Grace Vs. Works - Maybe Repentence = Key

[CrimsonKairos]

Eden was a way-station, not a destination.

The Fall was a step down, but also a step forward.

It was a blessing. Otherwise, I wouldn't be here, moving forwards towards my eternal destination.

[prisonchaplain]

I found a very interesting article on the fall at Religious Tolerance . org. It's neither an LDS nor a specifically Christian site. Rather, it is meant as an interfaith conversational site.

The article, and similar ones at the site, offer both conservative and liberal interpretations. Neither offers the LDS understanding that the Fall was a necessary and good course, with Adam & Eve as innocents who walked exactly as God wished them to.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/sin_gene.htm

[Traveler]

Impossible to lie before God? That does not make sense. When we lie, we lie before him every time.

The next time you look into the face of G-d as he talks directly to you - tell me how your lies turn out.

The Traveler

[Dr T]

God knows all. Is that what you meant? I though you were saying, "You can't lie to God." When people lie, they try and pass off something untrue. People do this all the time to God. "I've been doing the best I can." "It was the woman you gave to me Lord." Etc. We do lie to God. Is it effective? That is a different topic. I agree, it is not effective (but it happens)

[Traveler]

No, I'll let God be the judge:

Good - then you will never again fall for the temptation to call the action of Adam and Eve a rebellion? Consider that in this thing you are as guilty of turning from the councils of G-d as were Adam and Eve.

I have felt the goodness of your heart so many times PC that I talk directly - not as a critical enemy but as a friend the is confused with you statements. Let me summarize again this confusion that I face:

1. That what happened in the Garden was the will and plan of G-d the Father. You stated that you could not believe that G-d wanted his son to suffer. This is because of your goodness and only part understanding. (See Luke 22:42). As good and wonderful as Jesus was, he thought there must be some other way other than his suffering according to the will of the Father and that such harsh suffering did not make sense to him either. You have a lot in common with Jesus. But Jesus submitted his will to the will of the Father. One must understand that Jesus allowed himself to suffer - only because it WAS the will of the Father. Otherwise he would not have done it (by his own admission).

2. That the will and plan of G-d is constant and does not change for worldly or evil circumstances. G-d is the same yesterday, today and forever. G-d does not change his plans or his will because of Satan. It is contrary to scripture to teach and believe that G-d had one plan but had to abandon it for a second because of Satan. The concept of G-d abandoning "Plan A" for "Plan B" is not true in any sense of declaring it. There has only been one plan of G-d from before the "foundations of the earth". I submit in all honesty and by all that I believe that any doctrine or society that teaches that G-d has changed his will or plan - ever - at any time concerning his purpose in man is not a true doctrine or a society associated with the true G-d. The story of Adam and Eve is no exception.

3. The act of Adam and Eve was not a rebellion against G-d. I submit that anyone that has come to know G-d by what ever power of knowledge is given to them has afterwards been deceived by Satan. None of us, regardless of our religion or even belief in the Christ have "rebelled" less - Even and especially though we have full knowledge of Good and Evil that Adam and Eve did not have.

4. It was not the will of G-d that Adam and Eve remain forever in Eden. But Satan knew the plan and will of G-d the Father and he took steps to prevent what G-d had planned. If one cannot see what I have outlined in the first three points they will not understand what Satan is about even in our very day for he is attempting to disrupt the same plan of G-d today in the same manner he was about in the Garden. The garden epoch is a type and a shadow of all of us. Even the name Adam means "mankind". The garden epoch is as much a warning to us of our fall (even though we may have a relationship with G-d) as it is a story of Adam's fall. It is my belief that if we see the offering of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as the primary temptation of Adam and Eve - we have missed the most important point of the fall and we do not understand the will and plan of G-d nor do we realize the cleverness and deceptions of Satan.

The Traveler

[Dr T]

How can disobeying God not be rebellion? Plain and simple. It may have been part of his plan or he allowed for it to happen but they did what he told them not to.

[the Ogre]

How can disobeying God not be rebellion? Plain and simple. It may have been part of his plan or he allowed for it to happen but they did what he told them not to.

But weren't they in a bit of a paradox: don't-eat-fruit/fill-the-earth?

[Dr T]

<div class='quotemain'>

How can disobeying God not be rebellion? Plain and simple. It may have been part of his plan or he allowed for it to happen but they did what he told them not to.

But weren't they in a bit of a paradox: don't-eat-fruit/fill-the-earth?

I'm not sure where you are getting the paradox sir. They were first told to not eat. Later they were told to fill the Earth. Those don't seem diametrically opposed.

[Guest Yediyd]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

How can disobeying God not be rebellion? Plain and simple. It may have been part of his plan or he allowed for it to happen but they did what he told them not to.

But weren't they in a bit of a paradox: don't-eat-fruit/fill-the-earth?

I'm not sure where you are getting the paradox sir. They were first told to not eat. Later they were told to fill the Earth. Those don't seem diametrically opposed. Dr T, we LDS believe that Adam and Eve were in an innocent state before they partook of the fruit, they had no sex....they had no clue about their sexuality...that happened when they learned that they were naked. G-d gave them a pardox...don't eat of the fruit....to stay innocent...but if you do, then you won't bare children. Eat of the fruit...you will die, but you will fullfill my commandment ti fill the Earth....Either way they had a hard choice to make.

Adam knew EXACTLY what he was doing when he partook of the fruit...he fell, but it was a fall forward. He did it to progress G-d's plan.

The parodox was: whatever Adam chose to do...he would break G-d's law...either he would eat of the forbidden fruit and bare the children G-d told him to bare...or he would stay innocent and not obey G-d about filling the Earth...He chose to fill the Earth. His was an un-selfish decision. He put his children (us) ahead of himself.

[prisonchaplain]

<div class='quotemain'>

No, I'll let God be the judge:

Good - then you will never again fall for the temptation to call the action of Adam and Eve a rebellion?

Apples and oranges. I'll call sin sin, but leave to God the judging of individuals.

I have felt the goodness of your heart so many times PC that I talk directly - not as a critical enemy but as a friend the is confused with you statements. Let me summarize again this confusion that I face:

1. That what happened in the Garden was the will and plan of G-d the Father. You stated that you could not believe that G-d wanted his son to suffer. This is because of your goodness and only part understanding. (See Luke 22:42). As good and wonderful as Jesus was, he thought there must be some other way other than his suffering according to the will of the Father and that such harsh suffering did not make sense to him either. You have a lot in common with Jesus. But Jesus submitted his will to the will of the Father. One must understand that Jesus allowed himself to suffer - only because it WAS the will of the Father. Otherwise he would not have done it (by his own admission).

Traveler, surely you know that I believe God was willing for Jesus to be sacrificed for our sins. My argument was and remains that God would have preferred that Adam & Eve not sin in the first place. He always has plans available for whether we choose to sin or not sin. Jesus was sent because God so loved the world. We agree on this. Our disagreement is concerning whether or not Adam and Eve even truly sinned. I say they did and grievously so, while you seem to suggest that they were pawns in God's plan to thwart Satan.

2. That the will and plan of G-d is constant and does not change for worldly or evil circumstances. G-d is the same yesterday, today and forever. G-d does not change his plans or his will because of Satan. It is contrary to scripture to teach and believe that G-d had one plan but had to abandon it for a second because of Satan. The concept of G-d abandoning "Plan A" for "Plan B" is not true in any sense of declaring it. There has only been one plan of G-d from before the "foundations of the earth". I submit in all honesty and by all that I believe that any doctrine or society that teaches that G-d has changed his will or plan - ever - at any time concerning his purpose in man is not a true doctrine or a society associated with the true G-d. The story of Adam and Eve is no exception.

Ironically, you--a member of a church that argues more for free will (agency) than any other, are contending that ultimately, everything truly is predestined. I tread on thin theological ground here, and offer the caveat that my language is not precise, but I see too often in Scripture the notion that we play important roles in God's plan. Prayer is the primary example. It truly does "change things." We pray for the sick and they are healed. We're even told that if our prayers are double-minded they won't have the effect we want. God foreknows all, and so, it might be right to say that ultimately there has always been but one course for history to follow. Nevertheless, free agency is an absolute truth--and Adam and Eve had all that they needed, prior to the Fall, to exercise theirs.

3. The act of Adam and Eve was not a rebellion against G-d. I submit that anyone that has come to know G-d by what ever power of knowledge is given to them has afterwards been deceived by Satan. None of us, regardless of our religion or even belief in the Christ have "rebelled" less - Even and especially though we have full knowledge of Good and Evil that Adam and Eve did not have.

I do not read into the phrase "deceived by Satan" any innocence. This deception is akin to seduction. He woos us with temptation. We give in, then say, "The Devil made me do it." Did the Devil really make us cheat on our taxes, snap at our wives, and play solitaire on company time? Are these not all "tiny rebellions" against our God, who expects so much better of us?

4. It was not the will of G-d that Adam and Eve remain forever in Eden. But Satan knew the plan and will of G-d the Father and he took steps to prevent what G-d had planned. If one cannot see what I have outlined in the first three points they will not understand what Satan is about even in our very day for he is attempting to disrupt the same plan of G-d today in the same manner he was about in the Garden. The garden epoch is a type and a shadow of all of us. Even the name Adam means "mankind". The garden epoch is as much a warning to us of our fall (even though we may have a relationship with G-d) as it is a story of Adam's fall. It is my belief that if we see the offering of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as the primary temptation of Adam and Eve - we have missed the most important point of the fall and we do not understand the will and plan of G-d nor do we realize the cleverness and deceptions of Satan.

The Traveler

I'm simple minded. God told them not to eat from the tree. That was his will--his perfect will. He wasn't practicing "child psychology" on them. (You know--forbid them to eat vegetables, so they will?) He really wanted them to obey. He was ready for their fall, and was willing to offer the costly sacrifice of his Son for our redemption. But the Garden was no ruse.

Thank you for your passion and conviction, Traveler. You may will believe that Satan has clouded my mind with traditional apostate theology. However, minus the revelations of Joseph Smith, do you not see that my understanding is also the most direct reading of the Genesis account?

[Traveler]

Again I see we disagree. I believe in agency - I do not believe in choice without knowledge. Such choices are not agency. We cannot make choices of agency in matters that we do not understand. There is no agency in ignorance - especially when it comes to good and evil. I do not believe G-d expects us to make any decision (especially that have direct consequences in the eternities) based on ignorance and not truth. It is the knowledge of truth that will make us free – regardless of what we think we believe. I am sure G-d intends that we make our choices in the light of truth and not the darkness of ignorance. It is that single point that will not allow me to find acceptance of many churches. I have tried to indicate that there were more commandments than not eating the fruit. There were commandment given to Adam and Eve prior to that concerning the fruit – There was more than the fruit that Satan was about and Satan is still tempting in that regard. I find this whole discussion a criticism over a nat while we swallow a camel. In short I think you have missed the whole point of the scripture because you are so caught up in an interpretation that does not allow seeing greater things.

What we see with our eyes and hear with our ears is our agency and our choice. It appears that each of us has exercised our agency. I see the title of “Son of Man” a direct reference to Adam and a title of great honor – not disgrace.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Our differing views are over whether or not Adam & Eve were culpable for their consumption of the fruit in the Garden. The crux is whether they were truly ignorant or not. My contention is that they had sufficient knowledge to choose righteousness. I am "stuck in this interpretation" because it is what I see in Scripture.

[Traveler]

Our differing views are over whether or not Adam & Eve were culpable for their consumption of the fruit in the Garden. The crux is whether they were truly ignorant or not. My contention is that they had sufficient knowledge to choose righteousness. I am "stuck in this interpretation" because it is what I see in Scripture.

Blame is so easy - especially when we can point to someone else. I agree our views are different. I am sure the scriptures tell us that Eve acted out of confusion and was deceived. How are Adam and Eve more culpable that thoses that took the life of Christ - yet Jesus said, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do". The Scriptures also tell us that Adam and Eve did not have the knowledge necessary for proper differentiation between good and evil. The tree of "Knowledge of Good and Evil" was no pretense. How can anyone be saved when we are just as or more culpable than they? Because of believe and relationship to G-d? Do you want to compair your relationship and belief in G-d with that that of Adam and Eve? Let's be consistant with our point of culpable.

The problem I have with your view is that you change it for yourself, thinking you will be allowed to live with G-d for what you are culpable of but you think that G-d did the right thing with Adam and Eve. As long as someone else gets the blame, right? In general I dislike this attitude in religion that those that really should know better are made less culpable.

There are so many things that play into this point of view of blaiming Adam and Eve - and so we differ. You see - you see hardship as a curse - I see it as a blessing. You see the Fall as the worse possible that could happen - I see it as one of the best - not the very best but the second best possible - making what is the very best possible.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Blame is so easy - especially when we can point to someone else.

Do you really see it that way? The teaching that Adam and Eve knowlingly disobeyed God's direct command, and thus lost their eternal paradise, and were put out of the Garden, is as old as--well as old as Genesis. You really see this direct reading as some kind of gleeful finger-pointing exercise? These are our parents, after all.

I agree our views are different. I am sure the scriptures tell us that Eve acted out of confusion and was deceived. How are Adam and Eve more culpable that thoses that took the life of Christ - yet Jesus said, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do".

If, as you imply, they were truly, absolutely, and completely ignorant, then no forgiveness is necessary. Rather, Jesus is declaring that the do not realize they were executing the Savior, the Son of God. They do not fully realize that he is their scapegoat--an innocent, dying for their sins. He's not declaring them innocent, but rather woefully in need of forgiveness for their sins--sins worse than they realize.

The Scriptures also tell us that Adam and Eve did not have the knowledge necessary for proper differentiation between good and evil. The tree of "Knowledge of Good and Evil" was no pretense. How can anyone be saved when we are just as or more culpable than they? Because of believe and relationship to G-d? Do you want to compair your relationship and belief in G-d with that that of Adam and Eve? Let's be consistant with our point of culpable.

Your argument is akin to that of a first-time drug user, or arsoist, etc. They had never actually done the crime before, and so did not have sufficient knowledge to be declared guilty. No, no. The law is clear. They had relationship with God and his command. What the tree gave them was the EXPERIENCE of evil-doing.

The problem I have with your view is that you change it for yourself, thinking you will be allowed to live with G-d for what you are culpable of but you think that G-d did the right thing with Adam and Eve. As long as someone else gets the blame, right? In general I dislike this attitude in religion that those that really should know better are made less culpable.

Then perhaps you misunderstand my (our) view. I believe that Adam and Eve very likely will be in the kingdom of God forever. That the continued to offer sacrifices, and taught their children to do likewise, suggests as much. Furthermore, in the midst of their punishment, God offers a promise that the offspring of

Eve (Jesus) would crush Satan. God will forgive the repentent, and it does appear that Adam & Eve forsook their independence quest.

Further, why do you suggest I hold A&E to a different standard than myself? I do not understand the accusaton at all. I too must repent and be forgiven for my acts of rebellion against God.

There are so many things that play into this point of view of blaiming Adam and Eve - and so we differ. You see - you see hardship as a curse - I see it as a blessing. You see the Fall as the worse possible that could happen - I see it as one of the best - not the very best but the second best possible - making what is the very best possible.

The Traveler

God can indeed take what was meant for evil or difficulty, and garner glory for himself and redemption for us. But, A&E were wrong. I cannot get away from that. I thank God that the parented us all, and for God's redemption. But, I cannot help but label sin sin. And, disobedience is surely sin.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

Blame is so easy - especially when we can point to someone else.

Do you really see it that way? The teaching that Adam and Eve knowlingly disobeyed God's direct command, and thus lost their eternal paradise, and were put out of the Garden, is as old as--well as old as Genesis. You really see this direct reading as some kind of gleeful finger-pointing exercise? These are our parents, after all.

Yes I really do see it that way. Reading Genesis I see Adam's response as an attempt to do everything (not just the fruit of the tree thing) G-d commanded. Check to see how Adam responded to G-d's Questions. And Eve was deceived by Satan. She was tricked. How you can see this any other way is an astonishing to me. There was no rebellion. There may be confusion in their efforts but I do not see the intent to disobey. I greatly sorrow that you find in Adam and Eve rebellion and that you cannot find similar rebellion among your fellow Christians that believe the same doctrine you espouse.

If, as you imply, they were truly, absolutely, and completely ignorant, then no forgiveness is necessary. Rather, Jesus is declaring that the do not realize they were executing the Savior, the Son of God. They do not fully realize that he is their scapegoat--an innocent, dying for their sins. He's not declaring them innocent, but rather woefully in need of forgiveness for their sins--sins worse than they realize.

I am simply saying that Adam and Eve were no more guilty and should be held to no more punishment than those that brought death to Jesus. I find it interesting and inconsistent that some Christians believe Adam and Eve formed a evil alliance of rebellion with Satan - yet G-d (Jesus) forgave and would not hold accountable those that spit upon him and put him to death.

Your argument is akin to that of a first-time drug user, or arsoist, etc. They had never actually done the crime before, and so did not have sufficient knowledge to be declared guilty. No, no. The law is clear. They had relationship with God and his command. What the tree gave them was the EXPERIENCE of evil-doing.

So far this is a statement I agree with. The law has demands. They did break the law and for that came the fall because G-d is just and bound by law (a very important and necessary notion in understanding the truth of G-d) But they did not do it with knowledge and that is the point. It does appear that this understanding of the law and what happens when law is broken is not always applied. I believe that if a person believes in Jesus Christ - has a relationship with him and already has knowledge of good and evil and then breaks the law - they are more guilty and rebellious than Adam and Eve. This is the point that causes me to wonder about the doctrine of many Christians - that they cannot see their own rebellion - but they see ever body else's very well.

Then perhaps you misunderstand my (our) view. I believe that Adam and Eve very likely will be in the kingdom of God forever. That the continued to offer sacrifices, and taught their children to do likewise, suggests as much. Furthermore, in the midst of their punishment, God offers a promise that the offspring of

Eve (Jesus) would crush Satan. God will forgive the repentent, and it does appear that Adam & Eve forsook their independence quest.

Further, why do you suggest I hold A&E to a different standard than myself? I do not understand the accusaton at all. I too must repent and be forgiven for my acts of rebellion against God.

As I argue my point you have not really seen my point of view. I do not believe in rebellions in ignorance. I do not believe Adam and Eve rebelled. From what I know of you I do not believe that you rebel either. I believe that you (as I have) have broken the law. There is so much more here but until we can get past the concept of what really happened with Adam and Eve and that G-d had a plan for man that extended into the eternities beyond Eden - we are stuck. The other differences that we may find in our doctrines really do not matter.

I am grateful for the many thing upon which we agree.

The Traveler

[the Ogre]

Sorry for getting in the debate halfway, but I've been busy.

Apples and oranges. I'll call sin sin, but leave to God the judging of individuals.

Who are we to determine the sin in others other then than the sin we commit ourselves. I cannot be held accountable for the sins of Adam and Eve and as such nor should I be concerned. " believe will be punished for [myown] sins, and not for Adam's transgression" (Article of Faith 2). As such, why should I be concerned about the minutia?

I say they did and grievously so, while you seem to suggest that they were pawns in God's plan to thwart Satan.

I like the idea of "willing" pawns. Like yourself, PC, you have accepted a call to be a minister. Could not Adam and Eve done the same (a type and shadow of reading between the lines)?

I do not read into the phrase "deceived by Satan" any innocence. This deception is akin to seduction. He woos us with temptation. We give in, then say, "The Devil made me do it." Did the Devil really make us cheat on our taxes, snap at our wives, and play solitaire on company time? Are these not all "tiny rebellions" against our God, who expects so much better of us?

Sounds good.

However, minus the revelations of Joseph Smith, do you not see that my understanding is also the most direct reading of the Genesis account?

I don't know. I think you are reading a lot into it. The account is fairly sparse. We don't know everything that went on, just the highlights. The only way LDS theology regarding the fall is if one believes Joseph Smith is a prophet of G-d, and I do.

I do accept the idea of personal beliefs and interpretation, but one must recognize h/she is reading between the lines.

[the Ogre]

Our differing views are over whether or not Adam & Eve were culpable for their consumption of the fruit in the Garden. The crux is whether they were truly ignorant or not. My contention is that they had sufficient knowledge to choose righteousness. I am "stuck in this interpretation" because it is what I see in Scripture.

I like the romantic idea of this notion, except for: "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves" (NIV.Gen.3:6-7).

Opened from what to what? Only nudity? They were already aware of everything else? Except the nudity bit?

I buy that Satan could have been lying when he said: "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil" (NIV.Gen.3:5). Maybe Satan lied, he is known for having a pretty broad dishonesty streak in him.

My point is, we don't know what they knew or didn't know (except the nudity bit, we know about that).

[Annabelli]

Again I see we disagree. I believe in agency - I do not believe in choice without knowledge. Such choices are not agency. We cannot make choices of agency in matters that we do not understand. There is no agency in ignorance - especially when it comes to good and evil. I do not believe G-d expects us to make any decision (especially that have direct consequences in the eternities) based on ignorance and not truth. It is the knowledge of truth that will make us free – regardless of what we think we believe. I am sure G-d intends that we make our choices in the light of truth and not the darkness of ignorance. It is that single point that will not allow me to find acceptance of many churches. I have tried to indicate that there were more commandments than not eating the fruit. There were commandment given to Adam and Eve prior to that concerning the fruit – There was more than the fruit that Satan was about and Satan is still tempting in that regard. I find this whole discussion a criticism over a nat while we swallow a camel. In short I think you have missed the whole point of the scripture because you are so caught up in an interpretation that does not allow seeing greater things.

What we see with our eyes and hear with our ears is our agency and our choice. It appears that each of us has exercised our agency. I see the title of “Son of Man” a direct reference to Adam and a title of great honor – not disgrace.

The Traveler

It is the knowledge of truth that will make us free.............What does that mean? Make us free from what?

[Alaskagain]

<div class='quotemain'>

<snipped>

Again I see we disagree. I believe in agency - I do not believe in choice without knowledge. Such choices are not agency. We cannot make choices of agency in matters that we do not understand. There is no agency in ignorance - especially when it comes to good and evil. I do not believe G-d expects us to make any decision (especially that have direct consequences in the eternities) based on ignorance and not truth. It is the knowledge of truth that will make us free – regardless of what we think we believe. I am sure G-d intends that we make our choices in the light of truth and not the darkness of ignorance. It is that single point that will not allow me to find acceptance of many churches. I have tried to indicate

It is the knowledge of truth that will make us free.............What does that mean? Make us free from what?

I think I see. <<ray of light streaming into the room>> I think what Traveler means is not that it makes us free FROM anything. But, that Knowledge of truth is what defines our free agency.

- But then, does our accountability in our choices, that we are free to make by our own agency, hinge on the depth of our knowledge of truth? So lack of knowledge of truth actually limits our accountability? i.e., Ignorance is bliss?

Actually, I see now Traveler, that you have already explained very concisely further in the same paragraph. I just wasn't seeing it. <Prime example of: We see what we want to see and learn what we are ready to learn.>

<snipped>

I am sure G-d intends that we make our choices in the light of truth and not the darkness of ignorance. It is that single point that will not allow me to find acceptance of many churches. I have tried to indicate that there were more commandments than not eating the fruit. There were commandment given to Adam and Eve prior to that concerning the fruit – There was more than the fruit that Satan was about and Satan is still tempting in that regard. I find this whole discussion a criticism over a nat while we swallow a camel. In short I think you have missed the whole point of the scripture because you are so caught up in an interpretation that does not allow seeing greater things.

What we see with our eyes and hear with our ears is our agency and our choice. It appears that each of us has exercised our agency. I see the title of “Son of Man” a direct reference to Adam and a title of great honor – not disgrace.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

Alaskagain: There are several elements that must be present for a choice:

1. There must be more than one real and actual possibility.

2. There must be knowledge of all the real and actual possibilities as well as their consequences.

What I have tried to point out the difference is the difference between choice and guess. Choosing what is unknown behind closed doors is not a choice. In the game shows often the player is disappointed because their guess was not their real choice of what they really wanted.

The word agency has more than just choice. For example if you go to an insurance agency to buy insurance they will make a binding contract with the company the represent. The "agent” has the legal authority to represent. If we think we are making a binding contract with G-d for our salvation and the representative (proxy) of G-d is not authorized there is not binding contract and no exercise of agency.

Jesus though this principle when he said not everyone that uses his “name” is accepted in heaven. His response was “I never knew you” which is an indication that they were never authorized and not that G-d’s knowledge was limited in a manner that was not capable on including them.

There are two directions in choices – one will result in freedom and independence the other the opposite of freedom or a bondage (slavery or dependence). If we do not understand the choices we cannot exercise divine agency which is exactly what Satan’s plan was, is and will always be.

The Traveler

[Alaskagain]

Thank you very much Traveler. This is very thought provoking for me.

[Guest TheLordSaves]

We are all acountable for our sins. Adam and Eve knew God and still disobeyed Him. Even though Eve was deceived by the Devil, she still chose to consciously sin. They heard His voice, and still chose to disobey Him. Just because Satan will tempt us and confuse us, does not give us excuse for sin. Even more so, we should not even allow the confusion of the Devil to take root if indeed we have the Spirit in us. Sin is sin, unknowingly or not.

[Traveler]

We are all acountable for our sins. Adam and Eve knew God and still disobeyed Him. Even though Eve was deceived by the Devil, she still chose to consciously sin. They heard His voice, and still chose to disobey Him. Just because Satan will tempt us and confuse us, does not give us excuse for sin. Even more so, we should not even allow the confusion of the Devil to take root if indeed we have the Spirit in us. Sin is sin, unknowingly or not.

I see this as very harsh doctrine. Mostly I object when one only applies such doctrine to others and not themself - especially if they continue in a doctrine that they (knowing better and knowing what is of G-d and what is of Satan) will find excuse for their sins because they believe - where-as non believers will burn in hell for lesser things because they are ignorant.

I, for one, am very sure that the mercy of G-d will be directed towards those that acted as Adam and Eve did - because they were deceived and tricked. But those that know better - having knowledge of good and evil act out of rebellion - I see no purpose or reason in mercy for them - unless they completely repent and turn forever away from such evil. And part of turning away from evil is not becoming an accuser of others. Note that one of the titles given to Jesus was advocate and one title given to Satan is the title of accuser. For that reason I personally am skeptical of those that accuse others - rather I find trust in those that, like myself, beg for and believe in mercy for all that try regardless of a lack of understanding - not just for ourselves.

The Traveler

[Guest TheLordSaves]

I see this as very harsh doctrine. Mostly I object when one only applies such doctrine to others and not themself - especially if they continue in a doctrine that they (knowing better and knowing what is of G-d and what is of Satan) will find excuse for their sins because they believe - where-as non believers will burn in hell for lesser things because they are ignorant.

It is harsh, but it's in the Bible. Did God let Adam and Eve stay in the Garden anyway, no he cast them out even in their ignorance. We all have a conscience that tells us what's good and what's bad. Whenever we sin, we have broken a Law and must receive the proper punishment. To put it like this, if I never knew what killing was, but I stilled killed someone anyway, not out of an accident, but out of anger saying "I didn't know they were going to die?" Should I be held unnacountable? No. As Christians, we don't have an excuse, the blood of Jesus is not an "excuse" to sin. It is such that as if we were in a court facing a sentense for our crimes, the judge comes down and takes off his robes and says that he will talk your punishment instead of you. Now many Christians falsely say that it doesn't matter if they sin because they have the grace of God. That is a half-truth, and is a doctrine that will make someone lost. If you have Christ in you, you are accountable for your sins, but what's the difference between you and the non-believer is that you have Christ who took your punishment for you, not the ability to sin and get away with it. To continue sinning is evidence that you may not even be saved, and are rejecting the atonement of Christ.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

I see this as very harsh doctrine. Mostly I object when one only applies such doctrine to others and not themself - especially if they continue in a doctrine that they (knowing better and knowing what is of G-d and what is of Satan) will find excuse for their sins because they believe - where-as non believers will burn in hell for lesser things because they are ignorant.

It is harsh, but it's in the Bible. Did God let Adam and Eve stay in the Garden anyway, no he cast them out even in their ignorance. We all have a conscience that tells us what's good and what's bad. Whenever we sin, we have broken a Law and must receive the proper punishment. To put it like this, if I never knew what killing was, but I stilled killed someone anyway, not out of an accident, but out of anger saying "I didn't know they were going to die?" Should I be held unnacountable? No. As Christians, we don't have an excuse, the blood of Jesus is not an "excuse" to sin. It is such that as if we were in a court facing a sentense for our crimes, the judge comes down and takes off his robes and says that he will talk your punishment instead of you. Now many Christians falsely say that it doesn't matter if they sin because they have the grace of God. That is a half-truth, and is a doctrine that will make someone lost. If you have Christ in you, you are accountable for your sins, but what's the difference between you and the non-believer is that you have Christ who took your punishment for you, not the ability to sin and get away with it. To continue sinning is evidence that you may not even be saved, and are rejecting the atonement of Christ.

You have a different Bible - I guess. The Bible I have records one of the last statements of Jesus before he died was to forgive those that did not know what they were doing. Adam and Eve did not have a conscience that indicated the difference between Good and Evil. If G-d could not be merciful to them because of the law how can he be merciful to you having both a conscience and the law? The truth is there but I think you have missed it.

The difference has nothing to do with Christ for Christ is a constant element to all mankind. The difference is in the individual that comes unto Christ (prepares themselves) by the works and deeds of faith and repentance. But hay - anyone can argue using the Bible. The experts in scripture 2000 years ago sought the life of Christ - If your righteousness do not exceed theirs (which by the way you would not even have a Bible if it was not for their righteousness) you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven - for G-d himself has declaired it. (See Matt 5:20)

The Traveler