Warning about latest Smartphones and Tablets

[Bk Kevin]

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.

With that aspect being clarified that Adam no longer had any obligation to be one flesh with Eve due to her great sin against Jehovah -
Shouldn't the rule that Jesus applied to Judas Iscariot apply as well when Jesus said “On this account I say to YOU, Every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. Matthew 12:31.

Keeping in mind that Adam knew Jehovah very intimately so he was fully enlightened and a partaker of Jehovah Holy Spirit directly,
so in essence did not Adam sin directly against Jehovah's Spirit by disobeying his command in reference to the Forbidden tree.

Hebrews
6:4/6B For it is impossible as regards those who have once for all been enlightened, and who have tasted the heavenly free gift, and who have become partakers of holy spirit, 6B but who have fallen away, to revive them again to repentance,

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

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.

I’m with you on that if it truly brings to an end the discussion on the “dangers of smartphones and Tablets!” (That is a joke by the way!) Let‘s spend our time arguing the hind legs off a donkey about some scriptural matter. How about, “Did the animal skin that Jehovah dressed Eve in have His “Designer label“ in the collar?

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

With that aspect being clarified that Adam no longer had any obligated to be one flesh with Eve due to her great sin against Jehovah -
Shouldn't the rule that Jesus applied to Judas Iscariot apply as well when Jesus said “On this account I say to YOU, Every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. Matthew 12:31.

Keeping in mind that Adam knew Jehovah very intimately so he was fully enlightened and a partaker of Jehovah Holy Spirit directly,
so in essence did not Adam sin directly against Jehovah's Spirit by disobeying his command in reference to the Forbidden tree.

Hebrews
6:4/6B For it is impossible as regards those who have once for all been enlightened, and who have tasted the heavenly free gift, and who have become partakers of holy spirit, 6B but who have fallen away, to revive them again to repentance,

I can understand how Eve would have become dead in the eyes of Jehovah, but not necessarily on how that would dissolve the marriage vow with Adam. That vow could still remain unsullied. We are all in the same boat now, and the issues of fidelity still stand, as do the principles of Jehovah. Both Adam and Eve took of the fruit - both were “dead” though alive. It is what kind of death that is the question and which as you point out, it is that of grieving the spirit. Jesus knew of the rebellious spirit of Satan, I cannot recall where, but Jesus said “That one from the very beginning…”, and which I assume referred to Satan’s rebellious attitude before his actual critical sin against the spirit. I thought that death referred to the process by which death comes about - imperfection. Cessation of life, no matter when is an outcome of sin. Imperfection though does not nullify marriage, though its fulfilment is in sin. That still leaves room for fidelity even within sin. This is the difference between perfection and imperfection - giving way to sin. True worship is an act of preference in knowledge of all things both good and bad. That is its value, surely.

 

[Bk Kevin]

I can understand how Eve would have become dead in the eyes of Jehovah, but not necessarily on how that would dissolve the marriage vow with Adam. That vow could still remain unsullied. We are all in the same boat now, and the issues of fidelity still stand, as do the principles of Jehovah. Both Adam and Eve took of the fruit - both were “dead” though alive. It is what kind of death that is the question and which as you point out, it is that of grieving the spirit. Jesus knew of the rebellious spirit of Satan, I cannot recall where, but Jesus said “That one from the very beginning…”, and which I assume referred to Satan’s rebellious attitude before his actual critical sin against the spirit. I thought that death referred to the process by which death comes about - imperfection. Cessation of life, no matter when is an outcome of sin. Imperfection though does not nullify marriage, though its fulfilment is in sin. That still leaves room for fidelity even within sin. This is the difference between perfection and imperfection - giving way to sin. True worship is an act of preference in knowledge of all things both good and bad. That is its value, surely.

Barnaby that's a great point I didn't see that...Thanks for setting us straight,

yes you're absolutely right that would have not nullify their marriage vows until one or the other literally or physically died. but nonetheless they both had sinned so let the spiritually dead bury the physical dead .

Matthew8:21 Then another of the disciples said to him: “Lord, permit me first to leave and bury my father.” 22 Jesus said to him: “Keep following me, and let the dead bury their dead.”​

 

[Cristo]

With that aspect being clarified that Adam no longer had any obligated to be one flesh with Eve due to her great sin against Jehovah -
Shouldn't the rule that Jesus applied to Judas Iscariot apply as well when Jesus said “On this account I say to YOU, Every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. Matthew 12:31.

Keeping in mind that Adam knew Jehovah very intimately so he was fully enlightened and a partaker of Jehovah Holy Spirit directly,
so in essence did not Adam sin directly against Jehovah's Spirit by disobeying his command in reference to the Forbidden tree.

Hebrews
6:4/6B For it is impossible as regards those who have once for all been enlightened, and who have tasted the heavenly free gift, and who have become partakers of holy spirit, 6B but who have fallen away, to revive them again to repentance,

I can understand how Eve would have become dead in the eyes of Jehovah, but not necessarily on how that would dissolve the marriage vow with Adam. That vow could still remain unsullied. We are all in the same boat now, and the issues of fidelity still stand, as do the principles of Jehovah. Both Adam and Eve took of the fruit - both were “dead” though alive. It is what kind of death that is the question and which as you point out, it is that of grieving the spirit. Jesus knew of the rebellious spirit of Satan, I cannot recall where, but Jesus said “That one from the very beginning…”, and which I assume referred to Satan’s rebellious attitude before his actual critical sin against the spirit. I thought that death referred to the process by which death comes about - imperfection. Cessation of life, no matter when is an outcome of sin. Imperfection though does not nullify marriage, though its fulfilment is in sin. That still leaves room for fidelity even within sin. This is the difference between perfection and imperfection - giving way to sin. True worship is an act of preference in knowledge of all things both good and bad. That is its value, surely.

I actually thought I might get the last word when I posted, darn you guys First we certainly must address the elephant in the room, the long garments certainly had a designer label, and although it was not a faux fir, it was most certainly made in the greenest of standards. The animal, who unknowingly volunteered, was proud to have their skin turned into garments that would go down throughout history as the very first clothing fashion statement, and as the only divinely made fur ever made. Unfortunately the label 'divinely made' never made it far, as nobody could recreate the quality, and thus the 'manmade' label soon became the hottest trend. I wonder if it was a skunk, to remind the pair of what a stinky decision they made...

“. . .And Jehovah God proceeded to make long garments of skin for Adam and for his wife and to clothe them.. . .” Ge 3:21

Now to less serious matters..jk of course.

I don't think Adams sin would constitute as blasphemy against the holy spirit for the reason that I don't think he committed the sin with ill intent against God. Satan most certainly committed blasphemy when he lied to Eve for dishonest gain. Never once did Adam speak out against God. The fact that he wasn't deceived, yet chose to sin, does not itself constitute blasphemy against the holy spirit. In fact, if we look at the verse Kevin provided, it actually strengthens my argument in that 'every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men'. All sin goes contrary to Gods spirit, but not all sin is against Gods spirit(blasphemy), in that it is committed with a wicked heart, with malice as its intent. What's the difference? Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit must have its source in evil thought and is a reflection of such through the words of a person, such as Satan in Eden, or when Judas did it for evil gain when he agreed to betray Jesus, or when the Pharisees accused Jesus of blasphemy they were guilty of it themselves by doing so. Because they allowed their hearts to be hardened, they developed wicked hearts sourced by sin that produced evil intentions against the Holy Spirit. Again if we are to compare the sin of Satan, and the sin of Adam, the two most certainly do not equate with one another as regards intent to go against Gods purpose. Yes, they both sinned, and went contrary to Gods purpose, however the intention for doing so was completely different. One had a wicked heart, the other had a selfish one. The difference is what makes one sin unforgivable, and the other just so. Prior to Adams sin, he most certainly never had an evil thought against God, therefore his sin was not sourced with evil intent as Satans was, but rather, as I have pointed out many times on here, was motivated/sourced by his love for Eve.

The scripture that Barnaby alludes to suggests as much:

“. . .YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father. That one was a manslayer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of [the lie]. . .” Joh 8:44​

​

“. . .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.” 1Jo 3:8​

Because the sin of blasphemy must reside within a wicked heart, unless Adam himself had a wicked heart to begin with when he sinned, his sin cannot be constituted as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. There is nothing in the scriptures to suggest such a thing, but in fact just the opposite, as he was performing flawlessly in thought and deed, up unto the moment of sin. It is for this very reason that his sin must be sourced in love for his wife, not in a wicked heart such as Satan had, and that makes all the difference in the world.

Something else that occurred to me is the statement made by John in that 'he who carries on sin originates with the devil'. If Adam is the source of our sin, why is it that John does not mention him as the source, but rather he goes beyond Adam to the source of evil, the devil? Because evil intention is sourced, or originates, from Satan. Although Adam failed to make a right choice, sin came through him, but not from him. That is a distinction that must be understood in order to fully comprehend what happened, as he is not the father/source of the lie, of malice, of intent to deceive, of hatred against God, Satan is.

“. . .That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned—. 13 For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged against anyone when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death ruled as king from Adam down to Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the likeness of the transgression by Adam, who bears a resemblance to him that was to come.” Ro 5:12-14​

“. . .For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous. . .” Ro 5:19​

Sin did not come from Adam, but through Adam, from Satan. Just as salvation does not come from Jesus, but through Jesus, from Jehovah. It is a perfect balance which had to be restored in order for Gods purpose to continue.

“. . .to [the] only God our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, might and authority for all past eternity and now and into all eternity. . . .” Jude 25​

 

[Bk Kevin]

I actually thought I might get the last word when I posted, darn you guys First we certainly must address the elephant in the room, the long garments certainly had a designer label, and although it was not a faux fir, it was most certainly made in the greenest of standards. The animal, who unknowingly volunteered, was proud to have their skin turned into garments that would go down throughout history as the very first clothing fashion statement, and as the only divinely made fur ever made. Unfortunately the label 'divinely made' never made it far, as nobody could recreate the quality, and thus the 'manmade' label soon became the hottest trend. I wonder if it was a skunk, to remind the pair of what a stinky decision they made...

“. . .And Jehovah God proceeded to make long garments of skin for Adam and for his wife and to clothe them.. . .” Ge 3:21

Now to less serious matters..jk of course.

I don't think Adams sin would constitute as blasphemy against the holy spirit for the reason that I don't think he committed the sin with ill intent against God. Satan most certainly committed blasphemy when he lied to Eve for dishonest gain. Never once did Adam speak out against God. The fact that he wasn't deceived, yet chose to sin, does not itself constitute blasphemy against the holy spirit. In fact, if we look at the verse Kevin provided, it actually strengthens my argument in that 'every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men'. All sin goes contrary to Gods spirit, but not all sin is against Gods spirit(blasphemy), in that it is committed with a wicked heart, with malice as its intent. What's the difference? Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit must have its source in evil thought and is a reflection of such through the words of a person, such as Satan in Eden, or when Judas did it for evil gain when he agreed to betray Jesus, or when the Pharisees accused Jesus of blasphemy they were guilty of it themselves by doing so. Because they allowed their hearts to be hardened, they developed wicked hearts sourced by sin that produced evil intentions against the Holy Spirit. Again if we are to compare the sin of Satan, and the sin of Adam, the two most certainly do not equate with one another as regards intent to go against Gods purpose. Yes, they both sinned, and went contrary to Gods purpose, however the intention for doing so was completely different. One had a wicked heart, the other had a selfish one. The difference is what makes one sin unforgivable, and the other just so. Prior to Adams sin, he most certainly never had an evil thought against God, therefore his sin was not sourced with evil intent as Satans was, but rather, as I have pointed out many times on here, was motivated/sourced by his love for Eve.

The scripture that Barnaby alludes to suggests as much:

“. . .YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father. That one was a manslayer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of [the lie]. . .” Joh 8:44​

​

“. . .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.” 1Jo 3:8​

Because the sin of blasphemy must reside within a wicked heart, unless Adam himself had a wicked heart to begin with when he sinned, his sin cannot be constituted as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. There is nothing in the scriptures to suggest such a thing, but in fact just the opposite, as he was performing flawlessly in thought and deed, up unto the moment of sin. It is for this very reason that his sin must be sourced in love for his wife, not in a wicked heart such as Satan had, and that makes all the difference in the world.

Something else that occurred to me is the statement made by John in that 'he who carries on sin originates with the devil'. If Adam is the source of our sin, why is it that John does not mention him as the source, but rather he goes beyond Adam to the source of evil, the devil? Because evil intention is sourced, or originates, from Satan. Although Adam failed to make a right choice, sin came through him, but not from him. That is a distinction that must be understood in order to fully comprehend what happened, as he is not the father/source of the lie, of malice, of intent to deceive, of hatred against God, Satan is.

“. . .That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned—. 13 For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged against anyone when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death ruled as king from Adam down to Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the likeness of the transgression by Adam, who bears a resemblance to him that was to come.” Ro 5:12-14​

“. . .For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous. . .” Ro 5:19​

Just as sin came from Satan through Adam, so does salvation come from Jehovah through Jesus Christ. It is a perfect balance which had to be restored in order for Gods purpose to continue.

“. . .to [the] only God our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, might and authority for all past eternity and now and into all eternity. . . .” Jude 25​

Just because Adam didn't show any intent in his wording in his dialogue with Jehovah doesn't mean that Adam had no Wicked intention in fact Adams action proved beyond a shadow of doubt what his intentions were, when he disobey Jehovah and in his defiance ate from The Forbidden tree.
Thus sinning against Jehovah's Holy Spirit which he got directly from Jehovah.

Hebrews
6:4/6B For it is impossible as regards those who have once for all been enlightened, and who have tasted the heavenly free gift, and who have become partakers of holy spirit, 6B but who have fallen away, to revive them again to repentance,

They coveted what belong to God
to be like God knowing good and bad.

footnote>
“Like God.” Heb., kEʼ·lo·himʹ, without the definite article. This title is pl. to denote majesty or excellence.
Genesis

3:5 For God knows that in the very day of YOUR eating from it YOUR eyes are bound to be opened and YOU are bound to be like God,* KNOWING good and bad.”

Genesis 3:22
22 And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad,a and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of lifeb and eat and live to time indefinite,—”

With that being said I'm going to end our conversation regarding this subject so let's just agree to disagree and that's that.

 

[Cristo]

Just because Adam didn't show any intent in his wording in his dialogue with Jehovah doesn't mean that Adam had no Wicked intention in fact Adams action proved beyond a shadow of doubt what his intentions were, when he disobey Jehovah and in his defiance ate from The Forbidden tree.
Thus sinning against Jehovah's Holy Spirit which he got directly from Jehovah.

Hebrews
6:4/6B For it is impossible as regards those who have once for all been enlightened, and who have tasted the heavenly free gift, and who have become partakers of holy spirit, 6B but who have fallen away, to revive them again to repentance,

They coveted what belong to God
to be like God knowing good and bad.

footnote>
“Like God.” Heb., kEʼ·lo·himʹ, without the definite article. This title is pl. to denote majesty or excellence.
Genesis

3:5 For God knows that in the very day of YOUR eating from it YOUR eyes are bound to be opened and YOU are bound to be like God,* KNOWING good and bad.”

Genesis 3:22
22 And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad,a and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of lifeb and eat and live to time indefinite,—”

With that being said I'm going to end our conversation regarding this subject so let's just agree to disagree and that's that.

I agree to as well. Good convo nonetheless Kevin. Thanks for your input.

 

[Bk Kevin]

I agree to as well. Good convo nonetheless Kevin. Thanks for your input.

The way you write = your writing style seems very familiar to me , Are you Heath Orchard from Roberts other site?.

 

[Cristo]

The way you write = your writing style seems very familiar to me , Are you Heath Orchard from Roberts other site?.

No, just Cristo on this one, and that one. At first I was like, wait, Robert has another site, but then I realized you were talking about his main website with articles, and the Disqus commenting section. @Bk Kevin, that is the site you are referring to, is it not? Of course, now I'm curious who this Heath Orchard dude is, lol. Thanks Kevin....ha

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I actually thought I might get the last word when I posted, darn you guys First we certainly must address the elephant in the room, the long garments certainly had a designer label, and although it was not a faux fir, it was most certainly made in the greenest of standards. The animal, who unknowingly volunteered, was proud to have their skin turned into garments that would go down throughout history as the very first clothing fashion statement, and as the only divinely made fur ever made. Unfortunately the label 'divinely made' never made it far, as nobody could recreate the quality, and thus the 'manmade' label soon became the hottest trend. I wonder if it was a skunk, to remind the pair of what a stinky decision they made...

“. . .And Jehovah God proceeded to make long garments of skin for Adam and for his wife and to clothe them.. . .” Ge 3:21

Now to less serious matters..jk of course.

I don't think Adams sin would constitute as blasphemy against the holy spirit for the reason that I don't think he committed the sin with ill intent against God. Satan most certainly committed blasphemy when he lied to Eve for dishonest gain. Never once did Adam speak out against God. The fact that he wasn't deceived, yet chose to sin, does not itself constitute blasphemy against the holy spirit. In fact, if we look at the verse Kevin provided, it actually strengthens my argument in that 'every sort of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men'. All sin goes contrary to Gods spirit, but not all sin is against Gods spirit(blasphemy), in that it is committed with a wicked heart, with malice as its intent. What's the difference? Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit must have its source in evil thought and is a reflection of such through the words of a person, such as Satan in Eden, or when Judas did it for evil gain when he agreed to betray Jesus, or when the Pharisees accused Jesus of blasphemy they were guilty of it themselves by doing so. Because they allowed their hearts to be hardened, they developed wicked hearts sourced by sin that produced evil intentions against the Holy Spirit. Again if we are to compare the sin of Satan, and the sin of Adam, the two most certainly do not equate with one another as regards intent to go against Gods purpose. Yes, they both sinned, and went contrary to Gods purpose, however the intention for doing so was completely different. One had a wicked heart, the other had a selfish one. The difference is what makes one sin unforgivable, and the other just so. Prior to Adams sin, he most certainly never had an evil thought against God, therefore his sin was not sourced with evil intent as Satans was, but rather, as I have pointed out many times on here, was motivated/sourced by his love for Eve.

The scripture that Barnaby alludes to suggests as much:

“. . .YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father. That one was a manslayer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of [the lie]. . .” Joh 8:44​

​

“. . .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.” 1Jo 3:8​

Because the sin of blasphemy must reside within a wicked heart, unless Adam himself had a wicked heart to begin with when he sinned, his sin cannot be constituted as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. There is nothing in the scriptures to suggest such a thing, but in fact just the opposite, as he was performing flawlessly in thought and deed, up unto the moment of sin. It is for this very reason that his sin must be sourced in love for his wife, not in a wicked heart such as Satan had, and that makes all the difference in the world.

Something else that occurred to me is the statement made by John in that 'he who carries on sin originates with the devil'. If Adam is the source of our sin, why is it that John does not mention him as the source, but rather he goes beyond Adam to the source of evil, the devil? Because evil intention is sourced, or originates, from Satan. Although Adam failed to make a right choice, sin came through him, but not from him. That is a distinction that must be understood in order to fully comprehend what happened, as he is not the father/source of the lie, of malice, of intent to deceive, of hatred against God, Satan is.

“. . .That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned—. 13 For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged against anyone when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death ruled as king from Adam down to Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the likeness of the transgression by Adam, who bears a resemblance to him that was to come.” Ro 5:12-14​

“. . .For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous. . .” Ro 5:19​

Sin did not come from Adam, but through Adam, from Satan. Just as salvation does not come from Jesus, but through Jesus, from Jehovah. It is a perfect balance which had to be restored in order for Gods purpose to continue.

“. . .to [the] only God our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, might and authority for all past eternity and now and into all eternity. . . .” Jude 25​

No, just Cristo on this one, and that one. At first I was like, wait, Robert has another site, but then I realized you were talking about his main website with articles, and the Disqus commenting section. @Bk Kevin, that is the site you are referring to, is it not? Of course, now I'm curious who this Heath Orchard dude is, lol. Thanks Kevin....ha

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Cristo: My reply would not fit on your comment - over a 1,000 words, so I’ve put it here:

If truth is to be found, then we have to empty ourselves of our understanding and accept scripture - what is written. There are arguments in that too, thus there is no easy answer. What seems reasonable though is generally a good enough alternative if it is in context. I would suggest that the context is in what Satan’s aim was. That was two-fold. First, he wanted what was not his to have. This reflects exactly with Adam’s act of disobedience. He wanted the knowledge of Jehovah for himself, contained in that one act of taking from the tree. Secondly, Adam sided with Satan on the challenge to Jehovah in His right to the authorship of perfection and it’s necessary constituent parts.

Adam was the first creation of a man - the one upon whom Jehovah placed obedience to His authority. Eve was subject to Adam. Satan did not approach Adam directly, but it is clear that Adam was the target for this very reason. Eve was secondary to the motive of the lie. The plan of attack was through his perceived weak point. For Satan’s plan could not succeed without his compliance. The choice of Adam then was deliberate and in full knowledge of its meaning and an exact mirror of Satan’s challenge. How could Adam’s act of compliance in desire have differed from Satan’s challenge if it were to be a successful in its outcome to challenge Jehovah’s authority? He became an ally of Satan, not a victim. Eve was the victim, the means, Adam became complicit with Satan upon her failure in that moment. This is the context of “The woman whom You gave me…”. He specifically blames Jehovah, thus signals that Jehovah has fault within him. This mirrors the objectivity of the challenge from Satan.

I agree that Adam is not the source of sin. The scripture says that “sin entered the world through one man.” Sin must already exist to “enter” must it not? Passengers enter the station by alighting from the train that brings them, do they not“ Satan was the means whereby sin entered the world through Adam, whom he enticed. It is a mistake though to believe that in a perfect state, that Adam would side with his wife in her sin because of love. Perfect love is the ultimate in discrimination between good and bad. How could it be any different if Jehovah is the essence of and “creator“ of love. The Scriptures are clear; Jehovah is love. That is not the case for man. Man is the recipient of potential to perfection. His body may be perfect, as would his mind, but whereas Jehovah cannot lie, He gave man the option because of the very fact that love is freely given, not obligatory by means of a misunderstood concept of what perfection is - and which is to fulfil the purpose for what it is intended. Thus choice in perfection is obligatory. Jehovah does not allow Himself such choice. He alone is the standard of perfection and thus must rigidly and without exception, fulfil that standard. It was thus the challenge of Satan. Thus Adam did not require a wicked heart to sin, or to blaspheme, but indeed had the potential.

If Jehovah is the law maker, then it is He that makes the laws. It is He that determines what is right and what is wrong. How are we to know any different then? We know of no other way, excepting that which we choose. The definition of law, and good and bad, is why Jehovah cannot change. That is the personification of perfection. Ridged application to a given, consistent, unchangeable standard. Blasphemy then does not exist within these laws unless it is chosen to be by the instigator. That it is a choice is clear because A) it is ethereal, and B) it is desired, and C) it is acted upon. That is what brings it to existence. Its potential does not bring it to existence. The treachery of the heart is in its potential. Potential as already discussed, is not sin. Abstinence of it is perfection. To employ it is sin. Thus a perfect heart can indeed sin because sin is not in contemplation, but in its manifestation. Intent is another matter, ”That one from his very beginning was a man slayer…”. But there was no prior intent in Adam to sin that was recorded, thus his connivance with Satan can be seen as agreement, rather than an intent to sin. A deliberate choice.

This may appear as semantics, but I feel that can be ruled out in terms of scripture, because meaning must be scrutinised if truth is to be contextual in spiritual terms. I feel it worth pursuing because it’s not about who is right or wrong, but what is true if we are to reason on it correctly. I find reasoning on scripture quite enjoyable.

 

[Cristo]

If truth is to be found, then we have to empty ourselves of our understanding and accept scripture - what is written.

I thought thats what I have been doing to be honest. In fact I've shown several scriptures that support my view as regards to Adam being resurrected. When I provided this scripture earlier in a post, I felt there would be at least a little discussion regarding its weightiness for the potential of Adam & Eve to be resurrected, but nothing.

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

I too find reasoning on scripture quite enjoyable, let's reason on this scripture for a bit.

This is the context of “The woman whom You gave me…”. He specifically blames Jehovah, thus signals that Jehovah has fault within him.

From this perspective I of course agree with you. But I thought we have been already through this. First, we don't know how the words Adam spoke to Jehovah were inflected, the You is your interpretation of it, is it not? Second, the context you provide is NOT the context, Jehovah didn't just give Eve to Adam, like he owned her or something, he did it for a reason, to complete him, to be with him, to love him for all eternity. Thus the actual scripture states:

"the woman whom you gave, to be with me..." Gen 3:12.

Whereas you see blame with You, I see something else in to be with me. Perhaps I'm just a romantic at heart and want to believe that Adam, faced with the choice of losing his wife, chose her over Jehovah. He accepted his fate to be with her, regardless of the outcome. I don't think he wanted, or desired to be more than Jehovah had already given him, just as all of creation was content with their existence, so too was he. There is nothing to suggest that he did want more. If you think his sin is that suggestion then remember “. . .Adam was not deceived,. . .” 1Ti 2:14.

The lies that Satan told Eve, had absolutely no bearing on Adams decision to sin. Adam knew he would die, and he knew he wouldn't be like God. Because he was not deceived, there was no temptation, there was nothing that Satan could offer him that had any bearing on Adams decision to sin. Adam was content with his perfect existence, just as the countless other perfect creations(angels, seraphim, cherubim) had been for eons, and eons of time. The track record of creation alone bears this reasoning out, Jehovah held nothing back from us. The devil knew that Adam would respond perfectly if he went to him first, and that Adam would see through the lies being offered as something more than he had already been given, thus the devil would not use lies against Adam, but love. Satan knew he couldn't attack Adams mind and reasoning, thus he focused on his heart. That was Adams weak spot...his love for his wife.

The choice of Adam then was deliberate and in full knowledge of its meaning and an exact mirror of Satan’s challenge.

Yes most certainly, and yes, at a fundamental level, it came down to free will and the choice to use it for good, or bad, so in that regards I see your exact mirror comparison to the devils challenge. That is not what I am challenging, but it seems to always come back to that. My argument is about WHY he made the wrong decision, the motive for doing so, and in understanding that we can see that it is not an exact reflection of Satan, and here's why.

Satan wanted it all.

Adam wanted nothing more than he had already been given. You can't get more perfect than perfect. As stated, spiritual creatures from the very beginning have shown themselves to be perfectly content with their perfect selves, Adam was no different in that regards, there is nothing more to be had when one is perfect. It was only until something had been taken away from this perfection that he wanted more, but it really isn't wanting more if you just want back what was taken from you. Once Eve sinned, it most certainly felt like a part of him died. To anybody who has ever suffered the loss of a loved one I would think they can somewhat empathize with what he experienced at that moment. Regardless of perfection, or not, the pain can be overwhelming.

Was this pain shared by the devil? Were Adams feelings mirroring Satans when he was dealing with the loss of his wife? Do we have compassion to feel what Adam was dealing with at that moment? We are used to death, in fact thats all we know. Adam however, was the first person to have to experience the tremendous pain of a loss. That pain, that feeling, is not a natural pain. Humans were not supposed to die, therefore that pain that Adam felt was something that can only exist once sin has manifested into the world. Do you think Jehovah will take that into consideration in regards to a resurrection? I do.

This is of course when you are now thinking to yourself, "well Cristo is just trying to justify Adams wrong decision, regardless, Adam still had the full ability to make the right choice." Of course he did, just as you state, his decision was deliberate and in full knowledge of what would happen, and no, there is never justification for a wrong choice, but there is always a motive for one. There is nothing to show Adam was deceived into thinking he would receive more than he already had been given, or that he wanted more than to just be with his wife, in which he made the decision to die. If you can show me something other than Eve, that he was willing to die for, with supporting scriptures, please do so now.

And if you cannot, then you may just begin to see why he could not be blaming Eve. For why would somebody blame the one whom they had just given up their life for? Rather, wouldn't it make more sense for Adam to give up his life for the one that was meant 'to be with him(me)'?

This may appear as semantics, but I feel that can be ruled out in terms of scripture, because meaning must be scrutinised if truth is to be contextual in spiritual terms. I feel it worth pursuing because it’s not about who is right or wrong, but what is true if we are to reason on it correctly. I find reasoning on scripture quite enjoyable.

I couldn't agree more Barnaby. I do hope you will consider the scriptures that I have provided, the few that are there. I'm sorry I don't see it the way you do, its not black and white to me, as it seems to be for you. It seems you are still looking at it through the lens of blame, however I do challenge you to try and see it from my perspective. You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if I knew that you understand clearly what it is that I am trying to convey.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I thought thats what I have been doing to be honest. In fact I've shown several scriptures that support my view as regards to Adam being resurrected. When I provided this scripture earlier in a post, I felt there would be at least a little discussion regarding its weightiness for the potential of Adam & Eve to be resurrected, but nothing.

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

I too find reasoning on scripture quite enjoyable, let's reason on this scripture for a bit.


From this perspective I of course agree with you. But I thought we have been already through this. First, we don't know how the words Adam spoke to Jehovah were inflected, the You is your interpretation of it, is it not? Second, the context you provide is NOT the context, Jehovah didn't just give Eve to Adam, like he owned her or something, he did it for a reason, to complete him, to be with him, to love him for all eternity. Thus the actual scripture states:

"the woman whom you gave, to be with me..." Gen 3:12.

Whereas you see blame with You, I see something else in to be with me. Perhaps I'm just a romantic at heart and want to believe that Adam, faced with the choice of losing his wife, chose her over Jehovah. He accepted his fate to be with her, regardless of the outcome. I don't think he wanted, or desired to be more than Jehovah had already given him, just as all of creation was content with their existence, so too was he. There is nothing to suggest that he did want more. If you think his sin is that suggestion then remember “. . .Adam was not deceived,. . .” 1Ti 2:14.

The lies that Satan told Eve, had absolutely no bearing on Adams decision to sin. Adam knew he would die, and he knew he wouldn't be like God. Because he was not deceived, there was no temptation, there was nothing that Satan could offer him that had any bearing on Adams decision to sin. Adam was content with his perfect existence, just as the countless other perfect creations(angels, seraphim, cherubim) had been for eons, and eons of time. The track record of creation alone bears this reasoning out, Jehovah held nothing back from us. The devil knew that Adam would respond perfectly if he went to him first, and that Adam would see through the lies being offered as something more than he had already been given, thus the devil would not use lies against Adam, but love. Satan knew he couldn't attack Adams mind and reasoning, thus he focused on his heart. That was Adams weak spot...his love for his wife.

Yes most certainly, and yes, at a fundamental level, it came down to free will and the choice to use it for good, or bad, so in that regards I see your exact mirror comparison to the devils challenge. That is not what I am challenging, but it seems to always come back to that. My argument is about WHY he made the wrong decision, the motive for doing so, and in understanding that we can see that it is not an exact reflection of Satan, and here's why.

Satan wanted it all.

Adam wanted nothing more than he had already been given. You can't get more perfect than perfect. As stated, spiritual creatures from the very beginning have shown themselves to be perfectly content with their perfect selves, Adam was no different in that regards, there is nothing more to be had when one is perfect. It was only until something had been taken away from this perfection that he wanted more, but it really isn't wanting more if you just want back what was taken from you. Once Eve sinned, it most certainly felt like a part of him died. To anybody who has ever suffered the loss of a loved one I would think they can somewhat empathize with what he experienced at that moment. Regardless of perfection, or not, the pain can be overwhelming.

Was this pain shared by the devil? Were Adams feelings mirroring Satans when he was dealing with the loss of his wife? Do we have compassion to feel what Adam was dealing with at that moment? We are used to death, in fact thats all we know. Adam however, was the first person to have to experience the tremendous pain of a loss. That pain, that feeling, is not a natural pain. Humans were not supposed to die, therefore that pain that Adam felt was something that can only exist once sin has manifested into the world. Do you think Jehovah will take that into consideration in regards to a resurrection? I do.

This is of course when you are now thinking to yourself, "well Cristo is just trying to justify Adams wrong decision, regardless, Adam still had the full ability to make the right choice." Of course he did, just as you state, his decision was deliberate and in full knowledge of what would happen, and no, there is never justification for a wrong choice, but there is always a motive for one. There is nothing to show Adam was deceived into thinking he would receive more than he already had been given, or that he wanted more than to just be with his wife, in which he made the decision to die. If you can show me something other than Eve, that he was willing to die for, with supporting scriptures, please do so now.

And if you cannot, then you may just begin to see why he could not be blaming Eve. For why would somebody blame the one whom they had just given up their life for? Rather, wouldn't it make more sense for Adam to give up his life for the one that was meant 'to be with him(me)'?


I couldn't agree more Barnaby. I do hope you will consider the scriptures that I have provided, the few that are there. I'm sorry I don't see it the way you do, its not black and white to me, as it seems to be for you. It seems you are still looking at it through the lens of blame, however I do challenge you to try and see it from my perspective. You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if I knew that you understand clearly what it is that I am trying to convey.

You certainly have an empathetic argument Cristo . It appeals to me because I prefer it to thinking that Adam may not be subject to mercy. My uncertain humanity speaketh! My block is as stated, not in belief as you suggest, but in context - the issues of acting in my own knowledge and of the unyielding statutes of Jehovah. I believe as I do because of context. Of course, we are both looking at the same context, but it is perhaps, that our own desires, hopes and fears are reflected because of our own life experiences. That is powerful enough to blind ourselves - and I include myself - to the acceptance of fact. We see this in watchtower in an almost unexplainable level and in doing so, I am forced to admit that given the assumptions we make as humans as to justice and qualification in administering justice, that it is wise to assume we stand upon sand when considering Jehovah’s administration of such.

I can certainly make room for the consideration of mercy for Adam, not so much on what is said of him, or the context in which it was said and the assumed, though common, understanding of it, but in that we cannot assume on the mercy of Jehovah, because it is also my feeling that we have a (very) superficial insight into the attribute of mercy, justice and certainly love. “Judge not! Lest you be judged.“ We must accept all of scripture. How though does that sit with the certain knowledge of others? Well, we are judged as individuals and no matter the depths of knowledge it is our heart condition that counts. Empathy then is a factor and empathy being a construct of mercy and justice is a factor we should not ignore. However, the depths of it is unknown to us, basic as we are in our dealings with others. It is best left to Jehovah, and though that is a stock-in-hand phrase of watchtower, to be dished out at every Impasse such as this, it nonetheless has its merits. Therefore I can only yield to the thought that Jehovah is unmatched in his depth of mercy and justice and to agree with your sentiment of the conflict in mind that Adam may have had. It cannot be denied. I cannot presume to know if this event was a breach of grieving the spirit. It may well have been, but your argument as to the desperation in Adam’s heart at that moment, I too have stood over the dead body of my wife and pleaded with her to wake up. How then can I deny it in others and assume their thinking is rational or deliberate? It cannot be done. The subject matter therefore changes from inquiry to compromise and the weaknesses in our own understanding. I would not wish to defeat the emotive compassion of your reasoning because I have been there and I can in honesty, neither qualify it or reject it by assuming insight into the qualities betwixt mercy and justice as the Creator views it - though it appears to be well stated in the scripture. It is just not given to me. Therefore I will acknowledge your reasoning as justified and wait for insight.

 

[evw]

When reading and rereading this argument, one text always comes to mind: Matt. 10:37, 38. I could be completely wrong with the application, so forgive me in advance. But when Jesus says: Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and whoever has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me.38 And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. against imperfect humans, how much more so would it apply to Adam who was perfectly and been taught by Jehovah Hiself and then considers his wife worth more than Jehovah? Could that be a basis for a resurrection???

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

When reading and rereading this argument, one text always comes to mind: Matt. 10:37, 38. I could be completely wrong with the application, so forgive me in advance. But when Jesus says: Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and whoever has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me.38 And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. against imperfect humans, how much more so would it apply to Adam who was perfectly and been taught by Jehovah Hiself and then considers his wife worth more than Jehovah? Could that be a basis for a resurrection???

That is a good observation. I had not considered that, certainly. I would agree with it, though in my thinking - not necessarily correctly of course, that still does not plumb the depths of forgiveness. After all, all of us are unworthy of Jehovah’s mercy, hence the sacrifice of Christ. So our unworthiness can by some means, be forgiven. We can though be worthy of redemption. Jehovah has forgiven sins worthy of death - murder being but one. I would like to be certain of the issue, but to do so with certainty , one would have to know the full extent of the attributes of Jehovah, upon which, we are only given to skate upon the surface in our limited interpretation of such. The attributes are far more extensive than we may assume. Jehovah has in the past listened to the arguments of man and has changed his course of action - or rather delayed it. And this is the Creator Him self! And we sit here deciding on whether He will stretch out His hand and forgive? Perhaps I lack insight. I’m sure I do. But it seems rather arrogant to stray into areas of uncertainty with an emphatic solution to an attribute of Jehovah that cannot as yet be fathomed, let alone understood in its reach.

 

[evw]

That is a good observation. I had not considered that, certainly. I would agree with it, though in my thinking - not necessarily correctly of course, that still does not plumb the depths of forgiveness. After all, all of us are unworthy of Jehovah’s mercy, hence the sacrifice of Christ. So our unworthiness can by some means, be forgiven. We can though be worthy of redemption. Jehovah has forgiven sins worthy of death - murder being but one. I would like to be certain of the issue, but to do so with certainty , one would have to know the full extent of the attributes of Jehovah, upon which, we are only given to skate upon the surface in our limited interpretation of such. The attributes are far more extensive than we may assume. Jehovah has in the past listened to the arguments of man and has changed his course of action - or rather delayed it. And this is the Creator Him self! And we sit here deciding on whether He will stretch out His hand and forgive? Perhaps I lack insight. I’m sure I do. But it seems rather arrogant to stray into areas of uncertainty with an emphatic solution to an attribute of Jehovah that cannot as yet be fathomed, let alone understood in its reach.

I completely agree with you; it is an act of arrogance to determine who is and who is not forgiven and far be it from me to have an opinion on that. That Jehovah listens to imperfect people is soooo special and happy that He does. Yet what I was concidering about with this text was if this is true for imperfect human beings, how much more so would it be true for Adam, who was not imperfect, but perfect, right?

 

[Revvzone]

I’m with you on that if it truly brings to an end the discussion on the “dangers of smartphones and Tablets!” (That is a joke by the way!) Let‘s spend our time arguing the hind legs off a donkey about some scriptural matter. How about, “Did the animal skin that Jehovah dressed Eve in have His “Designer label“ in the collar?

I rather argue over what one calls a cow on the ground with no legs? I'd call it, Ground Beef :~)

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I completely agree with you; it is an act of arrogance to determine who is and who is not forgiven and far be it from me to have an opinion on that. That Jehovah listens to imperfect people is soooo special and happy that He does. Yet what I was concidering about with this text was if this is true for imperfect human beings, how much more so would it be true for Adam, who was not imperfect, but perfect, right?

My reasoning would be that Jehovah personifies perfection. He “cannot” as He says tell a lie - and I assume that encapsulates any deviation from his own standards as that too would constitute a lie to expect another to attain it if He can choose not to. I understand that Jehovah “demands “ unadulterated devotion, but ”demanding” of itself does not refer to perfection, but to effort. We ourselves ‘demand‘ obedience from our children to our standard if we are to be pleased, gratified and satisfied by their efforts, rather than their attainment. We respect their infancy and growth. Neither do we demand love, and which cuts us to the core when we discover that we have neglected some offering they have made for us at school and we appear to dismiss it, just as when we are saddened that they neglect our direction. But either way, do we cut them off? If we do, we have to bear in mind that others, for the same perceived crime, may not. So what is the standard by which we judge? It is a clearly fallible standard and in human terms imperfect.

Adam, I understand, was perfectly made. But is it so that perfection in human terms necessitates or implies, ridged and unswerving automatic and unthinking obedience and understanding without choice? If it does, then love has no value. Jehovah is the epitome of love, the creator or translator of its understanding and in the measure or value of its outcomes. It would be a contradiction in terms with His stated ethos to assume it is an inbuilt automatic response. That is not love. It is obedience. He asks for love. If we understand His love, we give obedience willingly because we love Him and appreciate His laws because they are fine and true. Worthy.

Are we to believe that because Adam’s body was perfect, that His sense of love was mature? Do we have that right to say so through scripture or our own understanding? Jehovah made Adam’s body and then breathed life into it. The two items are separate and though one informs the other, the body supports life and its expression if the scripture denotes a separation between the two. Life does not require flesh to express itself as it appears in spiritual form. If then, life can mature in expression in flesh, it clearly has to learn the language of flesh and the responses of the flesh - ergo, it’s five senses, let alone the infinite range of emotion and feeling and the understanding of what happens in our life and not even touching on the process of reasoning.

It is argued that as Adam was perfect, that he was so, in full possession of his mental faculties and reasoning. Cristo argues this point, as does Kevin from another perspective. Could, should Adam have been supplied with a perfect understanding of love? Love is akin to loyalty. Loyalty is akin to truth. Truth is akin to love, and love the scriptures say, is the result (in my understanding) of the culmination of all of the attributes of the spirit. The bible says that if you have all else, but not love, you have nothing.

If love is the epitome of Jehovah‘s existence for us, is it likely then that he gave Adam the full measure of it from the moment of his creation? Is that what perfection is? To give your newborn every last understanding and insight into the ethereal emotions in depth and meaning? Clearly not. Jehovah pointed to the tree and said “Eat of that and you die.” Therefore there was something for Adam to learn about love. If there was not; as obedience has to have meaning to obey itself, then there was no requirement for the tree. It was the realisation and loving subjugation in the full understanding of love that could alone, render the freely given measure of loving response that Jehovah requires. Free, understood, appreciated, imbued and imbibed willingly and returned altruistically to the creator. If that is true….

That Adam may have been “incomplete” in his own development, or, as I think Cristo suggested, emotionally torn between two choices, then a mistake on values is possible and thus, that Jehovah may take that into account. If Adam was perfect in body and perfect in love, then how could he have made such a choice? It’s not conceivable. What was it though, that Adam lost that Christ was willing to sacrifice his life for? Why, more importantly, did he have to give his life? I think this is the critical lever in the discussion. Adam also paid with his life. Does that fulfil the criteria for sin? Was Adam a victim as we are victims of him?

So two things apply: deliberate disobedience, or as Cristo suggests, a forgivable act ( from what course I will not speculate ). It depends I assume, on the depth of understanding that only Jehovah and His son have. Jehovah’s standard of perfection cannot be changed. I’m more or less played out on the subject! I’m just not qualified!

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I rather argue over what one calls a cow on the ground with no legs? I'd call it, Ground Beef :~)

Me too. Tasty!

 

[evw]

I’m just not qualified!

I am even less qualified, so, i won't get involved in the big boys' conversation anymore
But thank you for your answer.