief rough outline at >Darwin's Illusion<.

No… I think it is just you interpreting it in context of your belief system. I come to a completely different understanding.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

Becoming like one of us, knowing good and evil, "and only able to be the will of the Creator which is only good." is the "RI" real intelligence of infallible creation.

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" ─ 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.

The logic of choice places the chance to defile in the hands of the Souls in Heaven. Choice is the becoming if the being in Original sin, with the defiled information of choice intrinsic in the intelligence, the will of the being. If man were to eat of the tree of life in the defiles state of information, the spirit will of the defiled state with temptation to choose failure, then Heaven will eventually fall from choice of the being in the failed state to defile Heaven.

The eternal Will of God knows the diffecence between good and evil, but has not the chance to fail because the choice to choose is of only the Will of the Creator as infallible certainty, a choice to choose failure does not exist in the being.

"Behold, the man has become like one of us, means man has the ability to judge, knowing the difference between good and evil, and man has the ability to defile with choice from that of the "First" failed spirit choice or to choose the Divine Spirit will of God, that never fails.

The difference in the Divine Spirit in the bodies of the souls in Heaven is becoming reimaged in the spirit not able to will the choice for failure. The Divine Spirit confirmed in all beings in Heaven is of the Will of the Creator, with no chanch of failure in through the intelligence information which manifests eternity as infallible and is the intrinsic intelligence of the Will of The Creator, God, The Father. in heaven.

Resurrected mankind is identically like Those in the Kingdom when Original Sin is removed forever, and no chance of failure will exist as re-imaged becoming the Will of the Creator, with no chance, no choice to fail forever in Heaven.

Sin removed since the re-imaged information of intelligence is fulfilled with no choice for failure, only infallible "real" intelligence "RI" Will manifest eternity.

The "AI" of the failed state of the Spirit is:
"Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; "able to choose failure" and perhaps defile eternity with failure, and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever." God does not want man to live forever in a failed state, so...........
The real intelligence will become:
"Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil, "and only able to be the will of the creator which is only good"; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"

Becoming like one of us, knowing good and evil, "and only able to be the will of the Creator which is only good." is the "RI" real intelligence of infallible creation.

To me the Logic of the Will of The Divine Kingdom is not of the digital bistable multivibrator which can flip flop between different states of logic. The Divine intelligence is not unlike the logic of a digital monostable multivibrator, only able to remain in the state of the last know "Chosen" state.

We manifest in the "Chosen" selected spirit through the flesh to the soul by the Power of the "Holy Spirit" will of the Creator, God, The Father becoming His image in fulfilled Faith and Morality, just like Christ.

Peace always,
Stephen Andrew

 

[metis]

That is the placing of works in a heap and judging our works… not judging our salvation. Yes, if we did no good works, there is no reward. You could say “just a white robe” or you receive a crown.

This much I know.

My feeling on this is "Whatever happens, happens."