Adam's Choice to Remain with Eve--The keeping of a commandment and blessing.

[larkin31]

Jay53,
My point has been that Eve perceived (correctly based on what we learn afterward) that if she wanted “wisdom”, she needed to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God had presented no other option about obtaining wisdom. If she was going to want wisdom, there was only one way to get it.

Why not allow for the insight that she decided that “death” was a better option than staying in a non-progressive, no-growth, no-wisdom situation–especially when she had been placed on earth to be a “help meet” for Adam? In other words, her “choice” to disobey God in that one thing, was not a choice to disobey God in everything, and it was a choice for wisdom and against a no-growth situation. God had given her a choice, with a particular and specific consequence. She chose wisdom, and in so doing chose its consequence–but this was not rebellion against God because God already has wisdom. It was accepting that in order to obtain wisdom, there was only one way to do it and God had said the consequence was going to be eventual death which meant “a lot of pain.”

So, Parker, WHY do this? Why set wisdom up against immortality? Why would God want to deny “knowledge of good and evil” to his most beloved creation?

 

[RebeccaJ]

RebeccaJ,
You may or may not be aware that I will be delighted to have a go at challenging your point of view. Here goes (I really do think this is fun stuff):

ParkerD, it is really simple: Thou shalt not eat.

How do you respond to a commandment of God?

Satan temped Christ with all the glories of all the kingdoms he could see from a tower. The Father gave Him the Kingdom of Heaven.

Believing that you must go against a commandment of God in order to find fulfillment, whether that is knowledge, or a tasty fruit, or all the power of the greatest earthly king…fulfilling one’s own desires against a commandment of God is a great definition of foolish.

What you have going in this thread is nothing more than a repackaging of the serpent’s lies. May you find God’s mercy.

---

To the three-fold temptation in the garden…

God commanded they not eat of the fruit.

This is what you are supporting:

There it is, doesn’t it look delicious, why should you be denied the taste of that fruit? There it is, isn’t it beautiful, so perfect, and so lush, why shouldn’t it be yours? There it is, you know that if you eat it, you will be a god, why should you deny yourself?

God does not want for you to be denied these things. Take it. Eat it.

This is your argument ParkerD. It is the same as the serpent’s.

 

[RebeccaJ]

From your point of view, why did God have to protect this tree with the threat of death? I mean, why suffer mortality for acquiring the knowledge of right and wrong?

larkin31, this would be a great question for the philosophy forum. But, I have read before that the Hebrew view of sin is that it is synonymous with death. So the tree isn’t protected by the threat of death, the fruit (sin, which is to rebel against God), is analogous to the “fruit of our labors” when we choose sin.

I don’t believe the fruit itself held any magical properties. What it does represent, is the fruit we bear when we rebel against God, which is death. Adam and Eve had very intimate and immediate knowledge of God. When they chose to rebel against Him, they chose evil, and so they came to an intimate and immediate knowledge of evil. Something that may have been more abstract, or mysterious before…not known. They came to know sin, which was also to come to know death.

Because of their actions, they were cast out from the presence of God, and us (all of humanity) were cut off from the immediate presence of God. Through the millenia afterward, God kept bringing us to reconciliation, via covenants with His chosen people, which was made complete for all of humanity with the death of Jesus Christ.

 

[Jay53]

Jay53,
I didn’t think the example about stem cell research and “killing innocent life to obtain knowledge” was applicable to illustrate the dilemmas Eve faced or Adam faced. I still don’t. It is not a valid comparison, at all.

Then you weren’t following what I was saying. The ends do not justify the means. Disobeying God in order to obtain knowledge, just because you desire it, is not acceptable. Just as killing innocent life to obtain a cure for a disease is not acceptable. (or maybe you think it is?)

I’m not sure why you think sin is acceptable in God’s eyes.

The point about word choice has to do with where the word choice leads. If one thinks Eve chose “wisdom” as something she decided was desirable, and accepted that there was going to be a consequence that sounded painful and difficult, then that is a far different thing than to say she was being “prideful” and “avaricious” and “lustful.”

I thought the commandment was “Thou shalt not eat”. You seem to read that as “I prefer you don’t eat, but if you want to and want to gain knowledge, go ahead and I’ll come up with a plan to save you.”

Eve was tempted, true, but the verse that tells what her reasoning was does not emphasize that she was thinking about the “temptation” or the false statements Satan had made. The verse written by Moses and inspired by God tells that she was thinking about the fruit being “good for food” and “pleasant” and “desired to make one wise”. She was desiring wisdom, and evaluating how that could be obtained.

Against the express commandment of God. She could just have easily gone to God and asked Him for wisdom and knowledge. Deliberately disobeying God for one’s own gain is not acceptable. You seem to be saying that you think it is.

How does this fit in with a woman’s personality? I just came from a wonderful Sunday School class where some leaders had us as a class discuss marriage relationships and presented the concept of how different men are than women. Women view their lives in a non-compartmentalized way, generally, and may expect their husband to be able to “do likewise” when in reality their husband is usually going to approach life in a compartmentalized way. He may want to “fix things” for her when she merely wants to “talk about a problem” and be listened to as she comes to a solution (or she may not reach a solution until later). It is totally within a woman’s personality to desire wisdom for herself, and wisdom for her husband, and to hope that they can gain wisdom together by experiencing their lives together. Is she willing to risk pain and discomfort to gain such wisdom? I think the experience of the human race says, “yes, absolutely.”

A man may be a reluctant participant in that gaining of wisdom. He may be so content with the “status quo” that he won’t even think he is missing out on anything when life is simple and he has his little place in it, yet when he marries he finds out that there are aspects of life that his wife wants him to understand that he hadn’t a clue about before they married. She hopes he will “get a clue” and come to some understanding.

Personality has nothing to do with it. God gives us commandments; we are expected to obey.

As I have thought about the profound difference in approaches expressed during this conversation, my thought is that I freely choose to fall, to “partake of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil” knowing all the while that by doing that I will be able to experience making choices in life that will lead to gaining wisdom that I didn’t have before, and will experience pain and discomfort in the process and thus learn qualities of patience, love, compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, and so forth while all the while knowing that Christ has atoned for my sins that I am sure to commit along the way. I also choose marriage, and choose to keep my marriage as a gift from God that is intertwined with our love for Him, together

What you seem to have expressed here is the sin of presumption; thinking that it is OK to deliberately choose sin because you are presuming on God’s mercy.

I’m not sure why you mentioned marriage as part of this. You are not required to commit sins as part of marriage or as a symbol of fidelity to your marriage. Your allegiance is to God first, your spouse second.

 

[larkin31]

larkin31, this would be a great question for the philosophy forum. But, I have read before that the Hebrew view of sin is that it is synonymous with death. So the tree isn’t protected by the threat of death, the fruit (sin, which is to rebel against God), is analogous to the “fruit of our labors” when we choose sin.

I don’t believe the fruit itself held any magical properties. What it does represent, is the fruit we bear when we rebel against God, which is death. Adam and Eve had very intimate and immediate knowledge of God. When they chose to rebel against Him, they chose evil, and so they came to an intimate and immediate knowledge of evil. Something that may have been more abstract, or mysterious before…not known. They came to know sin, which was also to come to know death.

Because of their actions, they were cast out from the presence of God, and us (all of humanity) were cut off from the immediate presence of God. Through the millenia afterward, God kept bringing us to reconciliation, via covenants with His chosen people, which was made complete for all of humanity with the death of Jesus Christ.

Thanks. The tree was of “the knowledge of good and evil,” so that has to be of some relevance.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Thanks. The tree was of “the knowledge of good and evil,” so that has to be of some relevance.

St Augustine wrote:

For besides, He had made the prohibition, in order to show that the nature of the rational soul ought not to be in its own power, but in subjection to God, and that it guards the order of its salvation through obedience, corrupting it through disobedience. Hence also He called the tree, the touching of which He forbade, the tree “of the knowledge of good and evil;” Genesis 2:9 because when man should have touched it in the face of the prohibition, he would experience the penalty of sin, and so would know the difference between the good of obedience, and the evil of disobedience.

 

[ParkerD]

So, Parker, WHY do this? Why set wisdom up against immortality? Why would God want to deny “knowledge of good and evil” to his most beloved creation?

Larkin31,

If one is starting from the premise that God created human beings out of “nothing”, then it would seem like a logical question as to why God would “deny knowledge of good and evil to his most beloved creation”. That would be a very important question, and would not seem to have a good answer if God created these human beings in exactly the way He wanted to create them “out of nothing” and with exactly the qualities He wanted them to have inherently within themselves.

But I don’t believe that human beings were created “ex nihilo”. I believe they were “created” or “organized” from an existing spirit/intelligence that had a personality and had strengths and weaknesses plus the capacity to be “enlarged” by experience and the gaining of “wisdom.” Christ being God the Son had perfection inherently, but the spirits that have come to earth and become God’s creations as human beings, did not have such inherent perfection, thus needing both grace (through Christ) and experience (through living life in a world of imperfection and growth by making choices and seeing their outcomes).

The setting up of “wisdom” as a potential choice was with the built-in need to accept a life of problems, pain, “thorns and thistles”, and potential misunderstandings in relationships. (I think it was you who worded some important observations about this.)

But God being absolutely One who does indeed provide freedom of choice, was even doing that in the very beginning of this world, and was doing that by providing a choice in the garden of Eden that said, “if you want wisdom, truly, you will need experience and there will be pain within that experience–so if you really want it, then here is a choice that is yours to make but it is not forced upon you as the only choice you have.” “Wisdom” can’t be poured upon someone, or placed into their brain by some kind of osmosis. Wisdom comes by experience, by observation of the experiences of others, and by applying the mind to study and deep thought about these kinds of issues in real life.

Thanks for your deep questions and the comments you have made.

 

[ParkerD]

Then you weren’t following what I was saying. The ends do not justify the means. Disobeying God in order to obtain knowledge, just because you desire it, is not acceptable. Just as killing innocent life to obtain a cure for a disease is not acceptable. (or maybe you think it is?)

Jay53,
No, I don’t “think it is.”

The crucial question is, “could God have given humankind knowledge and wisdom without their gaining the experience of making choices?”

If God could do that and still be living by the principles of truth He established, then one would logically ask, "why did He place Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden where Eve perceived that “wisdom” was something she lacked? Did she really have a lack of wisdom, and if so, why since God had created her? Did He forget to add that quality, or was He just waiting until she asked for it and then it was magically going to come to her?

I’m not sure why you think sin is acceptable in God’s eyes.

I think if God wanted there to be availability of a choice that included pain and death while getting “wisdom”, that He could do that by creating such a tree with such a fruit and such a choice. We are talking one “sin” with a particular consequence that included pain, discomfort, and death.

I thought the commandment was “Thou shalt not eat”. You seem to read that as “I prefer you don’t eat, but if you want to and want to gain knowledge, go ahead and I’ll come up with a plan to save you.”

He already had a plan. Alpha and Omega was already in place as a part of that plan.

Against the express commandment of God. She could just have easily gone to God and asked Him for wisdom and knowledge. Deliberately disobeying God for one’s own gain is not acceptable. You seem to be saying that you think it is.

So you think wisdom just descends on people if they ask for it?

Personality has nothing to do with it. God gives us commandments; we are expected to obey.

We are talking about one specific commandment, with one specific outcome that could be weighed as a consequence and it be decided whether the consequence was worth the outcome.

What you seem to have expressed here is the sin of presumption; thinking that it is OK to deliberately choose sin because you are presuming on God’s mercy.

Paul talked about God’s mercy as being a quality that is there, amply supplied by God because of His love and the grace Christ offers.

I’m not sure why you mentioned marriage as part of this. You are not required to commit sins as part of marriage or as a symbol of fidelity to your marriage. Your allegiance is to God first, your spouse second.

Marriage is totally a part of the experience of Adam and Eve. They were “joined together” by God, really and truly. Eve had every right to consider her marriage as an important aspect of her life.

Peace to you and all, Jay53.

 

[RebeccaJ]

What you seem to have expressed here is the sin of presumption; thinking that it is OK to deliberately choose sin because you are presuming on God’s mercy.

Paul talked about God’s mercy as being a quality that is there, amply supplied by God because of His love and the grace Christ offers.

ParkerD, I’ve never heard any such thing as “assurance of salvation” preached by a leader of the mormon church. It is very Christian Fundamentalist/Evangelical in nature. I would be interested in you providing support from an authoritative LDS teaching in this regard.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD, I’ve never heard any such thing as “assurance of salvation” preached by a leader of the mormon church. It is very Christian Fundamentalist/Evangelical in nature. I would be interested in you providing support from an authoritative LDS teaching in this regard.

RebeccaJ,
When I wrote that mercy is abundantly given by God and that grace is offered through Christ, then I was not talking about “Assurance of salvation” nor was I agreeing with the points in the article you cited, nor do I think it necessary to cite an LDS article on the subject of grace although anyone can find such by going to lds.org and doing an easily done query.

Here are six pertinent verses from the New Testament on that subject (there are many others):

1 Timothy 1:14, 15
“And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.”

1 Peter 3:7
“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.”

Titus 3:5-7
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”

 

[ParkerD]

What you seem to have expressed here is the sin of presumption; thinking that it is OK to deliberately choose sin because you are presuming on God’s mercy.

I’m not sure why you mentioned marriage as part of this. You are not required to commit sins as part of marriage or as a symbol of fidelity to your marriage. Your allegiance is to God first, your spouse second.

Jay53,
I have realized that there is more I should add to what I had previously responded to you.

First, I was not attempting to imply that Eve committed a “sin of presumption” or that she was “presuming on God’s mercy” and therefore ate the forbidden fruit to gain wisdom while knowing that mercy was in her future, although certainly knowing that God is loving and is wise in how He provides commandments for the blessing of humankind.

The outcome of her choice was that in the midst of indeed receiving the condition of eventual death, the condition of estrangement from God, and the conditions of pain and discomfort in life (particularly in her case in child-bearing), she also became aware later that God had provided a pre-planned “rescue” through a Savior, and thus she and Adam and their children could receive mercy and grace. She did not choose to eat knowing of that rescue, which makes it all the more courageous that she could think to herself that “wisdom” was worth the price she was going to have to pay (and presumably she probably thought that she would be able to convince Adam that he would need to “fall” with her).

I am saying that I don’t think Eve was showing non-allegiance to God, but that she had come to the realization that there was a reason that forbidden fruit was in the garden of Eden, and it was not only that it be a temptation, but that it be an opportunity (if chosen as such) to gain “wisdom” if she and Adam were willing to “pay the price” although that price would indeed seem like a difficult price to pay for the gaining of wisdom.

 

[TheQuestioner]

Larkin31,

If one is starting from the premise that God created human beings out of “nothing”, then it would seem like a logical question as to why God would “deny knowledge of good and evil to his most beloved creation”. That would be a very important question, and would not seem to have a good answer if God created these human beings in exactly the way He wanted to create them “out of nothing” and with exactly the qualities He wanted them to have inherently within themselves.

But I don’t believe that human beings were created “ex nihilo”. I believe they were “created” or “organized” from an existing spirit/intelligence that had a personality and had strengths and weaknesses plus the capacity to be “enlarged” by experience and the gaining of “wisdom.” Christ being God the Son had perfection inherently, but the spirits that have come to earth and become God’s creations as human beings, did not have such inherent perfection, thus needing both grace (through Christ) and experience (through living life in a world of imperfection and growth by making choices and seeing their outcomes).

Ok, then from this point on I think we should just acknowledge that there is a difference here, and because of this fundamental difference (our unlimited view of God and your limited view of Him) we may never agree as to whether it was fair for God to have done what He did.

But God being absolutely One who does indeed provide freedom of choice, was even doing that in the very beginning of this world, and was doing that by providing a choice in the garden of Eden that said, “if you want wisdom, truly, you will need experience and there will be pain within that experience–so if you really want it, then here is a choice that is yours to make but it is not forced upon you as the only choice you have.”

NO NO NO NO NO! I hate when people read in their own back story when there is no indication from the scripture that such a situation was present. In order to make this claim (which is wild in and of itself because there is no hint of it in scripture) you must back it up with more scripture and teachings. Don’t just infer that that is what God meant.

We must properly define wisdom. First, wisdom does not equal experience. There are people who have gone through plenty of experiences and are none the wiser. Now that that is established, wisdom is defined as the quality of being prudent and sensible or knowledge of what is true or right coupled with just judgment as to action. So while wisdom is gained through experience, it is not to say that all experience brings out wisdom. Wisdom is a disposition in which a person will tend more to do what is the most just and right in the minimum amount of time. It is a disposition, and for us who believe God created us “ex nihil” it is God who infers this disposition on us.

“Wisdom” can’t be poured upon someone, or placed into their brain by some kind of osmosis. Wisdom comes by experience, by observation of the experiences of others, and by applying the mind to study and deep thought about these kinds of issues in real life.

NO NO NO NO NO! This too is wrong. Wisdom is most definitely poured on people. From the scriptures we read:

Job 12:13 “With Him are wisdom and might; To Him belong counsel and understanding”

Proverbs 2:6 “For the LORD gives wisdom; From His mouth [come] knowledge and understanding”

Daniel 2:20 “Daniel answered and said, “Let the name of God be blessed forever and ever, for wisdom and power belong to Him””

James 1:5 “But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all men generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him”

God is the source of wisdom, we do not receive it in and of ourselves. The reason we go through struggles in life is because of the fall. This put us in a state where our hearts were hardened to wisdom. However, God, in His infinite wisdom and knowledge, sought to use our struggles in order to soften our hearts and prepare us to receive wisdom from Him, as He alone is the very source of wisdom, from what we can see in the above verses.

 

[ParkerD]

Quote:
“Wisdom” can’t be poured upon someone, or placed into their brain by some kind of osmosis. Wisdom comes by experience, by observation of the experiences of others, and by applying the mind to study and deep thought about these kinds of issues in real life.

Questioner,
I suggest if you are reading in Job that you read Job 14, and realize that “Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble…But his flesh upon him shall have pain, and his soul within him shall mourn.” (v. 1, 22)

(I never wrote, by the way, that wisdom doesn’t “come from God”. The question to reasonably ask is “how does wisdom come from God to man and woman if man and woman want wisdom?”)

If you are reading in Proverbs, I suggest you read Proverbs 3:11-12 and realize that “My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction:
For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.”

How does a father correct a son, or how does the Lord correct humankind, if the father does not allow the son to make mistakes that need “correcting”, or if God does not allow for mistakes to be made that need “correcting” and by which they can learn that “Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding.” (v. 13)?

Of course “wisdom and power belong to God.” The question is, since wisdom does belong to God, how does God provide the opportunity for wisdom to be available to man? If you read Daniel 1 about Daniel and his companions (Hananiah or Shadrach and so forth), then it is clear that these “well favoured” children had already shown their “wisdom” by doing something in their lives that distinguished them, which means they already had demonstrated that they had learned from experiences of life–not from some sort of cocoon where they were protected from living life and making choices and gaining experience.

I agree that one wanting wisdom should ask God for help in getting that quality into their life, and that they should ask in “faith nothing wavering” but at the same time remember that “the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.” (James 1:3-4) Also remembering that “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.” (v. 12)

So I disagree completely and profoundly with your last paragraph. It is completely erroneous to think that God would give humankind wisdom without some effort on their part, compared with the Biblical teaching of how humankind can obtain wisdom from God through experience and through making choices and through praying but also living life and learning from life, with patience and endurance and faith in God.

 

[larkin31]

St Augustine wrote:

For besides, He had made the prohibition, in order to show that the nature of the rational soul ought not to be in its own power, but in subjection to God, and that it guards the order of its salvation through obedience, corrupting it through disobedience. Hence also He called the tree, the touching of which He forbade, the tree “of the knowledge of good and evil;” Genesis 2:9 because when man should have touched it in the face of the prohibition, he would experience the penalty of sin, and so would know the difference between the good of obedience, and the evil of disobedience.

Thanks. This interpretation is only about obedience, which I understand.

 

[TheQuestioner]

So I disagree completely and profoundly with your last paragraph. It is completely erroneous to think that God would give humankind wisdom without some effort on their part, compared with the Biblical teaching of how humankind can obtain wisdom from God through experience and through making choices and through praying but also living life and learning from life, with patience and endurance and faith in God.

sigh…God is the source of wisdom, we do not receive it in and of ourselves. The reason we go through struggles in life is because of the fall.** This put us in a state where our hearts were hardened to wisdom. **However, God, in His infinite wisdom and knowledge, sought to use our struggles in order to soften our hearts and prepare us to receive wisdom from Him, as He alone is the very source of wisdom, from what we can see in the above verses.

I’ll answer the rest later. By the way, I’m not too sure you actually know how grace works. This too I will address.

 

[larkin31]

Larkin31,

If one is starting from the premise that God created human beings out of “nothing”, then it would seem like a logical question as to why God would “deny knowledge of good and evil to his most beloved creation”. That would be a very important question, and would not seem to have a good answer if God created these human beings in exactly the way He wanted to create them “out of nothing” and with exactly the qualities He wanted them to have inherently within themselves.

But I don’t believe that human beings were created “ex nihilo”. I believe they were “created” or “organized” from an existing spirit/intelligence that had a personality and had strengths and weaknesses plus the capacity to be “enlarged” by experience and the gaining of “wisdom.” Christ being God the Son had perfection inherently, but the spirits that have come to earth and become God’s creations as human beings, did not have such inherent perfection, thus needing both grace (through Christ) and experience (through living life in a world of imperfection and growth by making choices and seeing their outcomes).

The setting up of “wisdom” as a potential choice was with the built-in need to accept a life of problems, pain, “thorns and thistles”, and potential misunderstandings in relationships. (I think it was you who worded some important observations about this.)

But God being absolutely One who does indeed provide freedom of choice, was even doing that in the very beginning of this world, and was doing that by providing a choice in the garden of Eden that said, “if you want wisdom, truly, you will need experience and there will be pain within that experience–so if you really want it, then here is a choice that is yours to make but it is not forced upon you as the only choice you have.” “Wisdom” can’t be poured upon someone, or placed into their brain by some kind of osmosis. Wisdom comes by experience, by observation of the experiences of others, and by applying the mind to study and deep thought about these kinds of issues in real life.

Thanks for your deep questions and the comments you have made.

Thanks. An interesting interpretation. Is this LDS teaching? It is new to me.

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks. An interesting interpretation. Is this LDS teaching? It is new to me.

Larkin31,
May I first remark that I think you have asked profound questions and have shown sincere kindness and thoughtfulness in how you have asked them, which I have so much appreciated. I wish you much happiness and all the best in your life.

That is indeed LDS teaching, and is considered by LDS members and leaders to be a very important teaching that helps us understand the purposes of this life in a great opening up of insights into the condition of humankind, and how God loves us yet here we are in this condition where we are learning “wisdom” through experience, and that by choice.

 

[ParkerD]

Questioner,
Which of the following people do you think lamented that “we go through struggles in life” without identifying that there was purpose in those struggles?

Christ?
Paul?
Peter?
Abraham?
Moses?
Hannah?
Ruth and Naomi?
Job?
Jeremiah?

Any Biblical writer or Biblical example, at all?

 

[Jay53]

Jay53,
I have realized that there is more I should add to what I had previously responded to you.

First, I was not attempting to imply that Eve committed a “sin of presumption” or that she was “presuming on God’s mercy” and therefore ate the forbidden fruit to gain wisdom while knowing that mercy was in her future, although certainly knowing that God is loving and is wise in how He provides commandments for the blessing of humankind.

The outcome of her choice was that in the midst of indeed receiving the condition of eventual death, the condition of estrangement from God, and the conditions of pain and discomfort in life (particularly in her case in child-bearing), she also became aware later that God had provided a pre-planned “rescue” through a Savior, and thus she and Adam and their children could receive mercy and grace. She did not choose to eat knowing of that rescue, which makes it all the more courageous that she could think to herself that “wisdom” was worth the price she was going to have to pay (and presumably she probably thought that she would be able to convince Adam that he would need to “fall” with her).

I am saying that I don’t think Eve was showing non-allegiance to God, but that she had come to the realization that there was a reason that forbidden fruit was in the garden of Eden, and it was not only that it be a temptation, but that it be an opportunity (if chosen as such) to gain “wisdom” if she and Adam were willing to “pay the price” although that price would indeed seem like a difficult price to pay for the gaining of wisdom.

I wasn’t referring to Eve regarding the sin of presumption, but you. You were the one who said:

I freely choose to fall, to “partake of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil” knowing all the while that by doing that I will be able to experience making choices in life that will lead to gaining wisdom that I didn’t have before, and will experience pain and discomfort in the process and thus learn qualities of patience, love, compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, and so forth while all the while knowing that Christ has atoned for my sins that I am sure to commit along the way.

That says that you would deliberately choose sin because you want wisdom no matter the cost, no matter if it offends God, no matter that it breaks His commandment because you know that Christ has atoned for our sins. You are thus presuming on God’s mercy. That is called the “sin of presumption” and is wrong in God’s eyes.

 

[Jay53]

Jay53,
No, I don’t “think it is.”

The crucial question is, “could God have given humankind knowledge and wisdom without their gaining the experience of making choices?”

Yes. With God all things are possible.

If God could do that and still be living by the principles of truth He established, then one would logically ask, "why did He place Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden where Eve perceived that “wisdom” was something she lacked? Did she really have a lack of wisdom, and if so, why since God had created her? Did He forget to add that quality, or was He just waiting until she asked for it and then it was magically going to come to her?

Eve was tempted by Satan. Satan told her she could have something “more” and she succumbed to that temptation at the cost of disobeying God. She possibly had all of the “wisdom” that she needed, but Satan convinced her she needed “more”.

I think if God wanted there to be availability of a choice that included pain and death while getting “wisdom”, that He could do that by creating such a tree with such a fruit and such a choice. We are talking one “sin” with a particular consequence that included pain, discomfort, and death.

I’m not sure what you mean by this. Every “sin” is abhorrent to God.

He already had a plan. Alpha and Omega was already in place as a part of that plan.

But Adam and Eve did not know that at the time. They still chose gaining wisdom over obedience to God. They did not trust God enough to give them everything they needed.

So you think wisdom just descends on people if they ask for it?

It can, if God so wills it. I certainly don’t believe that one must sin against God in order to obtain wisdom.

We are talking about one specific commandment, with one specific outcome that could be weighed as a consequence and it be decided whether the consequence was worth the outcome.

Then you are not viewing these as commandments from God, but as suggestions or various alternatives that one can pick and choose. In my view, this isn’t a, “Do I want what’s behind door #1 or door #2?” To me, this is “Thou shalt not…” so you don’t do it.

Paul talked about God’s mercy as being a quality that is there, amply supplied by God because of His love and the grace Christ offers.

Yes, God’s mercy is abundant. But we are not to presume on it and deliberately choose sin because we know that His mercy is available.

Marriage is totally a part of the experience of Adam and Eve. They were “joined together” by God, really and truly. Eve had every right to consider her marriage as an important aspect of her life.

OK, but I still don’t know what that has to do with what we were talking about. I would still assert that for Adam and Eve (and all of us) individually, our allegiance is to God first, a spouse second.

Peace to you and all, Jay53.

And to you as well.