Warning about latest Smartphones and Tablets

[Cristo]

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?

First, lets make sure we are taking about the same thing as to what Adam actually said. I never raised a point where Adam said "...gave to me", if I had I would have to agree with what you say, it would most certainly seem to support the accusative 'you'. Although a few biblical sources do say it as 'gave me', the majority of the texts do indeed agree that he said 'whom you gave to be with me". Please click here for the sources. The verse I use is from the New World Translation:

Gen 3:12 "The man said: “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, so I ate.”"

In fact when we look at what he actually said, everything about it was truth. If you read the verse without any inflection of blame, it was a matter of fact statement before all other things. The woman Jehovah gave to Adam, for the reason to be with him, gave him fruit and he ate. If we look at indicators of meaning besides what is actually said, as you state, the meaning is supported by the context of why God gave her to Adam in the first place, I couldn't agree more.

Looking at it from terms of language usage we could therefore translate what Adam meant, when he said "to be with" as:

• "The woman whom you gave to spend eternity with me...",​

• Or "the woman whom you gave to be the mother of my children..."​

• Or to truly stay within context "the woman whom you gave to help fill the earth and subdue it with me..."​

​

There is no "gave to me" in what he said, which would imply something far less than "gave to be with me".

I'm not trying to argue over words with you Barnaby, goodness no, I just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing here, and your comment seemed to suggest we weren't.

The narrative of choice and preference in Adam’s action and explanation is echoed in context throughout the scriptures.

Where?

Is this what you know, or is this what you want to believe is true? Just as @Bk Kevin would like scriptures supporting my theory to support Adam & Eves resurrection, I too must respectfully ask for the same showing where the narrative of choice and preference in Adams action is echoed in context throughout the scriptures. I would love to see where it is shown Adam & Eve will not be resurrected. There are no scriptures to support that view. Therefore it is merely a belief entrenched in blame making one believe it to be so.

Scriptures would seem to indicate, as I have shown, that the sacred secret would most certainly cover their sin. I'm not sure why that is being ignored, however, lets see what Jehovah said to Adam after the sin, perhaps that can enlighten us.

“. . .And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account. In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life. 18 And thorns and thistles it will grow for you, and you must eat the vegetation of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.”” Ge 3:17-19

But now we are going back to what we already know, Adam listened to Eve rather than listen to Jehovah, thus he returned to the ground. The entire premise of this examination is not what Adam did, it was to establish the why he did it when he had nothing to gain, and to see if we could determine whether the opportunity could exist that they would be resurrected, which bk Kevin, and many others, are skeptical of.

It is interesting that after all had happened, it was only then that Adam named the woman who had been given to be with him, Eve.

“. . .After this Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living.” Ge 3:20

I don't have time at this point to clearly explain why the sacred secret adequately covers Adam & Eves sin(with scriptures). I will do so, tomorrow when I have more time.

I would like however to make a point regarding what you(@BARNABY THE DOG. ) said.

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.

If that is true, then why do we not know the true name of Satan? It's not Lucifer, or Beelzebub. These are manmade given names to an unknown evil angel who is Jehovahs true enemy. The reason we don't know his name is because he obviously does not deserve it, for the actions he has taken for his manifestation of sin upon creation, the MOST EVIL thing one could do, clearly demonstrates that he is not worthy to have his name known by us. Why would God allow us to know Adam? Why not just call him the first man? Jehovah could have just as easily taken his name out of the Bible, and we would only know him as the first man. This in itself shows that Jehovah views Satan and Adam differently. I'm not claiming anything other here than that Jehovah does not view them as equals in regards to their actions.

​

 

[Jodan]

[1 Corinthians 15:21 For since death+ is through a man, resurrection+ of the dead is also through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all are dying,+ so also in the Christ all will be made alive.]

 

[The God Pill]

@Cristo in line with your position does not Jesus crown of thorns seem to imply he was taking upon/would lift the curse that was part of Adam's penalty the one on the ground etc.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

First, lets make sure we are taking about the same thing as to what Adam actually said. I never raised a point where Adam said "...gave to me", if I had I would have to agree with what you say, it would most certainly seem to support the accusative 'you'. Although a few biblical sources do say it as 'gave me', the majority of the texts do indeed agree that he said 'whom you gave to be with me". Please click here for the sources. The verse I use is from the New World Translation:

Gen 3:12 "The man said: “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, so I ate.”"

In fact when we look at what he actually said, everything about it was truth. If you read the verse without any inflection of blame, it was a matter of fact statement before all other things. The woman Jehovah gave to Adam, for the reason to be with him, gave him fruit and he ate. If we look at indicators of meaning besides what is actually said, as you state, the meaning is supported by the context of why God gave her to Adam in the first place, I couldn't agree more.

Looking at it from terms of language usage we could therefore translate what Adam meant, when he said "to be with" as:

• "The woman whom you gave to spend eternity with me...",​

• Or "the woman whom you gave to be the mother of my children..."​

• Or to truly stay within context "the woman whom you gave to help fill the earth and subdue it with me..."​

​

There is no "gave to me" in what he said, which would imply something far less than "gave to be with me".

I'm not trying to argue over words with you Barnaby, goodness no, I just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing here, and your comment seemed to suggest we weren't.


Where?

Is this what you know, or is this what you want to believe is true? Just as @Bk Kevin would like scriptures supporting my theory to support Adam & Eves resurrection, I too must respectfully ask for the same showing where the narrative of choice and preference in Adams action is echoed in context throughout the scriptures. I would love to see where it is shown Adam & Eve will not be resurrected. There are no scriptures to support that view. Therefore it is merely a belief entrenched in blame making one believe it to be so.

Scriptures would seem to indicate, as I have shown, that the sacred secret would most certainly cover their sin. I'm not sure why that is being ignored, however, lets see what Jehovah said to Adam after the sin, perhaps that can enlighten us.

“. . .And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account. In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life. 18 And thorns and thistles it will grow for you, and you must eat the vegetation of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.”” Ge 3:17-19

But now we are going back to what we already know, Adam listened to Eve rather than listen to Jehovah, thus he returned to the ground. The entire premise of this examination is not what Adam did, it was to establish the why he did it when he had nothing to gain, and to see if we could determine whether the opportunity could exist that they would be resurrected, which bk Kevin, and many others, are skeptical of.

It is interesting that after all had happened, it was only then that Adam named the woman who had been given to be with him, Eve.

“. . .After this Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living.” Ge 3:20

I don't have time at this point to clearly explain why the sacred secret adequately covers Adam & Eves sin(with scriptures). I will do so, tomorrow when I have more time.

I would like however to make a point regarding what you(@BARNABY THE DOG. ) said.


If that is true, then why do we not know the true name of Satan? It's not Lucifer, or Beelzebub. These are manmade given names to an unknown evil angel who is Jehovahs true enemy. The reason we don't know his name is because he obviously does not deserve it, for the actions he has taken for his manifestation of sin upon creation, the MOST EVIL thing one could do, clearly demonstrates that he is not worthy to have his name known by us. Why would God allow us to know Adam? Why not just call him the first man? Jehovah could have just as easily taken his name out of the Bible, and we would only know him as the first man. This in itself shows that Jehovah views Satan and Adam differently. I'm not claiming anything other here than that Jehovah does not view them as equals in regards to their actions.

​

i agree that the scriptures do not specifically indicate who will be resurrected, so I cannot argue that point. Though others are able to draw on the context of scripture to come to what amounts to a definitive answer, I do not have that confidence in my own understanding. The scriptures are helpful in two ways though; do not add to them or take away from them, and that Jehovah’s ways are not our ways. Thus essentially, for me at least, other than where the scriptures are definite, - do not eat blood, commit adultery etc, I prefer to rest my opinion on another scripture that indicates that Jehovah is merciful and infinitely so. How can we claim to plumb the depths of Jehovah’s thinking and reasoning when our own understanding of the fruits of the spirit allow some of us to, for instance, carry guns to protect ourselves? So in many respects, what we allow ourselves to believe or draw from scripture is our own thinking and persuasion. That is not say such opinions in learning are not valid, but are indeed necessary to separate dross from the mettle of our thinking. It is how we grow.

In many respects, your analysis is valid as far as semantics go and the uncertainty of translation and evolution in reference and meaning as language develops is also a valid point. The reason that I have doubt over the resurrection, (beside what I have already said) of Adam is that his choice was made in the light of perfection. It appears to me then, that he is on a par with Satan in his rebellion. Adam from the same viewpoint of Satan, preferred what was not his to have, and rejected Jehovah. The same issue will be presented to us come the end of the thousand years - with what appears to be, the same outcomes. This essentially, is where I am at in my understanding. I like (very much so) to discuss issues with you and others because it is productive, but I cannot rationally insist on one point or another because I may well be wrong. To do so simply causes division. I do not own truth. I wish I did. But I do not.

I am aware of course of the greater arguments as I too read avidly on many subjects, but when it comes to the bible, I do not even to pretend to understand prophesy - I cannot cope with uncertainty in understanding - so I maintain my sanity by ascertaining truth from what I do know, and by being advised by the above texts quoted, not to add to or take away from, but to use discernment in the scripture - part of which of course is not to insist on learning that cannot be proven from the ONE book. The bible is explicit in what we should and should not do. Thus guidance grows in us and it’s application is easy to learn and to develop our spirituality. As for prophesy and foresight /insight, that is given to few. I leave that well alone, and also it’s fringe issues. What is necessary is freely given. I confine myself to that. The rest is largely hidden until the due time. Thus why argue over what does not affect us when so much else does require discussion. Contribution to understanding is one thing, unnecessary pursuit is another, enjoyable though it is if time allows it. I love to speculate but not when it distracts from the issue. But in the end, I find distraction of the ephemera unnecessary to my own growth as it cannot be resolved. If Adam turns up on my door, I shall welcome him, but I have to be there to do so and that requires walking the narrow path without distraction. 👍

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

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/

Those scriptures are Exactly so.

 

[Truth_Seeker]

‘Therefore, I will judge each one of you according to his ways,+ O house of Israel,’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Turn away, yes, turn completely away from all your transgressions, so that they will not be a stumbling block bringing guilt upon you. 31 Rid yourselves of all the transgressions you have committed+ and acquire* a new heart and a new spirit,+ for why should you die,+ O house of Israel?’
32 “‘I do not take any pleasure in the death of anyone,’+ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘So turn back and live.’”+ Ezekiel 18.

Adam knew what he did. It was his choice to side with the rebellion no matter the reason. There is no evidence in the bible that Adam repented afterward.
If we ever have to choose, Jehovah is our first option no matter who or what else is involved. And every creature should have the same mindset. It is right to love Him before anyone else. He is our maker and he is not selfish in any way regarding His intentions towards us. This is how people will be able to live in peace and harmony.

 

[Bk Kevin]

First, lets make sure we are taking about the same thing as to what Adam actually said. I never raised a point where Adam said "...gave to me", if I had I would have to agree with what you say, it would most certainly seem to support the accusative 'you'. Although a few biblical sources do say it as 'gave me', the majority of the texts do indeed agree that he said 'whom you gave to be with me". Please click here for the sources. The verse I use is from the New World Translation:

Gen 3:12 "The man said: “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, so I ate.”"

In fact when we look at what he actually said, everything about it was truth. If you read the verse without any inflection of blame, it was a matter of fact statement before all other things. The woman Jehovah gave to Adam, for the reason to be with him, gave him fruit and he ate. If we look at indicators of meaning besides what is actually said, as you state, the meaning is supported by the context of why God gave her to Adam in the first place, I couldn't agree more.

Looking at it from terms of language usage we could therefore translate what Adam meant, when he said "to be with" as:

• "The woman whom you gave to spend eternity with me...",​

• Or "the woman whom you gave to be the mother of my children..."​

• Or to truly stay within context "the woman whom you gave to help fill the earth and subdue it with me..."​

​

There is no "gave to me" in what he said, which would imply something far less than "gave to be with me".

I'm not trying to argue over words with you Barnaby, goodness no, I just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing here, and your comment seemed to suggest we weren't.


Where?

Is this what you know, or is this what you want to believe is true? Just as @Bk Kevin would like scriptures supporting my theory to support Adam & Eves resurrection, I too must respectfully ask for the same showing where the narrative of choice and preference in Adams action is echoed in context throughout the scriptures. I would love to see where it is shown Adam & Eve will not be resurrected. There are no scriptures to support that view. Therefore it is merely a belief entrenched in blame making one believe it to be so.

Scriptures would seem to indicate, as I have shown, that the sacred secret would most certainly cover their sin. I'm not sure why that is being ignored, however, lets see what Jehovah said to Adam after the sin, perhaps that can enlighten us.

“. . .And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account. In pain you will eat its produce all the days of your life. 18 And thorns and thistles it will grow for you, and you must eat the vegetation of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.”” Ge 3:17-19

But now we are going back to what we already know, Adam listened to Eve rather than listen to Jehovah, thus he returned to the ground. The entire premise of this examination is not what Adam did, it was to establish the why he did it when he had nothing to gain, and to see if we could determine whether the opportunity could exist that they would be resurrected, which bk Kevin, and many others, are skeptical of.

It is interesting that after all had happened, it was only then that Adam named the woman who had been given to be with him, Eve.

“. . .After this Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she had to become the mother of everyone living.” Ge 3:20

I don't have time at this point to clearly explain why the sacred secret adequately covers Adam & Eves sin(with scriptures). I will do so, tomorrow when I have more time.

I would like however to make a point regarding what you(@BARNABY THE DOG. ) said.


If that is true, then why do we not know the true name of Satan? It's not Lucifer, or Beelzebub. These are manmade given names to an unknown evil angel who is Jehovahs true enemy. The reason we don't know his name is because he obviously does not deserve it, for the actions he has taken for his manifestation of sin upon creation, the MOST EVIL thing one could do, clearly demonstrates that he is not worthy to have his name known by us. Why would God allow us to know Adam? Why not just call him the first man? Jehovah could have just as easily taken his name out of the Bible, and we would only know him as the first man. This in itself shows that Jehovah views Satan and Adam differently. I'm not claiming anything other here than that Jehovah does not view them as equals in regards to their actions.

​

Even though Adam and Eve were made perfect in all their ways they still had to learned obedience to Jehovah, the reason why Jehovah did not instill obedience in them is because that would have infringing on their free will to choose. You see if they were to love Jehovah with their whole mind and heart and soul they would need free will and that includes the ability to choose for themselves.

The fact is that Adam and Eve never learned obedience to Jehovah even though Jehovah showered them with love Beyond comparison by providing a Paradise for them to dwell in,I mean the only thing they had to learn was obedience as to be perfect.

They failed in the very beginning, Why? Because Adam and Eve put their own selfish desires first and coveted what belong to Jehovah rather than please Jehovah and be obedient, so in reality/essence Adam and Eve obviously loved themselves more than Jehovah.

So Adam failed to conquer obedience to Jehovah because he didn't have a heartfelt unconditional love towards Jehovah.

So why should Adam have the right to eat from the Tree of Life if he already proved beyond a shadow of Doubt that he wasn't obedient?
I mean Jesus the second Adam the only begotten son of Jehovah came in the flesh to break up the works of the devil and he had to be obedient to death in order to conquer because Adam failed to be obedient to Jehovah.

I doubt very much that Jehovah in His righteous Justice would allowed Adam and Eve to be Resurrected because they already failed the test of obedience to Jehovah

1 John 3:8 He who carries on sin originates with the Devil,* because the Devil has been sinning from [the] beginning.*+ For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest,+ namely, to break up the works of the Devil

Hebrews5:7
In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions+ to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong+ outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.+ 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered;+ 9 and after he had been made perfect*+ he became responsible for everlasting salvation+ to all those obeying him,+ 10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Mel·chizʹe·dek.

Revelation2:7
Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit+ says to the congregations: To him that conquers+ I will grant to eat of the tree of life,+ which is in the paradise* of God.’

Genesis3:22
And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad,+ and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life+ and eat and live to time indefinite,—”

 

[evw]

If we ever have to choose, Jehovah is our first option no matter who or what else is involved

perhaps not properly applied in the context of Adam, but Matthew 10:37 comes to mind
'Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me;

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Even though Adam and Eve were made perfect in all their ways they still had to learned obedience to Jehovah, the reason why Jehovah did not instill obedience in them is because that would have infringing on their free will to choose. You see if they were to love Jehovah with their whole mind and heart and soul they would need free will and that includes the ability to choose for themselves.

The fact is that Adam and Eve never learned obedience to Jehovah even though Jehovah showered them with love Beyond comparison by providing a Paradise for them to dwell in,I mean the only thing they had to learn was obedience as to be perfect.

They failed in the very beginning, Why? Because Adam and Eve put their own selfish desires first and coveted what belong to Jehovah rather than please Jehovah and be obedient, so in reality/essence Adam and Eve obviously loved themselves more than Jehovah.

So Adam failed to conquer obedience to Jehovah because he didn't have a heartfelt unconditional love towards Jehovah.

So why should Adam have the right to eat from the Tree of Life if he already proved beyond a shadow of Doubt that he wasn't obedient?
I mean Jesus the second Adam the only begotten son of Jehovah came in the flesh to break up the works of the devil and he had to be obedient to death in order to conquer because Adam failed to be obedient to Jehovah.

I doubt very much that Jehovah in His righteous Justice would allowed Adam and Eve to be Resurrected because they already failed the test of obedience to Jehovah

1 John 3:8 He who carries on sin originates with the Devil,* because the Devil has been sinning from [the] beginning.*+ For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest,+ namely, to break up the works of the Devil

Hebrews5:7
In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions+ to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong+ outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.+ 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered;+ 9 and after he had been made perfect*+ he became responsible for everlasting salvation+ to all those obeying him,+ 10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Mel·chizʹe·dek.

Revelation2:7
Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit+ says to the congregations: To him that conquers+ I will grant to eat of the tree of life,+ which is in the paradise* of God.’

Genesis3:22
And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad,+ and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life+ and eat and live to time indefinite,—”

It is a strange fact of life that disobedience has to exist to allow free will, even if only as a choice and how for an uncounted number, many would choose disobedience above death. I often wonder if disobedience exists only because there is wisdom in choice, especially as wisdom is acquired and not given. It must be a factor of what constitutes perfection. How can perfection rule out the consideration of evil, if the same mind can conclude how to remedy it?

 

[Bk Kevin]

It is a strange fact of life that disobedience has to exist to allow free will, even if only as a choice and how for an uncounted number, many would choose disobedience above death. I often wonder if disobedience exists only because there is wisdom in choice, especially as wisdom is acquired and not given. It must be a factor of what constitutes perfection. How can perfection rule out the consideration of evil, if the same mind can conclude how to remedy it?

Whether you're perfect or imperfect you still need to love Jehovah with your whole mind heart and soul and I think that's why Adam and Eve failed .

1 Corinthians13:​

7 It bears all things,+ believes all things,+ hopes all things,+ endures all things.+8 Love never fails
13 Now, however, there remain faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.*+

1 John4:​

18 There is no fear in love,+ but perfect love throws fear outside,+ because fear exercises a restraint.* Indeed, he that is under fear has not been made perfect in love.+ 19 As for us, we love, because he first loved us.+​

Matthew 22:37​

37 He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah* your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’a

Romans 13:10​

10 Lovea does not work evil to one’s neighbor;b therefore love is the law’sc fulfillment.

1 Corinthians13:​

13 Now, however, there remain faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.*+

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Whether you're perfect or imperfect you still need to love Jehovah with your whole mind heart and soul and I think that's why Adam and Eve failed .

1 Corinthians13:​

7 It bears all things,+ believes all things,+ hopes all things,+ endures all things.+8 Love never fails
13 Now, however, there remain faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.*+

1 John4:​

18 There is no fear in love,+ but perfect love throws fear outside,+ because fear exercises a restraint.* Indeed, he that is under fear has not been made perfect in love.+ 19 As for us, we love, because he first loved us.+​

Matthew 22:37​

37 He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah* your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’a

Romans 13:10​

10 Lovea does not work evil to one’s neighbor;b therefore love is the law’sc fulfillment.

1 Corinthians13:​

13 Now, however, there remain faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.*+

That’s a good way to view it. Thanks.

 

[Cristo]

@Cristo in line with your position does not Jesus crown of thorns seem to imply he was taking upon/would lift the curse that was part of Adam's penalty the one on the ground etc.

Interesting take on the thorns. Whether it was some sort of symbolic post shadowing of the curse I suppose we cannot know, but great observation nonetheless. Thanks for the input.

 

[Cristo]

‘Therefore, I will judge each one of you according to his ways,+ O house of Israel,’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Turn away, yes, turn completely away from all your transgressions, so that they will not be a stumbling block bringing guilt upon you. 31 Rid yourselves of all the transgressions you have committed+ and acquire* a new heart and a new spirit,+ for why should you die,+ O house of Israel?’
32 “‘I do not take any pleasure in the death of anyone,’+ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘So turn back and live.’”+ Ezekiel 18.

Adam knew what he did. It was his choice to side with the rebellion no matter the reason. There is no evidence in the bible that Adam repented afterward.
If we ever have to choose, Jehovah is our first option no matter who or what else is involved. And every creature should have the same mindset. It is right to love Him before anyone else. He is our maker and he is not selfish in any way regarding His intentions towards us. This is how people will be able to live in peace and harmony.

Thank you TS for this, in more ways than one. It most certainly was a rebellion. Initiated by Satan, against Jehovah, and directed at mankind in particular. As I have stated many times, Adams reason for choosing what he did was not motivated by hate as Satans was, so to say he was siding with it is not entirely accurate. Regarding the evidence in the Bible that Adam repented afterward, you are correct to a point, but there is circumstantial evidence that he may have actually been repentant for what had happened. Of course, we know what unrepentant people typically act like, sour, angry, self justified in all that they do, self righteous etc..etc. Although the scriptures don't provide any insight at all into his attitude, we do have the examples of his two sons, Cain & Abel, who were obviously raised to not only believe in a creator, but also to offer up sacrifices. Where did they learn this from? Does the fact that they offered up sacrifices to Jehovah possibly suggest that Adam was repentant? Certainly if Adam felt no remorse for what he did, his heart would most certainly be hardened against doing any such thing. Of course there is no way of knowing for sure, but I thank you for your perspective because it brought a new thought I had never considered before to mind.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Interesting take on the thorns. Whether it was some sort of symbolic post shadowing of the curse I suppose we cannot know, but great observation nonetheless. Thanks for the input.

Maybe thorns has a significance with the curse given to Adam : genesis 3 : 17: 18. Cursed is the ground because of you……Both thorns and thistles it will yield for you …”. Perhaps the crown of was also symbolic of lifting that curse. Wearing that curse above his head? I have never considered its meaning before. I had assumed it was simply mockery, but now you mention it, it may mean more.

 

[Cristo]

Even though Adam and Eve were made perfect in all their ways they still had to learned obedience to Jehovah, the reason why Jehovah did not instill obedience in them is because that would have infringing on their free will to choose. You see if they were to love Jehovah with their whole mind and heart and soul they would need free will and that includes the ability to choose for themselves.

The fact is that Adam and Eve never learned obedience to Jehovah even though Jehovah showered them with love Beyond comparison by providing a Paradise for them to dwell in,I mean the only thing they had to learn was obedience as to be perfect.

They failed in the very beginning, Why? Because Adam and Eve put their own selfish desires first and coveted what belong to Jehovah rather than please Jehovah and be obedient, so in reality/essence Adam and Eve obviously loved themselves more than Jehovah.

So Adam failed to conquer obedience to Jehovah because he didn't have a heartfelt unconditional love towards Jehovah.

So why should Adam have the right to eat from the Tree of Life if he already proved beyond a shadow of Doubt that he wasn't obedient?
I mean Jesus the second Adam the only begotten son of Jehovah came in the flesh to break up the works of the devil and he had to be obedient to death in order to conquer because Adam failed to be obedient to Jehovah.

I doubt very much that Jehovah in His righteous Justice would allowed Adam and Eve to be Resurrected because they already failed the test of obedience to Jehovah

1 John 3:8 He who carries on sin originates with the Devil,* because the Devil has been sinning from [the] beginning.*+ For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest,+ namely, to break up the works of the Devil

Hebrews5:7
In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions+ to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong+ outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.+ 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered;+ 9 and after he had been made perfect*+ he became responsible for everlasting salvation+ to all those obeying him,+ 10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Mel·chizʹe·dek.

Revelation2:7
Let the one who has an ear hear what the spirit+ says to the congregations: To him that conquers+ I will grant to eat of the tree of life,+ which is in the paradise* of God.’

Genesis3:22
And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad,+ and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life+ and eat and live to time indefinite,—”

Great reasoning Kevin. I do appreciate that you are taking time to as least consider what is being proposed, and that in doing so, some great questions are coming out. Somebody once said asking the right question is halfway to the right answer, so when you ask "why should Adam have the right to eat from the Tree of Life...he wasn't obedient". Great Question! Why Indeed.

Do you think if Adam knew what would result from his sin; all the wars, the hatred and strife, the corruption and deceit, all the suffering and the death of everybody from that moment on...that he would have still made the same choice? Please consider it. When we look at this from his perspective he had no idea what would result by eating the fruit, except that he knew him and Eve would die. Perhaps he thought that once he ate..'POOF...' they would no longer exist, and that was that. When he chose to stick to his wife, he was essentially accepting his fate without knowing the tremendous impact it would have on his progeny. Does this somehow change how we perceive his decision, being that we have the luxury of hindsight in this matter? If he only knew then, what we know now! However, if we are to consider your question as to why he should have the right to eat from the tree of life, from a scriptural sound point then I offer this one scripture.

It states: “. . .For he who has died has been acquitted from [his] sin.” Ro 6:7.

The price we pay for sin is death. Adam paid it! Does this scripture possibly suggest that Adam has the right to live again, to get a second chance at eating from the Tree of Life? I don’t know, it does seem to have that vibe to it.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Great reasoning Kevin. I do appreciate that you are taking time to as least consider what is being proposed, and that in doing so, some great questions are coming out. Somebody once said asking the right question is halfway to the right answer, so when you ask "why should Adam have the right to eat from the Tree of Life...he wasn't obedient". Great Question! Why Indeed.

Do you think if Adam knew what would result from his sin; all the wars, the hatred and strife, the corruption and deceit, all the suffering and the death of everybody from that moment on...that he would have still made the same choice? Please consider it. When we look at this from his perspective he had no idea what would result by eating the fruit, except that he knew him and Eve would die. Perhaps he thought that once he ate..'POOF...' they would no longer exist, and that was that. When he chose to stick to his wife, he was essentially accepting his fate without knowing the tremendous impact it would have on his progeny. Does this somehow change how we perceive his decision, being that we have the luxury of hindsight in this matter? If he only knew then, what we know now! However, if we are to consider your question as to why he should have the right to eat from the tree of life, from a scriptural sound point then I offer this one scripture.

It states: “. . .For he who has died has been acquitted from [his] sin.” Ro 6:7.

The price we pay for sin is death. Adam paid it! Does this scripture possibly suggest that Adam has the right to live again, to get a second chance at eating from the Tree of Life? I don’t know, it does seem to have that vibe to it.

“Do you think if Adam knew what would result from his sin; all the wars, the hatred and strife, the corruption and deceit, all the suffering and the death of everybody from that moment on...that he would have still made the same choice?“

It is certainly reasonable to assume so, yet all things considered, though he had creation laid out before him, he appeared unable to consider the consequences of reproduction and future society. Not surprising given the enormity of it and the contemplation of the effects on sentencing one’s own children to death. But Eve had already made the choice. He must have understood death given the task of observing nature and to order it.

Yet given our own insight, choice, when it comes to selfishness is the last thing on our minds. We want it all. The singularity of mind when a woman searches for shoes can last a whole day to the exclusion of all else, before at closing time, rushing back to the first shop visited to buy the first pair she saw! We know that to be true. So though rare to see such a trait in a man, it is obvious that Adam, seeing his wife throw away such a gift, threw his lot in with her. It still goes on today so we know it is a fact. So yes, he would still have made the same choice. I’m now going to shut down my iPad before the sisters read this.

 

[MickHewitt]

“Do you think if Adam knew what would result from his sin; all the wars, the hatred and strife, the corruption and deceit, all the suffering and the death of everybody from that moment on...that he would have still made the same choice?“

It is certainly reasonable to assume so, yet all things considered, though he had creation laid out before him, he appeared unable to consider the consequences of reproduction and future society. Not surprising given the enormity of it and the contemplation of the effects on sentencing one’s own children to death. But Eve had already made the choice. He must have understood death given the task of observing nature and to order it.

Yet given our own insight, choice, when it comes to selfishness is the last thing on our minds. We want it all. The singularity of mind when a woman searches for shoes can last a whole day to the exclusion of all else, before at closing time, rushing back to the first shop visited to buy the first pair she saw! We know that to be true. So though rare to see such a trait in a man, it is obvious that Adam, seeing his wife throw away such a gift, threw his lot in with her. It still goes on today so we know it is a fact. So yes, he would still have made the same choice. I’m now going to shut down my iPad before the sisters read this.

Hey B? Remember the Daleks? 'Destroy!, Destroy!, Destroy! Looks though they are finally in charge? Dr Who is really deep state, born from Eaton and Oxford. His telephone box landed in Whitehall in 1799 not surprisingly the year Malthus wrote his thesis on eugenics. Not lizard people but Daleks B! I wish Bertrand Russel was still alive and on Twitter! Especially to reply to his statement of the bible not giving explanation of how to feed the multitudes! No wonder the New world order had to erase the Christ from their vision, to thier image!? Even Darwin dared believe let alone espouse his thesis but got Thomas Huxley (Who didn't beleive it either) to be his orator...and bouncer in doing the will of Brittania.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Hey B? Remember the Daleks? 'Destroy!, Destroy!, Destroy! Looks though they are finally in charge? Dr Who is really deep state, born from Eaton and Oxford. His telephone box landed in Whitehall in 1799 not surprisingly the year Malthus wrote his thesis on eugenics. Not lizard people but Daleks B! I wish Bertrand Russel was still alive and on Twitter! Especially to reply to his statement of the bible no giving explanation of how to feed the multitudes! No wonder the New world order had to erase the Christ from their vision, thier image!? Even Darwin dared believe let alone espouse his thesis and got Thomas Huxley (Who didn't beleive it either) to be his orator...and bouncer in doing the will of Brittania.

The Daleks were actually prophetic of the great tribulation and are mentioned in Genesis - well, in the original language that is…in verse 14 of chapter 3: “Cursed are you above all wild animals, on your wheels you will crawl and at the first flight of stairs you will be stumbled, and I shall put enmity between you and a step and between your wheels and all steps, shall I put enmity. And they will cause you to stumble and fall down and crush your head, and you will merely chip his paintwork”. This is how we know that come the tribulation, we will only be safe if we stay upstairs. In later translations of course it was read as to get out of the house and not to take the stairs with you suggesting that the daleks were already upstairs and would of course fall down them. That’s why we have others here to clarify the scriptures for us.

 

[MickHewitt]

wheels

Wheely? Oh Wheel work! Imagine how many dollars are out there since coming off gold standard in 71?In one instance; Obama sent two jumbo jets to Iran full of dollars to pursuade non nuclear development...All those dollars floating around the globe and the end game is?........Who's left with the most! Pass the parcel; Musical chairs...Logic prevents any more paper...sooo...digital, digital. la la la ha ha!

 

[Cristo]

Based off of a recent answer that Robert just gave on another thread I wanted to bring that thought to this thread. He said: "In modern wedding vows husband and wife pledge to remain married until death do us part." It was then that I realized that once Eve had sinned, and was essentially dead in Jehovahs eyes, the marriage arrangement between her and Adam was actually nullified. Therefore, my previous argument regarding sticking to ones wife, as far as Adam basing his decision on that, would not have any merit. Thanks Robert for inadvertently clarifying this for me, I sincerely do appreciate it.

Thank you for all who participated in this discussion.