Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 55

Thread: the forbidden fruit

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,819

    the forbidden fruit

    This is pure conjecture on my part, for your consideration. I view the forbidden tree as put in the Garden of Eden to demonstrate the authority of God's word for Man in matters involving what Man may *not* do. God had already given Man tremendous freedom to exercise choice on earth. But God wanted to ensure that Man know there are limits to His freedom. He is *not* free to oppose God's word in any way, at any time. And so the tree was placed in the Garden, to show this reality.

    It was called "the knowledge of good and evil" for the simple reason that disobedience to God's word, in partaking of the tree, would demonstrate "evil," namely the evil of opposing the authority of God's word. It was called "good" only because the tree, as all the trees in the Garden, were good, and produced good fruit.

    However, when God tells Man that he may *not* eat something, God's word must override that good, and choosing to obey God's word must come before the right to participate in something good. The "evil" in the "knowledge of good and evil" should've been enough to prevent Man from partaking of the fruit of the forbidden tree.

    Man should not have just looked at the "goodness" of the fruit, that it was something God created good for Man to eat. Man should've also considered that at times God will *not* allow us to do something good, specifically when He says no. He has the authority to do so, and chooses to demand recognition of His divine authority.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,527

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    I see the tree as the forbidden option to determine by your own knowledge and conscience that which is good and that which is evil, instead of living by God’s determination of good and evil.
    Some people don't mind contradicting themselves as long as they can keep disagreeing with you...

  3. #3

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    he who is doing the sin, of the devil he is, because from the beginning the devil doth sin; <is sinning vi Pres Act 3 Sg 1 John 3:8

    Was the devil sinning before the man was put in the garden where the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. was, and where the devil also was? Was the devil sinning before the man was created?

    Prior to the creation of, man, had the devil done any works that needed to be destroyed and or annulled?

    Where was the devil, prior to the creation of ,man. and what had the devil been doing until the creation of, man?

    Prior to the creation of, man, what was the son of God going to be manifested as? Prior to the creation of, man, why was the Son of God going to me manifested?

    What would the forbidden fruit have to do with the manifested Son of God and the destroying and or annulling of the works of the devil?

    Before the creation of, man. how was God going to go about dealing with the sinning devil and his work?


    for this was the Son of God manifested, that he may break up the works of the devil; 1 John 3:8

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northeast Alabama
    Posts
    4,921

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    This is a good topic that I've often discussed with the Calvinist's. Adam and Eve were not carnal and did not have a sin nature, right ? So why / how did they 'choose' to be disobedient ? To me , it's really a redundant question that we aren't in the position to answer.

    I think it all comes down to choice and simple obedience on our end. That's all we are responsible for and really all we should be focused on. Choose God, or not.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,819

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by ChangedByHim View Post
    I see the tree as the forbidden option to determine by your own knowledge and conscience that which is good and that which is evil, instead of living by God’s determination of good and evil.
    Completely agree with this. Thanks!

    Matt 4.4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,886

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by ChangedByHim View Post
    I see the tree as the forbidden option to determine by your own knowledge and conscience that which is good and that which is evil, instead of living by God’s determination of good and evil.
    I go with this answer mainly. There are two ways we gain knowledge. (i) By theory, and (ii) by experience. You can tell a two year-old the theory of getting burnt by a hot kettle, but he might disregard this and touch it. Then the knowledge is profound. Satan's argument to Eve was that God was unreasonable and was holding back the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil because it would elevate man to God's state of knowledge. But it was God's intention to make man in His image and likeness and so this would include knowledge of good and eve. But by what means? In Hebrews 5:14 we learn that CHRISTIAN MATURITY automatically gives the knowledge of good and evil. "But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil."

    What is the common denominator. It is EATING! When a man eats something his metabolism deals with it. If one were to cut open the man six or twelve hours later, one would not find that which he ate. It has gone through a process and has become organically one with the man. The man assimilates and becomes what he ate. And because he ate it, it is the most profound experiential lesson. The man KNOWLEDGE of the food may be theoretical, but it helps him not a wit. He must partake of it in his mouth and stomach.

    Adam and Eve had two ways to learn of good and evil. Eat the good and evil and become organically one with the good and evil, or eat the Tree of God's Life and learn of good and evil via become organically one with God. In Hebrews 5:14 above, the milk is for initial growth. God is His Word (Jn.1:1) and 1 Peter 2:2 says, "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby". But this "milk" is goood for a while but does not contain what meat does. And so with the eating of the solid and deep things of God, a man becomes knowledgeable about what is good and what is evil, not by doing it, but by being infused with God's nature. Another example of this is wisdom.

    Solomon wrote some books which contain wisdom given to him by God. I appreciate this wisdom, use it and taught my children it. But what is the catch. Why did the writer - so wise - fall so far? It is because it is outside of him. The Christian had a much better resource. 1 Corinthians 1:17-31 uses the word "wisdom" SEVEN TIMES. Verse 17 shows that the best wisdom is useless for the gospel. It reads; "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." But when he gets to verse 30 he says; "But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." When a man or woman is born again God, Christ and the Holy Spirit come to live in him/her (Jn.14:16-23). Added to this, any one born of Christ was, and is, IN CHRIST. By this organic union we have access to the wisdom of God, not via theory, but but an organic mingling as we are IN Christ and He is IN us.

    Adam and Eve knew evil by doing it. If they obeyed God in the first place and eaten of the Tree of Life, they would have known about it, been able to discern between them and would not have needed to PARTAKE of it to get familiar with it. Added to this, they would, by having God's Life in them, they would automatically avoid it. If we have human life in us it is no effort not to bark like a dog. We just have to act according to our nature. By having God's nature we would know about evil, but do good.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,819

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by Pbminimum View Post
    This is a good topic that I've often discussed with the Calvinist's. Adam and Eve were not carnal and did not have a sin nature, right ? So why / how did they 'choose' to be disobedient ? To me , it's really a redundant question that we aren't in the position to answer.

    I think it all comes down to choice and simple obedience on our end. That's all we are responsible for and really all we should be focused on. Choose God, or not.
    I'm a partial Calvinist--I suppose. But I do believe in Free Will. God certainly did not predetermine Satan to fall from His grace! Rather, God gave His angels Free Choice. The consequences of a higher angel falling was grave, because it impacted a number of those directly under him--perhaps 1/3 of the angels.

    What men choose to do also affects those under them, for better or for worse. It's not that men don't have any choice but to follow their leaders. Rather, it's that there is a negative impact when somebody above us falls.

    We call it the "domino effect." Or, we might call it "group think."

    One of the great dangers in the human race is the tendency to gather into clicks, into "cults." Various sects congregate among their own group, and then begin to vie for power over other groups. We should all submit to the supreme authority--to God's word.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    31,487
    Blog Entries
    95

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I'm a partial Calvinist--I suppose. But I do believe in Free Will. God certainly did not predetermine Satan to fall from His grace! Rather, God gave His angels Free Choice. The consequences of a higher angel falling was grave, because it impacted a number of those directly under him--perhaps 1/3 of the angels.

    What men choose to do also affects those under them, for better or for worse. It's not that men don't have any choice but to follow their leaders. Rather, it's that there is a negative impact when somebody above us falls.

    We call it the "domino effect." Or, we might call it "group think."

    One of the great dangers in the human race is the tendency to gather into clicks, into "cults." Various sects congregate among their own group, and then begin to vie for power over other groups. We should all submit to the supreme authority--to God's word.
    Hey brother! I always have to smile when I read or hear someone say that they are a "partial" Calvinist. At the end of the day, this means either 1) They don't understand what the doctrine entails or 2) they DO understand all of the doctrine but don't agree with some of it.

    The product of either of these, they AREN'T a Calvinist at all. Almost like saying, I'm partially pregnant... ya either are or aren't

    To your OP:

    That tree and the "knowledge", was something we most likely should have fed on (learned about) AFTER the return of Christ, not before. Thus why God ordered man to NOT eat of that tree. In the Bible we find it mentioned a few times, information that is hidden or given and prohibited from being offered in the Word of God, presently for our knowledge. In due time, all will be given/revealed... I do believe all we need to know about what they tree means, will then be given. Seems it is "eternal" in nature and our minds cannot fathom such right now.
    Slug1--out

    ~Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,~

    ~Honestly, the pain of persecution lets you KNOW you are still alive... IN Christ!~

    ~Colossians 1:28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.~


    ~"In the turmoil of any chaos, all it takes is that whisper that is heard like thunder over all the noise and the chaos seems to go away, focus returns and we are comforted in knowing that God has listened to our cry for help."~


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,819

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug1 View Post
    Hey brother! I always have to smile when I read or hear someone say that they are a "partial" Calvinist. At the end of the day, this means either 1) They don't understand what the doctrine entails or 2) they DO understand all of the doctrine but don't agree with some of it.

    The product of either of these, they AREN'T a Calvinist at all. Almost like saying, I'm partially pregnant... ya either are or aren't
    I kind of knew that was coming! And yes, I know what you mean. But because you're a good and respected brother, I'll confide in you a little. I've shared this before, but I don't know if you've heard it.

    I don't have a lot of spiritual gifts. But a very strange gift emerged in me many years ago when I lived in CA. WA is my home state, but I went to CA in an exasperated state, because all of my dreams had died in WA.

    I joined what ended up being a Christian cult in Anaheim, because the cult has been associated with a great Christian teacher, who I had admired so much. But I ended up attending Melodyland Christian Center, after I realized my error, and actually attended some of Walter Martin's Bible studies there. I'm hoping you know who he is?--great defender of the Faith against the American cults.

    I began to study to "show myself approved of God." Somewhere along the line, as I listened to Martin speak from the "Calvinist" pov, I accepted his arguments, and turned away from my own non-Calvinist position. Suddenly I was able to look back over my life and recognize all of the people who had not (yet) been chosen by God. Even though some of them had been "called," they had not been "chosen."

    Over the last many years, since the 70s, I've been able to look at most people and *know* whether they are going to get saved. I'm not saying that others *cannot* get saved--only that they *likely* will not get saved. God knows what's in the hearts of men. And God has given me some of His own insight, to protect me from my lack of discernment on some things.

    This makes me a Predestinarian, because God shows me He *knows* who will be saved, in *real time.* This is absolutely *fixed.* But neither is God saying He has been *preventing* anybody from choosing for salvation. He just knows they are *not*, in real time, accepting salvation.

    I don't think God judges people until their choices are final. But He does know, even before people are saved, that they *will be* saved. I'm just the messenger, speaking my own experience. You don't have to accept it. I just have to say it. Let the bits fall where they might. Many people who I deemed the future "chosen" have become Christians--not all. But they *always* show a vulnerability to the Christian message. Perhaps that is what I'm seeing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug
    To your OP:

    That tree and the "knowledge", was something we most likely should have fed on (learned about) AFTER the return of Christ, not before. Thus why God ordered man to NOT eat of that tree. In the Bible we find it mentioned a few times, information that is hidden or given and prohibited from being offered in the Word of God, presently for our knowledge. In due time, all will be given/revealed... I do believe all we need to know about what they tree means, will then be given. Seems it is "eternal" in nature and our minds cannot fathom such right now.
    I really like this answer. The tree was good, and it was good for eating. How so, when it was forbidden? It was not time yet. Great answer. Once immortal life and eternal fellowship with God has been had, then everything is pure to us. Nothing we do will be chosen apart from God's will and word. Excellent! We read nothing of any tree being forbidden in the New Jerusalem. All things are pure to him who is pure.

  10. #10

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by Pbminimum View Post
    This is a good topic that I've often discussed with the Calvinist's. Adam and Eve were not carnal and did not have a sin nature, right ? So why / how did they 'choose' to be disobedient ? To me , it's really a redundant question that we aren't in the position to answer.

    I think it all comes down to choice and simple obedience on our end. That's all we are responsible for and really all we should be focused on. Choose God, or not.
    And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. G 2:9

    To the contrary; They were carnal.

    But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.Matt 4:4

    Wonder why they became carnal minded instead of having the mind of God? There were two trees. They could have eaten from the other but being week in the flesh, carnal, they did not obey the law. Thou shall not eat. Rom 8:3

    Consider:

    'The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam for a life-giving spirit, but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual. 1 Cor 15:45,46
    he who is believing in me, according as the Writing said, Rivers out of his belly shall flow of living water;' and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified. John 7:38,39
    'This Jesus did God raise up, of which we are all witnesses; at the right hand then of God having been exalted -- also the promise of the Holy Spirit having received from the Father -- he was shedding forth this, which now ye see and hear; Acts 2:32,33

    Adam was not created as or like the Son of God, Christ, the Anointed.

    The Son of God was not manifested for the purpose of correcting what Adam did, but to destroy the works of the the devil, by redeeming Adam from the result, of what Adam did.

    Adam was not created spiritual. Thou shall not eat of it. That was spiritual > For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. Romans 7:14 The Son of God was manifested (as man) to die and be given life from death, to die no more and redeem man from death by sin. Destroy, annul, break up, the works of the devil, thus destroying him, the devil, who had the power of death. Heb 2:14

    Where am I wrong?

  11. #11

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; From Heb 2:14
    that He might destroy the works of the devil. From 1 John 3:8

    Did the above require, man, to bring forth sin and death, in order for the devil, the sinner from the beginning to be destroyed along with his works?

    Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Acts 15:18 A great verse.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,819

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by percho View Post
    And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. G 2:9

    To the contrary; They were carnal.

    But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.Matt 4:4

    Wonder why they became carnal minded instead of having the mind of God? There were two trees. They could have eaten from the other but being week in the flesh, carnal, they did not obey the law. Thou shall not eat. Rom 8:3
    I think what our brother was saying is that Adam and Eve sinned while in a state that had been sinless. They did not have a sin nature, popping out of them, and focusing them on a fatal attraction.

    But in a sense you are right. The moment Eve began to look at the tree as good food, and not as something evil and forbidden, she *became* carnal minded. She had not been before that, as I see it. She could not have been carnal-minded because there was no sin in her. In fact, neither Adam nor Eve even saw their own nudity as something corrupt.

    Quote Originally Posted by percho
    Consider:

    'The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam for a life-giving spirit, but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual. 1 Cor 15:45,46
    he who is believing in me, according as the Writing said, Rivers out of his belly shall flow of living water;' and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified. John 7:38,39
    'This Jesus did God raise up, of which we are all witnesses; at the right hand then of God having been exalted -- also the promise of the Holy Spirit having received from the Father -- he was shedding forth this, which now ye see and hear; Acts 2:32,33

    Adam was not created as or like the Son of God, Christ, the Anointed.

    The Son of God was not manifested for the purpose of correcting what Adam did, but to destroy the works of the the devil, by redeeming Adam from the result, of what Adam did.

    Adam was not created spiritual. Thou shall not eat of it. That was spiritual > For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. Romans 7:14 The Son of God was manifested (as man) to die and be given life from death, to die no more and redeem man from death by sin. Destroy, annul, break up, the works of the devil, thus destroying him, the devil, who had the power of death. Heb 2:14

    Where am I wrong?
    As the above verse notes, Paul was not carnal until he was "sold under sin." Since Adam and Eve had *not* been sold under sin, they had not been carnal.

    Dissecting 1 Cor 15.45-46 is another subject, but is involved. I would say that Paul is arguing the difference between natural men and a "Spirit-giving man." Christ gives us the Holy Spirit as a free gift, so that we can keep it forever. Adam lost some of his innate spirituality, although he retained enough of his spirituality to obey God's word on occasion.

    I would say, though, that Adam and Eve began in the Garden as spiritual people to some degree, because they had been fellowshipping with God, and obeying Him in all things except the forbidden tree. Going after that tree cost them an eternal claim on that spirituality, though they did not lose it entirely, nor the hope of regaining it for eternity. I would say, therefore, that Adam and Eve were "spiritual"--just not the "Spirit-giver" that Christ was. None of us are--only Christ.

    It may be argued that Paul is creating a dichotomy between natural men and the spiritual Christ. Indeed he is doing so. He seems to be relegating natural men to unspiritual men simply because they are not Christ.

    But this would be absurd--natural men are obviously not Christ. Paul is, in my view, only saying that what began with sinless, natural men ended up carnal, sold under sin, until Christ came along, and redeemed Man.

    You might ask, How can Adam and Eve have been "spiritual" when Paul said that the spiritual Man began with Christ? I might also ask, How can Adam and Eve have been "carnal" when Paul said that the carnal Man began with being sold under sin?

    I can only say that Adam and Eve were sinless, natural Man. In choosing for sin they lost whatever spirituality they were born with. They were created in the image and likeness of God--I assume that is "spiritual?" And once they had been sold under sin, and had become somewhat carnal, they could only re-appropriate spirituality on an eternal basis when Christ came and redeemed them.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    31,487
    Blog Entries
    95

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Originally Posted by randyk

    This makes me a Predestinarian, because God shows me He *knows* who will be saved, in *real time.* This is absolutely *fixed.* But neither is God saying He has been *preventing* anybody from choosing for salvation. He just knows they are *not*, in real time, accepting salvation.

    I don't think God judges people until their choices are final. But He does know, even before people are saved, that they *will be* saved. I'm just the messenger, speaking my own experience. You don't have to accept it. I just have to say it. Let the bits fall where they might. Many people who I deemed the future "chosen" have become Christians--not all. But they *always* show a vulnerability to the Christian message. Perhaps that is what I'm seeing?


    I don't want to lead into a change of your topic but this is where I'll make a comment. Based on this alone, you can't be a Calvinist. Like you, I value "some" of the doctrine and the parts that are not "aligned" with scripture, is all interpretation, thus I reject those portions of the doctrine. Meaning, I am 100% NOT a Calvinist because I may not agree with 2% of the doctrine (more like about 65% I don't agree with). To be a Calvinist, you have to be 100% in agreement with all tenants. Based on your words, I agree, God KNOWS who will choose Him and for them, He's predestined righteous works. When these righteous works will happen, well... that druggy on the street, we see a druggy but God knows that in 10 years, after losing ALL, turns to God and chooses to believe. God then begins to produce those righteous works through the person (first being, redemption/rebirth of his spirit unto Christ). Calvinists don't believe what you wrote, as God knows because He CHOSE for them and rebirths their spirit before they make a choice to believe and they, can't not believe. Anyway...

    I really like this answer. The tree was good, and it was good for eating. How so, when it was forbidden? It was not time yet. Great answer. Once immortal life and eternal fellowship with God has been had, then everything is pure to us. Nothing we do will be chosen apart from God's will and word. Excellent! We read nothing of any tree being forbidden in the New Jerusalem. All things are pure to him who is pure.



    It wasn't time because after "dying" by eating that fruit, if they then ate of the other tree, PERMANENT separation, no chance of redemption... both trees are for AFTER glorification.
    Slug1--out

    ~Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,~

    ~Honestly, the pain of persecution lets you KNOW you are still alive... IN Christ!~

    ~Colossians 1:28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.~


    ~"In the turmoil of any chaos, all it takes is that whisper that is heard like thunder over all the noise and the chaos seems to go away, focus returns and we are comforted in knowing that God has listened to our cry for help."~


  14. #14

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I think what our brother was saying is that Adam and Eve sinned while in a state that had been sinless. They did not have a sin nature, popping out of them, and focusing them on a fatal attraction.

    But in a sense you are right. The moment Eve began to look at the tree as good food, and not as something evil and forbidden, she *became* carnal minded. She had not been before that, as I see it. She could not have been carnal-minded because there was no sin in her. In fact, neither Adam nor Eve even saw their own nudity as something corrupt.



    As the above verse notes, Paul was not carnal until he was "sold under sin." Since Adam and Eve had *not* been sold under sin, they had not been carnal.

    Dissecting 1 Cor 15.45-46 is another subject, but is involved. I would say that Paul is arguing the difference between natural men and a "Spirit-giving man." Christ gives us the Holy Spirit as a free gift, so that we can keep it forever. Adam lost some of his innate spirituality, although he retained enough of his spirituality to obey God's word on occasion.

    I would say, though, that Adam and Eve began in the Garden as spiritual people to some degree, because they had been fellowshipping with God, and obeying Him in all things except the forbidden tree. Going after that tree cost them an eternal claim on that spirituality, though they did not lose it entirely, nor the hope of regaining it for eternity. I would say, therefore, that Adam and Eve were "spiritual"--just not the "Spirit-giver" that Christ was. None of us are--only Christ.

    It may be argued that Paul is creating a dichotomy between natural men and the spiritual Christ. Indeed he is doing so. He seems to be relegating natural men to unspiritual men simply because they are not Christ.

    But this would be absurd--natural men are obviously not Christ. Paul is, in my view, only saying that what began with sinless, natural men ended up carnal, sold under sin, until Christ came along, and redeemed Man.

    You might ask, How can Adam and Eve have been "spiritual" when Paul said that the spiritual Man began with Christ? I might also ask, How can Adam and Eve have been "carnal" when Paul said that the carnal Man began with being sold under sin?

    I can only say that Adam and Eve were sinless, natural Man. In choosing for sin they lost whatever spirituality they were born with. They were created in the image and likeness of God--I assume that is "spiritual?" And once they had been sold under sin, and had become somewhat carnal, they could only re-appropriate spirituality on an eternal basis when Christ came and redeemed them.
    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

    At this very moment, the devil already was, was already a sinner and had already been doing the works of the devil.

    the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep

    For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

    God could have created a spiritual man. But was wanting to deal with the devil and his works and could not do that through a spiritual man. The devil had the power of death and in order to destroy that power and the devil himself , God would work through a man in his image, yet of the flesh, because of, the death, of which the devil had the power thereof.

    God would sell man, including even his only begotten Son under sin, in order to destroy the devil and his works. Adam had to be created of the flesh, carnal, in order that the Son of God could come, in the flesh. Carnal literally means, of the flesh.

    If Adam had not sinned, Adam would have, condemned sin in the flesh and there would have been zero reason for the Christ and the devil would have continued doing his works.

    And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. Gen 2:2,3

    What was God's next move?

    For the creation was subjected to futility,( ματαιότητι vanity) not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; Rom 8:20
    Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity. Ecc 1:2 1:2 ματαιότης ματαιοτήτων εἶπεν ὁ Ἐκκλησιαστής ματαιότης ματαιοτήτων τὰ πάντα ματαιότης

    Adam did not subject the creation to vanity, God did, for a purpose.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,819

    Re: the forbidden fruit

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug1 View Post
    It wasn't time because after "dying" by eating that fruit, if they then ate of the other tree, PERMANENT separation, no chance of redemption... both trees are for AFTER glorification.
    We had this in a Bible Study last Thurs. eve. And the associate pastor, who leads the study, said just what you said. And I've heard it before. My response, however, was this. They were not allowed to eat of the tree of immortality because they had to die for their sin. God said so, and God's word is infallible.

    But we're saying the same thing. The reason God promised death to the sinner, and denied eternal life to the sinner, is because the carnal flesh, independent of God, cannot be in God's Kingdom. To be perfect, human beings must be made perfect--otherwise the Kingdom will be flawed. God's wants a perfect, and happy, Kingdom. Only that is worth having forever.

    As I said, I'm a partial Calvinist. That may not be possible, indeed. But the term helps me fit in somewhere. I've long recognized that God sees people as going to be saved even before they are saved. That's all I know. I also believe in Free Choice. God never denies any man the right to choose salvation. They choose against it by the nature that predominates in their life.

    God's word established, firmly, an exact number of the saved. But man's numbers proliferated, due to man's carnal ways, far beyond the number God chose to be His eternal saints. Those that exceed the number set by God's word have a nature that is produced by the will of carnal man, and not by the will of God, nor by His word. These men are not predisposed to want God nor to like God. It's a sad world, but that's how I see it, brother. Sorry, I always have to say what I believe.

    We are all born of this carnal nature. But some of us were planned by God. Those not planned by God cannot be blamed on God. God gave Man the ability to act on their own and to reproduce. Those born apart from the plan of God are free to choose God, but will not.

    The great thing is that even those who I see as "not planned" can choose for God, and produce for God. They may not like God, nor serve His will out of a pure heart. But I've seen many a nominal Christian actually serve God in many ways--even sincerely. And I trust that even though they are cast into "outer darkness," their punishment in eternity will be much lighter. God created *all men* to live in His image. And they can. But the most beautiful thing is for Man to love God from the heart, out of a pure heart, and to love His word.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Forbidden Fruit
    By Sa:ji:sdo:de in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Jan 21st 2018, 12:33 AM
  2. IMPORTANT Have Any Fruit?
    By alewiscii in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Mar 25th 2014, 11:40 AM
  3. having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit
    By Caleb in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: May 16th 2012, 05:57 PM
  4. By their fruit you shall know them. Works or fruit?
    By Brother Mark in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: Feb 22nd 2012, 03:15 AM
  5. Forbidden foods and OT
    By starlight777 in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 260
    Last Post: Feb 17th 2009, 02:17 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •