Warning about latest Smartphones and Tablets

Cathii said:
Adam never offered an apology in any form, instead he blamed Jehovah saying that "the wife YOu gave me".
Click to expand...
I understand that’s the official WT narrative but i don’t think it is correct. The fact is we don’t actually know how the words were inflected, thus an argument can be made that the “you” was not inflected with blame, but rather he inflected the words “to be with me” which creates a whole different perspective other than blame. You are more than welcome to look at it from the perspective of blame, many do, however it severely limits the potential to see anymore from this account.
Cathii said:
That being said, will Adam and Eve be resurrected?I could copy and paste half the Bible on this point, don't think it's necessary. The last Adam is Jesus Christ as our father who gives us life now, Adam is no longer in the play as our father. If Jehovah is truly in the marriage arrangement as the head of the man, there would be no secrets. Those scriptures apply to the anointed.
Click to expand...
Regarding Adam & Eve being resurrected that is not up to us. Jesus Christs death as a perfect human replaced ALL that was lost from the very moment sin entered into creation. His sacrifice would, if Jehovah allowed it to, cover their sin as well. Although the sacred secret does include the 144k, as you state, it also applies to Jesus Christ their brother, and together they are the solution that God created for when sin would manifest itself. This solution was created by God before time began, before Jesus was created. Hence the ‘sacred secret’.
 
Last edited:
Cathii said:
It’s amazing, Christo, that Paul had to instruct men in that congregation to love their wives. It should have been a given.
Click to expand...
it was counsel given not only to the husband but also that the wife “should have deep respect for her husband”. That should be a given as well I suppose.


Let’s say Adam was blaming Jehovah as you, and the watchtower suggest. Let’s assume that is the correct perspective, can you tell me what influenced Adam to make the decision to sin in the first place, what did he have to gain from sinning?
 
Bk Kevin said:
I don't see how these scriptures in Ephesians support your idea that Adam and Eve will be Resurrected. The sacred secret that Paul is alluding to has to do with the marriage of the lamb and his wife.
Revelation 19:
7 Let us rejoice and be overjoyed, and let us give him the glory,+ because the marriage+ of the Lamb has arrived+ and his wife has prepared herself.

Click to expand...
The sacred secret was the solution to sin that was implemented by Jehovah once sin was manifested into creation. It was established within Gods eternal purpose prior to creation so that when free will was used for the knowledge of bad, the sacred secret would set in motion the requirements needed to eradicate sin and eternal death. Built within this solution was the predetermined events that would take place to guarantee the fulfillment of Gods purpose.

The first mention of it is the first prophecy at Gen 3:15, wherein Jehovah unveils what is to occur: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring. He will crush your head, and you will strike him in the heel.”

The marriage of the lamb and his bride actually takes place after the completion of the sacred secret, and all that was required to bring creation back into line with Gods purpose will have been accomplished.
Rev 10:7 “7 But in the days when the seventh angel is about to blow his trumpet, the sacred secret that God declared as good news to his own slaves the prophets is indeed brought to a finish.”


The sacred secret essentially erases all the sin that came to exist AFTER it was first introduced into creation by Satan, and the influence it had upon mankind. It was the perfect vaccine to the worst virus. Obviously Satan can not benefit from the sacred secret because it was through him sin came to exist. Nor would we want it to as his sin was entirely motivated by hate, and the full weight of culpability falls on him. However, the sacred secret can most certainly cover Adam & Eves sin as they were directly influenced by it, in that they had to make decisions that were never intended for perfect creations to make. They were created to live within a perfect set of boundaries that God established and that all of creation had perfectly remained within for eons of time. If sin had not been introduced by Satan, Adam nor Eve would have had to make a decision that was a consequence of sin existing in the first place.

 
Cathii said:
What do you have to gain by bantering this subject
Click to expand...
Ad hominem, that was quick. I asked you a simple question after you chose to participate. I asked you What influenced Adam to make his decision, essentially what did he have to gain?

Your response is a subtle fallacy that does nothing to contribute. I hope you got your two cents worth.
 
Cristo is pointless to try to understand what Adam went through. It's obvious he made a selfish decision. Moreover, he willingly joined in the rebellion against Jehovah.
One thing I suggest would be more beneficial to understand: Jehovah’s thoughts that were conveyed through his main representative and beloved Son.
 
Cristo said:
I understand that’s the official WT narrative but i don’t think it is correct. The fact is we don’t actually know how the words were inflected, thus an argument can be made that the “you” was not inflected with blame, but rather he inflected the words “to be with me” which creates a whole different perspective other than blame. You are more than to look at it from the perspective of blame, many do, however it severely limits the potential to see anymore from this account.

Regarding Adam & Eve being resurrected that is not up to us. Jesus Christs death as a perfect human replaced ALL that was lost from the very moment sin entered into creation. His sacrifice would, if Jehovah allowed it to, cover their sin as well. Although the sacred secret does include the 144k, as you state, it also applies to Jesus Christ their brother, and together they are the solution that God created for when sin would manifest itself. This solution was created by God before time began, before Jesus was created. Hence the ‘sacred secret’.
Click to expand...
In terms of language usage, one must look to other indicators of meaning besides what is actually said and in this case, the meaning is accurately supported by context. Thus the “you” (gave me), can only be in the accusative. The point you raise as in “…gave to me”, is in support of the “accusative“ “You”. Why? In context, and in the case of the moral issues contained consistently within the bible, the giving of a marriage mate infers “ownership” or faithfulness to each other as a critical component in its purity. Did not Adam say “This is at last bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh“ on seeing Eve? How much more of a display of oneness and ownership and of shared life and existence can one ask for? There was no “you gave me” in it, but rather “you provided me with….”, in the same sense that a father in law is the provider of ones own wife. There is no giving in it, but choice and acceptance regardless between two mutually attracted people and nothing to do with who gave birth to either. Eve could easily have said to Jehovah, “The man you gave to me did not advise me in this matter properly or refer my spiritual welfare in the light of your command.“ But she did not. She sided with Adam.

Therefore Eve was already “given” to Adam as a possession, a companion and as closely together as one flesh as it’s possible to be, as they were literally of one flesh. Adam’s natural reply to Jehovah then would have been “MY wife deceived me.” and not, the woman that “YOU gave me.” Eve was not forced on Adam was she? No. He really was bowled over her beauty and countenance.

There are other supporting, independent and even unspoken inferences that support Cathii‘s comment. I.e., Adam did not explain himself or apologise or justify other than in the negative. The narrative of choice and preference in Adam’s action and explanation is echoed in context throughout the scriptures. For the same reasons, I’m inclined to also agree with the generally understood opinion that Adam would not receive a resurrection as in analysis, his stand was one of rebellion on a par with Satan as the concept of action in both Satan and Adam’s challenge are similar if not the same - blaming Jehovah.
 
Last edited:
Jehovah's laws are in place for the benefit of all creation and are fair. This is how harmony is maintained in the universe. Whoever brakes those laws in order to get an unfair advantage in regards to other fellow creatures will come under God's judgment. If Jehovah is to tolerate this situation in the new world he promised, things will not look much different from what we witness today.
 
Last edited:
Cristo said:
Jesus Christ their brother, and together they are the solution that God created for when sin would manifest itself. This solution was created by God before time began, before Jesus was created. Hence the ‘sacred secret’.
Click to expand...
are you suggesting that Jehovah had doubts about what he created, even before He had created any creation, being Jesus? That even though He Himself was very satisfied with His work as He says at the end of each day, He still had doubts?
Cristo said:
thus an argument can be made that the “you” was not inflected with blame,
Click to expand...
Shouldn't Adam, being head and, not unimportantly, older and perfectly taught by Jehovah, take responsibility for Eve's sin before Jehovah? Instead, he shifted the blame onto her. Gee where else do you come across that?

Reading your explanations I'm just wondering
 
evw said:
are you suggesting that Jehovah had doubts about what he created, even before He had created any creation, being Jesus? That even though He Himself was very satisfied with His work as He says at the end of each day, He still had doubts?

Shouldn't Adam, being head and, not unimportantly, older and perfectly taught by Jehovah, take responsibility for Eve's sin before Jehovah? Instead, he shifted the blame onto her. Gee where else do you come across that?

Reading your explanations I'm just wondering
Click to expand...
Heavens no. Jehovah doubts nothing he does for it is certain to succeed. “So the word that goes forth from my mouth will prove to be, it will not return to me without certain results for that which I sent it. “ Isa 55:11

The sacred secret was Jehovahs solution to the sin that he knew would eventually manifest within creation. Prior to creation he calculated his expense, just as a builder calculates theirs before building a tower. His purpose for creation involved giving free will, which if used for the knowledge of bad has drastic ramifications which we have all seen. To ensure his purpose succeeds, by calculating his expense, he created the sacred secret before the beginning of time so that when sin manifested he already had the solution.

If you have time and would like to read the article that explains this in detail here is the link.

Regarding what Adam should have done is easy to answer. My point in examining this account was in trying to understand why he didn’t. What influenced him to make the worst decision when he had nothing to gain from it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: evw
Cathii said:
What do you have to gain by bantering this subject?
Click to expand...
I wanted to apologize to you directly not only in the post that barnaby stated I wasn’t being fair. I am sorry for being so quick to defense, ran out of salt on that one.

I feel an answer to your question is more than warranted now, as I should have just answered it before. Humble pie…yummy 😔

I suppose what I have to gain depends on which perspective is correct, or at least closer to the truth. I could be completely wrong about his inflected words, and if I am then I am. Or I could be right. That’s the point, we chose which way we look at it. And depending on which way we look at it, at least from the comments I’ve seen, determines our belief on whether they will be resurrected or not. Unfortunately we are going to have to wait a a very very long time for the correct answer when the last person to be resurrected is going to either be Adam or Eve or Abel. I do feel that when we are closer to truths within scripture it opens up more truths, regardless if we have it all. Truth begets truth no matter how small. However some have made some decent points as to why my premise is false, I’m willing to consider those and see if I can find stronger reasoning to support my case. If I can’t, then I suppose I gain a new perspective other than my original. That’s not so bad,. In the end perhaps we agree to disagree. Was it just a waste of time, according to Solomon everything is vanity. I certainly hope it’s not because I like the sound of my own voice, and on that I think I’ll close.

Sorry Cathi
 
Last edited:
evw said:
are you suggesting that Jehovah had doubts about what he created, even before He had created any creation, being Jesus? That even though He Himself was very satisfied with His work as He says at the end of each day, He still had doubts?

Shouldn't Adam, being head and, not unimportantly, older and perfectly taught by Jehovah, take responsibility for Eve's sin before Jehovah? Instead, he shifted the blame onto her. Gee where else do you come across that?

Reading your explanations I'm just wondering
Click to expand...
The early church is largely responsible for treating women as chattels, and before the established church, necessity subjugated women in many ways after man started to rule as kings. It is as complex as it is broad with so many facets of intrusions into every aspect of domesticity and that has compartmentalised the role of women. Todays attempts at equality are weak and generally by consent of men. We will have to wait until the kingdom for the role of women to be appreciated in its glory. It’s not much fun being a man either, if that’s any comfort. It’s certainly not as cracked up as many women would wish to imagine. I much prefer being a dog…except a lunch time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: evw
The God Pill said:

The Forgotten Books of Eden: The First Book of Adam and Eve: The First Book of Adam and Eve

The Forgotten Books of Eden, by Rutherford H. Platt, Jr., [1926], full text etext at sacred-texts.com
www.sacred-texts.com

First book of adam and eve again while mostly Jewish has Christian interpolations. Gives us a view of how repentant jews and early christians viewed adam and eve as when they were kicked out.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how this could form an argument or an even a perspective to be considered in tandem with the scripture. It may be an over-statement to say, but nonetheless the principle applies, in that these writings are an “addition“ to the scripture, if not in stated aim, but in explanation of the scripture. If the scriptures are sacrosanct in forbidding adding to, or subtracting from the scriptures, then surely this explanation from Rutherford goes beyond that advice? The scriptures are a stand alone teaching. If we are to consider reasonings on speculation as an aid to understanding the scripture then something is wrong. Should we not look to context and meaning within the scriptures themselves to speculate? I found watchtower theorising on truth in watchtower articles to be the bane of my malcontent with them when I found out it was personal opinion in so many aspects - on a par with their “extended generations”.
 
It's hard to argue that the ancient Christians were more sexist than the watchtower given there are no female ministerial servants in the org. From Wikipedia

The oldest reference to women as deaconesses occurs in Paul's letters (c. AD 55–58). Their ministry is mentioned by early Christian writers such as Clement of Alexandria[7] and Origen.[8] Secular evidence from the early 2nd century confirms this. In a letter Pliny the Younger attests to the role of the women deaconesses. Pliny refers to "two maid-servants" as deacons whom he tortures to find out more about the Christians. This establishes the existence of the office of the deaconesses in parts of the eastern Roman Empire from the earliest times. 4th-century Fathers of the Church, such as Epiphanius of Salamis,[9] Basil of Caesarea,[10] John Chrysostom[11] and Gregory of Nyssa[12] accept the ministry of deaconesses as a fact.[citation needed] The Didascalia of the Apostles is the earliest document that specifically discusses the role of deacons and deaconesses more at length. It originated in Aramaic speaking Syria during the 3rd century, but soon spread in Greek and Latin versions. In it the author urges the bishop: "Appoint a woman for the ministry of women. For there are homes to which you cannot send a deacon to their women, on account of the heathen, but you may send a deaconess ... Also in many other matters the office of a deaconess is required."[13] The bishop should look on the man who is a deacon as Christ and the woman who is a deaconess as the Holy Spirit, denoting their prominent place in the church hierarchy.[14] The deaconesses are also mentioned in a passage[15] of the Council of Nicea in 325 which implies their hierarchal, consecrated or ordained status; then more clearly at the Council of Chalcedon of 451 which decreed that women should not be ordained deaconesses until they were 40 years old. The oldest ordination rite for deaconesses is found in the 5th-century Apostolic Constitutions.[16] It describes the laying on of hands on the woman by the bishop with the calling down of the Holy Spirit for the ministry of the diaconate. A full version of the rite, with rubrics and prayers, has been found in the Barberini Codex of 780 AD. This liturgical manual provides an ordination rite for women as deaconesses which is virtually identical to the ordination rite for men as deacons.[17] Other ancient manuscripts confirm the same rite.[18] However some scholars such as Philip Schaff have written that the ceremony performed for ordaining deaconesses was "merely a solemn dedication and blessing."[19] Still, a careful study of the rite has persuaded most modern scholars that the rite was fully a sacrament in present-day terms.[20] Olympias, one of the closest friends and supporters of the Archbishop of Constantinople John Chrysostom, was known as a wealthy and influential deaconess during the 5th century.[2][21] Justinian's legislation in the mid-6th century regarding clergy throughout his territories in the East and the West mentioned men and women as deacons in parallel. He also included women as deacons among those he regulated for service at the Great Church of Hagia Sophia, listing men and women as deacons together, and later specifying one hundred deacons who were men and forty who were women. Evidence of continuing liturgical and pastoral roles is provided by Constantine Porphyrogenitus' 10th-century manual of ceremonies (De Ceremoniis), which refers to a special area for deaconesses in Hagia Sophia.[2]

As Clement of Alexandria made mention of Paul's reference to deaconesses in 1 Timothy 3:11, so Origen of Alexandria (184 AD to 254 AD) commented on Phoebe, the deacon that Paul mentions in Romans 16:1–2: "This text teaches with the authority of the Apostle that even women are instituted deacons in the Church. This is the function which was exercised in the church of Cenchreae by Phoebe, who was the object of high praise and recommendation by Paul… And thus this text teaches at the same time two things: that there are, as we have already said, women deacons in the Church, and that women, who by their good works deserve to be praised by the Apostle, ought to be accepted in the diaconate".
 
BARNABY THE DOG. said:
I don’t see how this could form an argument or an even a perspective to be considered in tandem with the scripture. It may be an over-statement to say, but nonetheless the principle applies, in that these writings are an “addition“ to the scripture, if not in stated aim, but in explanation of the scripture. If the scriptures are sacrosanct in forbidding adding to, or subtracting from the scriptures, then surely this explanation from Rutherford goes beyond that advice? The scriptures are a stand alone teaching. If we are to consider reasonings on speculation as an aid to understanding the scripture then something is wrong. Should we not look to context and meaning within the scriptures themselves to speculate? I found watchtower theorising on truth in watchtower articles to be the bane of my malcontent with them when I found out it was personal opinion in so many aspects - on a par with their “extended generations”.
Click to expand...
While there are a few small parts and aspects in it i believe preserve valid tradition I don't respect much of the content books of adam and eve that much I treat them and derivative texts as third not second tier below my deutero-headcanon as "things to be read" I wasn't sharing in the interest of any persuasion of anyone on anything rather understanding some of what would be behind many early christians perception of adam and eve.
 
Last edited:
BARNABY THE DOG. said:
The early church is largely responsible for treating women as chattels, and before the established church, necessity subjugated women in many ways after man started to rule as kings. It is as complex as it is broad with so many facets of intrusions into every aspect of domesticity and that has compartmentalised the role of women. Todays attempts at equality are weak and generally by consent of men. We will have to wait until the kingdom for the role of women to be appreciated in its glory. It’s not much fun being a man either, if that’s any comfort. It’s certainly not as cracked up as many women would wish to imagine. I much prefer being a dog…except a lunch time.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your insight; indeed, things will work out between men and women - patience is a virtue - as the saying goes here. Having said that, my 'Gee where else do you come across that? was (this time) not about men in general, but I meant the GB. 1683390670954.png
 
Cristo said:
The sacred secret was the solution to sin that was implemented by Jehovah once sin was manifested into creation. It was established within Gods eternal purpose prior to creation so that when free will was used for the knowledge of bad, the sacred secret would set in motion the requirements needed to eradicate sin and eternal death. Built within this solution was the predetermined events that would take place to guarantee the fulfillment of Gods purpose.

The first mention of it is the first prophecy at Gen 3:15, wherein Jehovah unveils what is to occur: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring. He will crush your head, and you will strike him in the heel.”

The marriage of the lamb and his bride actually takes place after the completion of the sacred secret, and all that was required to bring creation back into line with Gods purpose will have been accomplished.
Rev 10:7 “7 But in the days when the seventh angel is about to blow his trumpet, the sacred secret that God declared as good news to his own slaves the prophets is indeed brought to a finish.”


The sacred secret essentially erases all the sin that came to exist AFTER it was first introduced into creation by Satan, and the influence it had upon mankind. It was the perfect vaccine to the worst virus. Obviously Satan can not benefit from the sacred secret because it was through him sin came to exist. Nor would we want it to as his sin was entirely motivated by hate, and the full weight of culpability falls on him. However, the sacred secret can most certainly cover Adam & Eves sin as they were directly influenced by it, in that they had to make decisions that were never intended for perfect creations to make. They were created to live within a perfect set of boundaries that God established and that all of creation had perfectly remained within for eons of time. If sin had not been introduced by Satan, Adam nor Eve would have had to make a decision that was a consequence of sin existing in the first place.
Click to expand...
You have not provided any noteworthy scriptural proof to back up your theory in reference to Adam and Eve being forgiven for their sins and Resurrected and for that reason I am skeptical especially in view of what Paul said when he said "make sure of all things.
Apostle Paul all so advised us not to go beyond the things written and so with all due respect I will follow his counsel.

1 Corinthians
4:6 Now, brothers, these things I have transferred so as to apply to myself and A·polʹlos+ for YOUR good, that in our case YOU may learn the [rule]: “Do not go beyond the things that are written,”+ in order that YOU may not be puffed up+ individually in favor of the one against the other.

2 John 1:9
9 Everyone that pushes ahead*a and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son.

Podcast #24​

This program considers questions such as: Has evil always existed? How does the holy spirit operate today? Are there still such things as blessings and curses? What about demon possession? Is it still common? Why was there so much demon possession during the time Jesus was on the earth? Will Adam and Eve be resurrected?> https://e-watchman.com/podcast-24/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top