Unorthodox views of the Creation story - did Adam and Eve know right from wrong?

[DrBubbaLove]

In defense of a belief in Universal Reconciliation (UR) and my attempt to point out troubling implications of that belief anonymouswho and others defending UR attacked some of what I would consider traditional views of the Creation Story. Specifically - for purposes of this thread and to avoid continuing the discussion in a UR thread - Before the Fall of mankind did Adam and Eve know right from wrong?

I will begin with this defense of a traditional view of the Creation Story:
If we say God is All Good and that He made Adam to love, serve and know Him, then we cannot also say Adam would not know how to love, serve and know All Good. And God could not create them to do that without also giving them the ability to FULLY do so. So whatever else we believe/understand about the Creation story, those beliefs/understandings cannot conflict with that ability He Gave them or His being All Good. So claim Adam and Eve lacked that knowledge (how to love, serve and know Him) must mean either that God is NOT All Good or that the stated purpose for making man (Adam) is not to love, serve and know Him.

Hopefully it should be obvious that someone who is FULLY loving, serving and knowing All Good, would not only NOT do the opposite, they would LACK the DESIRE to do anything opposed to that. Lacking the desire does not mean one is blissfully unaware - Eve clearly indicated she knew there was one thing they were told not to do. Knowledge that something was wrong and willful intent to do it are also requirements for being able to Justly hold a person accountable for doing wrong.

So whatever that one says the Tree of "knowledge" represents, the "knowledge" gained by that act must relate to the realization they were free to desire (and then justify in their own mind), wanting something they knew to be wrong. Eve even says she knew it was wrong before she does it.

Satan's lie is just that, a lie and a clever one at that. Yes, Eve was tricked but Adam has no such excuse, which is why he alone is credited with the Fall of the human race. In the sense Satan meant it, knowledge is more than desire, it is actually doing - and to the point doing evil. God cannot "know" the lack of what He is, (All Good vs lack of it-evil). That does not mean God does not know right from wrong, anymore than Adam and Eve lacking such a desire means they did not know what they were doing was wrong before they did it. And certainly God cannot be seen as Just to hold accountable someone who did not know better.

 

[donfish06]

I think that Eve's discussion with the serpent makes it obvious that she knew what he was trying to get her to do was wrong, but I do not believe she understood.

Adam clearly knew that it was wrong, because Paul tells us that Eve was deceived, Adam wasn't.

1Ti_2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I agree Eve was tricked and I agree they both knew. I do not agree with some UR defenders here that say otherwise and I fail to see how God could hold them accountable if one claims the story indicates the did not know what they were doing was wrong.

 

[adhidarmawijaya]

I agree Eve was tricked and I agree they both knew. I do not agree with some UR defenders here that say otherwise and I fail to see how God could hold them accountable if one claims the story indicates the did not know what they were doing was wrong.

Gen3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Now the man has become like one of us and has knowledge of what is good and what is bad. He must not be allowed to take fruit from the tree that gives life, eat it, and live forever."
After their fallen , they began to know good and bad, it means before their Fallen they could not discern the difference between good and bad.
These may tell more:
Why should be satan there ?.
Why should they being cheated first, before they ate the forbidden fruit ?.
In Gen3:22 hints a worry feeling within God , but not before their fallen why ?.

 

[donfish06]

Gen3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Now the man has become like one of us and has knowledge of what is good and what is bad. He must not be allowed to take fruit from the tree that gives life, eat it, and live forever."
After their fallen , they began to know good and bad, it means before their Fallen they could not discern the difference between good and bad.
These may tell more:
Why should be satan there ?.
Why should they being cheated first, before they ate the forbidden fruit ?.
In Gen3:22 hints a worry feeling within God , but not before their fallen why ?.

Before the fall, there was only one rule, not to take of the fruit. Anything they did them was right, and the only thing wrong would be the forbidden fruit. God told Adam this and clearly he told Eve because she told the serpent. They new that it was wrong to take of the fruit. AFTER the fall, there eyes were open to good and evil, meaning there was after that time MORE wrong.

 

[JaapAap]

It's like a kid knowing he shouldn't take candy from a stranger but not know why.
With the difference that they weren't kids and fully capable to just obey. They knew it was wrong to not obey God, but didn't know why until they did it.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

It's like a kid knowing he shouldn't take candy from a stranger but not know why.
With the difference that they weren't kids and fully capable to just obey. They knew it was wrong to not obey God, but didn't know why until they did it.

Before the fall, there was only one rule, not to take of the fruit. Anything they did them was right, and the only thing wrong would be the forbidden fruit. God told Adam this and clearly he told Eve because she told the serpent. They new that it was wrong to take of the fruit. AFTER the fall, there eyes were open to good and evil, meaning there was after that time MORE wrong.

Yeah I have heard this before, but this position is not exactly the same as saying they did not know the difference between right and wrong, which is the UR position I created this thread for. So while I might disagree slightly with these statements if I fully understood you, it is not the same as saying Adam and Eve were blissfully ignorant that anything was wrong for them.

Look at it another way. Clearly God says we are made even now with His laws written on our hearts (even though we tend not to listen), which is how people who have lived and died never hearing the Greatest Story ever told can still be properly Judged when all our resurrected. Whatever one sees "written on our hearts" to mean and because we are their descendants, I do not see how one can make the argument that Adam and Eve did not have this as originally made. Adam having that means they both knew what was right and wrong, and knew evil to be the opposite of doing good.

In light of that and the lie Satan told, the "opening of the eyes" would then be a reference to the awareness that they could form in their own minds (and against that which is in all our hearts - against their nature - which is against the One who gave us that nature) a subjective view of what is good. And that is how we sin. Prior to hearing that lie Satan told, the thought would not have occurred to them that God was intentionally keeping something from them that rather than being truly wrong, would actually benefit them. Whatever that "fruit" was, it was not meant for them - meaning it was not made for them to eat, so it would be against the nature God gave them, "unnatural" for them to do so. So they desired, envied something which was never intended (natural) for them.

In sinning, we take what we know to be wrong and convince our self that at least this first time it is not wrong for me - that it is actually for me something to be desired, envied and obtained. With repetition that gets easier. In doing so we place ourselves OVER God, saying MY will not Thy Will be done. God said do not - think of anything - which means then that is His Will. Adam said NO, not Thy Will, my will be done. Which is why sin is such an insult to our Creator. The creation is literally telling the maker I do not want to be what you made me to be.

I do not think it is a case of there was nothing Adan and Eve could do except this one thing that would be wrong. If one agrees man was made to love, serve and know God - then before the Fall (which corrupted Adam's nature) they would have both bodies and souls in perfect alignment with God, their will aligned with His Will. Put another way, they would Holy, without sin, as Jesus was Holy. In that state doing something "unnatural" would not have occurred to them as something to be desired. That is not a lack of knowledge that they could do unnatural things or a state where nothing was unnatural for them to do except this one thing. No, it would be more like a state where they wouldn't even have to think why would I do that or ask why not, nor would they use their imagination to consider unnatural uses for whatever. It is not until Satan put the thought out there that maybe God is holding something back from them that would actually benefit them that the twisted thought occurs to them that they (and not God) can decide what is natural for them.

 

[adhidarmawijaya]

Before the fall, there was only one rule, not to take of the fruit. Anything they did them was right, and the only thing wrong would be the forbidden fruit. God told Adam this and clearly he told Eve because she told the serpent. They new that it was wrong to take of the fruit. AFTER the fall, there eyes were open to good and evil, meaning there was after that time MORE wrong.

Before the fall, there was only one rule, not to take of the fruit.

Yes, before the fall = still glorious .
In that state , there is no another wrong except "eat the forbidden fruit" means eat the fruit of the tree of life will not make some things worsen .
The point i shared above:
If in this state (glorious) they already knew good and bad it meant they could eat the forbidden fruit by their own will /intentionally :
1.satan was not needed to be there .
2.They already covered their nakedness.
3. God should worry about them, cause they could eat the forbidden fruit intentionally then followed eating the fruit of the tree of life intentionally too (there was no previous event that God could read as sympton)----> then every thing run beyond God plan = God failed .

So according to my own opinion :
In the glorious state, Adam and Eve only have positive will (obedient etc ).
After fall they only have negative will (rebel etc ).

note :
Glorious state = as us who have already saved.
doing every things good not being said as working on Sabbath day/ doing some thing to reach salvation/salvation by work ( eating the fruit of the tree of life does not make some things bad).
Trying to fulfill the Torah laws for the unsaved = working on Sabbath day/ salvation by work = eating the fruit of the tree of life intentionally .
1Tim1:9 It must be remembered, of course, that laws are made, not for good people, but for lawbreakers and criminals, for the godless and sinful, for those who are not religious or spiritual, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,

 

[bling]

In defense of a belief in Universal Reconciliation (UR) and my attempt to point out troubling implications of that belief anonymouswho and others defending UR attacked some of what I would consider traditional views of the Creation Story. Specifically - for purposes of this thread and to avoid continuing the discussion in a UR thread - Before the Fall of mankind did Adam and Eve know right from wrong?

I will begin with this defense of a traditional view of the Creation Story:
If we say God is All Good and that He made Adam to love, serve and know Him, then we cannot also say Adam would not know how to love, serve and know All Good. And God could not create them to do that without also giving them the ability to FULLY do so. So whatever else we believe/understand about the Creation story, those beliefs/understandings cannot conflict with that ability He Gave them or His being All Good. So deny Adam and Eve lacked that knowledge must mean either that God is NOT All Good or that the stated purpose for making man (Adam) is not to love, serve and know Him.

Hopefully it should be obvious that someone who is FULLY loving, serving and knowing All Good, would not only NOT do the opposite, they would LACK the DESIRE to do anything opposed to that. Lacking the desire does not mean one is blissfully unaware - Eve clearly indicated she knew there was one thing they were told not to do. Knowledge that something was wrong and willful intent to do it are also requirements for being able to Justly hold a person accountable for doing wrong.

So whatever that one says the Tree of "knowledge" represents, the "knowledge" gained by that act must relate to the realization they were free to desire (and then justify in their own mind), wanting something they knew to be wrong. Eve even says she knew it was wrong before she does it.

Satan's lie is just that, a lie and a clever one at that. Yes, Eve was tricked but Adam has no such excuse, which is why he alone is credited with the Fall of the human race. In the sense Satan meant it, knowledge is more than desire, it is actually doing - and to the point doing evil. God cannot "know" the lack of what He is, (All Good vs lack of it-evil). That does not mean God does not know right from wrong, anymore than Adam and Eve lacking such a desire means they did not know what they were doing was wrong before they did it. And certainly God cannot be seen as Just to hold accountable someone who did not know better.

You make some very questionable assumptions:

1. “He made Adam to love, serve and know Him”,
   that sound like God selfishly wants man to “serve” Him.
   If God is all that they say He is He is not in need of anything:
   God would be wanting to give humans all the wonderful gifts He can give especially the gift of Godly type Love and not be trying to get something from humans.
   
   
2. The stated “purpose” of mankind is to “love, serve and know God”:
   We have a mission statement to “Love God (and secondly others) with all our heart, soul, mind and energy”. We then go beyond just having a “purpose” to having an objective while here on earth.
   
   
3. Adam was “FULLY loving”
   If Adam did have a full Godly type Love Adam would have obeyed: “If you Love me you will obey me”, but how could Adam have this Godly type Love initially? Any Love given to Adam instinctively would be robotic and not like God’s Love and God could not force His Love on Adam since that would not be Love and the Love gotten would not be Godly type Love (it would be like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun).
   

OK let’s look at the story:

1. Adam and Eve were made “very good” by God’s standard but is that “perfect” like Christ was perfect?

2. God’s “very good” might mean and need to be as good as any being could be “made”, but are there some things that are impossible to make initially in a being?

3. If Adam and Eve are incomplete from the beginning because of impossibility: does that mean they are broken to begin with?

4. Did Adam and Eve have the same “objective” as all other humans have had since then, thus providing the reason they are even in the Garden situation? (Go beyond “glorifying God” on this question)

5. Does Adam and Eve’s sinning show they did not complete their earthly objective while in the Garden?

6. What would it take for Adam and Eve to fulfill their earthly objective and before sinning?

7. If Adam and Eve who were made as good as you can be made and raised (programmed) to adulthood by the very best parent and yet sinned in the Garden, does that not suggest the Garden situation is a lousy place (or impossible place) for humans to fulfill their earthly objective?

8. I, for one, appreciate what Adam and Eve went through in the Garden to show me and others; why the Garden situation would not be good for me or anyone else. It helps me address the question: “How could a Loving God allow this _____tragedy?” Did it also have benefit to Adam and Eve?

9. Would you prefer to be: in a situation where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your personal ability to obey God or in a situation where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your humble accepting His charity?

10. We might agree that Adam and Eve’s sins were inevitable, but were these sins also necessary?

11. Does sin have purpose in help humans fulfill the initial part of their earthly objective?

12. I know you did not address this, but why did Eve add: “neither shall you touch it”?

13. You bought up the idea that: “with” meant Adan was beside Eve while satan talked to Eve, but is that what “with” would have to mean?

14. “with” (אָכַל) is used over 800 times in the OT, so we do not have time to go over ever one but it often (I think a majority of the times) takes on the meaning of being supportive of the other person and in contrast to being “against the person” and does not have to mean physically beside the person. Knowing that time had passed to the point Adam and Eve had developed a very close relationship might be important to understand satan’s timing and Adam’s sin. To have Adam physically standing by Eve, when we know from Paul: “Eve was being deceived and Adam was not deceived”, makes no sense. Adam would have to be an evil jerk and not have been made “very good” if he is going to let Eve commit suicide. Why would Adam “hate” God and Eve?

15. It would make more logical sense, since Adam was not deceived and Adam will be placed in charge of Eve, that Adam ate the fruit out of a love for Eve, since Adam had reached the point in their relationship of not being able to live without Eve (he was with Eve). Was Adam’s love for Eve greater than his love for God when Adam ate?

16. Are we trying to “restore” man to the type of imperfect relationship Adam and Eve had in the Garden prior to sinning?

17. Christ tells us he wants us to be one with the Father as He is one with the Father, so was that the type relations Adam and Eve had in the Garden with God?

18. Can we have an even closer relationship with God while here on earth than we have with our spouse?

19. You talked about: “free will” being needed to have true Godly type Love, but does that mean everyone that has free will also has the ability to express Godly type Love? In other words: did Adam and Eve prior to sinning have Godly type Love, since they had free will?

20. Is free will needed to allow the person also to obtain “Godly type Love”, so even if a person chose to Love others with a Godly type Love they could not without first obtaining Godly type Love, as a Gift from God, but how do they get that Love?

21. Can a human instinctively be given, develop, learn, earn, or payback the gift of Godly type Love?

There is a lot to be learned from the Garden story and a lot of miss information being passed around.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

You make some very questionable assumptions:

1. “He made Adam to love, serve and know Him”,
   that sound like God selfishly wants man to “serve” Him.
   If God is all that they say He is He is not in need of anything:
   God would be wanting to give humans all the wonderful gifts He can give especially the gift of Godly type Love and not be trying to get something from humans.
   
   
2. The stated “purpose” of mankind is to “love, serve and know God”:
   We have a mission statement to “Love God (and secondly others) with all our heart, soul, mind and energy”. We then go beyond just having a “purpose” to having an objective while here on earth.
   
   
3. Adam was “FULLY loving”
   If Adam did have a full Godly type Love Adam would have obeyed: “If you Love me you will obey me”, but how could Adam have this Godly type Love initially? Any Love given to Adam instinctively would be robotic and not like God’s Love and God could not force His Love on Adam since that would not be Love and the Love gotten would not be Godly type Love (it would be like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun).

Questionable Assumptions

Those were not assumptions. I realize some protestors may have never heard it put like that, but I have never heard anyone attempt to object to the points of that statement. I gave that statement as merely a reference point to show that in defense of UR beliefs, some people here have demonstrated a willingness to toss any number of basic foundational beliefs that traditional Christians hold. Am unclear how any of the three responses given creates questions about the purpose given for God making us. I suspect because it came from the Church may be the true reason the purpose is being questioned. BTW have asked and no one has yet responded with a better response to "why are we here".

1) If someone thought God were human I can understand the objection to saying we are to serve Him. Most of us agree God is All Good and we are to do good. Doing something good can certainly be described as a service. In this case a service to what? Goodness(God). So am unsure how stating that we are to serve Good creates a belief that God needs us to do Good. If that were true one could say the same of loving and knowing Him. God is, was and will be All Good. God has no needs. We do not negate those truths simply by suggesting a reason for our existence.

2) Answering why did God make us is useful, so I suppose to the extent an individual wants to fulfill that purpose one could look at that as a mission statement. And certainly if one is fulfilling that fully, as I said Adam was made to do and was doing before he sinned, then one would be following ALL God’s commands. Yes, our Lord gave two commands while He walked here but those commands are supportive of the reason given for His making us, not in conflict. Remember too that He only needed to give us commands to live by AFTER the Fall. Even if one rejects the stated purpose I quoted, the position by some here supporting UR would still hold that Adam was created unable (bad seed) to love God "with all his heart" and this demonstrated by his sin. So the point remains these UR advocates would have God creating a creature that He commands to do something he is currently incapable of doing – which also makes no sense.

3) No, Adam is free so God has not forced him to love Him, just as He will never force us to love Him. The point is we were made to freely choose to love Him and Adam was doing that perfectly up until he sinned.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

You make some very questionable assumptions:
OK let’s look at the story:

1. Adam and Eve were made “very good” by God’s standard but is that “perfect” like Christ was perfect?

2. God’s “very good” might mean and need to be as good as any being could be “made”, but are there some things that are impossible to make initially in a being?

3. If Adam and Eve are incomplete from the beginning because of impossibility: does that mean they are broken to begin with?

4. Did Adam and Eve have the same “objective” as all other humans have had since then, thus providing the reason they are even in the Garden situation? (Go beyond “glorifying God” on this question)

5. Does Adam and Eve’s sinning show they did not complete their earthly objective while in the Garden?

6. What would it take for Adam and Eve to fulfill their earthly objective and before sinning?

7. If Adam and Eve who were made as good as you can be made and raised (programmed) to adulthood by the very best parent and yet sinned in the Garden, does that not suggest the Garden situation is a lousy place (or impossible place) for humans to fulfill their earthly objective?

8. I, for one, appreciate what Adam and Eve went through in the Garden to show me and others; why the Garden situation would not be good for me or anyone else. It helps me address the question: “How could a Loving God allow this _____tragedy?” Did it also have benefit to Adam and Eve?

9. Would you prefer to be: in a situation where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your personal ability to obey God or in a situation where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your humble accepting His charity?

10. We might agree that Adam and Eve’s sins were inevitable, but were these sins also necessary?

11. Does sin have purpose in help humans fulfill the initial part of their earthly objective?

12. I know you did not address this, but why did Eve add: “neither shall you touch it”?

13. You bought up the idea that: “with” meant Adan was beside Eve while satan talked to Eve, but is that what “with” would have to mean?

14. “with” (אָכַל) is used over 800 times in the OT, so we do not have time to go over ever one but it often (I think a majority of the times) takes on the meaning of being supportive of the other person and in contrast to being “against the person” and does not have to mean physically beside the person. Knowing that time had passed to the point Adam and Eve had developed a very close relationship might be important to understand satan’s timing and Adam’s sin. To have Adam physically standing by Eve, when we know from Paul: “Eve was being deceived and Adam was not deceived”, makes no sense. Adam would have to be an evil jerk and not have been made “very good” if he is going to let Eve commit suicide. Why would Adam “hate” God and Eve?

15. It would make more logical sense, since Adam was not deceived and Adam will be placed in charge of Eve, that Adam ate the fruit out of a love for Eve, since Adam had reached the point in their relationship of not being able to live without Eve (he was with Eve). Was Adam’s love for Eve greater than his love for God when Adam ate?

16. Are we trying to “restore” man to the type of imperfect relationship Adam and Eve had in the Garden prior to sinning?

17. Christ tells us he wants us to be one with the Father as He is one with the Father, so was that the type relations Adam and Eve had in the Garden with God?

18. Can we have an even closer relationship with God while here on earth than we have with our spouse?

19. You talked about: “free will” being needed to have true Godly type Love, but does that mean everyone that has free will also has the ability to express Godly type Love? In other words: did Adam and Eve prior to sinning have Godly type Love, since they had free will?

20. Is free will needed to allow the person also to obtain “Godly type Love”, so even if a person chose to Love others with a Godly type Love they could not without first obtaining Godly type Love, as a Gift from God, but how do they get that Love?

21. Can a human instinctively be given, develop, learn, earn, or payback the gift of Godly type Love?

There is a lot to be learned from the Garden story and a lot of miss information being passed around.

The Creation story

1) Yes, Adam was perfect in every way before he sinned, just like Jesus is the perfect man. The difference is Jesus remains perfect.

2) Obviously not impossible since the Bible indicates less than half the angels “fell” and that the ones that did fall were originally perfect like the ones that still remain so. The Bible also indicates Jesus was a perfect man. So we could hardly conclude it is not possible to create such creatures.

3) That is not my position, that is the UR position I am objecting to – Adam/mankind are said to be “bad seed”, sown that way by God (which also means He creates evil). Being created broken in order to eventually grow into something better – presumably perfect – even if it takes some time in Hell to finish the “lesson”.

4) Yes, Adam and Eve’s “place” before the Fall would be the same place we all could be by the Grace He made possible to restore us to “place”. Forgetting location, “place” more importantly representing a perfect relationship with God and a human body/soul in perfect harmony with itself (not at war as Saint Paul was fond of saying)

5) Not a matter of completing something. By Adam; sin they lost (death came) what they had for themselves – the perfect “place” God had made for mankind and lost it for all of us too. So that “place” is no longer attainable by us in in life.

6) Nothing, they had it just like the angels that chose not to sin still have it today.

7) No, it suggests as the story depicts that a creature had already made his choice to do wrong and attempted to interfere with God’s purpose for making Adam. Further there is nothing in that story to suggest that had that not happened that Adam’s lease would have been up anyway.

8) We were looking at the story before the “tragedy” happened. Am not sure why we need to see Paradise as corrupt before it is corrupted. Once it is corrupted, everything changes including Adam’s (and so ours) relationship with God. The Loving God allows it because He made us able to corrupt His perfect work nd create “tragedy”. Without our being free to do so, the value of the love and service we give Him becomes suspect.

9) Actually it depends on both, so am unclear why we should think this a choice.

10) I do not agree Adam’s sin was inevitable – and isn’t that just another way of saying necessary = at least from God’s view.

11) How could we say doing evil represents loving, serving or knowing He is All Good?

12) If I had to guess I would definitely say it clearly represents her knowledge that desiring that was wrong.

13) Whether the original oral legend contained a word that would be translated to “with” today is rather pointless as far as what I was trying to express – the point is the story does not indicate any change of scene between Eve being tricked and Adam eating. So I think it is a safe bet to say Adam watched this go down and then made his own choice – which is why he alone is held accountable for the Fall.

14) See 13 and explain then why no discourse occurs between Satan and Adam before he is depicted doing it.

15) Well he did try to blame his sin on her, which sort of kiboshes the idea he nobly fell on his sword out of love for her.

16) Am not the one saying it is imperfect, if understood you are along with several people who do so to defend UR.

17) Yes

18) Why not?

19) Not just me talking about free will, several thousand years of theologians and in the last 500 most from both sides of the Catholic/Protestant isles have supported the idea of free will. We were made to love but our nature is corrupt – has been since Adam corrupted his by sin. Any true love given would have to be a reflection of Love (in your words “Godly Love”) even if imperfect. But since you mentioned it, if we fully loved, served and knew Good, then we would perfectly love others (and ourself). Like the angels in Heaven now do.

20) I think you misunderstood. God could either make us love Him or give us a choice to or not. Free will is our ability to choose to love Him or not.

21) Unsure of the question, but if we say our nature was made to love, serve and know Him then a part of that nature would have to be knowing how to do that – knowing what Is right and wrong. Our problem is that because of Adam’s sin our nature is corrupt such that we are born inclined to do what we know to be wrong.

 

[bling]

donfish06 and I have been discussing through private messaging but I would like everyone to join in and give their thoughts.

Before really getting into all of the “options” one can come up with for interpreting the Adam and Eve scenario we need to understand the objectives. Man’s objective while here on earth given by God and God’s objective in both making humans in the first place and His objective as it relates to humans.

The objectives should be the overall reason for all that happens and will happen.

Why did God make humans in the first place?

Why did God put humans in the Garden to begin with and not heavenly beings?

Why did God make humans very good and not perfect?

Is Eve just a clone of Adam with different plumbing or was she made different for some reason?

Why did God allow them to sin?

Why were they driven from the Garden?

What can we learn from the Garden story even if we do not believe it really literally happened?


Running around picking verses out all over the scripture and saying these “ably” directly to the story is extremely questionable at best and just distract us from what we really can learn. We need to get the important stuff first and then we might consider the hypothetical.

 

[bling]

The Creation story

1) Yes, Adam was perfect in every way before he sinned, just like Jesus is the perfect man. The difference is Jesus remains perfect.

2) Obviously not impossible since the Bible indicates less than half the angels “fell” and that the ones that did fall were originally perfect like the ones that still remain so. The Bible also indicates Jesus was a perfect man. So we could hardly conclude it is not possible to create such creatures.

3) That is not my position, that is the UR position I am objecting to – Adam/mankind are said to be “bad seed”, sown that way by God (which also means He creates evil). Being created broken in order to eventually grow into something better – presumably perfect – even if it takes some time in Hell to finish the “lesson”.

4) Yes, Adam and Eve’s “place” before the Fall would be the same place we all could be by the Grace He made possible to restore us to “place”. Forgetting location, “place” more importantly representing a perfect relationship with God and a human body/soul in perfect harmony with itself (not at war as Saint Paul was fond of saying)

5) Not a matter of completing something. By Adam; sin they lost (death came) what they had for themselves – the perfect “place” God had made for mankind and lost it for all of us too. So that “place” is no longer attainable by us in in life.

6) Nothing, they had it just like the angels that chose not to sin still have it today.

7) No, it suggests as the story depicts that a creature had already made his choice to do wrong and attempted to interfere with God’s purpose for making Adam. Further there is nothing in that story to suggest that had that not happened that Adam’s lease would have been up anyway.

8) We were looking at the story before the “tragedy” happened. Am not sure why we need to see Paradise as corrupt before it is corrupted. Once it is corrupted, everything changes including Adam’s (and so ours) relationship with God. The Loving God allows it because He made us able to corrupt His perfect work nd create “tragedy”. Without our being free to do so, the value of the love and service we give Him becomes suspect.

9) Actually it depends on both, so am unclear why we should think this a choice.

10) I do not agree Adam’s sin was inevitable – and isn’t that just another way of saying necessary = at least from God’s view.

11) How could we say doing evil represents loving, serving or knowing He is All Good?

12) If I had to guess I would definitely say it clearly represents her knowledge that desiring that was wrong.

13) Whether the original oral legend contained a word that would be translated to “with” today is rather pointless as far as what I was trying to express – the point is the story does not indicate any change of scene between Eve being tricked and Adam eating. So I think it is a safe bet to say Adam watched this go down and then made his own choice – which is why he alone is held accountable for the Fall.

14) See 13 and explain then why no discourse occurs between Satan and Adam before he is depicted doing it.

15) Well he did try to blame his sin on her, which sort of kiboshes the idea he nobly fell on his sword out of love for her.

16) Am not the one saying it is imperfect, if understood you are along with several people who do so to defend UR.

17) Yes

18) Why not?

19) Not just me talking about free will, several thousand years of theologians and in the last 500 most from both sides of the Catholic/Protestant isles have supported the idea of free will. We were made to love but our nature is corrupt – has been since Adam corrupted his by sin. Any true love given would have to be a reflection of Love (in your words “Godly Love”) even if imperfect. But since you mentioned it, if we fully loved, served and knew Good, then we would perfectly love others (and ourself). Like the angels in Heaven now do.

20) I think you misunderstood. God could either make us love Him or give us a choice to or not. Free will is our ability to choose to love Him or not.

21) Unsure of the question, but if we say our nature was made to love, serve and know Him then a part of that nature would have to be knowing how to do that – knowing what Is right and wrong. Our problem is that because of Adam’s sin our nature is corrupt such that we are born inclined to do what we know to be wrong.

The Creation story

1. The Bible does not say they were made “perfect” and especially not perfect like Christ. Jesus is deity so He was not a created being, which is a huge difference.
   

1. Again the Bible does not say angels were ever “perfect”. If a being is perfect it will not sin.
   

Where does it ever say: “the son of God is a created being”?

1. That is not my position. Since Adam and Eve did sin they are less than those that did not sin (Christ) so what are they short in?
   

1. Would you prefer to be in a place where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your personal ability to obey God (the Garden before sinning) or in a place where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your just humbly accepting God’s charity (Grace/mercy/Love/forgiveness) that is where you are today?
   

1. One of the things Adam and Eve showed themselves and all of us is: the Garden situation is a lousy (impossible) place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective.
   

1. The Garden situation is not at all like being a “sexless” spiritual being in heaven. We might think of the Garden as a heaven on earth situation, but heaven is much different.
   

1. Eve sinned, but are you blaming satan for this?
   

1. I did not say there was anything “wrong” with the Garden itself, but it was not what man needed to help him complete his earthly objective. The rich man in the story of the Rich man and Lazarus seem to have it all and Lazarus had nothing so would you prefer to be in the rich man’s situation or Lazarus’?
   

1. The Garden scenario allows us to consider being in one situation and the world around us enables us to consider the other situation. From your own experience and everyone else that has lived to maturity do you think you could keep from sinning?
   

1. When you teach your child to ride a bike, you know the child will fall sometime, but you do not want or like the child to fall. God would easily realize humans on earth, given their situation in or out of the Garden, would not humble themselves to the point of willingly accepting pure charity as charity (Godly type Love) unless they had an extremely strong “need” to accept charity, partly due to their own mistakes. A child that has done absolutely nothing wrong (been a perfect child), can expect His/her parent to take care of them if the parent can easily take care of them and would love that parent with a strong child for parent type love, but that love is not Godly type Love.
   

1. How could we say doing evil represents loving, serving or knowing He is All Good?
   
   I did not say that, just as falling off a bike while learning to ride a bike is good. God is trying to help us get to the situation of accepting His help (this is like what the father allowed the prodigal son to go through.
   

1. If I had to guess I would definitely say it clearly represents her knowledge that desiring that was wrong.
   

?


12)Absence of scripture references is not proof of anything. The “with” could be in there to show Adam had by this time grown to be supportive of almost anything Eve wanted.

1. Did Adam really try to blame Eve or was Adam trying to put some blame on God for giving him Eve?
   

16)I do not defend UR at all or have that belief.


17)Wow! Not what I see.


18) Good

19) Godly type Love is not instinctive (a robotic type love) and it could not be forced on humans since that would not be Loving nor would it be true Godly type love the person got.

We have to obtain Godly type Love before we can Love god with all our heart, soul, mind and energy.


20. Where and how did the nonbeliever obtain the gift of Godly type Love? “Instinctive or forced on him?”


21. since Adam and Eve sinned prior to their nature changing, why would our nature have to change for us to sin?

21. Can a human instinctively be given, develop, learn, earn, or payback the gift of Godly type Love?

 

[DrBubbaLove]

bubba's reply to bling's post #12

God's purpose for making mankind. If not already stated in this thread - I like the Church statement;God made man to love, serve and know Him and share in His Eternal Happiness.
Why a physical world?
God willed to makes us a combination of flesh and spirit, which requires a physical realm for flesh to exist. And that realm distinct from the realm He made for spiritual beings like angels.

Very Good.
A scale of goodness is only made possible by the very real existence of He who is All Good. So I would suggest that Very Good, on such a scale, represents as close to All Good as He could possibly make man. IOW based on that scale Adam could never be any better that God made him - and this applies to Adam ONLY before he sinned-the Fall of Man. It also supports that God would do less (Good in this case) than He could have in making Adam. To claim Adam as originally made could be improved upon means God could have made Adam better than He did. Also making Adam less than He could of negates the possibility of the purpose as I stated above because it means Adam would have no choice in his not being able to fully serve, love and know God. Which is then troubling to hold Adam accountable for what he did when God is said to have made him that way.

Eve - made from - so different from - and a natural help mate - complement to Adam's existence.

Why does God allow man to sin? As with everything He allows, for His Glory and the greater good. Do we always understand how that is so? no not now.

Why drive them from the Garden? As stated in the Garden they had access to something giving them immortal life - which could only apply to the body since most of us hold the soul as being created immortal. Many of us hold that tree is/represents Jesus. They are driven out because otherwise they would be stuck forever in there fallen miserable state they had freely chosen to put themselves in.

Creation did happen, but the legend, myth story is full of literal and abstract thoughts. What can we learn. God made us to love, serve and know Him and share in His Eternal Happiness. Because of Adam's sin, our current state works against that purpose so we need a Redeemer in order to restore us to the state Adam was in before the Fall, with glorified bodies like Jesus had after His Resurrection.[/quote]

 

[DrBubbaLove]

The Creation story

1. The Bible does not say they were made “perfect” and especially not perfect like Christ. Jesus is deity so He was not a created being, which is a huge difference.

1. Again the Bible does not say angels were ever “perfect”. If a being is perfect it will not sin.

Where does it ever say: “the son of God is a created being”?

1. That is not my position. Since Adam and Eve did sin they are less than those that did not sin (Christ) so what are they short in?

1. Would you prefer to be in a place where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your personal ability to obey God (the Garden before sinning) or in a place where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your just humbly accepting God’s charity (Grace/mercy/Love/forgiveness) that is where you are today?

1. One of the things Adam and Eve showed themselves and all of us is: the Garden situation is a lousy (impossible) place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective.

1. The Garden situation is not at all like being a “sexless” spiritual being in heaven. We might think of the Garden as a heaven on earth situation, but heaven is much different.

1. Eve sinned, but are you blaming satan for this?

1. I did not say there was anything “wrong” with the Garden itself, but it was not what man needed to help him complete his earthly objective. The rich man in the story of the Rich man and Lazarus seem to have it all and Lazarus had nothing so would you prefer to be in the rich man’s situation or Lazarus’?

1. The Garden scenario allows us to consider being in one situation and the world around us enables us to consider the other situation. From your own experience and everyone else that has lived to maturity do you think you could keep from sinning?

1. When you teach your child to ride a bike, you know the child will fall sometime, but you do not want or like the child to fall. God would easily realize humans on earth, given their situation in or out of the Garden, would not humble themselves to the point of willingly accepting pure charity as charity (Godly type Love) unless they had an extremely strong “need” to accept charity, partly due to their own mistakes. A child that has done absolutely nothing wrong (been a perfect child), can expect His/her parent to take care of them if the parent can easily take care of them and would love that parent with a strong child for parent type love, but that love is not Godly type Love.

1. How could we say doing evil represents loving, serving or knowing He is All Good?
   
   I did not say that, just as falling off a bike while learning to ride a bike is good. God is trying to help us get to the situation of accepting His help (this is like what the father allowed the prodigal son to go through.

1. If I had to guess I would definitely say it clearly represents her knowledge that desiring that was wrong.

?


12)Absence of scripture references is not proof of anything. The “with” could be in there to show Adam had by this time grown to be supportive of almost anything Eve wanted.

1. Did Adam really try to blame Eve or was Adam trying to put some blame on God for giving him Eve?

16)I do not defend UR at all or have that belief.


17)Wow! Not what I see.


18) Good

19) Godly type Love is not instinctive (a robotic type love) and it could not be forced on humans since that would not be Loving nor would it be true Godly type love the person got.

We have to obtain Godly type Love before we can Love god with all our heart, soul, mind and energy.


20. Where and how did the nonbeliever obtain the gift of Godly type Love? “Instinctive or forced on him?”


21. since Adam and Eve sinned prior to their nature changing, why would our nature have to change for us to sin?

21. Can a human instinctively be given, develop, learn, earn, or payback the gift of Godly type Love?

In response I would like to focus on the reason I started this thread, to question the belief of some of those supporting Universal Reconciliation that Adam and Eve, mankind essentially, was originally created imperfect -basically as we are now. The other points you made I will try to touch on only briefly and feel free to IGNORE that part of my reply unless you would like to start another thread to go off topic. Will indicate points in my reply that are off topic by *** with the # of those indicating how far off.

I did not say Adam was made perfect like God is perfect - am saying He made them the very best He could make a creature - which for our purpose should mean He could do no better than what He did - and they would have to have been originally Holy to make loving, serving and knowing Him possible. To imagine Him doing less is to say one believes He would do less than He could have - which sounds more like a slacker than a Perfect All Good Creator. The Son of God was with the Father in the beginning, so please don't put words in my mouth that I did not say. I said Adam was Holy. When God is Incarnated - the created Man, Jesus, that He is, is also Holy, not because He is God, but because that Man was born Holy (unlike us -without an inclination to sin we got because of Adam's sin) and Jesus remained so, sinless to His death - not sinning - remaining perfectly aligned as a Man with God - which is the difference between Him and Adam. So in that view both Jesus and Adam start out their life the same, with Jesus remaining that way and Adam falling by sin.

**If the angels were not made perfect - and for their purpose we would mean Holy - then we could not explain their being now where they are said to be or why if they are not Holy they would be allowed to stay while others that BECAME unholy were obviously tossed out.

**As some of the angels were once good (holy in order to be where they were) and freely chose to rebel (become bad/unholy), it is blatantly obvious that it is NOT true that beings created with such a choice cannot remain holy since 2/3s of them were not tossed out. Again by perfect, we mean created Holy and able to then serve the purpose for which they are made provided they remain that way. If not originally made that way, Holy, how could they even be and remain "with God" right now?

Yes, Adam and Eve sinned but there was a time before that they did not and nothing changed until they did - and until they did they had access to a "Tree" which permit them to live for ever - which means if they did not sin God would not have thrown them out and they would have remained forever just as they were originally created, Holy as He is Holy.

****You present a false dichotomy, the position I am in now with God is still dependent on my choices just as Adam's was. So it cannot be a choice of either or as you presented.
The difference with me now and the way Adam was originally made is that I am born inclined to do what I know I should not. Whereas Adam freely chose to do what he knew he should not, which among other things corrupted his human nature. That corruption created a disharmony within Adam, a disorder in his members as Saint Paul discussed. It is that disorder Adam passed down to all of us which is said to make us inclined to do what we know we should not. The same thing Jesus escaped inheriting when He is created in His Mother's Holy womb. Which is why we can say Jesus as a man is in the same place, and stood in place of the first man, Adam - but unlike Adam Jesus never sinned.

One cannot claim the Garden place is lousy place to put a perfect man without at same time saying God would put man in a crappy place. It means God set man up, which means it was intentional, which typically we do not accept punishing someone who is setup to fail - yet this explanation of the Garden has God doing just that. No. More appropriately and I guess what could be lousy about it and the question to be asked is why God allowed Satan to interfere with mankind? And I think that question is answerable completely answerable without imagining God creating evil or God doing less than He could have in creating a crappy place to put man. Besides, up until they are tossed out, there is nothing in the story to suggest that it is a crappy place at all - in fact seems quite the opposite.

****Yes, I side with those saying Eve was tricked and that done by Satan. And it would God allowing Satan to do that, not God creating a crappy human or a crappy place to put humans that we should be asking.

*******Am unclear how we can apply what occurs after the fall of mankind with the state of Adam before the fall. The rich man and Lazarus clearly lived after the Fall, so why are we talking would I rather, when this whole thread was created to discuss whether or not Adam and Eve were perfect examples of humans BEFORE they sinned. Once they sinned, everything changes.

**Because we are inclined to do what we know we should not, our ability now to not sin requires an infusion of supernatural Grace, yet we still sin and require another infusion...so on. Adam and Eve are originally created with that infusion but still free to make a choice. With that infusion they had, it was not until Satan put the idea in their heads to envy something they were told they could not have, that it would have occurred to them to do something they knew they should not do. When they did it, just like when we sin now, any infused Grace can be diminished or depart entirely - one reason it becomes easier to repeat.

In your bike scenario, the idea would be giving a child a bike they could not possibly stay on - setting them up to fail. I cannot see God doing that and then holding His child accountable for falling. So no, rather than being set up by God, they were made holy and not inclined to sin and lived however long that way in a perfect relationship with God until Satan planted the seed of envy in their minds.

We orthodox do not say sinning represents loving, serving, knowing He is All Good. But we do say that would be what Adam and Eve were doing perfectly up until they sinned and were made to do that BEFORE they choose to sin. After sinning Adam could only serve that purpose imperfectly as we do now, which is why Adam and we need a redeemer. Conversely if one claims they are created by God imperfect (and put in an imperfect place) then you are correct in saying that purpose does not fit - and we arrive at what UR followers describe as God creating/sowing an evil seed in order to allow that evil to grow into something better - either in this lifetime or during the next in Hell - but all these "bad seeds" will eventually grow into something better. Which is clearly opposed to that purpose for making man, and both life and hell become some sort of experiment. Also hard to see a need for anything more than a coach rather than a redeemer in such a view.

The "if I had to guess" comment was in regard to your point #12 in post #9 = why did Eve embellish on what God told them not to do. Without speculating beyond her saying that, whatever else one claims to know Eve meant by that, it shows she knew it was wrong to do what she did.

Your speculation on why Adam did what he does goes beyond the story detail and also beyond what I said. My point is the story indicates Adam was there while this discourse with Satan occurred and there is nothing mentioned of him objecting or attempting to stop it. IOW Adam did not protect Eve from what he knew to be wrong. I do not need to speculate to see that is not mentioned, so absolutely safe in saying it did not happen as that would be a very important detail to omit.

From my view of the story, Adam attempt to blame anyone but himself for doing what he knew he aught not do -which was my point. Yes I think he attempts to place blame for his choice on both Eve and on God for giving him Eve.

*I do not agree about the "God type Love" thing because I believe both the angels and Adam were given free choice to love God or not. Given that free choice is real, which Adam would only be capable of expressing a true Love of God if he actually had a choice in the matter. Adam's ability to reflect a "God type Love" would only be possible if he remained holy - which sinning precludes. So depending on the degree of his doing wrong Adam could only subsequently reflect a lessor type of love if any at all - so at best an imperfect love because Adam's sin corrupted his nature. Jesus is able to reflect that perfect love as a man because He remained sinless. Adam would have reflected it up until the point he sinned.

***As stated in my OP, I started this thread to refute/question the idea presented by some UR believers that God created Adam and Eve imperfect, flawed, which is to say less good than they could have been, which is also another was of saying evil. Buried in that is the assumption that evil is not a thing, but the relative absence of Good - an idea which orthodox Christian philosophers have defended for thousands of years and these same UR believers also object to.

Yes, the orthodox Christian view is that before sinning Adam and Eve are in perfect harmony with God, and there is no disharmony in their members (as Saint Paul says we are now, which is the disordered state our first parents caused within themselves when they sinned and we inherited. So yes relationship wise, Adam and Eve before they sinned had a perfect relationship with God. And that was why I said they perfectly filled the purpose for which He made them up until the time they choose to sin. As to whether their bodies prior to sinning represent the same type of body Christ had after resurrection and the same type He said we could have (like Him), am not sure how we could be certain or rule out that it is the same type of flesh.
Clearly if they had not chosen to sin, they were put in a place where they could have lived forever the way they were, which just as clearly we must admit was the way God intended us to be - if Adam did not sin. He did sin and corruption of his (and our) nature followed from that, so it is rather a moot point - but if we say Adam was free to make that choice, then the possibility that he could make the right choice had to exists - which would mean he would remain forever exactly as God made him. So it makes more sense to me to suggest our resurrection represents God restoring those bond for Glory the way He intended man to be. Way more sense than saying He planted a bad seed (evil) with the intent of helping us become better.

***If something is not forced on us, then the implication is we are free to choose to accept/avail ourselves of it or not - which is the point of saying we are given free will like the angels also have. And the point about the ability to Love God goes to my point (actually thousands of years of Christian philosophers) saying Adam had to have been given the ability to love Good (God who is all Good) when God made Adam, else Adam could not be said to have been created to love, serve and know God. Adam did not loose that ability or purpose by sinning, it was diminished in him. He was still made to love God. Sinning works to remove some or all any Grace God applies to aide/dwell in us, so we can reflect that "Godly Love". So Adam is originally made infused with that supernatural grace, but acts to defeat it and diminishes that infusion by sinning. Unlike Adam, we are born in a state because of what Adam did where that Supernatural grace is already diminished and our nature bent such that we are inclined to sin, rather than do what we know to be right.

 

[adhidarmawijaya]

donfish06 and I have been discussing through private messaging but I would like everyone to join in and give their thoughts.

Before really getting into all of the “options” one can come up with for interpreting the Adam and Eve scenario we need to understand the objectives. Man’s objective while here on earth given by God and God’s objective in both making humans in the first place and His objective as it relates to humans.

The objectives should be the overall reason for all that happens and will happen.

Why did God make humans in the first place?

Why did God put humans in the Garden to begin with and not heavenly beings?

Why did God make humans very good and not perfect?

Is Eve just a clone of Adam with different plumbing or was she made different for some reason?

Why did God allow them to sin?

Why were they driven from the Garden?

What can we learn from the Garden story even if we do not believe it really literally happened?


Running around picking verses out all over the scripture and saying these “ably” directly to the story is extremely questionable at best and just distract us from what we really can learn. We need to get the important stuff first and then we might consider the hypothetical.

The objectives should be the overall reason for all that happens and will happen.

Isa43:7 They are my own people, and I created them to bring me glory.

Why did God make humans in the first place?

Finally Humans shall inhabit the new earth eternally.

Why did God put humans in the Garden to begin with and not heavenly beings?

Glorifying Him in the earth.

Why did God make humans very good and not perfect?

There is no other created being that is better than " like and resemble to God " even angels.

Is Eve just a clone of Adam with different plumbing or was she made different for some reason?

Gen2:18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to live alone. I will make a suitable companion to help him."
For man that he should depend on each other ( not arrogant ), and men could bear their kids.

Why did God allow them to sin?

The only way that men finally can glorify God, ( the only way that the God's Grace can be bestowed Eph1:4 ).

Why were they driven from the Garden?

If they remained in Eden they surely ate the fruit of the tree of life, meant they already had the eternal body that could not change ( they would never have their offspring/eternal being would not bear kids ).

What can we learn from the Garden story even if we do not believe it really literally happened?

Salvation shall come as the God's Grace only , cause all men are spiritually dead in the eyes of God.

Rom8:20 For creation was condemned to lose its purpose, not of its own will, but because God willed it to be so. Yet there was the hope

 

[bling]

Isa43:7 They are my own people, and I created them to bring me glory.

Does God have some “need” for glory?

I get the “glory” answer lots of times, so a tree brings glory to God by being a tree, what is the difference with man?

Can people not bring glory to God and other people do bring glory to God, so what is the difference?

Did David bring glory to God when he was involved in adultery?

Isaiah is preaching to the Northern Kingdom which will be lost so did they always bring glory to God and where they bringing glory to God with the way they were behaving right then?

Is: Loving God (and secondly others) with all your heart, soul, mind, and energy, bringing glory to God?

If you are doing that first and second command do you have to do other stuff?

If you do other stuff without “Love” is it worth anything? (1 Cor. 13:1-3)

If you have Godly type Love will it not compel you to glorify God?

How does a person initially obtain this huge unique type of Love, that will enable you to be completely selfless?

Finally Humans shall inhabit the new earth eternally.

That does tells us what they will do but not why they were made in the first place? Why did God not make angels or sheep to do that?

Glorifying Him in the earth.

Did Adam and Eve bring glory to God on earth by what they did?

From my own experience with humans I could have told God they could not be obedient for eternity, so am I smarter now then God was then?

Is God lacking something without man bringing Him glory to satisfy some “need” God has?

There is no other created being that is better than " like and resemble to God " even angels.

So did God lack the Love and power needed to make humans like He is?

Are you saying God could, but did not want to?

God does choose what He will do and chooses to do the very best every time, but to make humans like God they will have to also have that ability to choose and certain things cannot be prechosen for them and still be their personal choice.

Gen2:18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to live alone. I will make a suitable companion to help him."
For man that he should depend on each other ( not arrogant ), and men could bear their kids.

If Eve was made suitable for Adam would that mean differently emotionally, psychologically, and maybe even intellectually and not just with different plumbing?

Eve was made to meet the needs of Adam, so Eve might have some lesser qualities than Adam even though Adam can meet the needs of Eve?

The only way that men finally can glorify God, ( the only way that the God's Grace can be bestowed Eph1:4 ).

Does sin bring glory to God?

Think for a moment about the father in the prodigal son story: If the prodigal son does not come home and starves to death in the pigsty, is the father any less glorious? Did the father do perfectly what he should do to help the young son fulfill the objective of becoming like the father (in unselfish Love)?

The objective of the prodigal son (like our objective) is to become like the father (with Godly type Love) by the son just humbly returning to the father (not out of Love for the father, but to get something he does not deserve from the father [a job]) the father can shower the young son with pure charitable gifts including the forgiving him of an unbelievable huge debt. Since “…he that is forgiven much loves much…” the prodigal son will automatically receive an unbelievable huge Love (he came Love with a Godly type Love like his father has).

If they remained in Eden they surely ate the fruit of the tree of life, meant they already had the eternal body that could not change ( they would never have their offspring/eternal being would not bear kids ).

This physical body change is not in there. Their bodies with the help of the fruit from the tree of life could last forever.

Salvation shall come as the God's Grace only , cause all men are spiritually dead in the eyes of God.

The Garden story does not present the idea all humans are spiritually dead from then on?

It does not talk about “salvation” per say?

The fact that our very best (created by God and raised [programmed by God to adulthood]) all human representative sin, does mean all of us would sin and not fulfill our earthly objective in the same situation.

There is a lot we can learn.

Rom8:20 For creation was condemned to lose its purpose, not of its own will, but because God willed it to be so. Yet there was the hope

There are other alternative ways on interpreting those verses.

 

[bling]

God's purpose for making mankind. If not already stated in this thread - I like the Church statement;God made man to love, serve and know Him and share in His Eternal Happiness.

I like what God says and is in scripture and not someone interpretation of scripture and drawing some conclusion.

How do you “make a being to Love you”? How is that different from a robotic type “love” or an instinctive type “love”?

Are we programmed with a “Love” instinct?

Is God’s Love like some kneejerk reaction?

Why do some people not “love” God?

Why a physical world?

God willed to makes us a combination of flesh and spirit, which requires a physical realm for flesh to exist. And that realm distinct from the realm He made for spiritual beings like angels.

Why did God “will” to do this?

Very Good.
A scale of goodness is only made possible by the very real existence of He who is All Good. So I would suggest that Very Good, on such a scale, represents as close to All Good as He could possibly make man. IOW based on that scale Adam could never be any better that God made him - and this applies to Adam ONLY before he sinned-the Fall of Man. It also supports that God would do less (Good in this case) than He could have in making Adam. To claim Adam as originally made could be improved upon means God could have made Adam better than He did. Also making Adam less than He could of negates the possibility of the purpose as I stated above because it means Adam would have no choice in his not being able to fully serve, love and know God. Which is then troubling to hold Adam accountable for what he did when God is said to have made him that way.

We are in agreement with “…represents as close to All Good as He could possibly make man”, so does that also mean there are somethings God cannot do like make a being that has always existed (another Christ)?

How is it fair to all God’s other children: to make Adam superior to begin with?

It is logically impossible to make a being that has always existed, but it is not logically impossible to make all humans with the same nature as Adam?

.

Why does God allow man to sin? As with everything He allows, for His Glory and the greater good. Do we always understand how that is so? no not now.

What is the problem with seeing the obvious purpose in allowing humans to sin?

.

Creation did happen, but the legend, myth story is full of literal and abstract thoughts. What can we learn. God made us to love, serve and know Him and share in His Eternal Happiness. Because of Adam's sin, our current state works against that purpose so we need a Redeemer in order to restore us to the state Adam was in before the Fall, with glorified bodies like Jesus had after His Resurrection.

Where beside the “church” do you get this: “God made us to love, serve and know Him and share in His Eternal Happiness”?

 

[bling]

In response I would like to focus on the reason I started this thread, to question the belief of some of those supporting Universal Reconciliation that Adam and Eve, mankind essentially, was originally created imperfect -basically as we are now. The other points you made I will try to touch on only briefly and feel free to IGNORE that part of my reply unless you would like to start another thread to go off topic. Will indicate points in my reply that are off topic by *** with the # of those indicating how far off.

I did not say Adam was made perfect like God is perfect - am saying He made them the very best He could make a creature - which for our purpose should mean He could do no better than what He did - and they would have to have been originally Holy to make loving, serving and knowing Him possible. To imagine Him doing less is to say one believes He would do less than He could have - which sounds more like a slacker than a Perfect All Good Creator. The Son of God was with the Father in the beginning, so please don't put words in my mouth that I did not say. I said Adam was Holy. When God is Incarnated - the created Man, Jesus, that He is, is also Holy, not because He is God, but because that Man was born Holy (unlike us -without an inclination to sin we got because of Adam's sin) and Jesus remained so, sinless to His death - not sinning - remaining perfectly aligned as a Man with God - which is the difference between Him and Adam. So in that view both Jesus and Adam start out their life the same, with Jesus remaining that way and Adam falling by sin.

**If the angels were not made perfect - and for their purpose we would mean Holy - then we could not explain their being now where they are said to be or why if they are not Holy they would be allowed to stay while others that BECAME unholy were obviously tossed out.

**As some of the angels were once good (holy in order to be where they were) and freely chose to rebel (become bad/unholy), it is blatantly obvious that it is NOT true that beings created with such a choice cannot remain holy since 2/3s of them were not tossed out. Again by perfect, we mean created Holy and able to then serve the purpose for which they are made provided they remain that way. If not originally made that way, Holy, how could they even be and remain "with God" right now?

Yes, Adam and Eve sinned but there was a time before that they did not and nothing changed until they did - and until they did they had access to a "Tree" which permit them to live for ever - which means if they did not sin God would not have thrown them out and they would have remained forever just as they were originally created, Holy as He is Holy.

****You present a false dichotomy, the position I am in now with God is still dependent on my choices just as Adam's was. So it cannot be a choice of either or as you presented.
The difference with me now and the way Adam was originally made is that I am born inclined to do what I know I should not. Whereas Adam freely chose to do what he knew he should not, which among other things corrupted his human nature. That corruption created a disharmony within Adam, a disorder in his members as Saint Paul discussed. It is that disorder Adam passed down to all of us which is said to make us inclined to do what we know we should not. The same thing Jesus escaped inheriting when He is created in His Mother's Holy womb. Which is why we can say Jesus as a man is in the same place, and stood in place of the first man, Adam - but unlike Adam Jesus never sinned.

One cannot claim the Garden place is lousy place to put a perfect man without at same time saying God would put man in a crappy place. It means God set man up, which means it was intentional, which typically we do not accept punishing someone who is setup to fail - yet this explanation of the Garden has God doing just that. No. More appropriately and I guess what could be lousy about it and the question to be asked is why God allowed Satan to interfere with mankind? And I think that question is answerable completely answerable without imagining God creating evil or God doing less than He could have in creating a crappy place to put man. Besides, up until they are tossed out, there is nothing in the story to suggest that it is a crappy place at all - in fact seems quite the opposite.

****Yes, I side with those saying Eve was tricked and that done by Satan. And it would God allowing Satan to do that, not God creating a crappy human or a crappy place to put humans that we should be asking.

*******Am unclear how we can apply what occurs after the fall of mankind with the state of Adam before the fall. The rich man and Lazarus clearly lived after the Fall, so why are we talking would I rather, when this whole thread was created to discuss whether or not Adam and Eve were perfect examples of humans BEFORE they sinned. Once they sinned, everything changes.

**Because we are inclined to do what we know we should not, our ability now to not sin requires an infusion of supernatural Grace, yet we still sin and require another infusion...so on. Adam and Eve are originally created with that infusion but still free to make a choice. With that infusion they had, it was not until Satan put the idea in their heads to envy something they were told they could not have, that it would have occurred to them to do something they knew they should not do. When they did it, just like when we sin now, any infused Grace can be diminished or depart entirely - one reason it becomes easier to repeat.

In your bike scenario, the idea would be giving a child a bike they could not possibly stay on - setting them up to fail. I cannot see God doing that and then holding His child accountable for falling. So no, rather than being set up by God, they were made holy and not inclined to sin and lived however long that way in a perfect relationship with God until Satan planted the seed of envy in their minds.

We orthodox do not say sinning represents loving, serving, knowing He is All Good. But we do say that would be what Adam and Eve were doing perfectly up until they sinned and were made to do that BEFORE they choose to sin. After sinning Adam could only serve that purpose imperfectly as we do now, which is why Adam and we need a redeemer. Conversely if one claims they are created by God imperfect (and put in an imperfect place) then you are correct in saying that purpose does not fit - and we arrive at what UR followers describe as God creating/sowing an evil seed in order to allow that evil to grow into something better - either in this lifetime or during the next in Hell - but all these "bad seeds" will eventually grow into something better. Which is clearly opposed to that purpose for making man, and both life and hell become some sort of experiment. Also hard to see a need for anything more than a coach rather than a redeemer in such a view.

The "if I had to guess" comment was in regard to your point #12 in post #9 = why did Eve embellish on what God told them not to do. Without speculating beyond her saying that, whatever else one claims to know Eve meant by that, it shows she knew it was wrong to do what she did.

Your speculation on why Adam did what he does goes beyond the story detail and also beyond what I said. My point is the story indicates Adam was there while this discourse with Satan occurred and there is nothing mentioned of him objecting or attempting to stop it. IOW Adam did not protect Eve from what he knew to be wrong. I do not need to speculate to see that is not mentioned, so absolutely safe in saying it did not happen as that would be a very important detail to omit.

From my view of the story, Adam attempt to blame anyone but himself for doing what he knew he aught not do -which was my point. Yes I think he attempts to place blame for his choice on both Eve and on God for giving him Eve.

*I do not agree about the "God type Love" thing because I believe both the angels and Adam were given free choice to love God or not. Given that free choice is real, which Adam would only be capable of expressing a true Love of God if he actually had a choice in the matter. Adam's ability to reflect a "God type Love" would only be possible if he remained holy - which sinning precludes. So depending on the degree of his doing wrong Adam could only subsequently reflect a lessor type of love if any at all - so at best an imperfect love because Adam's sin corrupted his nature. Jesus is able to reflect that perfect love as a man because He remained sinless. Adam would have reflected it up until the point he sinned.

***As stated in my OP, I started this thread to refute/question the idea presented by some UR believers that God created Adam and Eve imperfect, flawed, which is to say less good than they could have been, which is also another was of saying evil. Buried in that is the assumption that evil is not a thing, but the relative absence of Good - an idea which orthodox Christian philosophers have defended for thousands of years and these same UR believers also object to.

Yes, the orthodox Christian view is that before sinning Adam and Eve are in perfect harmony with God, and there is no disharmony in their members (as Saint Paul says we are now, which is the disordered state our first parents caused within themselves when they sinned and we inherited. So yes relationship wise, Adam and Eve before they sinned had a perfect relationship with God. And that was why I said they perfectly filled the purpose for which He made them up until the time they choose to sin. As to whether their bodies prior to sinning represent the same type of body Christ had after resurrection and the same type He said we could have (like Him), am not sure how we could be certain or rule out that it is the same type of flesh.
Clearly if they had not chosen to sin, they were put in a place where they could have lived forever the way they were, which just as clearly we must admit was the way God intended us to be - if Adam did not sin. He did sin and corruption of his (and our) nature followed from that, so it is rather a moot point - but if we say Adam was free to make that choice, then the possibility that he could make the right choice had to exists - which would mean he would remain forever exactly as God made him. So it makes more sense to me to suggest our resurrection represents God restoring those bond for Glory the way He intended man to be. Way more sense than saying He planted a bad seed (evil) with the intent of helping us become better.

***If something is not forced on us, then the implication is we are free to choose to accept/avail ourselves of it or not - which is the point of saying we are given free will like the angels also have. And the point about the ability to Love God goes to my point (actually thousands of years of Christian philosophers) saying Adam had to have been given the ability to love Good (God who is all Good) when God made Adam, else Adam could not be said to have been created to love, serve and know God. Adam did not loose that ability or purpose by sinning, it was diminished in him. He was still made to love God. Sinning works to remove some or all any Grace God applies to aide/dwell in us, so we can reflect that "Godly Love". So Adam is originally made infused with that supernatural grace, but acts to defeat it and diminishes that infusion by sinning. Unlike Adam, we are born in a state because of what Adam did where that Supernatural grace is already diminished and our nature bent such that we are inclined to sin, rather than do what we know to be right.

Thank you for giving me the orthodox view on the subject.

We are in agreement that: “Adam and Eve were made as good as God could make them”. But disagree on their being equal with Christ in their abilities.

Did Adam and Eve exist before God created them on earth?

Did Christ exist before He came to earth?

Was Christ a created being?

If Christ is not a created being than Christ has always had Godly type Love and never had to get it down the road. Godly type Love is part of Christ’s existence, but it is a Love made by beings with a choice, since it is choosing out of one’s free will to be unselfish toward another for no logical reason.

Since Adam is a created being he has to somehow “get” Godly type Love, but how can Adam get it:

If we say: Adam had this Godly type Love instinctively from birth (creation) than it is a robotic type Love and not what we consider to be like God’s Love.

Godly type Love could not just be forced on an individual since that would not be Loving on God’s part and the “love” received by force would not be Godly type love.

The ability to be totally unselfish would be huge beyond measure, beyond man’s ability, so it has to come from God as a purely charitable gift and must be accepted as a pure charitable gift (not forced).

Here in lies the huge difference between Adam and Christ: Christ at birth had Godly type Love, but it was not something instinctive God gave Christ, but it is something Christ always had.

What kept Adam and Eve from being “perfect” like Christ while in the Garden before sinning was this lack of Godly type Love which God could not instinctively give them and still be Godly type Love.

Just as the father in the prodigal son story was trying to provide the best opportunities for his sons to become like he was (Unselfishly Loving), God is doing all he can to help us to become like He is (Unselfishly Loving).

Adam and Eve would have had the very best child for parent type love, but not a totally unselfish type Love to begin with. God is Loving them unselfishly, but since they have been totally obedient to God prior to sinning , they did not have to humbly “accept” God’s Love as pure charity, since they had no reason to be humble (they had done everything “perfectly”), so they would accept God’s Love as a wonderful parent’s love for obedient children.

Why would they or anyone else desire to humbly accept pure charity, if they did not need pure charity?

Prior to sinning why would Adam and/or Eve feel bad about themselves and be lacking in pride?

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I like what God says and is in scripture and not someone interpretation of scripture and drawing some conclusion.

How do you “make a being to Love you”? How is that different from a robotic type “love” or an instinctive type “love”?

Are we programmed with a “Love” instinct?

Is God’s Love like some kneejerk reaction?

Why do some people not “love” God?

Why a physical world?



Why did God “will” to do this?



We are in agreement with “…represents as close to All Good as He could possibly make man”, so does that also mean there are somethings God cannot do like make a being that has always existed (another Christ)?

How is it fair to all God’s other children: to make Adam superior to begin with?

It is logically impossible to make a being that has always existed, but it is not logically impossible to make all humans with the same nature as Adam?

.


What is the problem with seeing the obvious purpose in allowing humans to sin?

.


Where beside the “church” do you get this: “God made us to love, serve and know Him and share in His Eternal Happiness”?

Would be silly to think "made" in my quote as anything but what it was intended - "He created us to" - after all that purpose is suppose to answer why did He make us - not what does He make us do. Sorry for the confusion using a different word apparently "made".

Most of the rest of your questions regarding our purpose for existing only result from that misunderstanding. The rest relate the requirement in most of Christian orthodox views that God gave both angels and mankind free will. As to why Adam sinned - he was free to do so and God allowed Satan to interfere to place the idea of envy in Adam's head, something that would not have occurred to Adam before that point.

As to why we ALL sin now (and ever since Adam's first sin); that is because what Adam did created a war in his/our members (to borrow Saint Paul's phrasing of it). Which is what having a corrupted/fallen nature results in - we are inclined to do what we know we should not. We "know" because it is "written on hearts" which would be only fitting/required for a creature CREATED (almost said made again) to know All Good, which Adam was/is and since we descend from our first parents so we are.

A physical world is required in order for a physical body to interact. He made us flesh and spirit, which we can only conclude is the way He wanted us to be - rather than imagining Him imprisoning us inside something evil to be "freed" from later as some have imagined. Again a "restoration" does not mean create something new, but rather make something the way it aught to be because it currently is not.

Why did God create beings that could interact with both a physical and a spiritual world?
Well, the spiritual side is easy - because that would be the only way either angels or humans could directly interface with Him since He is Spirit. The physical side less obvious to me anyway, but whatever we say it would have to be for His Glory. And the physical world is indeed a marvel reflecting His Greatness. This sort of goes off topic, except to say He made us with physical and spiritual natures combined, rather than just spiritual like the angels. To have no body must mean to not be fully human - because that is not the way He made humans, so clearly not the way He wanted us to be or else we would have been made differently.

More off topic, but if God has no beginning or end - am unclear how to see Him making something with no beginning. I could certainly see Him making things that never end - like spirits - our souls, His Kingdom (the Church)..etc. The orthodox concept of the Son of God is that He is God and not a "created" thing, so because God has no beginning - it is not possible to say any of the Three Persons have a beginning. That would also be the meaning behind saying "begotten not made" (which "made" here obviously does not mean forced to be the Son, sorry : ) ). And also kind of odd to imagine the Father existing for any "time" before His Word (a perfect image of Himself in His Mind - the Son) existed or the Perfect expression of Love between them existed (the Holy Spirit). So if one imagined the Father having a beginning, then the defined relationships and thus the existence of other two Persons would mean all Three have to be imagined coming into existence simultaneously.

I do not see Adam as superior, but rather in a superior state with his relation to God than we are. And we are in the same state Adam fell to - which is then not possible to suggest the view the "resulting" Adam as "superior". He certainly lived longer as did the first several generations, and some have speculated that longevity a direct result of his temporary access to whatever one sees the Tree of Life representing.

All of us do have the exact nature Adam had when him and Eve together created the first generation of our ancestors. As to whether it is impossible for God to have not allowed the corruption Adam of our nature to extend to his progeny, I can only guess that because nothing is impossible with God He certainly could have - but the story does not reflect that He did - so am not sure why this is a question. I do think because we get our flesh (not our souls) biologically that the corrupted nature is obviously a part of our inherited bodies. So it would take supernatural intervention (God) to prevent that from being passed to Adam's offspring. And besides a majority of us (not you obviously) prove we believe such a supernatural intervention is possible for God to intervene and block that biological transfer because He did so for Mary and with His Grace Mary remained that way, which then allows the natural biological transfer of Her biology to Jesus - removing any doubt that He is fully human. So why does He not do it for everyone, again for His Glory. In our view the lives of Jesus, Mary and perhaps others (Elijah & Enoch come to mind) prove we can choose not to sin, just as does the angels in Heaven now prove that creatures with a choice can choose not to sin.

I gave an obvious purpose for God allowing sin - and if we maintain that He made creatures truly free to choose - the ability (not necessity) of sinning is required. So am not sure what you think I reject that is obvious to you?

You must be looking at that purpose statement for God making us as something it is not and was never meant to be. It is a simple statement on the level of a child's understanding to explain our existence, which is a logical question for anyone to ask - why am I here and maybe just as importantly is it good that I am here. There must be an answer to the first and I would hope your answer to the second is yes.
It is not a creed or commandment or mission statement for humans or meant to be an all encompassing statement of our beliefs like a Creed. God did not need to create, did not need to share, does not need our love or service, does not need us to see Him face to face (know All Good), He does not need anything for that matter and He is
eternally Happy - start from there and you come up with better simple statement that a child could follow for why He made us.