"Free will was given to man by god."

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6351
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:20 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:54 am
But did you think the "resistors" were being mean, or do you think they were just thrown off and a little taken aback? Do you believe they were nice people who did the wrong thing, or bad people who did what they intended, and offended you?
This is hard to say. I knew that I wasn’t understood and church officials developed an attitude to what they didn’t understand. Is this being mean or defensive? It is hard to say.
Well, so long as you don't feel personally wounded, I guess it doesn't matter. But if you did, then it would probably make a difference whether you thought their reaction to you was intentional or not.
I don't think we'd drilled down into the question of the nature of evil, so I don't think we've indicated any differences yet. So far, I think we've just talked about the different meanings of the two trees. But for the record, I would suggest that evil is both a product of what we do and of who we are.
You seem to be leading to subjective concepts of evil
Heavens, no. I can't imagine what made you think so. Absolutely not.
while I am referring to objective good and evil defined as a quality of relative being and human being for us. For example consider 1 Corinthians 15:
35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?”
Paul is describing the evolution,
Not at all. He's describing resurrection...quite a different thing, I think you'll find. Check the context, and you'll see for sure.
The legalists said that only what you DO counts; Jesus said that what you DO comes out of what you ARE.
Yes, this is the problem. We don’t know what we ARE and even avoid confronting the human condition within ourselves which would reveal what we ARE so we could begin to become ourselves.
Hmmm...the wording here doesn't make sense to me. And I'm pretty sure it's not what I meant. I simply meant that thieves steal. The action, stealing, is an expression of the inner character, that of a thief. So "sin" is a matter of both. But that's not quite what you're saying, I think.

So I've got to ask, how can we "begin to become ourselves," when we already are ourselves? And how would knowing what we already "are" make us more able to "become" what we already are?

Can you untangle that idea for me? It looks, at least on the surface, to be contradictory.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by RCSaunders » Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:51 pm

Belinda wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:56 am
In view of the fact that so many people do use The Bible as an authority would it be better to enter a caveat that this is NOT my intention?
Unfortunately there is a tendency among those who call themselves philosophers to intentionally, "misunderstand," so they can attack their misrepresentation of another's points. If I've misunderstood you, it's my fault, but a caveat might not be a bad idea just for the sake of avoiding unnecessary explanation.

By the way, there is one case where the Bible can be used as an authority. When the debate concerns what is actually written there, it is the authority.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2832
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by -1- » Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:37 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:14 pm
-1- wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:00 am
Will Guffo or somebody else please tell me where the idea of "free will" emerged in christian thinking, and what Christians use as explanation to it in the bible?
Torah, Genesis 1.
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness..."

This is a much-discussed passage. Naive readers may think it means, "Let us (haShem) make man with two legs, two arms, and so on, like us." That's obviously contradictory to all that is said later about the nature of haShem, so that can't be it. So in what sense is it being said that man will be, "in haShem's image"?

Free will. Creativity. Personal identity. Moral capability. Choice...These are some of the qualities that have been postulated as being "in the image" of the qualities inherently possessed by God. And you can see the commonality -- they all have to do not with physical likeness but with unique spiritual identity...they have to do with mind, volition, distinctness of individuality, ability to choose and relate, and so on. But what's generally acknowledged by any commentator that thinks there's any seriousness in Genesis 1 at all, that it does not have to do with bodily identity.

So that is likely to be the first mention. But there are many others that follow. For example, every single time an individual is imputed as having a choice or moral responsibility, or for taking unique actions, this implies free will. Absent from the Biblical account is the idea of human beings that cannot be made accountable to God, because they could not have done anything but what they did.

Fair enough?
1. You did not supply a direct quote that deals with free will.

2. What you supplied was a statement that is VERY much up for debate; how do you decide or reject similarity between two entities. It is an epistemological / antephauphthsys nightmare. Trying to win an argument coming down to hard facts what god meant when he said "let man be created in my own image" is ab ovo impossible. This is definitely a statement much discussed and not decidable by mortal humans.

3. You supplied your own commentary; my question to you included the request of no commentaries. Without your commentary (and, incidentally, with it, too) the passage you quoted to me does not say "god created man with free will."

4. God has no free will. It has no morals, it is super-moral and all-knowing. If he knows ALL, he knows his own next thought; to him time is not a dimension, as any time in the future or in the past is as clear to him as the present. So he KNOWS what will happen; therefore he makes no choices. The ability to make choices is the ability to choose an act between two or more possible ones. But to god only one possibility exists in any choice, as he has to make the choice that happens.

In other words, we, humans, have no choice NOW for deciding what to do in the PAST. For god, the FUTURE, the NOW, and the PAST are equivalent to the PAST, so he has no choices at all.

This is a difficult concept.

If making choices is what's similar between god and man, then man can't make choices, either. I. e. There is no free will.

Therefore the passage you quoted to me not only is a far cry from what I asked for, but your commentary proves that it is the opposite to what I asked for.

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:20 am

I C
Well, so long as you don't feel personally wounded, I guess it doesn't matter. But if you did, then it would probably make a difference whether you thought their reaction to you was intentional or not.
I think people with my experiences are wounded for a while since they are alone and feel guilty for having doubts leading to questions. But there are avenues for these people to pursue capable of answering questions. The problem is finding them and making them more available

There are many atheists who become believers because they were able to move beyond the superficiality and negativity of what they were being taught.

Jacob Needleman for example was an atheist. He was turned off by what he knew about Judaism and Christianity. When he was hired to teach a course on religion he had to explore Christianity from the writings of the Church Fathers. He quickly learned that Christianity was far deeper than he had known. It changed his mind as to the ancient truths which had become distorted by society.
Not at all. He's describing resurrection...quite a different thing, I think you'll find. Check the context, and you'll see for sure.
But the resurrection is the evolution of one quality of being into a higher quality of being. Some versions of modern Christendom deny the importance of the resurrection as the aim of Christianity and only concentrate on worldly morality. Again from 1 Corinthians 15:
12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either.17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
So when the resurrection is removed from Christianity, what is left is the morality of secular humanism
Hmmm...the wording here doesn't make sense to me. And I'm pretty sure it's not what I meant. I simply meant that thieves steal. The action, stealing, is an expression of the inner character, that of a thief. So "sin" is a matter of both. But that's not quite what you're saying, I think.

So I've got to ask, how can we "begin to become ourselves," when we already are ourselves? And how would knowing what we already "are" make us more able to "become" what we already are?

Can you untangle that idea for me? It looks, at least on the surface, to be contradictory.
It would require more than a post to do justice to your question so this answer will be simplistic. First of all the Bible raises questions. It doesn’t supply answers. If it were to teach certain techniques they would be abused which is why esoteric Christianity is an oral teaching.

A person can learn important ideas from Platonic Christianity. Not to get into that now I’ll just post a thread to show how many church fathers were aware of the relationship between Plato, Plotinus, and Christianity.

http://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/cp.htm
The following is a list of Christian philosophers, theologians, and writers with Platonist/Neoplatonist interests or influences. Their main works, and especially those relevant to the topic of Christian Platonism, are also shown.
According to Plato Man exists as a tripartite soul rather then as inner unity. Thought, emotion, and sensation are not connected. As a result we live in opposition with ourselves. Rather than being consciously connected the tripartite soul becomes connected by imagination. As a result we cannot remain open to the help of grace. Imagination prevents it. Our task is to harmonize the tripartite soul so we function realistically rather than governed by habitual reactions. When we become ourselves, a conscious whole, then receiving the help of grace would be normal. As of now it is only our potential.

From book 1V of the Republic
“having first attained to self-mastery and beautiful order within himself, and having harmonized these three principles, the notes or intervals of three terms quite literally the lowest, the highest, and the mean, and all others there may be between them, and having linked and bound all three together and made of himself a unit, one man instead of many, self-controlled and in unison, he should then and then only turn to practice if he find aught to do either in the getting of wealth or the tendance of the body or it may be in political action or private business, in all such doings believing and naming the just and honorable action to be that which preserves and helps to produce this condition of soul.”
To become oneself a person must acquire self mastery and harmonized these three principles. We can see how far we are from it and why we remain attached to the shadows on the wall for meaning.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6351
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:29 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:20 am
Not at all. He's describing resurrection...quite a different thing, I think you'll find. Check the context, and you'll see for sure.
But the resurrection is the evolution of one quality of being into a higher quality of being.
No, it's the opposite. Evolution is, by definition, gradualism produced by natural causes. Resurrection is instantaneous, and caused by God.
Some versions of modern Christendom deny the importance of the resurrection
Maybe. But they're not Christian, then, by the Apostle Paul's definition.

He regarded the resurrection as a sine qua non of Christianity, as you say in the subsequent passage you quote from 1 Corinthians.
So when the resurrection is removed from Christianity, what is left is the morality of secular humanism
Something worse, I would suggest: it's incoherent humanism, coloured by a completely gratuitous religiosity.
Can you untangle that idea for me? It looks, at least on the surface, to be contradictory.
It would require more than a post to do justice to your question so this answer will be simplistic.

First of all the Bible raises questions. It doesn’t supply answers.
I think it does both. It gives answers, but also raises questions to make us think about them.

It's not an "esoteric" text. One can try to read it like that -- for that matter, one can read an Ikea manual "esoterically," if one wishes. But one is not approaching the text for what it presents itself as being, then.
According to Plato Man exists as a tripartite soul
I think Plato was merely speculating. I see no justification for treating him as a religious text, though he spoke of religious matters at times.

We may be tripartite, or we may not: but if we are, I don't think that "Plato said so" is a reason for us to believe it.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6351
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:40 pm

-1- wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:52 am

1. You did not supply a direct quote that deals with free will.
...in your opinion. That, as I said, is a matter of debate. I think it does.

But let's pretend it doesn't, and that you have reason to know it doesn't. Okay. Then every single time the Torah holds man responsible for his own choices, starting with the Garden of Eden, you have an affirmation of free will. So any way you slice it, that's in the Torah from the first book of Moses.

The fact that your words, the words, "God created man with free will" do not appear is inconsequential. You wouldn't expect God to need your words to say what He wants to say, would you?

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:17 pm

I C
No, it's the opposite. Evolution is, by definition, gradualism produced by natural causes. Resurrection is instantaneous, and caused by God.
As I understand it what science calls evolution is limited to mechanical evolution. This is the process of parts of a whole originating on the earth becoming what they are capable of. Involution is the process by which the evolved returns to its source – the earth. From dust to dust. A perennial plant is a good example it grows to produce what it is capable of. It then involves back into the earth only to repeat the cycle.

The level of earth is a unique universal quality in that it is the level at which mechanical evolution can lead to conscious evolution.

Matthew 11:11
11 Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
John was born from below and has reached the pinnacle of his conscious understanding. He has yet to experience the next step of being born from above which is the beginning of conscious evolution.

Jesus Resurrection was a process beginning with the crucifixion and the struggle in his being between above and below. It was finally reconciled by the Holy Spirit making the resurrection possible and clearing the inner Christian path which leads back to our origin. We are invited to follow and reconcile our higher and lower natures for the purpose of our conscious evolution.
It's not an "esoteric" text. One can try to read it like that -- for that matter, one can read an Ikea manual "esoterically," if one wishes. But one is not approaching the text for what it presents itself as being, then.
The New Testament was written in a way that bypasses the literal mind so a person can feel its meaning more deeply. This excerpt may appear odd to you if you are not familiar with these ideas but it explains why people have trouble with the New Testament. They are not open to its purpose.
The Gospels speak mainly of a possible inner evolution called "re-birth". This is their central idea. ... The Gospels are from beginning to end all about this possible self-evolution. They are psychological documents. They are about the psychology of this possible inner development --that is, about what a man must think, feel, and do in order to reach a new level of understanding. ... Everyone has an outer side that has been developed by his contact with life and an inner side which remains vague, uncertain, undeveloped. ... For that reason the teaching of inner evolution must be so formed that it does not fall solely on the outer side of man. It must fall there first, but be capable of penetrating more deeply and awakening the man himself --the inner, unorganized man. A man evolves internally through his deeper reflection, not through his outer life-controlled side. He evolves through the spirit of his understanding and by inner consent to what he sees as truth. The psychological meanings of the relatively fragmentary teaching recorded in the Gospels refers to this deeper, inner side of everyone.

- Maurice Nicoll; The New Man
I think Plato was merely speculating. I see no justification for treating him as a religious text, though he spoke of religious matters at times.

We may be tripartite, or we may not: but if we are, I don't think that "Plato said so" is a reason for us to believe it.
Don’t believe; verify by making efforts to “know thyself.” Have you ever observed yourself thinking one thing while emoting about something else while sensing something else? This is how we are. Often we think when we should feel, feel when we should think and sense instead of thinking and emoting. There is no reason to believe it. We can observe how we live disconnected as a plurality. This plurality lives by imagination preventing the energy of grace from entering into our being.
"Grace fills empty spaces, but it can only enter where there is a void to receive it We must continually suspend the work of the imagination in filling the void within ourselves."

"In no matter what circumstances, if the imagination is stopped from pouring itself out, we have a void (the poor in spirit). In no matter what circumstances... imagination can fill the void. This is why the average human beings can become prisoners, slaves, prostitutes, and pass thru no matter what suffering without being purified." ~ Simone Weil
Think of what a society would be like if it functioned with knowledge of the value of harmonizing ourselves for the sake of our conscious evolution and making the efforts to receive the help of grace to clean ourselves out of the results of self serving imagination. It would be a super civilization no longer possible as we are.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6351
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Immanuel Can » Wed Jun 19, 2019 12:44 am

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:17 pm
mechanical evolution can lead to conscious evolution.
We have no empirical data to justify that the trajectory of human morality is upward.
The New Testament was written in a way that bypasses the literal mind so a person can feel its meaning more deeply.
No, it was written in common language by very ordinary people, actually. Any specialness of the text is additional to that. It's not in the obscurity or esoteric baggage hidden in there.
The Gospels speak mainly of a possible inner evolution called "re-birth". This is their central idea. ... The Gospels are from beginning to end all about this possible self-evolution.
Well, I hate to be blunt, but it's clear you haven't read them, if you suppose that. That is one thing that they contradict quite clearly. Human beings are not getting anywhere on their own.
I think Plato was merely speculating. I see no justification for treating him as a religious text, though he spoke of religious matters at times.

We may be tripartite, or we may not: but if we are, I don't think that "Plato said so" is a reason for us to believe it.
Don’t believe; verify by making efforts to “know thyself.”
Really, that's terrible advice. If the truth were hidden inside us, don't you think we'd all be doing better? The problem is not self-knowledge: it's realism about who we are, and about what our real problems are. We're not willing to own up to our real moral position, take ownership of what we've done, recognize that it's our fault that we did it, and do anything about it.

The Bible calls that "sin." It's the self-willed belief (and the associated practices) that we have no need of God.

jayjacobus
Posts: 888
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by jayjacobus » Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:35 am

Job said "You are the God and I am the man."

Do you get it?

If not, you do not understand religion.

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by Nick_A » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:09 am

I C
We have no empirical data to justify that the trajectory of human morality is upward.
True. We also have no empirical data to justify wisdom as something higher than casual understanding. When a person experiences a higher perspective it is by definition higher for them. It isn’t necessary to try to prove it to someone without experience.
No, it was written in common language by very ordinary people, actually. Any specialness of the text is additional to that. It's not in the obscurity or esoteric baggage hidden in there.
You are underestimating the depth and profundity of the New Testament.
Well, I hate to be blunt, but it's clear you haven't read them, if you suppose that. That is one thing that they contradict quite clearly. Human beings are not getting anywhere on their own.
Quite true. We need help from above but insist on denying it.
Really, that's terrible advice. If the truth were hidden inside us, don't you think we'd all be doing better? The problem is not self-knowledge: it's realism about who we are, and about what our real problems are. We're not willing to own up to our real moral position, take ownership of what we've done, recognize that it's our fault that we did it, and do anything about it
.

If we are living as fallen Man and in opposition with ourselves, how can we do any better without first confronting the problem of the human condition? There is a continual struggle between our higher and lower parts that Paul described in Romans 7. It is why he called himself the Wretched Man and without help from above our situation is hopeless.

Forget about blame. The human condition is what it is and the essential question is what can we do with help from above to become normal?

Do you believe that it is essential at some point for a Christian to be born again to appreciate Christianity? What does being born again mean to you?

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV
John 3:1-21 New International Version (NIV)
Jesus Teaches Nicodemus
3 Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]”
4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”
5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[c]must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”[d]

gaffo
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by gaffo » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:04 am

-1- wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:00 am
"Free will was given to man by god." This I often hear from theists. I searched the bible and found no support for this from the word of the supposed god.

So this is inference? Or did I miss something.

Will Guffo
someone call my name?

Freewill is overrated and 3/4 of the "Bible" does not support that concept. most of the bible affirms predenstination/fatalism.

"god walled off the heart of pharoh", and so we get the 7 plagues/etc,




-1- wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:00 am
or somebody else please tell me where the idea of "free will" emerged in christian thinking, and what Christians use as explanation to it in the bible?
I confess ignorance in where in the Bible freewill is affirmed as dogma (I've not found it), and also confess ignorance where theologists/"the church" finds it.

if/when you find where, let me know please.

"Guffo"

gaffo
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by gaffo » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:13 am

Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
God determines everything that has happened or will ever happen.

and?


so he knows all near infinate outcomes men/man may take in their/his life.

those permutations are not infinate, but limited. God knows all of them even if man/men do not.

so man is limited - so no freewill IMO.

Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
So that men could choose to obey God, or not as the case may be,
Torah and Koran both affirm that God denies the "freewill" of some to find him" - for "His" larger purpose.

"Pharoh's heart was walled off from God" to allow God's Hebrews to rebel and return to Judea via the Exodus.


Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
God gave men Free Will by special dispensation so that men apart from all other created things could choose to obey God and not have to act from necessity like plants and cows and things.

so you saying that your God gave us Freewill as the "loser's prize" via "original sin/fall".

why not allow man to not have original sin, and be sinless like all the other animals?

gaffo
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by gaffo » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:14 am

HexHammer wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:59 pm
Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
"Free will was given to man by god."
LOL!??!?! ..god didn't want us to have free will, so he forbade us to eat the fruit of wisdom!
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THEN HE removed that OTHER TREE - the Tree of Life (Immortality!)...........out of fear man would become equal to him!!!!!!!!!

wise post Sir BTW, you have understanding IMO.

gaffo
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by gaffo » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:37 am

Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:19 pm
HexHammer wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:59 pm
Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
"Free will was given to man by god."
LOL!??!?! ..god didn't want us to have free will, so he forbade us to eat the fruit of wisdom!
The myth you refer to is not about God causing this or that. The story of the rebellion of Adam and his subsequent expulsion from Eden is a poetic story

bullshit, Genesis is a polytheist Judiac work adopted by the prior Akkadian and earlier Summarian tales of a similar kind.

the Jews included it in their "Bible" so they affirmed it.

BTW the "fall" was not a fall, the "snake" (not the Devil - who is Ahriman - and did not exist when this work was written) spoke the Truth, i.e. that when one eats of the ToK would would become "As one of the Gods" (if a dog or cat or rat eat of the ToK they would become "As Gods" too, but they did not, we did instead), so Snake spoke the truth, we ROSE to Demi-godhood.

and would become God's equal - and even challenge he and his sisters/brothers (Cananite Heavenly Court) - refer to the "We" and "us" through out the book of Genesis - fully Polytheistic.

so not a "Fall" and out of FEAR YHWH removed that OTHER TREE from Adam/eve's reach - the one of immortality!

Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
that describes how men find Free Will burdensome compared with Eden where men have no responsibility of choice.
hogwash, your God placed pain in childbirth, thorns for the farmer and animals as man's enemy - not due to our gained Godhood/Freewill, but because he was pissed we rose half way to him.

HE (your God) lied about "eating of the tree" would result in our death - we die because He removed THE OTHER TREE (ToL) from us!!!!!

Snake spoke the truth about the ToK all along.

Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
In the mythical Garden of Eden there would be no discussion about clinical abortion as God's necessity would prevail as in everything.There would be no sin as nothing could happen there that was not ordained by God.
as was stated by all the OT prophets and Jesus - i.e. the restoration of the Kingdom of God after the "Day of YHWH" (Apocalypse).

where the lion and the lamb will lie down together and both eat straw. i.e. prior to the "Fall" all aminals were vegitarians (and why the devout jews were vegitarians in Jesus' time), some animals due to the "Fall" were corrupted by our "sin" and become carnivores. Refer to Jubaless (per that work animals could speak with man and vise versa prior to the fall (St Francisis anyone?).

Jubaless is a good work BTW, i like it myself - should be in the Canon (as should be Enoch) - but sadly not for whatever reason.

gaffo
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: "Free will was given to man by god."

Post by gaffo » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:48 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:20 pm
HexHammer wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:59 pm
Belinda wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:17 am
"Free will was given to man by god."
LOL!??!?! ..god didn't want us to have free will, so he forbade us to eat the fruit of wisdom!
No. It doesn't say that. It says, "The tree of the knowledge of good and evil," not "the tree of wisdom."

Wisdom is positively lauded in the book of Proverbs, or in James. Biblically, it's celebrated.

indeed so about proverb/james, and nope about the Tok NOT being the same thing as ToW.

from simply reading of Genesis one can equate the ToK as giving man "Self awarness".............and so wisdom.

for only AFTER he/she eats of that tree do they become fearfull of God "awesomeness" and hid from him. prior they were dumb animals (no self awareness, no "eyes opened") and loved God as one of them, as my cat does me. if my cat ever eat of the ToK she will fear me as a God.


Immanuel Can wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:20 pm
Not so with two-sided moral knowledge. Man was to choose not to come to know how to disobey God. But, being a free-will being, he was also free to do so, because freedom entails choice. It was specifically negative moral knowledge that was forbidden. Man should have chosen obedience. He did not.
???? don't follow welcome clarification.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Age and 12 guests