If you have faith in Jehovah, through Jesus Christ, you are more than adequately qualified evw. Gods spirit is directed towards those with sincere and open hearts. You are always welcome to join the discussion.I am even less qualified, so, i won't get involved in the big boys' conversation anymore
But thank you for your answer.
Great scripture, and certainly valid in this discussion. It is hard to justify any sort of resurrection to Adam when we compare his actions of showing greater affection for his wife than Jehovah. Only because I have taken the role of advocate for him, Adam that is, is why I look for opportunity to find potential reasons for a resurrection, but that doesn't mean that I must deny the possibility that he won't. I don't deny Adam may not get resurrected. I hope he does, but if not then it was Gods will, and I'm ok with that.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???
As I have repeatedly stated in this thread, my goal was really two fold in not only seeking to find a reason for the potential of a resurrection, but more so, in trying to discover WHY he did what he did. We already KNOW what he did, and it always seems to come back to the what, but I feel it is just as important, if not more so, to truly understand the why, the motive for doing such a thing in the first place. Perhaps we will never truly know, but that is what this is about, me trying to understand his thinking at the moments just prior to the sin. As Barnaby says, i'm more or less played out on this as well, and if I can sum up all that i have come to discover throughout all this it would be this.
The bible makes this comparison, “The first man Adam became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” 1Co 15:45. Thus, Adam in these scriptures represents a perfect man. It can be said then that prior to the sin, Adam was equal to Jesus Christ as far as perfection goes. Just as Barnaby alluded to they were created with a standard of perfection. Using this knowledge from the scriptures, we can then say there was nothing that the devil could have offered Adam to tempt him, because he was already perfect, he was already complete within himself, and he would have seen through the lies that Satan was peddling.
The scriptures state “. . .Adam was not deceived,. . .” (1Ti 2:14), therefore the two lies that Satan deceived Eve with had no influence over Adams decision. This means that Adams motive for sinning could not be based on what Satan had offered them. If Adam did believe he wouldn't die, or did believe he would be like God, then that would mean he had also been deceived, but the scriptures state that he wasn't, thus his motive, his reason for sin, must be found elsewhere.
Satan knew that by getting Eve to sin first, Adams motivation for sin would be through her if he would sin at all. Obviously Adam didn't want to be without his wife, for even though he had the perfect capacity to say no, he chose death to be with his wife. There can be thus only one reason why he sinned, his motive, was he didn't want to live without Eve. His love for his other half, at that moment, was greater than his love for Jehovah. I suppose then that Eve, in this sense, became the fruit on the tree for Adam.
I do not know if the statement "must stick to his wife" had any bearing on that decision, and I have wondered if that could be considered a commandment, for the word 'must' is strongly suggestive of it. If that were true, it still doesn't negate the fact that Adam still had to have the perfect capacity to listen to Jehovah, and not eat from the tree, for even though he 'must' stick to his wife, his loyalty to Jehovah would always need to come first.
Do I think Adam was blaming God for what happened? He could have been, but i am also willing to consider the other perspective, in which he inflected the words 'to be with me' instead of 'you'. I think the feelings he felt towards Eve, the woman who was supposed to be with him, reflected in his statement to God for what had just happened. The fact that he had just given up his life to be with her illustrates this to be possible. I don't hear any accountability in Adams words when he said "the woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree and so I ate", it almost sounds as though he is blaming Eve, not God, perhaps he just realized what a tremendous mistake he had just made and was trying to justify it somehow.
Honestly, in the end, i don't know if I'm any closer to to understanding, I suppose I should have just listened to the advice to keep searching for what we know is true. Next time I'll do my best to pay heed a bit more...Anyways thanks again for all who participated.