The Controlled Fall

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by netchaplain, Nov 30, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. I do not believe Satan transferred sin to Eve that wasn't already resident within her and Adam. Their disobedience was evidence of possessing a sin nature prior to the act. I believe the Enemy did not inject something but rather revealed something preexisting.

    Eve's disobedience was due to deception, for "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" (1 Tim 2:14); "the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty" (2 Cor 11:3). The evidence of her sin nature was that she saw, "a tree to be desired to make one wise" (Gen 3:6); and we must realize this was before the temptation.

    These three causes of Eve in Genesis 3:6 have been paralleled with 1 John 2:16; "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh (good for food), and the lust of the eyes (pleasant to the eyes), and the pride of life (desired to make one wise), is not of the Father, but is of the world." She was familiar with the fact that "out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food" (Gen 2:9), but this scenario did not apply to a tree to be desired to make one wise.

    Adam's disobedience was due to putting God's word second to his wife, for he "hearkened unto the voice of thy wife" (Gen 3:17). Scripture is not clear concerning Adam's reason for the disobedience, other than "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat" (Gen 3:12). This sounds like blame but I think Adam was just stating a truth, not blaming Eve because my conjecture is that out of compassion for Eve, he was willing to die with her.

    The crux of this concept is to portray that God in His omniscience "worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph 1:11); "according to His own purpose and grace" (2 Tim 1:9). Simply put, what transpired was the way He desired it to go, or He would have done it another way.
    KingJ likes this.
  2. It's true that until they were tested (for their learning, not God's), disobedience was not in their mind, but it's tendency was shown to be in their heart and I think God placing the tree there was His first lesson to begin revealing to man His will and desires. I believe God's plan was for man to "become as One of Us, to know good and evil (Gen 3:22)", which is related to Their desire to "make man in Our image, after Our likeness" (Gen 1:26).

    There's no other reasonable conception for Him placing it in the Garden, and in the middle, along with the tree of life (Gen 2:9; 3:3). I believe this is where He chose to start teaching us because He had to start somewhere. There's a good reason why God allowed the temptation, it wasn't a casual or unforeseen occurrence because all occurrences are foreknown and pre-planned according to His purpose.

    Though no act of disobedience was present prior to the temptation, this does not confirm the absence of its tendency in them. The Enemies beguilement did not implant the desires Eve had within her (Gen 3:6), His temptation was an arousal to what was already there, prior to the act of disobedience, for it shows these desires in her after the temptation but prior to the disobedient act.

    Either Eve possessed the tendency prior to the act or the Enemy implanted it in her heart and mind. I do not think the Lord would allow the devil to implant evil in them or he could have his way with them.

    I believe Satan can only test our desires (for our learning), not force his desires for our defilement. I believe if God did not intend man to sin, He would have not allowed the sin nature (old man) to become part of us and the tree would have not been of a necessity in His plans, nor the devil, whom God planned prior to creation in using.

    I believe it is noteworthy to point out that any concept which does not relate to receiving salvation or that does not necessarily promote growth within it (such as my post in this thread) should not be considered essential to the believer.
  3. Could Eve have willfully disobeyed God if she did not know what it was to disobey?
  4. Hi TF and God's blessings to your Family! Good question and comment. I am left to decide they weren't willfully disobedient because their act was evidenced with repentance by that fact that they were ashamed; "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself" (Gen 3:10). Regardless the reason, disobedience evidences an inexcusable sin nature, which is why the purpose for Christ's atonement.

    Concerning their knowledge of disobedience, I do not think God would give a command which they didn't understand. To me I see it that they were aware of right and wrong from God's commands, which is not necessarily the same as good and evil. One can mostly know wright from wrong but not the seriousness of them, which requires enlightenment to comprehend and thus understanding good and evil.

    If God had not allowed them to choose to know good and evil, there would be no learning of His holiness and character and no accoutability; "If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remains" (John 9:41). "If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both Me and My Father" (John 15:24).
  5. I am just glad that I shall only have to answer for my own sins and not the sins of Adam and Eve or the sins of the whole world but rather I shall be judged on my own life. Obviously Eve was born with the ability to be disobedient and I agree with netchaplin who speaks of "something pre-existing" which I believe to be free-will. :)

    Theo Fane likes this.
  6. And what do I find swimming these brackish waters?
    Should a Christian bifurcate seek to showcase his own life? Better to fall back on the mercy of the great Lord and claim his righteousness lest much condemnation be awarded instead of a crown of life.
  7. Strange, I was discussing this with my wife on the weekend. I don't like to say God made us with a 'sin nature'. I prefer to say that God made us as 'perfect humans'. Humans being a creation at a very high level of accountability able to accept or reject God and His ways. I agree with your post! I see the devil as only speeding things up. With free will and the level at which we are created it is inevitable that at some point in time, mankind fall from grace. It just happened to be with Adam and Eve. I don't think that God foreknew it would be with them.
    Theo Fane likes this.
  8. Before all else, can I just say that I am relieved that you preface much of what you say with 'I do not believe', 'I think' and 'my conjecture'. There is much of what you say here that is not supportable by Scripture.
    Firstly Gen 1:26. informs us that the Lord God created man in His image and at the end of the day, upon reflection/review, He declared everything very good. Gen 1:31. So the question is did God create a sin nature in His own image? Is the Lord God a sinner? You wanna stand before Him and tell Him that? :cautious:
    Then you suggest that Gen 3:6 comes before Gen 3:4,5. strange chronology you follow.
    Then you stated:"....not blaming Eve because my conjecture is that out of compassion for Eve, he was willing to die with her." Very romantic, but contrary to the plain message of scripture. Eve ate, she didn't turn to dust before his eyes, Adam also ate, because this living beauty gave him some of the maudlin heroics there, just led astray by a skirt :whistle:
  9. Hi Ian - The free will of man was made obvious by that fact that God gave him a choice concerning the Tree (Gen 2:17; Deu 30:19).
  10. Hi Salmon - I'm not sure what you mean by "showcase his life" but I would like to reply the best I can. My intention of acknowledging the sin nature is to maintain awareness of it and of the Enemie's vices using it to disrupt us.

    I agree concerning the Lord's mercy and it's not only better to seek it but it's the only atonement available for the unsaved. For the saved, they need not seek mercy but live gratefully.
  11. Hi KJ - It must be realized that omniscience includes foreknowledge of all things, from their beginning to their end, and this is the point of the issue. Since God foreknew what would occur, He could have chosen a different way, if it wasn't good to Him. He knew they would partake of the Tree, even when He was forbidding them not to partake.
    He didn't intend them to be obedient, but to become obedient.
  12. Hi Calvin - I do not find it an advantage to claim what Adam and Eve entered into was not suppose to occur. Such a concept would leave one with confusion, in that it would admit of misunderstanding omniscience by attributing the possibility of an unforeseen occurrence. It would also further aggravate the misunderstanding by not considering something good when God declares it good. I believe He declared it good in reference to it all as being part of His plan, which no doubt is perfect.

    Only God is perfect and if Adam was the same, it would have been evidenced by him avoiding disobedience. Image and likeness does not confirm exactness. Adam was just the first "figure" of God, not just like Him; "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come" (Rom 5:14).

    Many have claimed that Adam blamed Eve but I believe he thought they were going to die the next time they saw God and that he was willing to die with her.

    It's obvious that my concept is not directly supported by Scripture (hence the the term conjecture), which I call "Speculative Theology", which is non-essential and such beliefs, regardless who they come from, should not necessarily be considered doctrine.
  13. Thank you for your reply.
    I would only further comment/observe that Omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence are derived ideas and as such cause a good deal of confusion anyway. True, the concepts are taught in the Scriptures, but we have tended to take them beyond the teaching of scripture because of our limitations in understanding.

    But to be quite candid here, suggesting that we were created with a sinful nature paves the way for a complete lack of moral accountability. "So what is your problem Lord?.. I lived as I did because I was created that way.. you want to get all hot and bothered and call my conduct sin? well who created me with a nature that lent itself to what you now so conveniently brand as sin?" Errr Ahhhh, not my words just a hypothetical you understand :cautious: :cautious:

    We were created with
    1. Free Choice. Gen 2:16.
    2. Moral accountability. Gen 2:17.
    3. A righteous standing before the Lord. Gen 1:31. Gen 2:25.
    I.M.N.S.H.O. having free will does not equate to having a sinful nature. Choosing to disobey the Lord gave birth to sin and added an imperfect reflection of His sense of moral judgment. Gen 3:22
    Please note well that the phrase "has become like" is a recognition of a change in that created image.
    But that does mean the acquirement of a new nature.....a sinful nature. Not the exercising of a dormant and pre existant taint, else the forbidden fruit incident would have been just incident....hardly worth mentioning.
  14. You're on target more than you realize here, because God created man in a way which would require dependence on Him and not himself, for a right standing. His will for us involves more than just moral conduct but godliness, which comes only through Christ by His Spirit. From Adam until Christ, God used morality as a "schoolmaster" (Gal 3:24) to teach us godliness, which was not possible until the coming of Christ (3:25).
  15. I just don't see it like that. I believe God knows what all our choices will be except for the decision to reject / accept Him as Lord. How can He be impartial on man if He foreknew who would accept hell? Free will / omniscience thread ;).
  16. Net Chaplain posts
    Why you would stoop to such a childish slur is beyond comprehension.
    I know exactly how on target my theological understanding is.
  17. I think that it would be helpful to understand that man was created INNOCENT but not RIGHTEOUS.

    What then is RIGHTEOUSNESS? It is "innocense" that has been maintained in the presence of temptation.

    Temptation will either develop you or destroy you. The Garden of Eden was not a hothouse and man was not a hothouse plant. CHARACTER must be developed and it can only be developed in the presence of temptation. Man was created a "responsible" being and as such he was responsible to glorify, to obey, to serve and to be subject to divine government.

    There were many many trees in the garden, but only ONE that God said taht they could not eat from. It is therefore a
    TEST. Did they pass the test????????? NO!!!!! Did God know they would fail this test YES!!!
    Did God make Eve eat of the tree? NO!!!

    Eve was temped and then she choose to disobey God's Word.

    Genesis 3:6-7
    So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.

    We can see from the Bible account that before the "fall" man did not have a conscience! He was "innocent" but not righteous. Again....innicence is ignorance of evil. Man did not make conscience. It is an accuser that each one of us now having living on the inside of us. Don'r think so????????/ Loof again at the verses above............

    "And they KNEW that they were naked and sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons".

    The fig leaves they used concealed but really did not cover them. Adam and Eve did not confess, they just tried to cover up what they did. This IMO is the same condition of man today in religion. He goes through exercises, and rituals and washings, joining one church and then another. He becomes RELIGIOUS.

    Now....Satan works from the outside in. He temps with the lust of the eye, and the feel of the fleah. God on the other hand works from the INSIDE out. Religion is something that you rub on the outside but God says......"YE MUST BE BORN AGAIN".

    Instead of confessing and running to God --Adam and Eve made aprons and ran from God.
    May I say that man is still running from God and still making aprons of religion when it is the heart of man that God is wanting.
    th1bill, KingJ and Theo Fane says Amen and like this.
  18. Is it right for a Christian to hate or dislike religion?

    I feel as though I should. More and more, I think of religion as something artificial --a covering-- between us and our God. When Jesus commisioned His apostles to take the Good News to the nations, did this not guarantee the formation of religious institutions? Religion is like a machine that has over millennia overpowered and absorbed its users. Correct?

    Religion is a work of man, so therefore it suffers from human depravity.
    th1bill likes this.
  19. I read somewhere that religion is what men do for their God, while Christianity is what God has done for man.
    Major likes this.
  20. I can fully agree with that! Amen!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page