So, then, how does one gain virtue, unless there is an alternative to virtue?
Do you mean to choose evil? Well that is the only other functional side to virtue because all the other alternatives I can think of to being virtuous is to either be innocent, like a human baby, or to be stupid like a fool, or to be dumb like an animal, or simply, to be evil.
At this point, the only opposition to virtue WAS the tree of conscience.
Careful, Doc I'm thinking that you're really not that far now from grasping my understanding.
And for that, I would say that the Tree of Conscience was not in opposition
to them acquiring virtue but was a part of the process
needed for them to acquire virtue.
It cannot be undone what the work of the fruit was supposed to accomplish in them, that is, end their innocence and give them a conscience.
There was only one shot at 'getting it right the first time', so to speak. After that it would require God to, one by one, seek and save each of us, changing us, one by one, through the spirit of Jesus, one way or another, into what He intended for us to be all long, through The Adam Completed.
And this is what Jesus meant when He said of the seeming impossibility
of a rich man to take hold of the kingdom of God, "With God, all things are possible." That is to say, God can
restore this rich man to Himself… and will.
So even though they didn't have virtue, how could they have gained virtue unless there was something to oppose it?
Do you mean here the nachash
Therefore, the ONLY way they could have gained virtue was from eating of the tree, which means that God must have planned for them to do it...
OK so, you don't mean the nachash
. Actually Doc I don't think you are grasping what virtue is.
I can only hope that I clarified that previously in this reply.
and not after they gained virtue, because there was no alternative (only goodness and innocence) unless they ate from the tree!
Actually there was
an alternative… obey Jehovah
, who they personally knew to be really great God; a God Who walked and talked with them… and maybe even raced with Ish down to that tree yonder and back while Ishsha flagged the winner… and trust Him
and don't eat the fruit of that
Virtue, Doc, is all about being free to choose that which is correct and right to do in any situation.
And for choosing 'right', for choosing to trust this awesome God, they and we would know things…
Like, of evil, objectively, for experiencing and doing good.
And you have already admitted that there is no virtue without conscience/ knowledge of good and evil.
Wow. I'm sorry, cause if I actually said that exactly
as you say I did, then I'm not communicating well, am I? So, could you provide me with the place where I said exactly
that that so I can see if I can salvage the damage done?
Cause what I know I would have meant
was that by acquiring virtue first, through making a choice to trust Jehovah against doubts not to, they could then acquire this conscience, with His permission -which permission would alleviate all doubts in their mind about Him- and thus, through eating, they would not only gain a conscience but have wisdom like God's for knowing the difference between good and evil so that they would know of evil objectively while being and doing good; just like the God Who made them to resemble Him.
Which all means...that God planned (and hence foreknew) for them to eat from the tree that he told them not to eat of, because he knew that was the only way that they could move from innocence to perfection.
So says you! LOL!
I don't agree that having them eat of the tree, against His command not to, "was the only
way that they could move from innocence to perfection". Obedience to His command
would have accomplished the same thing, don't you think?
And consider this, doesn't He still expect us to be obedient to His commands? Didn't His Son say, "If you love me you will keep my commands?"
Has not He Himself declared several humans to be righteous, even 'perfect' exactly because they do what they are asked to do or what they know to do and thus are obedient to His commands?
So, why would He not
expect them to keep this command? Because He foreknew they would fall and therefore had to insure it by giving them a command He knew they would disobey? Indeed why would He command any of us to do anything He already foreknows we either couldn't
do? So he could insure His foreknowledge is right? For His glory
? OK. But I'll have to say, "Thanks, but no thanks" to this
God. Of course he'll likely smite me for being so arrogant even as I know some humans reading this would like for Him to do, or perhaps do it for Him, in His name.
I'm not saying this to be rude or disrespectful. Instead I'm saying these things so that, in all seriousness, I can ask, "Why haven't any of you asked these kinds of questions of yourselves?"
Are you aware that the 'lost' are asking these kinds of questions and rejecting this
(your) God because you can't answer them with a good answer?
Even Jesus Christ learned obedience from the things that he suffered and he was sinless!
Hummm… this is an interesting thought! Let me ponder it a bit…
…OK I'm back. You're quoting Hebrews 5:8. Here it is with its context:
"For every chief priest obtained from among men is constituted for men in that which is toward God, that he may be offering both approach presents and sacrifices for sins, able to be moderate with the ignorant and straying, since he also is encompassed with infirmity, and because of it he ought, according as for the people, thus for himself also, be offering for sins.
And not for himself is anyone getting the honor, but on being called by God even as Aaron, also.
Thus Christ also does not glorify Himself by becoming a chief priest, but He Who speaks to Him, "My Son art Thou! I, today, have begotten Thee," according as in a different place also He is saying, "Thou art a priest for the eon according to the order of Melchizedek," Who, in the days of His flesh, offering both petitions and supplications with strong clamor and tears to Him Who is able to save Him out of death, being hearkened to also for His piety, even He also, being a Son, learned obedience from that which He suffered. And being perfected, He became the cause of eonian salvation to all who are obeying Him, being accosted by God "Chief Priest according to the order of Melchizedek,"…"
What I'm reading here is that what His sufferings as a human taught Him was how hard it is to be an obedient human, that is, obedient to God, as a human
, despite Him being the very Son of God…
I'm thinking here of His painful , gut-wracking, moment-of-doubt filled, blood- pressure-raising- to- the-point- of-sweating- great-drops-of-blood, words in Gethsemane…
And therefore He was perfected by remaining in obedience to His Father's desires for Him to become the Lamb that takes away the Sins of the World even though it caused Him great physical suffering, in more ways than we can know by simply reading words, so that He could become a sympathetic
and therefore eternally effective
Chief Priest for being able to sympathize with us, through experience
, how hard it is to be obedient to God, as a human
Remember Jesus was something else with God before He permanently
left that state and became, forever, a glorified Human on our behalf, at the behest of His Father. Talk about us screwing things up cosmically! God truly is agape to have done this for us… I am in awe as I contemplate it.
I think then, Doc, that is somewhat out of context to say that what is meant here as an explanation of how, despite Him being The Son of God, the unique
and very difficult sufferings of Jesus, that came to Him for being obedient to the Fathers' desires, obedience that perfected Him to become a Human who can be a sympathetic and eternal Chief Priest, able to forgive the sins of mankind forever, equates
to saying that the only
way anyone can ever
learn obedience is by suffering, whether it be for their own sins or the Sins of All… is a bit… disrespectful
of what Jesus did for us.
As well as being unflattering of the nature of God.
Just as Peter said here:
For what credit is it if, sinning and being buffeted, you will be enduring it? But if, doing good and suffering, you will be enduring, this is grace with God. For for this were you called, seeing that Christ also suffered for your sakes, leaving you a copy, that you should be following up in the footprints of Him Who does no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth; Who, being reviled, reviled not again; suffering, threatened not, yet gave it over to Him Who is judging justly, Who Himself carries up our sins in His body on to the pole, that, coming away from sins, we should be living for righteousness; by Whose welt you were healed. 1 Pet 2: 20-25
And here also:
Christ, then, having suffered for our sakes in flesh, you also arm yourselves with the same thought, for he who is suffering in flesh has ceased his sins, by no means still to spend the rest of his lifetime in the flesh in human desires, but in the will of God. 1 Pet 4: 1-2
As the writer of Hebrews says here:
"For take into account the One Who has endured such contradiction by sinners while among them, lest you should be faltering, fainting in your souls. Not as yet unto blood did you repulse, when contending against sin. Heb 12: 3-4
And as Paul said here about His sufferings and what they mean for us ALL:
For let this disposition be in you, which is in Christ Jesus also, Who, being inherently in the form of God, deems it not pillaging to be equal with God, nevertheless empties Himself, taking the form of a slave, coming to be in the likeness of humanity, and, being found in fashion as a human, He humbles Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Wherefore, also, God highly exalts Him, and graces Him with the name that is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should be bowing, celestial and terrestrial and subterranean, and every tongue should be acclaiming that Jesus Christ is Lord, for the glory of God, the Father. So that, my beloved, according as you always obey, not as in my presence only, but now much rather in my absence, with fear and trembling, be carrying your own salvation into effect, for it is God Who is operating in you to will as well as to work for the sake of His delight. Phil 2:5-13
So you see, that is God's pattern, His design. The seed must fall into the ground and die to produce life.Adam had to die to be perfected!
Yes, Doc I do 'see' what you are saying. I have all along.
(The 'seed' thingy is also taken out of context, by the way, for it being said in reference to His own death multiplying to life for all, but you can check that out for yourself)
All I can say to this, after much pondering of what I can say to help you 'see', is that if you understood your God you would realize just how… unaware… and unpleasant
this conclusion is.
It is logical
yes, to arrive at this conclusion if
it is an axiomatic truth that Jehovah 'foreknew', as a fact
, that The Adam was going to turn before He created them.
I understand that logic. I see your point. I know where you are coming from. Been there, done that. I dig
. As do countless scores of other Christians, worldwide.
But, it is as I said before, understanding does not equate to agreement.
For I also perceive that you do not grasp how detrimental and maligning this logical conclusion is to the character of your God. As do, also, countless scores of other Christians.
Or do they? There are many, many humans who have experienced His forgiveness and re-siring and know Him to be agape.
Maybe the truth
is that they just don't know what to say against this logic? For they too believe what the brilliant logician, John Calvin, made them believe, through the King's English
, specifically, that, through His foreknowledge
of the future, Jehovah foreordained
His Son, from the foundation
of the world, to be the Lamb slain in sacrifice for our sins.
Are there any Christians in the room, besides me, who would disagree with this thought, exactly
as I have stated it?
So, do you now
see, Doc, that, of a truth, this thought, as I have stated it, was a quite brilliant and therefore deliberate deception, just as I have shown it to be?
And the reason this thought was translated into existence was because it well-served Augustine's and Calvin's hell-based theology to have YOU
, the English
reader, logically conclude, from his
mistranslation of key words, without Him actually having to say such an ugly thing directly
, that Jehovah must
have then 'foreknown' that the Adam was going to 'fall' before He created them.
And then to clinch this
conclusion firmly into our heart of thoughts, we
came to understand that this conclusion must
be true because without God having the ability to know of the future before it happens He could not be sovereign over His creation; which is a truth that I have not denied in any of my writings, at anytime
Instead, what I have shown is exactly
how Jehovah gets His knowledge of the future, according to the correct usage of those key words that Augustine of Hippo and John Calvin deliberately mis
translated to support their hell-based theology.
You said "Adam had
to die to be perfected!" And that your very own physical death is therefore "…God's pattern, His design." And so it must have been His intention, all along, for Adam and his wife and their sons and their son's sons, through to millions, all the way up to and through the flood and then all over again on up through many, many more millions right on into October 8th, 2009 A.D. and beyond, to die
Why? Because, as you say, this is, "God's pattern, it is His design".
I understand. Really, I do.
It's funny isn't it? Because this is also what Ish and Ishsha also came to believe; that He is a God of Death. They too came to believe that the good God that they knew, would punish them with death if they so much as even touched
the fruit of the 'forbidden' tree.
what their truly good God said to Ish was, "… in the day that you eat of it (nothing about touching it) in dying, you will die."
Which words I have come to conclude, because of what did happen when they ingested the fruit, was supposed
to happen. For the fruit did what it was created to do- when swallowed, it ended their useless innocence and imparted to them a conscience. But, without a choice made by them to be virtuous, first, by trusting in Jehovah and His goodness, which was his good will for them and His intention, even if they may not have known what virtue was themselves, it was the distrust of Him that was in their heart of thoughts, at that time, that corrupted the work of the fruit. And the world that was intended for them and us to know was disrupted.
And so instead of a clean and useful conscience, useful for knowing of evil, objectively, for both being and experiencing good, just like how their God and ours knows of evil, they and we, must now learn, because of this disruption, of good objectively for experiencing evil; and that of our own
making, not God's.
And as I said before, the rest is history.
How do you get a kid to do something? Tell them not to do it!
Talk about a great illustration of the difference between God's stated will and intention....
Wouldn't it be great, Doc if every human child born to us, didn't have to be taught to tell the truth?
Thank you, Doc.
And blessings to you as well.
P.S. I'll be pondering your other replies and will give an answer soon enough. And while I have found the 'serpent thingy 'fascinating for the things I'm reading- very educational, thank you for bringing it to my attention- I would like to ask you if I could refrain from replying to that post; unless you just want me to give you my nascent thoughts, for your own benefit, because, for you
, I will do that. Truly, you have been a blessing!