It appears that even among very conservative fundamental churches there is starting to be a movement away from believing that Adam and Eve were real people. Is it really of any great importance whether we believe it or not? Yes. Why is that? Because if they were not real people, the entire Bible, its message, Christ's death and resurrection are completely undone. There is no need for salvation, nor reason to believe the Bible, and Christ was a liar.
Those are strong statements to make, but they are the logical conclusion of saying that Adam and Eve were not real. Let's start with the New Testament and work backwards. Jesus genealogy was traced back to Adam in Luke 3:38 “ Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.” How could Jesus genealogy be traced back to someone who did not exist? It could not. So we see that Jesus lineage is one verification that Adam was real and that Seth was his son. Luke gave us the first witness to that fact. Now Paul is going tell us that Adam was also very real. 1 Corinthians 15:45a, says that Adam was the first man that God created as a living soul. “ And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul.” He also tells us this again in 1 Timothy 2:13-14 “For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” Then in a verse in Corinthians Paul tells us the result of that transgression. 1 Corinthians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” Paul is saying that because of Adam's transgression all mankind is cursed to die, not only physically, but we are born spiritually dead, however in Christ we can have both spiritual life and eternal life. Paul also tells us in Romans 5:14 that death, which was brought about by Adam reigned from Adam to Moses even over people who had not sinned as Adam had. “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.”
Jude, Jesus brother, tells us that Enoch, the first man to be “raptured” or translated, was the seventh patriarch after Adam. Jude 1:14 “And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints.” Jude was saying that Adam was a real person.
Now returning to the Old Testament, we see that Job accepted Adam as a real person from whom his original sin nature came. Job 31:33 “If I covered my transgressions as Adam, by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom.” Everyone believed Adam to be a real person.
Moses writes about Adam when he mentions that God divided the inheritance of the nations or sons of Adam. Deuteronomy 32:8 “When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.” Moses is saying that all people are descended from Adam.
Hebrews mentions two of Adam's sons, Abel and Cain. There can be no sons, if there is no father, so Adam had to have existed. Hebrews 11:4 “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.” and Hebrews 12:24 “And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.” Abel was real, and he was the son of Adam, so Adam had to have been real.
If Adam and his sons did not exist, then the writers of these verses are liars. Worse we have the testimony of Jesus Himself that Abel was a very real person, thereby verifying that his father Adam was real, as Abel could not exist without a father. Jesus is warning the Pharisees in these passages. Matthew 23:35 “That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.” Luke 11:51 “From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.” If Adam did not exist to father Abel, then Jesus Christ was a liar.
Setting aside all these verses for a moment, let us merely look at the logic of the situation. What is the Bible supposed to be? It is supposed to be a portrait of Jesus Christ and the plan of salvation for man. But why does man need salvation? Because man is sinful. Why is man sinful? Because Adam sinned against God by eating the forbidden fruit. But wait, what if Adam wasn't real? What if he is just an allegory. Then....well, then death, which supposedly came through Adam's fall existed right from the beginning, not as a result of Adam sinning. If death was a part of creation, then when God said everything was good, He meant that everything dies as part of the natural order. Therefore, death is not a result of sin. But if death is not a result of sin, then there is no sin. If there is no sin, there is no need for redemption. If there is no need for redemption, why would we need a redeemer? If there is no need for a redeemer, then Christ dying for our sins is a sad joke on Him. If Christ's dying was meaningless, then why believe in Christ for salvation. If we don't need Christ, and the Bible isn't true as to the whole story of sin and redemption, and death is natural and normal, then why not throw away the Bible and just live as we please? Without a real Adam, without a real fall from grace and sin, without death entering the world through Adam and mankind needing a redeemer, the whole reason for Christ and the entire Bible becomes pointless. So, was there a real Adam? Well, if you are reading this and you are a Christian, and you don't believe Adam and the entire creation account was real, your faith is useless. Christ will have been a liar, as were his apostles, and you are spending your life trying to live for something that doesn't exist, and then you will die and that will be the end. Or.....you believe that God was telling you the truth about things exactly the way they happened. He created a world in six literal 24 hour days that looked as if it had been here for millennia. And He created a man called Adam in perfection, who then disobeyed bringing sin and death into the world. He then promised and gave us a redeemer to pay for our sins and restore us to a relationship with God giving us eternal life. Those are your choices. You choose what you will believe.
Thank you so much. Our minister announced last night during a Bible Study that Adam and Eve were just allegorical references to humanity, and that there is no evidence of the devil in the Garden of Eden. I appreciate your blog. Would love to know you better, as I teach an adult Sunday School and his statement was rocking my world.
ReplyDeleteI'm so glad that you found my blog encouraging. It seems that so many Christians are abandoning the literal truth of the Bible. I have been dealing with that very subject with a group lately. They spiritualize everything there. The first lie Satan told was "has God REALLY said?" He didn't want Eve to take God literally at His Word and neither does he still today for he works at having people ignore the literalness of Scripture.
DeleteWould love to correspond with you. I will find a way to do it.
Hi... I have a simple question... why did god create adam ? What is the reason behind this creation ?
ReplyDeleteHi Winay,
ReplyDeleteThat is a simple question, and if I knew exactly what your background was I could give you a one sentence answer, but not knowing that, I am afraid I'll have to make it a little longer.
God created us in His image. So to know a little more about God we only need to look at man. One of the most powerful desires man possesses is the desire to be loved. And not in a forced way, but we want to be loved for ourselves, warts and all by the choice of the person loving us. We want to be loved freely, unselfishly, completely. Well guess what? God was lonely and wanted someone to love Him too. I realize He is a Trinity, but the Trinity is still one being. We are created in a Trinity-like state too. We have a body, we have an intelligence and will, and we have an eternal spirit. Yet we are one persona.
God wanted someone to love Him. Freely, unselfishly, completely. He desired companionship with someone outside of Himself. So He decided to create man. First He created the earth and universe to house man. But to get the kind of love He wanted (and we all want) He had to create man with a free will to reject Him. So that is why He created Adam. But He knew what loneliness was, and as Adam was so different, He felt Adam needed a mate, plus he needed to procreate to create more beings with whom God could have a relationship. So God created woman, both for human companionship, as well as a way to procreate. As a test of their love for Him, (aren't we always testing the love of those who say they love us?) God gave them one rule to keep. They failed and as such broke their fellowship with Him. Christ came to restore that fellowship by bridging the gap between us and God.
Most people don't think of God as just being a person who wants to be loved, but that is exactly who and what He is. He is simply a far greater being than we are. He doesn't desire religion or traditions from us, He wants a relationship with us. He wants us to love Him as much as He loves us, and that is really what the entire crux of the matter is all about. That is why He sent His Son to die for us. He loved us enough to do that, as it was the only way He could get a relationship with us back again. God uses the imagery of marriage to try to describe the kind of relationship He wants with us. Most people think that means sex, but that is not what marriage is really about. It is about loving the other person to the exclusion of your own wants and needs. It is putting them first. It is being their friend and companion and doing what is best for them. God calls Israel His wife. The church is the Bride of Christ.
So that is why God created Adam. He wanted someone to love Him. And that also answers another one of the great mysteries of life. What is the meaning of life? The meaning of life is to love God.
Speaking as a Christian, I can't say that I feel comfortable with this explanation: "God wanted someone to love Him. Freely, unselfishly, completely. He desired companionship with someone outside of Himself."
DeleteIf there was a time when a person's spirit did not exist, and God is the cause for the beginning of that spirit's existence, then on God's head rests a kind of responsibility, or fault (you might say), for that spirit's experiences.
This is not to say that free will doesn't exist, but if Joe kidnaps Bob and throws him into a war zone and the only way to live is for Bob to listen to what Joe says on the walky-talky then yes, Bob's willingness to listen will determine if he lives. But it is also true that Bob never would have been in any danger if Joe hadn't put him there to begin with.
Therefore, if even one soul will be damned for eternity then God is, at least in part, responsible for that damnation, meaning that God created a number of souls, knowing that at least one of them will suffer horrors for which there will be (for this soul) no possible consolation, or nothing to make up for it. All this, so that God can be loved by people.
And I cannot be comfortable with this explanation because that, friend, is the behavior of a dangerous egomaniac.
There is no "if" about there being a time when a person's spirit did not exist. We did not exist before God created us. God is not responsible for our decisions and the consequences, we are. Nor is He responsible for the actions that others perpetrate upon us. So to say that He is responsible for the experiences of every individual is saying that we have no free will to choose evil. We do. To compare God giving us life with Joe throwing Bob in a war zone is not a fair comparison. God put Adam and Eve in a perfect paradise. They are the ones who ruined it, not Him. We are still suffering the consequences of their choice.
DeleteIt is because we are born into the war zone that our parents, Adam and Eve, threw us, God in His infinite love sacrificed Himself in the person of the Son to remedy that situation. He gave us the means to get out of the war zone. By accepting Him as our Savior, we give Him the permission to take control of the circumstances and experiences in our lives. And we escape this war zone for an eternity in a perfect paradise when we die. Dying is not the end, it is the beginning for a believer. While stuck in this war zone, God may allow the enemy to perpetrate terrible things upon us, but it is only for our growth and His glory that He does so. In the end, what we suffer here is more than made up for when we finally meet Him face to face.
God does not damn people to eternity, they damn themselves. It isn't as if He Himself did not endure this war zone. He endured a horrible persecution and death for our sakes. He knows what we go through.
The situation as you put it is more that Bob's parents deliberately wandered into the war zone, even though Joe warned them against going. As a consequence, they were killed, leaving Bob in there. Joe, wanting to help Bob tries to tell him how to get out of the war zone. Bob can listen or not, as he sees fit. That is a better picture of the truth of the matter. And as you can see, Joe is not at fault. He didn't put Bob there, Bob's folks did, against Joe's warnings. Free will choice. It is the cause of the evil in the world.
God gives us life so that we may experience the glories of a life in heaven. That some choose to reject it is not His fault.
(thanks for replying!)
DeleteBut God put A&E in that perfect paradise knowing what they would do. Indeed, before God created them God knew that doing so would result in infinite suffering for one or more individuals.
Without God, A&E would never have been in the circumstances that led to the Fall. That's why it isn't "Bob's parents went into the war zone despite Joe saying not to go."
At most, it's: Joe put them in a situation where it was possible to enter the war zone, and yes, he told them not to go, but it remains that
+they could only have entered the war zone in the first place with Joe's intervention
+Before Joe made it possible for them to enter the war zone, he knew what they would do if the possibility were there.
If God knows everything, then God knew the whole course of history before it began. (I think we're both in agreement here, right?)
And if that's so, then God chose to create people *knowing* that at least one of them would suffer infinitely. And that does make God responsible.
So basically you are saying God should have never created the universe or us in the first place because He knew by giving us free will, it would all go bad? It is better that man never existed, then? That is the only other choice.
DeleteYes, God knew in advance what would happen. That is why before He even created us that Christ agreed to sacrifice Himself and suffer to rectify our very bad free will choice. He created us knowing exactly what He would have to suffer to redeem our sins and all of creation. So God took responsibility for Adam and Eve's choice and made it possible for us to be redeemed out of the sin in which they left us. That doesn't undo the consequences that the universe and we must suffer because of what they and what all of the evil in the hearts of men have done. Once brought into a perfect world, sin corrupted everything. God made a way to make that right. That's taking responsibility, if you think He is responsible, isn't it?
And I don't see why Adam and Eve could only enter the war zone in the first place WITH God's intervention. They entered it without Him doing a thing except creating them and putting them in paradise. He didn't make them eat of the tree. There is a price to be paid for free will. What good is a creation that can only act according to the will of the one who created it and have no mind or will of its own? How can one love or get love from a mindless, emotionless robot?
People who are damned are choosing it. They could just as easily choose to be with God, but they don't want to be. If everyone chose the path of God and lived their lives following the example of Christ, there would be no evil in the world. We would all treat each other with love and kindness and the world would be a nice place to live. It is our choice to make this world so awful. It needn't be that way. People prefer sin. They also prefer to be where He is not, so He's giving them what they want. Hell is what exists when God is absent from that place. It is the antithesis of everything He is, hence why it is so awful. But that's what people want. Someplace where He won't interfere with them. So He obliges them. He is not responsible for their choice to suffer infinitely, because He provided them with a way to escape that. That was how He took responsibility, if you insist that He must be responsible. It is not His responsibility that they have chosen to reject His great sacrifice on their behalf.
//So basically you are saying God should have never created the universe or us in the first place because He knew by giving us free will, it would all go bad? It is better that man never existed, then? That is the only other choice.//
DeleteOnly if God created us for the purpose of being loved. That's what my initial objection was, assuming that this is also happening in context of a non-Universalist cosmos (if there is no such thing as infinite suffering but only, so to speak, damnation until people change their course, then the problem is solved from the other direction).
The reason that God is responsible is because he created them and put them in paradise knowing that they would eat of the tree. If God was less than completely omniscient and didn't know this for certain then the situation would be different.
But if I know exactly what you're going to do in a particular situation then I share the responsibility in your actions if I put you in that situation.
PS. I realize that I just assumed that you believed that those who are damned in death are /forever/ damned and can never choose at any point in their damnation to repent and seek God. If I was wrong in assuming that then, as I mention above, the problem falls apart in a different way and there's no issue.
What other purpose is there other than God loving us, and us loving God back? He wanted someone to love and to love Him in return. There really is no other reason for being. That is what we will be doing for eternity in heaven, so what other purpose could there be? What goes on here on earth is merely the carrying out of the plan of redemption (not only of us, but the entire universe) so that we who choose so, can be with Him in eternity. We are not the only ones caught in this struggle. There is a spiritual world that has a destiny to carry out too.
DeleteAs I said above, God is redeeming His creation. What more would you have Him do? He created us all to be eternal beings, so yes, damnation is eternal. Once in hell there is no second chance. But those there probably would not want to be in heaven anyhow. If they did, they would have chosen it before death.
As for your accusation against God that He is responsible, I think reading the book of Job might be helpful for you. God does not need to explain Himself to us, even though many think He should. If you are not understanding what I am saying, then I have no other way to explain it. You will have to take your problem up with God Himself. That's why I recommend reading Job. As for me, I'm content to know that I have an eternal future with Him, because that is my choice. Whatever evils I must suffer here, they will all be forgotten then.
It dawns on me that you are expressing the attitude that young people today do about responsibility. They don't want to take responsibility for their own actions, so they blame someone or something else. It wasn't me, it was because someone abused me, It wasn't my fault, it was because my parents gave me a poor life. It wasn't my fault it was .....whoever. With your take on things, you are trying to absolve man of any responsibility for his own actions and put all the blame on God. What about personal responsibility. God took responsibility. When He came and died for our sins, He lifted the curse for us if we accept Him. OUR responsibility is to claim it. You can't expect to not have to shoulder any of the responsibility for your own destiny. You can't lay all the blame on God for our sins. Sorry. If you can't accept that, then I think you don't have the relationship with God that you think you do, for our salvation comes when we repent of our sins and ask God to forgive us, and accept Christ's substitution for us. We need to take responsibility for our actions that separate us from God. Again, it seems that today's younger generation wants to go through life responsibility free. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You are responsible for your choice, Nobody else is. Not even God.
DeleteI'm saying that responsibility can be shared.
DeleteWe find the same idea in the prosecution of criminal negligence being an accessory, and defense via a claim of entrapment.
Humans made choices that led to consequences, but God made the choice for that to be possible, knowing full well not just what /might/ happen but what /would/ happen.
God lifted a curse that was only made possible because of actions that God took, knowing full well that this would lead to the curse and therefore to the infinite suffering of some individuals. They have responsibility for this, but so does God.
If I set up one of those jars that trap a monkey's hand because the monkey wants the treat inside and won't let go, even to escape, then yes, the monkey is responsible for its present situation.
But I am also responsible, because *I* put the trap there, and I did so *knowing* that the monkey would fall victim to the trap. Even if it wasn't my intention specifically to trap the monkey, just to, I don't know, test the monkey or give the monkey freedom to choose between two paths, never for a second did I have the slightest suspicion that the monkey would do anything but succumb to the trap.
The monkey is culpable, but so am I.
I hate to keep repeating myself, but it seems that the fact is still escaping you that God made good on His responsibility by providing a way out of the situation.I am not understanding why you are not grasping this truth.
DeleteLet's take the monkey example. Yes, you put the trap there for the monkey and he fell for it. So now his hand is trapped. So what do you do? You provide a treat (a much better one by the way) for him outside the trap, so now he can let go and pull his hand out. All he has to do is accept that you have a better treat waiting for him and pull his hand out, leaving the lesser treat in the trap. So your responsibility for him having his hand stuck is no longer your responsibility. You have made the situation all good again. You have the treat waiting for him outside the trap. All he has to do is let go of the one in there and pull his hand out and take the one you have for him. So who's responsible now? You? No. You've virtually undone the situation by providing the treat without him having to put his hand in the trap. You are no longer responsible for his having his hand stuck. It is his stubbornness to want to have the one in the trap and hang onto that treat he has in his hand, rather than accept the one which you are offering, which is not only just as good, but much better than the one in his hand. That's what God did for us.
So now, if the monkey refuses the way out of the trap, and is stuck with his hand in the trap forever, because he wants that treat instead of the one you are offering him without having to put his hand in the trap, whose fault is that? God made good on His responsibility by not only providing a way out of sin and eternal punishment, but when we accept His substitution for us, we gain far more than if we cling to our own way. You aren't seeming to understand that. The monkey can pull his hand out and have a better treat if he allows the one who put the trap there to do it for him. If you still are not getting this I am afraid you never will. I have tried to explain is as simple terms as I possibly can and yet you don't seem to understand. It seems like you somehow want to blame God for all our sins and say that He needs to take the blame for people choosing to go to hell. He has provided that they don't have to. That's all there is to it. Any choice to go there is now THEIR responsibility. By the way, whether you want to accept that this is the way it is or not, this is the way it is. You can't tell God He has to take the blame. As I said, you should spend some time reading the book of Job. Maybe you will understand that God's ways are so far beyond our understanding that to question them is simply arrogant disrespect on our part.
Except that /you know/ that the monkey is not going to leave the trap, and you know this before you ever drop the trap.
DeleteThat's what I don't think you're understanding.
God knew from the beginning that there were going to be people who were never ever ever going to accept this substitution that God was offering. Not that it was possible, not that it was probable, but that it was certain.
...
I'm going to take a gander and suppose that you subscribe to the divine command theory of morality. I think that's where part of our disagreement is coming from.
That, or you're not clear on the idea behind legal concepts like entrapment, criminal negligence, being an accessory, heck, maybe even manslaughter (but that's fuzzier).
No, I think the problem here is that you don't understand that God doesn't live by man's rules and concepts. We are to live by His. Again, I am going to refer you to the book of Job. Perhaps you'll have a better idea of His attitude toward us when we try to make Him live up to our legal standards as you put it. There's nothing more I can add to this conversation, so have a nice evening.
DeleteYou have a nice evening too!
Delete(I hope that doesn't sound snide over the internet or something... my apologies if it does.)
(I'm glad we could disagree without name-calling or yelling)
No that doesn't sound snide at all. You've been very pleasant throughout the conversation, so there is no reason to think it wasn't nicely meant. It was nice to not have the name-calling or yelling I so often receive, so thank you for that.
DeleteHi. At the onset accept my sincere thanks for the reply.
ReplyDeleteI understand what you are saying but that means at some level for his own adulation he created us. That I feel is very selfish and look what has happened today most and I mean most of the population on this planet is suffering every second of this existence. I can go and on about suffering world wide right from natural disasters to man made...but I am sure you would know that as well.
Pain and suffering exists at all levels... from macro to micro... is there every where... free will is a concept which is very deceptive... honestly not trying to sound rude but we don't even control an iota here... again there are many many examples of this right from some one suffering in due to sandy storm to some one losing life in Afghanistan....
If he wanted to be loved then there were angels who according to all major
Scriptures (judaisim, Christianity, islam) were better at loving him.
I am not moving ahead on any other topic since I feel this is where it all started and if this is clear then rest is easy.
Once again thanks.
Hi Winay,
DeleteI am hoping you will come back and continue the conversation until we can clear up your understanding on it. This may take several posts, due to restrictions for length, so keep reading. You are absolutely right about one thing. This is where it all started, and if you can't make sense of it, the rest is of no importance. That is where so many Christians make the mistake when trying to witness and convert people. This first few chapters of the Bible are crucial to understanding, and also it is crucial to understand that it is history, not allegory. Without this being real, historical, and accurate, the rest of the Bible is useless.
It may come across to you as selfish that God would create people, seeing as where we have ended up, but you must understand that where we are is entirely our own fault. God created Adam and Eve in perfection. The world was a perfect world. They would never die, never get sick, childbirth would have been painless, all the animals were loving, everyone was vegetarian including the animals, evil did not exist. God created the angelic world just prior to us, and they were created in perfection too. The catch was, God created everyone with wills of their own and intellect. What would be the point and where would the companionship and love be, if everyone were nothing more than automatons?
With free will and intellect comes the ability to make your own choice. You presently (from what I can discern from what you wrote) have elected to not accept the Bible or God, because you do not feel it warrants your belief. That is your free will choice made from your intellect. I on the other hand have chosen to believe. That choice that we both made cannot be laid at God's door. We have to take some responsibility here. We (if we are good parents) give our children some leeway as they grow up to make their own decisions. Do they always make the right one? No. Do they suffer the consequences? Yes. That's how it works. Choices reap results.
God created all to be love, peace, light, etc. The first to rebel against this was Lucifer, the highest angel in the ranks. He had the same attitude many people do. His attitude was, "Who do you think you are to make me worship you?" Worship is the word we use, because God is so much greater than us, but really the word we should use is love, for when we truly love someone deeply, don't we in a way worship them? We want to please them, to make them happy. And in the process, if the relationship is a good one, it is a reciprocal feeling. God loves us and wants to give us everything too. If Adam and Eve had not chosen to not love Him, there would not be all this evil and pain in the world.
Lucifer (Satan) did not want to love God, and in fact wanted to supplant God and be worshiped in His place. But the difference was, Satan did not want to love in return. He wanted to rule as a dictator, making people worship him against their own desire, and force them to do his bidding to please him, with no regard to what the consequences were to them. As a result, he wanted to not only take the third of the angels who followed him, he wanted to ruin all of creation. He went after Adam and Eve by lying to Eve and deceiving her into choosing to disobey God. Then Adam followed by his own choice, not deception. This broke the fellowship with God, for God cannot tolerate evil in His presence. As a result, he condemned them and their progeny to die. But this was a blessing, not a curse, for in order to be able to live in God's presence again, we had to shed the sinful fleshly body we inhabit. Our souls do not die, they are eternal, but we were trapped in evil fleshly bodies. We also needed to have our spirits redeemed from evil, for now our inclinations would be evil. God couldn't bear that this happened, so Christ agreed to pay the price that was required (the blood sacrifice) that would bridge that gap so that we could be restored to God. The reason this was needed, was because our life is in our blood. When Satan got Eve to sin, she by default, made herself his follower, so now he owned her life and since her life was in her blood, her blood was forfeit to him when he wanted it. Again, God wanted man to have a chance to be redeemed, so something had to be substituted for our blood, which was now owned by Satan by virtue of our being descendants of Eve's flesh. Initially he had animals' blood sacrificed as a substitute (the sacrificial system is a little more complex than that, but for now this is all that is needed to know), but the blood of animals was not the blood of humans, and so could not truly substitute on an eternal basis. At some point, Satan would have to have a human sacrifice that he was not due, to cancel out the debt. So Jesus offered Himself as that substitute. He incarnated into a human form, for the sacrifice had to be of Eve's flesh, but being God, He was perfect and without sin. As a human he lived a sinless life so that His entire life was one that was not owned by Satan. As such He made the perfect blood sacrifice to atone for the sinfulness of man. Hence the crucifixion.
DeleteThe only thing that God asked of us to be able to qualify for this atonement was to believe that it existed, that He had provided it through Jesus, and to show Him our belief by loving Him and living in such a way that it demonstrated that love. After all, even WE demand that the people who say they love us give us some demonstration of it. Of course we aren't perfect, being trapped in our sinful body, so we often commit sinful acts, but God also provided a way around that. We merely have to confess and repent and we're back in fellowship with Him again.
It is really all very simple, but everyone has made it so complex. People think you have to have "religion," attend churches, do ceremonial things, etc. but the truth is, all you have to do is admit you are born of sin and are therefore sinful, (in other words believe the Genesis account) have faith and believe that God provided a way back to Him, and love God. He merely wants us to believe in Him and love Him. That's all.
DeleteAs for the evil in the world, we perpetrate that on each other, which is why as you say, we have not an iota of control. I can't control you, you can't control me, and God does not force Himself on us as a dictator. God is not responsible for our decisions. He did not make those men fly into the Twin Towers, did He? He doesn't make people abuse children, does He? We do this to ourselves. We don't even incarcerate or punish those who do these things. Whose fault is that? You may ask, why does God not intervene? He does, when He is asked. But who is praying and asking? Practically nobody. I don't know if you ever saw the article that circulated at the time of 9-11, but while there were many who were killed, there were so many more who would have been, but were not, because something caused them to not go to work, or be late for work, or not board the plane, etc. People don't acknowledge what God does do to intervene. They ignore that part of it and blame Him for the evil, which is really our fault.
The physical world is groaning under our sin too, for when Adam and Eve sinned, that also destroyed the perfection of the universe. That is why the physical disasters are getting worse. Even the physical world is wanting to be redeemed, as it deteriorates.
Back to death, we choose during our life whether we want to love God, or follow Satan in rebellion against God's love. When we die, we either get to go live with God - (and will get a new physical corporeal body upon the resurrection) or we get to go to a place where God doesn't allow His presence to exist. That is what hell is. People who reject God and His love say they don't want to be where He is, so He has provided a place where His presence does not go, to oblige them. But God is love, light, peace, joy, hope, etc. If God is not there, all those qualities will be missing from that place, and it will be inhabited by all those people who have chosen to reject God. Usually these people are not all that nice. And without God's presence, there is also no restraint, for make no mistake, evil, as bad as it is on earth, is being restrained by God.
Without His intervention it would be far worse, and in fact is, it is about to become far worse when He does withdraw His restraint, just before He returns. With no restraint, no hope of intervention, and no fear of God's further punishment, hell is a place where evil reigns at levels you cannot imagine. God does not send people there. Quite the contrary, it is His wish that all would be saved from that horror. People choose to go there by rejecting His offer of redemption. It is their own choice, for the truth of how to avoid it is taught everywhere.
DeleteIt really is so simple. Mankind has made it hard. I think they have made it hard, because Satan does not want anyone to love God, as he hates God with a passion and misery loves company, so he has corrupted the truth, so that people do not understand God and think He is some tyrant that doesn't deserve for them to love Him. The more you get to know and truly understand God and what really is going on, the more you realize how very much He loves us and how painful it is for Him to watch what is going on. He grieves over the conditions on earth. He would love to intervene and stop it all, and shortly He will, but until then He patiently waits and hopes that as many as possible will come to Him. He does have a limit to how long His patience will put up with Satan though, and that has about reached its end. The signs all point to this generation being the one that will see things come to a head. Then He will return and establish a kingdom where He rules. There is a lot more to that story too, but I think this is about all (and probably more) than you want to hear right now.
I hope that this helps to make some of this clear to you, for I completely understand your need to be able to comprehend this. In fact, I applaud you for starting here, for if you can finally grasp this, then all the rest WILL make sense and you will understand in a way that so few people, who say they believe in God, do. As a consequence, if you choose to believe, nothing will shake that belief.
"If adam and eve had not chosen to love hi then there would not have been pain and suffering"... I did not understand this I find it to be contradictory.
DeleteAll 3 scriptures (old testament, new testament koran) have blamed satan for being arrogant, egoistic and have blamed him for instigating adam and eve... I am sure that satan was also created by god since this whole creation is his... satan
Angels other life forms right up to humans are all created by god. God here being the most powerful entity
allowed satan to do what he did being fully aware what is going to happen. God created adam and then eve again fully aware of the consequences... as per koran angels were against the creation of adam.
Somewhere this gives out a feeling that either god was doing an experiment which went wrong or he knew exactly what is going to happen.
My sense is he knew....
If he knew and I am sure he did then the question is why... today we don't control anything here... free will doesn't exist. We are completely driven by a map which was designed or is getting designed by someone higher up above.
ReplyDeleteI understand your point of free will for a person who grows up to being able to exercise his free will. . But what about those who are born and die with in few years in any manner... those who are physically challenged from birth... those who are mentally challenged...
If they are bearing the fruits of their past birth then why don't we as humans know what is it that has been wronged by us... and then when does this cycle of births end....
He created us anyhow, knowing how He would have to suffer Himself to redeem us and creation, because He wanted us to have the possibility of existence. Had He decided against doing this, there would be no universe, no earth, no humans, nothing and God would go on alone as He was. Doing anything requires some risk. And again, you act as if He is sending people to hell. He's not. You seem to think there is no free will. Just because God knows the future does not mean that He makes it happen the way He wants. He takes advantage of our choices to help His own, I will grant you that, but He doesn't interfere with our choices. He merely uses them for His own purposes. Those of us who willingly submit our choices to Him allow Him the means to alter the consequences of the choices that those who do not love Him make. So it still comes down to free will. I let Him make my choices, but that is my choice. I know He knows more than me and I trust Him to do what is best, as He knows the future and other's decisions which I do not.
DeleteWe do control things here. It is just that people do not want to take responsibility for their choices. It is easier to blame God and be mad at Him, but that's not going to accomplish anything or change anything.
Hi Winay. First I must correct one sentence that you misread. I wrote,"If Adam and Eve had NOT chosen to NOT love Him." In other words, had they chosen TO love Him, there would not be evil, at least until some other descendant chose to reject Him.
ReplyDeleteSatan IS an egotistical,, arrogant, prideful being. He thinks he is God. And he hates all of mankind. He is not solely to blame for their fall. They chose to believe his lie. But he did what he could to make them choose evil by lying. Those are simply the facts. Satan was created by God. He was the highest angel, but that still wasn't good enough for him. He wanted to be number one, God himself.
There is nothing in the Bible that indicates that the angels were against the creation of man. After all they didn't have a clue what was going to happen, so why should they object.
God knew what would happen, which is why Christ agreed to die for our sins even before He created the entire creation, universe, angels and all. It was not an experiment. You act as if this did not affect God and that we are the only ones suffering. You do know what Christ had to suffer, right? He took the punishment of the entire world's sins from the beginning of time until the end on Himself. That is no small sacrifice.
I'm not sure if these posts will print in the order I am writing them as I'm not sure if I hit reply or just the comment button, so hopefully you can make sense of them.
ReplyDeleteFinally those who die before they can understand or are incapable of understanding are not treated the same as those who can. God makes a provision for them. He is a just God, not an unfair one.
Your comment seemed to indicate you might believe in reincarnation. There is no such thing. Man lives once and dies once and that is it. The choice is made for eternity. So you had seriously better consider where you want to be going when you die, as there is no second chance.
This statement would be wrong seeing as Jesus was a man and rose from the dead, and he also called Lazarus out from the tomb...both dead but brought to life a second time.
DeleteJesus was resurrected, which is an entirely different thing from being raised from the dead. If you don't understand the difference I would suggest studying up on it. As for Lazarus and the little girl that he raised, the few whom Jesus rose from the dead were raised for the strict purpose of demonstrating His power over death. This was not something that was going to happen on a regular basis for no reason. These people did die then and meet their eternal fate. The Scriptures tell us that it is appointed once for man to die. If God changes the rule for reasons of His own to demonstrate His power over death, that is His choice, but you should not assume that you are going to be granted that.
DeleteOne thing cannot be done is try to prove the Bible by quoting it. When I as a child questioned my mother, a believing and practising Christian Anglican about the Bible creation story and evolution, she would say that evolution is just God's way of doing things and anyway, it does not matter. What matters is that you love God and your neighbour. I have based my beliefs on these premises and have no problem with Bible fables at all.
ReplyDeleteYour mother may be a good woman and very sincere, but I'm afraid she is incorrect about it mattering. It does matter, a great deal. It is the lack of belief in this first chapter and an acceptance of evolution that has led so many to turn from God. The entire Bible is the story of the history of the creation of the universe, the world, and us, God's relationship to us and how it was broken, and the history of how God went about bringing Christ into the world to fix it and our relationship with Him. If you think it is only a bunch of fables, then why believe in God at all? The first chapter of the Bible tells us what the problem is between us and God and the rest of the Bible is the story of how God dealt with the problem. so that we could get back to Him. If you don't accept what God has told us, then you cannot find your way back to Him no matter how much you may love your neighbor. He has made it quite clear that we are sinners, WHY we are sinners, (a real Adam and Eve sinning) and why Christ had to come and die for our sins, which He says is the only way back to Him. You cannot choose your own path to God. The Bible is our instruction manual and God intends for us to take Him at His Word. You ignore it and dismiss its truth as fables at your own peril.
DeleteWho says that the Bible is an infallible instruction manual? The Bible. I would like to believe that devout Muslims and Hindus, (and liberal Christians) find their path to heaven and Catholics who hold the Church as the supreme interpreter of the Faith. After all, Peter was given the keys to the kingdom and told 'What ever you bind on Earth is bound in Heaven"
ReplyDeleteWell, the way I see it, Jesus was the only one to ever declare that He was God incarnate and validate what He said by coming back from the dead. He told us this was to save us from our sins. He told us He was the only way to God. Nobody in the other religions ever did that. He validated the O.T.and declared it to be the truth. The N.T. is the story of His life and what He said written down by His followers who knew Him, the teachings of His apostles for the churches of that era and all churches through the ages, and His message to us about the end of the world and His return. He never said any church (like the Catholic church claims) was the way to heaven. He said He and He alone was the only conduit by which we could be saved. I tend to believe Him, because He proved what He said by His resurrection. You can choose to believe whatever you want. That is your choice.By the way, the keys to the kingdom is not a church. It is the message of who Christ is - God incarnate - which Peter was the first disciple to really understand and acknowledge. All believers have the keys to the kingdom, not just Peter. We (true believers) all know who Christ really is and what the message of salvation (the only way to heaven) is. And we all have the power through Jesus Christ to bind things. It is not our power, nor was it Peter's. It is the power of Christ within His believer that is enacted by their faith in His power.
DeleteOnce again you are using the bible to prove the bible. The Fundamentalist Christian faith is NOT the only one to have a God on Earth concept. One cannot prove that he Bible is factually correct at all.
ReplyDeleteThe Egyptian Myths
About two thousand years before the Christian era Mut-em-ua, the virgin Queen of Egypt, was said to have given birth to the Pharaoh Amenkept (or Amenophis) III, who built the temple of Luxor, on the walls of which were represented:
1) The Annunciation: the god Taht announcing to the virgin Queen that she is about to become a mother.
2) The Immaculate Conception: the god Kneph (the holy spirit) mystically impregnating the virgin by holding a cross, the symbol of life, to her mouth.
3) The Birth of the Man-god.
4) The Adoration of the newly born infant by gods and men, including three kings (or Magi?), who are offering him gifts. In this sculpture the cross again appears as a symbol.
Doesn't this concern you at all?
No it doesn't concern me, because I have done enough research to know where these myths originate, and that they don't precede the Bible. You may not know all the Babylonian Mysteries and all the history, but I have done extensive research. And as far as the Bible not being shown to be factually correct, you need to do your research. Archeologists use the Bible to initiate their study for digs and it has been shown to be accurate, even about cultures such as the Hittites which were only mentioned in the Bible, and not any other source, but whom have been discovered. Not only has it been shown to be historically accurate through archeology, it's prophecies have and are still coming true. You need to do your research. I have done mine. As for other religions having gods, yes they do. Their gods are spiritual beings who were created by God and whom have separated themselves from the one true God and who like to be worshiped as gods themselves. Hence they get people to think they are gods by performing what we would see as miraculous acts, but which within their sphere of the spiritual realm are not. They will answer to the one true God one day. And the one true God is the one found in the Bible. But hey, you can believe whatever you want. God doesn't force belief in Him on anyone. But don't expect me to give up my belief, when God has shown Himself to me not only through the research to be the one true God, but I have experienced a personal and intimate relationship with Him through Jesus Christ that has changed my life. I know the truth and the truth has set me free. But you are welcome to your own opinion. This blog however will always teach Jesus Christ crucified for our sins.
DeleteThey do precede the bible and well done for having an intimate relationship with God. So do I, in a different way. Only your faith tells you this --nothing else. I do not claim to have the whole truth but you do.
DeleteActually they don't precede Bible as the Bible starts with the creation of the universe. Nothing precedes that. All the myths and cultures came about after the Flood of Noah, which you will find the antediluvian history in the book of Genesis. The Egyptian myths came after the Babylonian myths. You can find the source of those also in the Book of Genesis, chapter 11, where the Tower of Babel was erected. It is Nimrod and his wife Semiramis that are the source of the Babylonian mysteries which then traveled to Egypt and around the world at the dispersion at Babel. If you check the myths, you will find that many of them are similar. That is because they go back to the same source. I do not claim to understand all the truth, for God's truth is more than any human can understand. What I do know is that the Bible is the source of all truth, as it was given to men by God to then pass on to us. Moses may have compiled the first five books and wrote most of them, but the toledot indicates that Adam and his son Seth and their descendants down through Noah more than likely wrote the first few chapters of Genesis. This precedes any myths of Egypt of any other culture. God spoke directly to Moses, so I imagine he got it right, since God told him what to write.
DeleteThe theory that Genesis is a toledot (generational account) is also a matter of opinion and one held only by the fundamentalists, who are still determined that evolution and creation cannot go hand in hand. Well they can, without endangering one's immortal soul, or so I believe. Fundamentalist forms of religions have caused most of the religious wars of the then and now.
DeleteReading all of the above...it all seems so anticlimatic. the issue i have is not
ReplyDeletewith Adam and Eve but with the plan...how perfect could the creation of Adam
and Eve be in the garden that GOD created when the first situation they
encounter...they fail. Don't eat of the tree of knowledge ! GOD certainly
knew they would not overcome the first temptation they encountered.
moving along...why would God allow the devil to be in his special garden
in the first place to unravel his plan ? Then having to create his son to die
a horrible death to undo everything....i guess my question is the plan seems flawed to begin with...he knew all the suffering that would ensue
from that point on...why do it that way...when he could have done it
perfectly to begin with ????
It's called free will. God could have created an entire creation both spiritual beings and human beings that had no will but to do His will, but the entire point of creation was so that He would have companions who would love Him freely of their own choice. Would you want to be loved by someone who had no choice in the matter? How would you ever feel that someone really loved you, if they were compelled to do so and had no choice to choose otherwise no matter what? It's not love if it isn't a choice. To have love freely given, one must have free will, and with free will comes the chance that love will be rejected. God knew it would be, but He made a provision that EVERYONE could have a chance to repair the damage that Adam and Eve created. Thus undoing the damage they did. But because there is free will, not everyone wants that relationship repaired. Some (just as Satan and his followers chose) choose to want to reject God's love. The plan wasn't flawed. The plan was to give us free will, and also give us a way to still be with Him in spite of the wrong choice our two original parents made. If Satan hadn't tempted them, someone still would have chosen to reject God, because that is just how free will works. Do you love everybody you meet? Of course not. Free will has a cost and requires a sacrifice. God was willing to allow that, but look at what it cost Him. His Son had to take the punishment of the sins of the entire world upon Himself. He has suffered the worst in all of this. So why should we complain.
DeleteCONNIE,
DeleteGOD needs our flawed love like a giraffe needs a sore throat...
is GOD not perfection within himself ? If GOD is all good where did all this evil come from...why would he create it ? As far as
free will goes i'm not sure...the mere fact that he knows our every choice seems to negate free will...he would have to say..
i really don't know what choice he will make ! Again why would
GOD permit the devil to roam the world seeking the ruin of souls. I ask you...if you truly loved your family...would you allow
someone to darm to them...knowing you could prevent it.
Spiritual truths can only be spiritually discerned, and that can only happen when one has an intimate relationship with God. I'm afraid that no matter how much I try to explain this to you, it will never make any sense, for you do not have the key to understanding it, from what I have been able to glean from your comments. It also seems clear from your comments that you have some sort of bone to pick with God about His way of doing things, which means that until you are willing to humble yourself and accept God on His terms, you will never understand the situation. I'm sorry. I can't help you.
DeleteWEll really Connie. How self-satisfied can you be? What key?
DeleteYou have failed to answer those crucial quations asked by curious, simply because you can't. Answer this: If God is all-powerful, can He make a rock too heavy for Him to lift? Curious has no 'bone to pick' with God at all, simply asking questions which we all share and if you don't have such doubts you are an insecure person relying entirely upon a fairly flawed document as your tenet of belief. Answer this then too? If God has given us free will, surely he did so to the writers of the Bible. They thus were free to err like the rest of us.
I find it strangely interesting that I can go months without so much as a comment and then in a couple of days am inundated with comments from a "group" of people who basically say the same thing and defend each other. Either you are working together or you are one person with multiple names. Either way, if you don't like what I have to say, nobody is making you read my articles. It would appear that there is no real searching for truth here but just an attempt to attack me and get me to respond. I prefer to not deal with people who simply troll doing this for their amusement. Please continue on to someone else's blog. Thank you.
DeleteAs with most fundamentalists you don't like people disagreeing with you because your position is defenceless. The questions asked were valid ones- which have disturbed me as a liberal Christian all my life. Bye Connie
DeleteQuite honestly I care not whether people agree or disagree with me. God has told me that I am to present the truth, but whether people believe it or not is not my problem. that is between them and God. My position is not defenseless. It is just that I can explain it over and over, and have at times, but people are unable to comprehend the answer and therefore think I have not answered their question. Either that or they don't like the answer and therefore say the same thing, that I have not answered their question. As I said before, spiritual things are not discerned by the carnal man. And no matter what defense I present, it will not be accepted, because you reject the truth of the Bible. There is nothing I can do to change that, nor is it my problem to do so. You admit to being a liberal "Christian." Well, God is not liberal. He has some very black and white truths and rejecting them is not going to change who He is either.
DeleteI don NOT reject the spiritual truth of the Bible, just the literal. How do you know that God is not liberal anyway? HE certainly does become moreso in the New Testament-until freind Paul came along with his absolutes. Don't put Christian in italics either. It tends to suggest that liberals are not. THis is prime presumption.
ReplyDeleteAs this article pointed out, and its premise apparently escaped you, to reject the literal is to nullify anything the Bible teaches, for the entire reason the Bible exists is to tell us of the origin of our sin and a need for a Savior and how God brought that about through a nation known as Israel, whom He used to bring the Savior into the world. To reject that history - from Adam forward, is to reject the entire meaning of and reason for the Bible, for Christ Himself spoke of Adam as a literal being who existed, as did Paul. Paul is not the originator of those truths, God is. Many of them are the New Covenant, and many of them are the Old Covenant reiterated, for they have not been nullified by the New Covenant. How can a person be a true Christian if they reject them literal truth of God's Word? The phrase liberal Christian is an oxymoron. One cannot reject the truth and then label themselves as someone who accepts it. God is not more liberal in the N.T. Salvation has always been by faith through grace, and obedience to maintain that salvation relationship in good standing. It is just that Christ took the penalty of the law for us, so the rules were altered to reflect that. We are still expected to live by the Ten Commandments. Christ told us if we loved Him we would do this. The other laws were for a nation's government. They were never meant to carry over into the rest of the world at that time. That is why God destroyed the temple, for without it most of those laws become invalid. Christ "broke" those laws because He offered the better way, mercy rather than punishment. The laws were given to show people their sin, not to nullify it by keeping those laws. They were also simply to keep order within the nation as all nations must have laws. If you do not understand how the O.T. and N.T. work together, then you don't understand Christianity. I suggest you read my article on how can God be a God of justice and mercy at the same time. It explains why things changed between the Old and New Testament. God didn't become more liberal. It is just that Christ's sacrifice altered the manner in which these things were done. God is still a God of justice as much as He ever was. And He is still a God of mercy as much as He ever was. Christ is the distinguishing factor, but if you reject Adam and Eve and Genesis as literal, then Christ's whole reason for coming is non-existent and therefore Christianity becomes a joke. That is why there is no such thing as a liberal Christian. Either you believe the truth, or you don't.
DeleteThus you condemn most Catholics as non-Christian. This sums up their official position.
DeleteFundamentalists often make it a test of Christian orthodoxy to believe that the world was created in six 24-hour days and that no other interpretations of Genesis 1 are possible. They claim that until recently this view of Genesis was the only acceptable one—indeed, the only one there was.
The writings of the Fathers, who were much closer than we are in time and culture to the original audience of Genesis, show that this was not the case. There was wide variation of opinion on how long creation took. Some said only a few days; others argued for a much longer, indefinite period. Those who took the latter view appealed to the fact "that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Pet. 3:8; cf. Ps. 90:4), that light was created on the first day, but the sun was not created till the fourth day (Gen. 1:3, 16), and that Adam was told he would die the same "day" as he ate of the tree, yet he lived to be 930 years old (Gen. 2:17, 5:5).
Catholics are at liberty to believe that creation took a few days or a much longer period, according to how they see the evidence, and subject to any future judgment of the Church (Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical Humani Generis 36–37). They need not be hostile to modern cosmology. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "[M]any scientific studies . . . have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life forms, and the appearance of man. These studies invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator" (CCC 283). Still, science has its limits (CCC 284, 2293–4). The following quotations from the Fathers show how widely divergent early Christian views were.
The liberal view of the Fall illustrates the way scripture can the used spiritually without being literal. God did create a perfect world. As Man became more sophisticated and intelligent as he evolved, evil crept into the picture, whether by nature or nurture. The Genesis story of the Fall is an early explanation of this phenomenon and it certainly needed the sacrifice of our Lord to redeem the situation.
ReplyDeleteBeing from the era of the first century or later did not automatically make people right. The Gnostics were totally wrong. Evil just gradually crept into the picture? Really? That makes sense to you? You are aware that Christ's genealogy is traced back to Adam, aren't you? Genealogies were considered of the utmost importance to Jews. It is not a fabrication. And Christ said that Abel was a real person. Abel was Adam's son. So is Christ a liar? Cause if He is, then He is not the Son of God and where does that leave you? The vast majority of Catholics put their hope in their church for salvation, as do some other denominations. The church is not going to save them. The church did not die for their sins. Mary did not die for their sins and she cannot save them either. Do some Catholics believe in Christ for their salvation and not the church? Yes, I have known some who believe the Word of God literally, that Adam and Eve were real, so no, not all Catholics are condemned by any means. A person's individual faith in God is not determined by their denomination.
DeleteBy the way, if evil crept in gradually, then not everybody has been or is guilty of sin, right? Some were/are still perfect in that case. So why is it that we are told that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God? How could it be that ALL have sinned if not ALL have come from Adam and Eve.
I'm really looking at it from an evolutionary point of view. As man developed from primate, so did his ability to choose selfishness, gratuitous violence evil against his fellows.. Jesus came to save us from this- to teach us a better way. What's wrong with this marriage of evolution and Christianity?
ReplyDeleteThe problem is this. According to the Bible AND Jesus, death is the result of sin, NOT the natural order of the original creation. It is the result of the very real disobedient sin of two real people, Adam and Eve. God created everything good. If this is not the way things happened, then God did not create everything good because death would have reigned from the beginning and therefore death and separation from God is not the result of sin, and Jesus is completely unnecessary, because that is why He came according to Him. He came to pay the price for that sin, conquer death, and reconcile us to God. If Jesus is unnecessary, because death and evil is the natural order of creation, then the Bible is useless and we don't need to repent of our sins or worry about heaven and hell.
ReplyDeleteJesus didn't come to just teach us a better way. His entire purpose in coming was to pay the penalty that God inflicted on us for sin, death and eternal separation from God. His blood atoned for our sins, for only a perfect blood sacrifice could atone for sin. For life is in the blood and blood had to be sacrificed so that Adam and Eve's sin could be temporarily covered (as well as their bodies) until the perfect sacrifice (Jesus) came. (Hence all the animal sacrifices in Judaism.) His resurrection conquered death, so we no longer need to stay dead (we will also be resurrected if we believe in Him). It's not just a better way of - love your neighbor and that is all that's required for salvation. It is required that you confess and repent of your sins (both the original sinful nature that you inherited from Adam and Eve, and your own personal sins), personally accept that Christ died and took the punishment of your sins in your place to satisfy God's justice, and then that He made it possible for God to extend mercy and forgiveness to you (to all of us) for those sins and then believe and have faith in that substitutionary atonement. Then you must continue to live for Him by keeping His Commandments and living a life holy and sanctified unto Him, continuing to confess to Him your sins as you commit them to stay in a goodstanding relationship with Him. That last part is the most difficult as we all are prone to give in to the sinful nature. It is not through any church or denomination that we receive salvation. It is through this personal relationship with Him. If you believe Jesus is the Savior, then you must believe He is the truth, and that He told us the truth. He said that Adam and Eve were real, for He speaks about their son Abel being the first prophet, and He traces His ancestry back to Adam and Eve. So you have to choose. Are you going to believe Christ, or aren't you? There is no alternative where you can straddle the middle. It's a black and white choice. I'm sorry, I didn't make the rules. God did. As for evolution, are you open minded enough to bother checking out creationism? Most people dismiss it before even examining the evidence. That is not the way a true seeker of truth behaves. It is closed-minded. Please go to answersingenesis.org with Ken Ham (make sure that is "answers", not "answer" or you'll get another website. ) or check out the institution for creation research at icr.org. Really read through their articles. It might surprise you.
So were Adam and Eve the only ones God created in those 6 days?
DeleteAdam and Eve were the only humans that God created in those 6 days. The angelic realm was also created during that time.
DeleteI'm still uncertain about the absolute veracity of the Bible. As an example I refer to Matthew 16:18 RSV. "I say to you there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." YOu might argue that he's referring to the transfiguration in the next chapter. I say no. Jesus did not come in his kingdom in the transfiguration. I asked a colleague in the Ministry (Baptist church) how he interpreted this. He simply said, "He was misreported". The early church did believe that close by was the end of days, even as far as the Council of Nicaea, when the scriptures were gathered together. I would certainly agree with my colleague that the writers were fallible, as all people are.
ReplyDeleteWell, no offense to your Baptist colleague, but he apparently does not understand to what Christ was referring. But then I have discovered that people in the ministry have spent all their time studying commentaries instead of the Bible, so that does make it harder for them to grasp things at times. Have you read Revelation? John was taken forward via vision (or maybe time travel for all we know, which he interpreted as a vision) to the Second Coming of Christ to record all that would happen in the end times just before Christ comes back. John saw the Second Coming before he died. He saw the Son of Man coming in His kingdom, just as Christ said someone would. He recorded it all for us. Also Paul was taken up to the third heaven and we do not know what he may have seen, for he never reported it. Not that he was standing there when Christ said this, so this verse really didn't apply to him, but he also wrote about the Second Coming and seemed to have an awful lot of information, so one assumes he either saw or was told what would happen. We don't know who else among the disciples/apostles were given visions of the future. Peter seemed to have knowledge of it. They may not have recorded seeing the Second Coming, if they did see it, for it seems that John was the one who was chosen to lay out the entire scenario for us. They all seemed to have knowledge of it from somewhere, though. We know that at least one (John) absolutely did see the 2nd Coming though, because he did record it. There is no misreporting in the Bible. There is only lack of understanding on the part of people.
ReplyDeleteOf course the writers were fallible as all people are, but when one is being controlled by the Holy Spirit, God works through that person to say or do or write what God intends. The prophets were fallible, but when they prophesied they were never wrong. The penalty was death if they were, and that was by God's command, so don't you think He made sure that His prophets were never wrong? Do you not believe that God has that much power to control what is said or written on His behalf? When they wrote for God, they wrote what God wanted. You only have to compare the various O.T. prophets to see that what they wrote message-wise was coming from one author (God). The message was exactly the same from book to book in many cases, albeit the wording was not always exactly the same from book to book. The human authors were allowed to put some of their personality into it, but the message was from God. The same with Paul and John and the other N.T. writers. What they write about Christ's life or His Second Coming lines up exactly to tell the same message when interpreted correctly. In fact, that is a key to knowing that you are interpreting it correctly. It will line up from scripture to scripture. But their personalities made the flavor (grammatically, etc.) of the message different from another person's. Paul wrote like a lawyer. Matthew did not. The Bible is true from cover to cover. When we run across things that we don't understand, it is because we either lack the knowledge, or there are missing pieces that are found somewhere else in the scriptures that we need, to unlock understanding, or some other reason like this. It is not that it is wrong. It is that we are incapable of understanding for some reason. I have found over the years that many things that eluded me at first have become very clear and simple to understand the more I studied God's Word. So many times understanding a passage requires that you have knowledge from some other passage in scripture, and quite frankly very few people study their Bibles, much less study them to that extent. Sometimes understanding comes from something that isn't found in the Bible. If you check my archives, (I think it's the first article I wrote) you'll find an article on the supposed discrepancy between Matthew's and Luke's account of how Judas died. What was missing was the key ingredient of knowing the field in which Judas killed himself. All becomes clear once you have that missing piece of information and understand that Matthew was a tax collector and Luke was a physician. Those three little things make everything come together to explain the discrepancy. The same with the identity of Melchizadek. You have to understand the pattern of the Temple to understand who Melchizadek is, for it is a missing puzzle piece to that puzzle. Who would connect the two? But they are connected. I have an article on that too. When you start understanding and taking God's Word as literal, a whole new world of understanding opens up and things become so crystal clear of the entire picture that the Bible is from Genesis to Revelation. It's quite amazing. You start to understand things you never did before. It's like unraveling a tangled ball of string or putting together a jigsaw puzzle and seeing the picture emerge. It's fascinating
DeleteTime travel? What might the others have seen? YOu are very keen on Revelations but you seem to be adding to it, which is regarded as a mortal sin. By the way, Paul only refers to someone he met who had been taken to the thrird heaven, not himself. (Cor 12 2-4)). My Baptist colleague by the way, and I shared the same profession, both retired many years ago, he Baptist, I high church Anglican. I made my peace with my God early in my life as a result of my upbringing, additionally inspired by Billy Graham, and am never likely to change my mind, certainly NEVER along fundamentalist lines. A dear friend of mine, Christian counsellor, told me that the majority of people whom he finds most distressed are the intelligent fundamentalists who cannot accept the literal interpretation, so they throw the whole thing away.
DeleteI am not adding to Revelation. John was shown the end times and Christ's return. That's in there. As to my wondering if it was just a vision or God transported him to the actual event, that is merely a side comment, not adding to the scriptures. I was not endorsing that it happened that way, just saying that we don't know what actually did transpire. Please do not deliberately misinterpret what I say. We also do not know what God might have shown others. We do know that the apostles seemed to know a great deal about the end times, and we don't know how that happened. Some scholars say that Paul was speaking of himself, but did not want to brag to puff himself up, but either way, he does say that someone was taken up and given revelations, so it did happen to people i.e. "the others" to which I referred, correct? I do not consider myself a "fundamentalist." Just because I believe that the Bible is inerrant and the Word of God, and that God literally means what He says, (unlike the first lie Satan said, which was basically "Does God REALLY mean what He says?" does not make me a "fundamentalist" unless your entire definition is that a fundamentalist believes that the Bible is the Word of God, inerrant, and to be understood at it's most basic literal level whenever the literal interpretation makes sense (which is most of the time.) I do not belong to any denomination. Nor do I consider myself even a Protestant, as I see as much apostasy and error in teachings in that domain as I do the Catholic church. I am strictly a believer in Christ and God's Word - Old and New Testament. I don't know why "intelligent fundamentalists" find a literal interpretation so distressing. I have a very high IQ according to testing, if that is supposed to stand for anything, and I have no problem with it at all. That is because I have bothered checking out what creationism teaches and I found it to be a most enlightening experience. Have you ever bothered really checking out what it teaches, or do you (as I suspect) dismiss it out of hand, or barely look at it at all if you do, just so you can say you did? You come with a preconceived bias against it and nothing will probably change your mind no matter how much evidence they might show. Okay. I can live with that. You have a right to believe whatever you want. I don't know why you feel the need to keep coming back here and harping at me, when you clearly have no open-mindedness to entertain anything other than what you believe. There is really no point in our continuing to discuss this in my opinion. Don't you agree? Maybe it's time you moved on and told someone else how stupid you think they are for believing God's Word.
DeleteI thought that your blog was for dialectic purposes but I see that it's not at all. You simply don't want to hear from those who have other points of view. As far as openmindedness is concerned I'm might be far more accepting of other views than you, who have only one. I have never suggested that you are stupid, but simply challenge your views, and give you mine. I do know a lot about the so-called creationist science and accept some of it. I can't really believe that ordinary horses become zebras by hiding in dappled shade, no matter how many million years roll by. As far as carbon-dating is concerned, perhaps the rules of today did not apply then--perhaps. I still believe in it though. I accept that all races and all religions have a pathway to our God, in different ways. They also have their versions of God's word. So I have a large open mind to forms of belief quite foreign to mine. Let this then suffice.
DeleteTo say that "intelligent" fundamentalists cannot accept the literal interpretation of the Bible is just a roundabout way of saying that those of us who do are stupid. Well this "stupid" person can read between the lines of your comments to see the label you so surreptitiously apply to us. As for the rest, if you want to accept that all religions have a path to God, then you are free to do so. I am closed-minded about it because Christ, the Son of God who died for my sins was closed-minded about it. He said, and I quote (via English translation), "I am the way, the truth, and the life: NO MAN cometh unto the Father BUT BY ME." That says it all, right there as far as I am concerned. If God says it, it is good enough for me. You can take your disagreement up with Him when you stand before Him.
DeleteAs the Bible was collected together, the gospels a mix of over 40 'true accounts', Constantine actually paid the members of the council to reach a consensus as to what would be the content of the Gospels. The verse you quote would be a product of the political and religious affirmations he sought. It gave him and succeeding Christians the right to use any method possible to force their creed on others. So it continued through the centuries-kill in the name of Christ or its opponents, whichever side you were on. It still goes on.
DeleteChrist never taught to kill in His name. I don't know what Bible you are reading, but that is not taught by Him in mine. So you obviously do not believe Christ is God incarnate if you don't believe He is the way, the truth, and the life, and nobody comes to God except through Him. God is perfectly capable of preserving His Word regardless of what man might try to do to it. I wish you well with your belief, for I am afraid it will not stand you in good stead when you stand before God on judgment day.
DeleteYes. Christ is God, as stated in the Creed. I read the same Bible in which at His (supposed) command dreadful atrocities were supposed to have been visited upon thousands of people in the Old Testament--Joshua, Kings, Chronicles, Judges, if we are to believe the Bible literally. This is not the God I know and I don't believe he commanded these things. And-- as far as my standing with my Maker, Judge not that ye be not judged.
DeleteThe fact that you do not believe or understand what the events of the O.T. are all about shows that you do not comprehend who God is and what He was doing. When you take it all as literal history, it makes perfect sense. God is a God of justice, not just mercy. How could He not be and be a perfect and holy God, for holiness requires that evil and wickedness be punished out of justice. That is what God was doing to those tribes in the O.T. He was visiting justice upon them for their wickedness via Israel. He will visit justice again upon the entire world for their wickedness just before Christ returns, as He did in Noah's day, except not by water. You may not believe Revelation is literal, but you will one day if you live long enough. The sun will go dark (be eclipsed) the moon turn blood red (also eclipsed) - both by another celestial body, as this is scientifically the only way both can be eclipsed around the entire world at the same time, as the entire world is to see this event. I am not adding to scripture here, I am understanding what it is saying. There will be meteor showers (stars falling) and a huge asteroid will hit the earth (in the ocean) as predicted in Revelation. This will be followed by more of the same, and hordes of demonic entities (non-human looking entities which will probably be believed to be aliens by people, for that is how people are being programmed) being unleashed upon the world. Before this, the antichrist will rise and kill Christians by the millions and force the world to either worship him or die. There will be events that will drive people to be suicidal out of fear. This will be just the prequel to God's judgment upon the wicked world that has rejected Him and His Word. You may not believe it is coming, but if you are alive when it does, you will realize that I have been speaking the truth and the Bible is to be taken literally. Of course by then it will be too late for you to learn what it has to say on that level. You will not be able to say that you did not know or have not been warned, for you have just been. I assume you will reject what I am saying, but rejection does not make it untrue. By the way, if you take the mark of the antichrist you can only look forward to an eternity of damnation. Just saying.
DeleteWhat about the slaughtered children? How had they been wicked? NO! The tribes displaced by Joshua gave the Israelites the land they needed. To claim that God ordered them to do this killing is absolutely obscene. One again this is not the God I know and love.
DeleteBy the way:
I presume that you are a woman if you use your sones and dancing partners. If so you should not be preaching or teaching at all if you use the Bible literally..•
]1 Timothy 2:11-15 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
I presume that Timothy was divinely inspired.
By the way, do I appear to have the mark of the antichrist? I actually do believe in the Apocalypse, and the end may be violent, but not for a few billion years, when the sun reaches supernova state.
DeleteI'm assuming New Blog that you are putting yourself in the place of God to make this determination about the children. You do not understand the circumstances involved, nor why God gave the order. I do, but you would never understand, because it requires accepting the Bible as literal truth. I am a woman, but I am not preaching. I am merely writing articles. Am I teaching. Yes, Is that forbidden to a woman? No, only as a shepherd in the church. And it is only forbidden for her to teach a man in church, she is to teach other women and children. Priscilla helped Aquilla teach outside of church. No problem there. If you read the Scriptures you will find that women did teach and it was acceptable under certain circumstances. I do not have a pulpit nor a congregation. I merely have obeyed God in writing His truths. Who reads them is up to God. As for you Brian, did I say you have the mark of antichrist? Please read my comments and don't just skim them assuming what you think I have written, because you seem to not read them correctly. I said if you take the mark of the beast you can only expect eternal damnation. Whether you do or not (if you are still alive when it happens) is entirely up to you. I think the apocalypse is coming much sooner than you think. The prophecies are already coming to pass.
DeleteNow Connie, if I read you right, women who teach men in a church are sinning, and will not stand up to Judgement. I'm afraid that the Presbyterian, Anglican and Quaker churches to name but a few would not agree with you. They all have women in the Ministry.
DeleteYes, you understood the scripture correctly. Women are not to have spiritual authority over men. I do not have spiritual authority over any man in writing this blog. I am merely witnessing to God's truth as is the mandate for every Christian. As to how they will be judged, that is dependent upon their relationship with God. If we are truly in a relationship with God, He generally chastises us for our sins here, as our eternal punishment has been taken by Christ. If they don't have a real relationship with God, then yes, they will not stand up in Judgment, but not because of that particular sin, but because they do not have the relationship with Christ. But then they will be judged on all of their sins to determine their punishment.
DeleteAnd it doesn't matter what denominations teach or do. It doesn't make it acceptable to God just because they decide to do it. We don't make the rules and tell God He has to adjust with the changing times. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Exodus 31:14-15
DeleteYe shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death. (v.14)
Whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. (v.15)
I wonder Connie. Do really think those who work on the sabbath should be put to death? I wonder how the law would see this. Or perhaps you have a convoluted meaning for 'Put to Death."
During the time that Israel was under the Laws of Moses, yes, it was required by God that this judgment be carried out, although I understand that often they turned a blind eye to the transgressions and did not carry the punishment out. Should people be put to death today? The punishment of the transgressions of the law were fulfilled by Christ. We are not under the penal code of the Law of Moses (which was only for the nation of Israel anyhow, not for the Church), but that does not mean that we should not keep the 10 Commandments. We should keep the Sabbath holy. I am sure God has some other form of punishment in mind for those of His children who disobey the Commandments, for we cannot think we can sin with impunity and not be chastised by the Lord. However the death penalty was paid by Christ. The other laws of Moses other than the 10 Commandments do not affect us UNLESS they were again reiterated in the New Testament. e.g. do not eat blood is one of them. You might want to read my article on this subject of the difference between the 10 Commandments and the rest of the laws, and what we are obligated to observe and keep. http://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2012/09/should-christians-keep-entire-law-of.html
DeleteVery convenient, but doesn't fit in at all with the rest of your fundamentalist literal tenets.
DeleteBy the way, what are your views on transubstantiation, the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption?
DeleteNo, it is not convenient, it is what the Bible teaches. And it fits very well with my literal tenets, however you do not understand what they are and apparently have not read much of what I have written, so that would be difficult for you to know. For instance, I have written on the Lord's Supper, or Eucharist, it is in my archives http://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2011/10/does-eucharist-lords-supper-make.html. Perhaps you should peruse the contents of my archives and you will find my answers to your questions before having to ask them. As for the Immaculate Conception, Mary was born a sinner just like the rest of us. :"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23. Nowhere does it teach that she was sinless. That is a tradition in some churches, but not Scriptural at all. She had to accept her Son as her Savior just as the rest of us do. As for the Assumption, the same thing applies. It is not in Scripture, it is a tradition in some churches, nothing more. If it's not taught in Scripture, then it's not so. She died and is in heaven, again, just like all believers who accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Before you ask, no, Mary is not a co-redeemer of mankind. Only Christ is. "For there is one God and on mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Tim. 2:5.
DeletePeter was the first leader of the Church and was, in Matthew 16 given the power to be the initiator of doctrine.(bound on earth-bound in Heaven) Surely the Holy Spirit would not allow him or his successors, the Popes, to err in matters of faith and doctrine. The Catholic Church holds transubstantiation, the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception to be important doctrines from the authority given to Peter. Anyway, is it reasonable to believe that all doctrinal inspiration stopped, the moment the Bible was authorised by the Council of Nicaea? NO. For many Chrsitians, the Christian faith is a living growing entity. Miracles happen every day, and divinely inspired decisions made by all manner of wonderful people, from all races and all creeds, people not negatively tied to a collection of writings of dubious origin.
DeletePeter's Confession of Christ
…18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."
The Bible says, "you are Petros (Gr. a chunk of rock) and upon this Petra (Gr. a massive rock) I will build My church. If you check the rest of Scripture you find that ever time the word Petra is used in this context, it is referring to the belief in the gospel that Jesus Christ died for our sins. Jesus is the Rock upon which the Church (the entire body of true believers in Christ regardless of denomination) is built. What Christ was saying was that it was Peter's statement of faith of belief in Him and who He was [the Rock of our salvation, which made Peter (hence Petros, not Petra) a part of the greater Rock (Petra - Himself) ], not the person of Peter himself that He would found His church. The church is founded on the belief in Christ, not the belief in Peter or Peter as its head. Christ is the head of the Church. (Col. 1:18: Eph. 5:23). Paul was the apostle to the Romans, (he wrote the epistle to them) not Peter. There is no bona fide evidence that I know of that Peter was ever even in Rome. Just traditional stories. Meaning, it is not taught in the Scriptures, therefore should not be doctrine. As for the popes, perhaps you should read a history of these so-called men of God in this succession. Some were evil and corrupt individuals. Would God allow men like that to make proclamations about doctrine that supersedes His own Word? I doubt it. What about the fact that Christ told us in Revelation that there is to be nothing more added to His Word and that those that do will suffer the consequences mentioned in that book? The faith is a growing entity in that as people study God's Word, they learn what He has to say and grow from it. Unfortunately both Catholics, Protestants, and offshoot groups listen to their fallible and most often erroneous leaders rather than studying what God Himself has to say, so they accept all sorts of incorrect beliefs. If you want to put your faith in a man-made organization and the people who run it instead of Jesus Christ and God's Word you are welcome to do so. Personally I will put my trust in God alone (through Jesus) for my salvation. Somehow I don't think the excuse "but I was a member in good standing in my church" is going to hold up in court when we stand before God. I think He's more interested in whether we had a personal relationship with Him and spent our time reading what HE had to say rather than listening to everyone else. But that is everyone's personal choice and I leave you to yours. If my showing what God's Word says bothers you, then don't read it. Go find a blog that reinforces what you want to believe.
DeleteMy goodness me! Heaven will be empty apart from your followers. If you don't like what I have to say, don't answer me. Answer only those who agree with you, if I 'bother you'.
DeleteFundamental people can make any interpretations they like but it does not change the fact that there are glaring errors in the Bible, such as light coming before the creation of the sun. Do you really believe that the earth was created before the sun? That plants grew before the sun was created?
ReplyDeleteThere is no clear proof that John (the Divine) wrote Revelations. A large body of scholars question the Greek style and accept that John of Patmos wrote it and that at any rate it is an allegory.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your questions/comments will take a lot more space that is provided here. Contact me at Victoriaphile@gmail.com so that I can give you a complete answer to all this.
DeleteI refer here to Matthew's version of the Temptation in the Wilderness. 'The devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world' Literally impossible. The world is a sphere. At any rate my interpretation of the whole story is that Jesus realized that he had the power to rule the world, that he had the power to perform great and popular miracles in public (the jumping off the temple.) that he had the power to break his fast if he wished, but that he decided to choose his Father's way of peaceful persuasion, by humility and by living a saintly life to the cross and beyond. Having made this decision he knew that he was in touch with God and experienced inner peace (angels ministered unto him). This way was of course why people still follow him, 2000 years later.
DeleteDo I endanger my soul with this interpretation? It certainly isn't literal belief in the bible.
You have the freedom of choice to interpret it any way you want. Be my guest.
Delete