Was Adam a universalist?

[Hmm]

Okay, a clickbait title!

The question really is, did Adam do wrong or is it we who are doing the wrong by misunderstanding God?

The common understanding seems to be that Adam/Adam and Eve/just Eve alone did something wrong which took the whole world into chaos and Jesus was subsequently sent to set things right.

That interpretation makes no sense to me. So I wonder if the Adam and Eve story is not some kind of metaphor instead? Instead of having God change from someone who's angry and wants to punish Adam to someone who forgives us because of Jesus's actions, should we not be thinking instead that it's we who need to change from someone who sees God as Punisher to seeing Him as Forgiver?

It makes more sense to me anyway to think of us having to change rather than God changing.

Looking at it this way, Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is God's way of telling us that we need to sacrifice our old way of thinking about God. That we need to stop thinking that His approval depends on us never sinning but that His forgiveness is unconditional and will always be ours no matter what we do. I remember someone telling me that Jesus would still have died for me if I was the only one living at the time.

So Adam may not have been a universalist but is not the lesson of his story that we should be?

 

[Sketcher]

God didn't change.

The New Testament clearly teaches that God is the judge, and he also has the power and willingness to forgive, if his conditions for amnesty are met. Faith in Christ happens to be the key condition for amnesty.

He's like a king in this regard. No small wonder, as he is called the King of Kings.

Also, if universalism is true, then there's no "need" to change our thinking about God. Since we'd all be in Heaven at the end anyway, erroneous thinking about God would be meaningless, whether in the "conservative" direction, or in the "liberal" direction.

 

[timothyu]

Eve (and Adam's) only sin (an original) was to put their will ahead of the will of God. Jesus of course said He only did the will of the Father, which of course was ultimately put to the test by accepting to die.

 

[Hmm]

Also, if universalism is true, then there's no "need" to change our thinking about God. Since we'd all be in Heaven at the end anyway, erroneous thinking about God would be meaningless, whether in the "conservative" direction, or in the "liberal" direction.

That's not what universalism says. It's pretty mainstream actually and says that we need to acknowledge Christ before we can be saved.

 

[Rescued One]

God either KNEW Adam would disobey or PLANNED the fall because He already had planned to send His Son as a Savior for those He would bring to Christ.

We can't give ourselves faith in Christ.

Romans 8:9
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

 

[timothyu]

God either KNEW Adam would disobey or PLANNED the fall because He already had planned to send His Son as a Savior for those He would bring to Christ.

God didn't only give Adam and Eve the choice regarding the Tree of Knowledge, but that choice was connected to a choice over the Tree of Life. Man might call it a great experiment to see if, in putting Himself in an animal, that He, who would not act in supreme dominance, would be a match for the self-serving survival instincts of the animal in our actions. Was He in angels too or were they a different construct? They failed also. Did he plan that? Has temptation always been part of the plan?

We all still act upon those animal instincts to this day, usually refusing to accept responsibility for personal failure, even though the Bible has stated over and over where God suggested the wisdom in putting His will first while recording the repercussions of not doing so by choosing the more fallible instinctive route. Jesus opened the door to the Kingdom, but the battle for allegiance still goes on for those seeking entrance.

 

[Blade]

"The question really is, did Adam do wrong or is it we who are doing the wrong by misunderstanding God?"

Whats written? "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many."

So yes some have misunderstood what He said and did. Christ said many will try to get in but Christ alone is the only way in. There is no other way. We do not have greater mercy, grace, forgiveness, wisdom than the great I AM does. Some things we say can it lead them the wrong way and miss salvation? Do we tell them what He said? For God so loved the world He gave His only son that who so ever believes in Jesus Christ shall not die but have ever lasting life. I am the way the truth and the life "no one" comes to the Father but through Me (Christ).

Christ is coming again this time not as baby nor a broken man on a cross but with fire in His eyes as King of kings lord of lords. That's the messiah the Jews expected. God is not like man. He does not think like us act like talk like us for He is a spirit. The great tribulation is coming on this whole world...the wrath of God. He will not strive with man forever. "And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; "

No offence I pray. GOD REALLY LOVES US..song playing now..what are the odds.. thank you FATHER!

 

[public hermit]

That interpretation makes no sense to me. So I wonder if the Adam and Eve story is not some kind of metaphor instead? Instead of having God change from someone who's angry and wants to punish Adam to someone who forgives us because of Jesus's actions, should we not be thinking instead that it's we who need to change from someone who sees God as Punisher to seeing Him as Forgiver?

It is interesting that nothing really changes after they eat from the tree. Presumably, they were already naked and capable of dying. What changes after they eat is their perception of their situation- now their nakedness (mortality?) is percieved as a bad thing. At any rate, I think that aspect of the narrative kind of tracks what you're saying.

If the main problem of humanity's condition is our perception of God, then Abelard's moral influence theory makes more sense that Anselm's or Calvin's. I think people reject his position because there is no "mechanism " for salvation. A caricature of Abelard's theory would say it doesn't do anything; it just reveals God's love. Jesus' death and resurrection do not pay off a ransom or restore God's honor/justice. I think that comes from a very limited view of what revelation does. Revelation reveals God, according to the department of redundancy department. If that doesn't transform you, nothing will. God does not need a mechanism to save us; we just need to see God. Or we need eyes to see, I guess.

 

[Hmm]

It is interesting that nothing really changes after they eat from the tree. Presumably, they were already naked and capable of dying. What changes after they eat is their perception of their situation- now their nakedness (mortality?) is percieved as a bad thing. At any rate, I think that aspect of the narrative kind of tracks what you're saying.

If the main problem of humanity's condition is our perception of God, then Abelard's moral influence theory makes more sense that Anselm's or Calvin's. I think people reject his position because there is no "mechanism " for salvation. A caricature of Abelard's theory would say it doesn't do anything; it just reveals God's love. Jesus' death and resurrection do not pay off a ransom or restore God's honor/justice. I think that comes from a very limited view of what revelation does. Revelation reveals God, according to the department of redundancy department. If that doesn't transform you, nothing will. God does not need a mechanism to save us; we just need to see God. Or we need eyes to see, I guess.

Very informative as usual, thanks. I'm trying to understand what we are actually required to do from a universalist perspective. I've got about as far as understanding that God will eventually put all things right and restore all of creation. And that the death and resurrection of Jesus were somehow necessary for this, but I don't know why. So my conclusion is that all we are called on to do is to try to understand as far as we can the extent of God's love and forgiveness that he showed us through Jesus, through His life as well as His death. And if we do this all the works of sanctification that are required for universal salvation will follow, eventually, resulting in the completion of God's project to build a new heaven and earth. In summary, all we have to do then is, as you say, to try to see God as clearly as we can, and God will take care of everything else.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Okay, a clickbait title!

The question really is, did Adam do wrong or is it we who are doing the wrong by misunderstanding God?

The common understanding seems to be that Adam/Adam and Eve/just Eve alone did something wrong which took the whole world into chaos and Jesus was subsequently sent to set things right.

That interpretation makes no sense to me. So I wonder if the Adam and Eve story is not some kind of metaphor instead? Instead of having God change from someone who's angry and wants to punish Adam to someone who forgives us because of Jesus's actions, should we not be thinking instead that it's we who need to change from someone who sees God as Punisher to seeing Him as Forgiver?

It makes more sense to me anyway to think of us having to change rather than God changing.

Looking at it this way, Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is God's way of telling us that we need to sacrifice our old way of thinking about God. That we need to stop thinking that His approval depends on us never sinning but that His forgiveness is unconditional and will always be ours no matter what we do. I remember someone telling me that Jesus would still have died for me if I was the only one living at the time.

So Adam may not have been a universalist but is not the lesson of his story that we should be?

 

[FineLinen]

God either KNEW Adam would disobey or PLANNED the fall because He already had planned to send His Son as a Savior for those He would bring to Christ.

We can't give ourselves faith in Christ.

Romans 8:9
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Our God continues to amaze my life within him. When you begin to think you have seen all the stars of his heavens, behold behind each star are more hidden dden behin

 

[FineLinen]

God either KNEW Adam would disobey or PLANNED the fall because He already had planned to send His Son as a Savior for those He would bring to Christ.

We can't give ourselves faith in Christ.

Romans 8:9
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Our God continues to amaze my life within him. When you begin to think you have seen all the stars of his heavens, behold, behind each star are more hidden behind each one. Never ever attempt to limit the unlimited One who dwells beyond what we can think or imagine.

 

[fhansen]

Okay, a clickbait title!

The question really is, did Adam do wrong or is it we who are doing the wrong by misunderstanding God?

The common understanding seems to be that Adam/Adam and Eve/just Eve alone did something wrong which took the whole world into chaos and Jesus was subsequently sent to set things right.

That interpretation makes no sense to me. So I wonder if the Adam and Eve story is not some kind of metaphor instead? Instead of having God change from someone who's angry and wants to punish Adam to someone who forgives us because of Jesus's actions, should we not be thinking instead that it's we who need to change from someone who sees God as Punisher to seeing Him as Forgiver?

It makes more sense to me anyway to think of us having to change rather than God changing.

Looking at it this way, Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is God's way of telling us that we need to sacrifice our old way of thinking about God. That we need to stop thinking that His approval depends on us never sinning but that His forgiveness is unconditional and will always be ours no matter what we do. I remember someone telling me that Jesus would still have died for me if I was the only one living at the time.

So Adam may not have been a universalist but is not the lesson of his story that we should be?

The gospel proves that God desires only the very best for man-always has-He wants none to perish. God is love. This can only mean that He wants man to choose correctly, for our highest good. He refuses to violate our wills. And this means that He allows us to maintain our distorted image of Him (man having conceived that image at the Fall, of a distant and angry God, aloof in His superiority, "jealous of His perogatives" as its been taught). This wrong perception carries over even into believers: enmity comes from man, not God. Man preferred himself over God at the fall, as it's also been taught.

God will always work towards peace between Himself and man, towards reconcilation and the union with Him that we were created for-that we're lost without. To the extent that we want to remain in our pride, however, in ourselves, we create the distance. And full ultimate distance from God is hell.

 

[FineLinen]

God didn't change.

The New Testament clearly teaches that God is the judge, and he also has the power and willingness to forgive, if his conditions for amnesty are met. Faith in Christ happens to be the key condition for amnesty.

He's like a king in this regard. No small wonder, as he is called the King of Kings.

Also, if universalism is true, then there's no "need" to change our thinking about God. Since we'd all be in Heaven at the end anyway, erroneous thinking about God would be meaningless, whether in the "conservative" direction, or in the "liberal" direction.

We are fallen creatures from the One who has made us for fellowship within himself. Our thinking must be changed from where we dwell, in our tiny boxes, into where He is in expansive dimensions of grandeur.

He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.

 

[Hmm]

This wrong perception carries over even into believers: enmity comes from man, not God. Man preferred himself over God at the fall, as it's also been taught.

I agree with all you say in your entire post but.. I think probably we have a point of disagreement in that you may see our physical death on earth as a kind of final cutoff point, in that our moral/spiritual state at that moment determines our future, our eternal future, while I see it more as another stagecoach point along the long and winding road.

It seems to me that when we talk about our perception of God, we're talking about something/someone that we can see but not completely so. So we can be both accurate in our knowledge about Him but also know only the tip of the iceberg.

We prefer ourselves over God, as you say, which is pride I guess. I think the accuracy we can get about God is through thinking about Jesus as His perfect image, but we need humility too and should acknowledge that we can never know Him completely and really only know a tiny fraction of who He is. Much like a human relationship perhaps. We can be very sure that friends, partners or family members are genuine, do love us and that we can trust them, but we can never know everything about them. They never cease to surprise us. Same as with babies and dogs! Or like a physicist, who knows some things about the material world to an incredible degree of accuracy but at the same time knows that there is far more that he doesn't know. We religious folk can learn a lot from scientists ironically.

 

[jacks]

As long as we put our own desires and our own standards of right and wrong above that of God, we are Adam and Eve and we fall everyday.

 

[David's Harp]

And that the death and resurrection of Jesus were somehow necessary for this, but I don't know why

I feel for you Hmm, I really do. I've been trying to get my head around UR theology because - as I said in another thread - I would love to believe it was true (wouldn't everyone?). But I don't see it. Indeed your very comment here highlights one of the dangers of this theology, in that it cheapens, or lessens, the meaning and work of the Cross.
Now let's go back to your earlier comment:

Jesus would still have died for me if I was the only one living at the time.

Now imagine you're the only one amongst billions of others who will perish because they don't want to know Him. He would still do it for you. That's the love of Christ. He searches out his lost sheep, and I love Him all the more because He would consider me part of His flock.
God Bless. I pray He gives you clarity and peace of mind in regard to the power of the Cross!

 

[Hmm]

I feel for you Hmm, I really do.

That's pretty weird tbh.

 

[David's Harp]

That's pretty weird tbh.

Well, somehow, I imagined you may be struggling with some sort of doubt, but I guess not. Forgive me for showing any concern.

 

[Der Alte]

The gospel proves that God desires only the very best for man-always has-He wants none to perish. God is love. This can only mean that He wants man to choose correctly, for our highest good. He refuses to violate our wills. And this means that He allows us to maintain our distorted image of Him (man having conceived that image at the Fall, of a distant and angry God, aloof in His superiority, "jealous of His perogatives" as its been taught). This wrong perception carries over even into believers: enmity comes from man, not God. Man preferred himself over God at the fall, as it's also been taught.
God will always work towards peace between Himself and man, towards reconcilation and the union with Him that we were created for-that we're lost without. To the extent that we want to remain in our pride, however, in ourselves, we create the distance. And full ultimate distance from God is hell.

But God's patience has a limit.

Jeremiah 13:11
(11) For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.
Jeremiah 13:13-14
(13) Then shalt thou say unto them, Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will fill all the inhabitants of this land, even the kings that sit upon David's throne, and the priests, and the prophets, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, with drunkenness.
(14) And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

Romans 1:24
(24) Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

Romans 1:26
(26) For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Romans 1:28
(28) And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;​