Does god want everyone to be saved?

[Kapalika]

I would say justified (justice) because of first being: forewarned.

That reasoning is flawed because it has to rely on the reasoning that any warning is a justification of an act. Suppose that I say I will blow someone's head off if they don't give me their wallet. That does not absolve me if I do it on their refusal to give me their wallet. It's then a murder-robbery.

Just as Adam and Eve were told what would happen before hand. Told what would happen before it happened.

Actually, they weren't told the whole picture, just one aspect. But who the heck puts a giant cool looking tree in the middle of everything, say "this is the only one you can't touch" and then have those beings created to be so easily fooled into doing it? Since they had no understanding of evil yet, how could they commit it? Evil takes intent. So it couldn't of been a sin.

In some minds some crimes are considered small crimes such as driving through a red light.
The person who has a driver's licence knows before hand that going through a red light is breaking the law.
That is often considered as a small crime, instead of saying the person sinned against the motor-vehicle code.
Other crimes so serious that it carries with it capital punishment, or an execution death for the 'sake of justice'.

Irrelevant since often man-made laws are injust, as are it's punishments in some cases. Execution is a case where it is very often unjust.

In my view of 2 Peter 3:9 we are ALL forewarned that if we do Not ' repent ' we will ' perish ' (be destroyed).

That doesn't absolve god from the murder-robbery metaphor. It just says he is using threats to gain our love. If someone told me they would burn me alive if I didn't return their "love" I'd call them a psychopath.

In Noah's day the people were judged as being past reform, past repenting, so the executional Flood came.

But if god is all powerful, no one would be beyond repentance. Isn't this even said that Yeshua can save anyone who accepts salvation? This would make any execution to NEVER be the last resort, since there is always hope that one might repent and so execution an evil act.

Are you also suggesting that it's okay, at least for god, to kill non-believers not just in the afterlife, but in this life too?

If there was No justice for righteous Noah and family then all righteous people would have been killed off by those violent people who did Not value life in Noah's day and reached the point, so to speak, of No return.

There is no justice, no righteousness in that kind of global genocide.

As in our day, Noah warned people before the Flood came, today people are forewarned before the coming ' time of separation ' comes upon those of us still alive on Earth at that coming time of Matthew 25:31-33,37.

Oh look, it's okay because the mugger warned me.

It isn't people who do the judging, but rather Jesus decides who are the humble ' sheep'-like people, and who are the haughty ones beyond repenting.

Come on, we all know that Jesus judges them, but he always agrees with whatever the Christian's views even if they don't speak it. So THEY may not judge them, but they know that Jesus is condemning them so that's why they don't got to say it.

It's a nice rationalized loophole. I get it, but it's just a way to attribute one's own judgement to Yeshua.

So, as in Noah's day, if God would Not take decisive action only violent people would end up on Earth and they would be violent against each other with No regard for the sacredness of life. God's purpose for Earth is that humble meek people inherit the Earth, and Not violent or wicked people.

I think Yahweh is the violent one here. Look at all of the cultures that didn't know about Yahweh for thousands of years. They held up pretty good. The Inca are a really good example. Nationally maintained roads and a postal service and they didn't go around killing each other. And this was before such a thing was ever seen in the European centric cultures.

So, to me, such destruction is justified because otherwise there would be No justice for righteous people.

The idea that you need to kill "bad" people to make "good" people feel good isn't only dangerous, it's evil, for a lack of better word.

Also, didn't the Bible teach that none are righteous? See Romans 3:10. From my pretty apt understanding of the Christian Bible, if justice were truly served in the eyes of it, we would all go to hell and burn forever... or in your case, all be destroyed forever. It is stated in the Christian Bible and commonly believed too that one only escapes justice because Yeshua took on their debt. So the entire idea of Christianity is NOT justice, but escaping justice through forgiveness... through pardon.

Funny that is, isn't it? Of course I think it's all hogwash but if you are going to say you believe in the Christian Bible you could at least be consistent with it and own up to all the terrible things it says particularly about Hell like I outlined in all those verses but I felt you never really answered why it isn't fire but rather total destruction and how you explain those verses. Some pretty clearly stated that the fire never went out and that people had been there for centuries.

 

[omega2xx]

I always understood the passage in 1Ti. 2:4 to mean that god had a strong desire for everyone to be saved, past, present, and future. But the rest of the Bible does not support universalism. Jesus makes it clear that the vast majority will enter into the wrong gate.

I also thought god's will was inviolable. What god wants, god gets. Nothing can stand in the way of his will. No amount of human free will can change that. So if even one person goes unsaved, it has to be because god didn't want that person to be saved. How much more true does that have to be if most people will not be saved?

All of that is before you get to the declaration in Romans 9 that some are created to be vessels of destruction. This means the Bible offers two opposing views of god's will for salvation. One view is that god wants everyone to be saved. And the other view is that there are some created who were never intended to be saved. Which is it?

If the Bible says 'God want all to be saved, and it does twice, then He wants all to be saved, but on His terms. God did not create robots. Man must desire to be with God, and they must put the faith in Him---without faith it is impossible to please God. Heb 11:6

God prepared all vessels, knowing some would become a vessel of Destruction, because they would not accept God's method of salvation. If they had free will and I Tim 2:4 and 2 Pet 3:9 indicate they did, they had the ability to repent if they wanted to. You can't blame anything on God if man has free will.



...nor are you to break any bone of it----coming to Jesus, when they saw He was dead, they did not break His legs---for these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, not a bone of Him shall be broken.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Until clinical death was a thing, yes, you could be "sort of dying". I don't see the gospels noting they confirmed with an EKG and EEG or whatever.
Yeah, but since the serpent was just a serpent and not a demon or a devil or a specific devil ...
Well, that sucks, since graveyards are filled with the corpses of people who wanted eternal life.

I think that most people who are in the grave wanted eternal life, wanted to keep on living.
In my view, if we could stop sinning we would Not die.
Since we can Not stop from doing wrong we die.
That does Not mean there is No such thing as: eternal life.
While Jesus was on Earth he performed many healthy physical resurrections.
Those resurrected restored-back-to-life people and their loved ones 'rejoiced'.
Jesus was giving us a preview, or coming attraction, of what will take place in the future here on Earth.
Since we were created to want to keep on living, then wanting eternal life is only natural.
As Romans 6:7 says the dead are freed or acquitted from sin, so the dead will have an eternal-life opportunity.
That everlasting-life opportunity is what Jesus' coming 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth will accomplish. Enemy death will be brought to nothing according to 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8
As Jesus promised at Matthew 5:5 the meek will inherit the Earth. Not an Earth filled with violence but Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill. That means the dead can then be restored (resurrected) back to happy-and-healthy physical live on a beautiful paradisical Earth with everlasting life in view.

It is my understanding about ' clinical death ' that after being dead for 4 days there is No just-sort-of dying.
Interesting to me about the ' 4 days ' part is that Jesus' dead friend was dead for 4 days before Jesus resurrected him. So, by 4 days there would be No further cell activity perhaps such as finger nail growth. - Just a thought.

According to Revelation 12:9,12 Satan was that snake-in-the-grass serpent of Genesis.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

But if God created A&E gullible enough to be tricked by a talking snake that God obviously created as well then they were created flawed (with a dent in the cookie cutter) to begin with. For God to then blame His creations for having been created with the flaw He created them with seems absurd.

Not gullible to me, but as James wrote at James 1:13-15 that each person is drawn out by their 'own' desire.
Free-will choices are Not flaws. Without free-will choices we would just be automatons or robots.
We are Not programmed to be forced to blindly serve a Creator.

In my view, God does Not blame His creation (us), but sent Jesus from heaven to Earth for us to undo the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us. Adam tipped the scales of justice and sinless Jesus balanced the scales of justice so that we could gain everlasting life on Earth as originally offered to Adam before Adam's (Not God's) downfall.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

If the Bible says 'God want all to be saved, and it does twice, then He wants all to be saved, but on His terms. God did not create robots. Man must desire to be with God, and they must put the faith in Him---without faith it is impossible to please God. Heb 11:6
God prepared all vessels, knowing some would become a vessel of Destruction, because they would not accept God's method of salvation. If they had free will and I Tim 2:4 and 2 Pet 3:9 indicate they did, they had the ability to repent if they wanted to. You can't blame anything on God if man has free will.
...nor are you to break any bone of it----coming to Jesus, when they saw He was dead, they did not break His legs---for these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, not a bone of Him shall be broken.

I would like to take the liberty to add to the ^above ^ in connection to being a vessel.
We are the clay. God is the Potter. God works with us as a potter works with clay.
If we make ourselves into unsuitable clay, then we will end up as a vessel fit for destruction.
On the other hand, if we present ourselves to God as malleable clay, then God has something good to work with.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Indeed, "to you," and "in your understanding." Others mileage may, and does, vary - often by a considerable margin. Your views are just one of thousands of subjective views, with no objective basis for why yours is more, or less, correct than the others.

Since the Bible is Not written ABC as a dictionary is, then we need to study or research the Scriptures by subject or topic arrangement. ( I add 'in my understanding', etc. because if I don't the forum won't let me post ) .
The people's objective of Acts of the Apostles 17:11 is that they searched the Scriptures every day to see if what they were hearing, what they were learning, was really found in Scripture, was what the Bible really teaches.
To me, the Bible is unique in its corresponding cross-reference verses and passages showing the internal harmony among it many writers, thus we can get a complete objective picture of the Bible's theme, and the theme of Jesus' teachings about his objective about ' thy kingdom come ', and how Jesus said the ' good news about God's kingdom ' would be proclaimed on an international scale as it is being done world-wide today according to Jesus' objective for his followers found at Matthew 24:14 and Acts of the Apostles 1:8.
' Thy kingdom come ' is the righteous coming government of Daniel 2:44 with Jesus being the objective of being the King of God's Kingdom government for a thousand years over Earth as the one who will usher in global Peace on Earth among people of goodwill.

I believe I am correct in that we are at the ' final phase ' so to speak of Matthew 24:14 because even modern technology has made possible rapid Bible translation, so that remote translation offices can now quickly translate Scripture for people in their own native languages or mother tongues.
Also, I believe we are nearing the ' final signal ' of 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 when ' they ' (powers that be) will be saying, " Peace and Security " as a precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14 before Jesus, as Prince of Peace, ushers in global Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

That reasoning is flawed because it has to rely on the reasoning that any warning is a justification of an act. Suppose that I say I will blow someone's head off if they don't give me their wallet. That does not absolve me if I do it on their refusal to give me their wallet. It's then a murder-robbery.
Actually, they weren't told the whole picture, just one aspect. But who the heck puts a giant cool looking tree in the middle of everything, say "this is the only one you can't touch" and then have those beings created to be so easily fooled into doing it? Since they had no understanding of evil yet, how could they commit it? Evil takes intent. So it couldn't of been a sin.
Irrelevant since often man-made laws are injust, as are it's punishments in some cases. Execution is a case where it is very often unjust.
That doesn't absolve god from the murder-robbery metaphor. It just says he is using threats to gain our love. If someone told me they would burn me alive if I didn't return their "love" I'd call them a psychopath.
But if god is all powerful, no one would be beyond repentance. Isn't this even said that Yeshua can save anyone who accepts salvation? This would make any execution to NEVER be the last resort, since there is always hope that one might repent and so execution an evil act.
Are you also suggesting that it's okay, at least for god, to kill non-believers not just in the afterlife, but in this life too?
There is no justice, no righteousness in that kind of global genocide.
Oh look, it's okay because the mugger warned me.
Come on, we all know that Jesus judges them, but he always agrees with whatever the Christian's views even if they don't speak it. So THEY may not judge them, but they know that Jesus is condemning them so that's why they don't got to say it.
It's a nice rationalized loophole. I get it, but it's just a way to attribute one's own judgement to Yeshua.
I think Yahweh is the violent one here. Look at all of the cultures that didn't know about Yahweh for thousands of years. They held up pretty good. The Inca are a really good example. Nationally maintained roads and a postal service and they didn't go around killing each other. And this was before such a thing was ever seen in the European centric cultures.
The idea that you need to kill "bad" people to make "good" people feel good isn't only dangerous, it's evil, for a lack of better word.
Also, didn't the Bible teach that none are righteous? See Romans 3:10. From my pretty apt understanding of the Christian Bible, if justice were truly served in the eyes of it, we would all go to hell and burn forever... or in your case, all be destroyed forever. It is stated in the Christian Bible and commonly believed too that one only escapes justice because Yeshua took on their debt. So the entire idea of Christianity is NOT justice, but escaping justice through forgiveness... through pardon.
Funny that is, isn't it? Of course I think it's all hogwash but if you are going to say you believe in the Christian Bible you could at least be consistent with it and own up to all the terrible things it says particularly about Hell like I outlined in all those verses but I felt you never really answered why it isn't fire but rather total destruction and how you explain those verses. Some pretty clearly stated that the fire never went out and that people had been there for centuries.

First of all, to me biblical hell is just the grave for the sleeping dead: John 11:11-4; Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalms 115:17
So, while dead Jesus was in biblical hell Jesus was in a sleep-like state until his God resurrected Jesus out of hell.
If biblical hell was a permanent place, then Jesus would still be in biblical hell - Acts of the Apostles 2:27.
When KJV translated the word Gehenna in English as hell fire they wrongly put the flames in biblical hell.
Gehenna was just a garbage pit outside of Jerusalem where things were destroyed forever Not burning forever.
So, there was No scare tactic used by God, but scare tactics are used by false clergy.
God told Adam and Eve the truth. You eat, you die. God could Not go back on His Word.
There was No post-partum penalty for Adam, just returning back to dust ( non-life ).
They could live forever on Earth as long as they wanted by Not eating (stealing) from God's tree.

If someone gave you a big beautiful house, furnished, had plenty of good food, beautifully landscaped complete with a swimming pool, but the person giving you such a luxurious home said the house is always yours, even tax free, but you had to stay out of one closet, would you accept the gift ? _______
Eden had plenty of food, etc. so it was No hardship for Adam and Eve to show their appreciation for Eden.
Eating the forbidden fruit was Not automatic, but as James 1:13-15 writes that each person is drawn out by their own desires. So, plenty of thought was given before breaking God's law.

Who was the robber/ thief from God's tree ? _______
Out of all the trees on Earth only one tree belonged to God.
By saying 'Do Not touch' was as if God was putting up a No trespassing sign on His tree.
If you had a generous neighbor with many fruit trees, and he said come over at any time and have a much fruit as you want except do Not take fruit from one particular tree, would you consider your generous neighbor as wrong?

I think we can all repent if we do Not wish to perish ( be destroyed ) -2 Peter 3:9
However, just as there was a cut-off time in Noah's day, there will be a cut-off time today as illustrated by Jesus' illustration about the figurative humble sheep and haughty goats of Matthew 25:31-33,37. In other words, we can Not read hearts, but Jesus' can and will at the soon coming ' time of separation ' on Earth between the sheep and the goats. Jesus will Not judge by outwards appearances - Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.

 

[Kapalika]

If someone gave you a big beautiful house, furnished, had plenty of good food, beautifully landscaped complete with a swimming pool, but the person giving you such a luxurious home said the house is always yours, even tax free, but you had to stay out of one closet, would you accept the gift ? _______

No, because that sounds like the start of a bad horror movie. It kind of makes me think of one of those movies where the forbidden area or thing is somehow powering the wonderfulness of the place at a price. Something dark, scary evil ect

There is also a saying that if it's too good to be true it probably is. So it's a similar reason for me.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I think that most people who are in the grave wanted eternal life, wanted to keep on living.

"Wanted" and "are going to get" are two different things. I can want to fly unaided. I'm not going to jump off a building to prove it (and Jesus didn't either, I might add).

In my view, if we could stop sinning we would Not die.

Babies can't possibly sin, and they can die. Plants can't possibly sin, and they can die.

How does one come to this conclusion since it doesn't reflect any semblance of reality?

While Jesus was on Earth he performed many healthy physical resurrections.

Many?

Those resurrected restored-back-to-life people and their loved ones 'rejoiced'.

And you get to keep the same body.

"I'm so happy you came back to life, Mom. Sure, you were eaten up with gangrene and now look like an extra in the Walking Dead, but you're back, so yay!"

Since we were created to want to keep on living, then wanting eternal life is only natural.

People who have never really suffered may want to live forever. Some of us wouldn't mind the break.

As Jesus promised at Matthew 5:5 the meek will inherit the Earth. Not an Earth filled with violence but Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.

"I think you're confusing 'peace' with 'quiet'." -- Ultron

Easy to have peace after you've killed off billions of the population, no?

That means the dead can then be restored (resurrected) back to happy-and-healthy physical live on a beautiful paradisical Earth with everlasting life in view.

When Jesus woke back up, he still had nail holes (though no word about how he SHOULD look like human hamburger meat if he were really as tortured as it sounded). That's not "back to happy and healthy".

t is my understanding about ' clinical death ' that after being dead for 4 days there is No just-sort-of dying.

You're not getting it: THERE IS NO PROOF HE WAS DEAD. I can think of a couple of medical reasons he could look dead and then wake back up three days later. Ever read Romeo and Juliet? She wasn't dead and yet was buried in a tomb as well ...

Without free-will choices we would just be automatons or robots.

Yes. Not liking the conclusion doesn't make it inaccurate. With the right stimuli, chemical to magnetic to lots of other things, I can manipulate a human being like a harp. Free will is an illusion.

In my view, God does Not blame His creation (us), but sent Jesus from heaven to Earth for us to undo the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us.

And he was SO effective he has to have a SECOND coming to fix what should've been fixed the first time?

The people's objective of Acts of the Apostles 17:11 is that they searched the Scriptures every day to see if what they were hearing, what they were learning, was really found in Scripture, was what the Bible really teaches.

They just whipped out their bibles they got from the local Christian book store? Is that how that worked in the ancient Middle East prior to any sort of mass production capabilities?

If someone gave you a big beautiful house, furnished, had plenty of good food, beautifully landscaped complete with a swimming pool, but the person giving you such a luxurious home said the house is always yours, even tax free, but you had to stay out of one closet, would you accept the gift ?

If someone gave you such a present, you should definitely want full disclosure. We bought a house and the insides were nearly destroyed due to rampant neglect. Are you so shallow? I bet dishonest realtors LOVE you ...

 

[QuestioningMind]

Not gullible to me, but as James wrote at James 1:13-15 that each person is drawn out by their 'own' desire.
Free-will choices are Not flaws. Without free-will choices we would just be automatons or robots.
We are Not programmed to be forced to blindly serve a Creator.

In my view, God does Not blame His creation (us), but sent Jesus from heaven to Earth for us to undo the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us. Adam tipped the scales of justice and sinless Jesus balanced the scales of justice so that we could gain everlasting life on Earth as originally offered to Adam before Adam's (Not God's) downfall.

Free will + a lack of critical thinking skills = gullibility.

Sorry, but if you give someone free will without any critical thinking skills that's a flaw, because it makes a person gullible enough to be tricked by a talking snake (or Satan, depending on who you ask). If I give my three year old free will to go outside and do whatever he wants but simply tell him to not run out into traffic, when he gets run over it won't be my child's fault. It would be MY fault for 1) failing to properly teach him to act responsibly and 2) allowing him to go out and play near something so potentially dangerous as a busy street filled with traffic. What would be even worse would be if I'd also created a talking snake that I put out in the yard who I knew would try and tell my child that running out into the street is perfectly safe.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

No, because that sounds like the start of a bad horror movie. It kind of makes me think of one of those movies where the forbidden area or thing is somehow powering the wonderfulness of the place at a price. Something dark, scary evil ect
There is also a saying that if it's too good to be true it probably is. So it's a similar reason for me.

In my view, what all religion teaches could sound too good to be true.
For one example: Jesus resurrecting dead people could sound too good to be true for some people.

Suppose that closet just housed the power grid that ran that beautiful house, would that be scary, etc.
The only price is to 'obey' by staying out of that one particular closet.
So, to me, one can think either in a positive or negative way.
Jesus, to me, chose the 'positive way' by saying the meek would inherit the earth (earthly home ).
The humble meek receive a favorable judgement according to Matthew 25:37.

In Scripture God is pictured as a lion when executing adverse judgement on un-repentant people.
- Hosea 5:14; Hosea 11:10; Hosea 13:7-9
God's First Officer, the King of His Kingdom, is Jesus of the tribe of Judah symbolized by a lion.
- Ezekiel 1:10; Ezekiel 10:14; Revelation 4:7
The lion, in other context, is symbolized or represented by wicked ones because of their being fierce.
- Psalms 10:9; Psalms 22:13; Psalms 35:17; Psalms 57:4; Jeremiah 12:8; 1 Peter 5:8

Jesus, as the Lamb of God, and the Lion of Judah, shows his different roles.
Under Jesus' coming millennium-long day of governing over Earth lions will eat straw like a bull does.
Both in the literal and figurative sense peace with exist between human kind and animal kind.
The words of Isaiah 11:16 will be a reality.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

"Wanted" and "are going to get" are two different things. I can want to fly unaided. I'm not going to jump off a building to prove it (and Jesus didn't either, I might add).
Babies can't possibly sin, and they can die. Plants can't possibly sin, and they can die.
How does one come to this conclusion since it doesn't reflect any semblance of reality?
Many?
And you get to keep the same body.
"I'm so happy you came back to life, Mom. Sure, you were eaten up with gangrene and now look like an extra in the Walking Dead, but you're back, so yay!"
People who have never really suffered may want to live forever. Some of us wouldn't mind the break.
"I think you're confusing 'peace' with 'quiet'." -- Ultron
Easy to have peace after you've killed off billions of the population, no?
When Jesus woke back up, he still had nail holes (though no word about how he SHOULD look like human hamburger meat if he were really as tortured as it sounded). That's not "back to happy and healthy".
You're not getting it: THERE IS NO PROOF HE WAS DEAD. I can think of a couple of medical reasons he could look dead and then wake back up three days later. Ever read Romeo and Juliet? She wasn't dead and yet was buried in a tomb as well ...
Yes. Not liking the conclusion doesn't make it inaccurate. With the right stimuli, chemical to magnetic to lots of other things, I can manipulate a human being like a harp. Free will is an illusion.
And he was SO effective he has to have a SECOND coming to fix what should've been fixed the first time?
They just whipped out their bibles they got from the local Christian book store? Is that how that worked in the ancient Middle East prior to any sort of mass production capabilities?
If someone gave you such a present, you should definitely want full disclosure. We bought a house and the insides were nearly destroyed due to rampant neglect. Are you so shallow? I bet dishonest realtors LOVE you ...

The home of Eden had full disclosure: Live forever in paradisical conditions if you don't eat from God's tree.
There was No neglect when Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden.

Wanting to keep on living does Not have to mean going outside the Law of Gravity by breaking it.
You are right, Jesus respected that gravity law and did Not jump.

Plants were never granted everlasting life. That gift was only for human kind.
Because of our inheritance from father Adam is why a parent knows at the birth of a child that its leanings will be toward wrongdoing. So, although sinless at birth, a child's leanings will Not always be upright.

In Scripture I think Jesus performed resurrections at Luke 7:11-15; Luke 8:49-56; John 11:38-44.
Since Not everything Jesus did is recorded in Scripture there could have easily been more.
Jesus' ransom covers MANY according to Matthew 20:28 so there will even be more to come.

Jesus' friend of John 11 was resurrected happy-and-healthy although dead for four days.
So, in the resurrection we are talking about people resurrected with sound hearts, minds and bodies.
Because people are in God's memory, then "Mom" will be beautiful and chock full of good health with everlasting life in view as was offered to Adam before his downfall.

Since 'death is sleep' according to John 11:11-14; Psalms 115:17; Ecclesiastes 9:5, then yes, a suffering person could welcome death's nap. As we are Not aware of the passing of time while asleep, the dead will be awakened healthy and Not be aware of how much time has passed.

God resurrected Jesus back to his pre-human spirit body. ( Nobody else on Earth had a previous spirit body )
Since the spirit realm is invisible to us, then the resurrected spirit Jesus used different materialized physical bodies to appear to his followers. Only one materialized body had the nail marks to prove a point to doubting Thomas.
Didn't the Roman soldiers make sure Jesus was dead by stabbing him.
Didn't Pilate give the OK to have guards in front of his tomb, so my understanding of the account is that Jesus was really dead.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Free will + a lack of critical thinking skills = gullibility.

Sorry, but if you give someone free will without any critical thinking skills that's a flaw, because it makes a person gullible enough to be tricked by a talking snake (or Satan, depending on who you ask). If I give my three year old free will to go outside and do whatever he wants but simply tell him to not run out into traffic, when he gets run over it won't be my child's fault. It would be MY fault for 1) failing to properly teach him to act responsibly and 2) allowing him to go out and play near something so potentially dangerous as a busy street filled with traffic. What would be even worse would be if I'd also created a talking snake that I put out in the yard who I knew would try and tell my child that running out into the street is perfectly safe.

Where do you read in Scripture that Adam and Eve had a lack of critical thinking skills.
Eve was tricked according to 1 Timothy 2:14, but Not Adam - 2 Corinthians 11:3
That is why sin ( our inherited imperfection from father Adam ) entered into our world - Romans 5:12
Adam and Eve were created as Adults, Not minor children.
God did Not marry children but married Adults - Genesis 2:22-24 - as man and wife.
In my view, they were properly taught before hand that eating from the forbidden tree was wrong - Genesis 2:17
Adam had the thinking ability to study and name the animals as he wished according to Genesis 2:19-20

 

[QuestioningMind]

Where do you read in Scripture that Adam and Eve had a lack of critical thinking skills.
Eve was tricked according to 1 Timothy 2:14, but Not Adam - 2 Corinthians 11:3
That is why sin ( our inherited imperfection from father Adam ) entered into our world - Romans 5:12
Adam and Eve were created as Adults, Not minor children.
God did Not marry children but married Adults - Genesis 2:22-24 - as man and wife.
In my view, they were properly taught before hand that eating from the forbidden tree was wrong - Genesis 2:17
Adam had the thinking ability to study and name the animals as he wished according to Genesis 2:19-20

How did I conclude that Eve was created without sufficient critical thinking skills? Because even though she had been told that eating from the tree was wrong by the creator of everything, a talking snake was able to easily trick her into believing it was okay. That demonstrates a serious lack of critical thinking skills on Eve's part. Did it ever occur to her that the snake might be lying? Had she or Adam ever lied? Had God ever lied to them? Was she even aware of the concept of being dishonest? Did God sit them down and warn them that if some talking animal comes up to you and tells you something, it may not be the truth? It suggests a creation that was created with the flaw of being easily deceived (gullibility). The fact that God created a talking snake designed to try and trick Eve suggests that God KNEW He'd created Eve with this flaw and went out of His way to exploit it.

I never claimed that A&E were not adults. Yet God is supposed to be our Father we are are His children, so using a parent/child analogy seems rather apt.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

How did I conclude that Eve was created without sufficient critical thinking skills? Because even though she had been told that eating from the tree was wrong by the creator of everything, a talking snake was able to easily trick her into believing it was okay. That demonstrates a serious lack of critical thinking skills on Eve's part. Did it ever occur to her that the snake might be lying? Had she or Adam ever lied? Had God ever lied to them? Was she even aware of the concept of being dishonest? Did God sit them down and warn them that if some talking animal comes up to you and tells you something, it may not be the truth? It suggests a creation that was created with the flaw of being easily deceived (gullibility). The fact that God created a talking snake designed to try and trick Eve suggests that God KNEW He'd created Eve with this flaw and went out of His way to exploit it.
I never claimed that A&E were not adults. Yet God is supposed to be our Father we are are His children, so using a parent/child analogy seems rather apt.

A parent/child relationship is proper for any age, but Adam and Eve were Not 3-year old children.
In my viewpoint, Eve ' saw ' the tree was good to eat according to Genesis 3:6
So, Eve ' observed '. Perhaps the snake (in the grass, so to speak) told her that he could talk because he ate from the forbidden tree. ( the snake itself was Not really talking, but as a ventriloquist uses a dummy then Satan used a snake ). Eve could have 'seen' other animal or birds eating from the tree and seeing Nothing happen to them.
For the tree itself was Not a poisonous tree, but the tree stood for the Law of the Land.
Since God already told what was good and what was bad, then Eve could have concluded that she wanted to experience ( have knowledge ) of that ' evil/bad ' as the snake said was good and Not bad.
Knowledge of the evil/bad was that there is death involved. She did Not see the snake die, so over who knows how long a period of time, before observing a talking snake not dying would she fall for his tricks. She became deceived by faulty reasoning. Eve thus experienced sweet fruit and the sour afterwards taste experiencing the bad ( death ).

Adam, on the other hand, was Not tricked or deceived, Adam deliberately ate. ( Adam committed suicide ).
That is why Romans 5:12 does Not place the blame on women but directly on Adam.

As a new car comes with a warranty, the warranty comes with requirements.
If something goes wrong it will be taken care of but only if we keep our part of the agreement.
Requirements require us to keep up our part of the obligation.
Adam and Eve had the opportunity to act responsibly toward their God by Not breaking God's Law.
They could have upheld God as Sovereign by choosing to keep God's Divine Law.
Rather, they chose to turn aside from God's Law and imitate the opposition rebel Satan.
Thus, they set up Satan as the god of this world of badness doing what Satan wants.

 

[QuestioningMind]

A parent/child relationship is proper for any age, but Adam and Eve were Not 3-year old children.
In my viewpoint, Eve ' saw ' the tree was good to eat according to Genesis 3:6
So, Eve ' observed '. Perhaps the snake (in the grass, so to speak) told her that he could talk because he ate from the forbidden tree. ( the snake itself was Not really talking, but as a ventriloquist uses a dummy then Satan used a snake ). Eve could have 'seen' other animal or birds eating from the tree and seeing Nothing happen to them.
For the tree itself was Not a poisonous tree, but the tree stood for the Law of the Land.
Since God already told what was good and what was bad, then Eve could have concluded that she wanted to experience ( have knowledge ) of that ' evil/bad ' as the snake said was good and Not bad.
Knowledge of the evil/bad was that there is death involved. She did Not see the snake die, so over who knows how long a period of time, before observing a talking snake not dying would she fall for his tricks. She became deceived by faulty reasoning. Eve thus experienced sweet fruit and the sour afterwards taste experiencing the bad ( death ).

Adam, on the other hand, was Not tricked or deceived, Adam deliberately ate. ( Adam committed suicide ).
That is why Romans 5:12 does Not place the blame on women but directly on Adam.

As a new car comes with a warranty, the warranty comes with requirements.
If something goes wrong it will be taken care of but only if we keep our part of the agreement.
Requirements require us to keep up our part of the obligation.
Adam and Eve had the opportunity to act responsibly toward their God by Not breaking God's Law.
They could have upheld God as Sovereign by choosing to keep God's Divine Law.
Rather, they chose to turn aside from God's Law and imitate the opposition rebel Satan.
Thus, they set up Satan as the god of this world of badness doing what Satan wants.

"Perhaps the snake (in the grass, so to speak) told her that he could talk because he ate from the forbidden tree."

And if Eve had no knowledge of evil/bad, how would she even understood the concept of someone being untruthful? And if God was going to allow this snake (or Satan in snake form) to enter the garden of Eden, why didn't God warn Eve that the snake might try and deceive her? This all-powerful all-knowing God would surely be aware that His creations would face a deceptive snake/Satan and would succumb to his lies, but STILL chose to create her gullible enough to be fooled.

 

[omega2xx]

I would like to take the liberty to add to the ^above ^ in connection to being a vessel.
We are the clay. God is the Potter. God works with us as a potter works with clay.
If we make ourselves into unsuitable clay, then we will end up as a vessel fit for destruction.
On the other hand, if we present ourselves to God as malleable clay, then God has something good to work with.

I basically agree with that. The clay must not move until the potter has completed the vessel . It is interesting to me that for the clay to stay malleable, the Potter applies water at the proper time. Water is a general symbol for God's word---man does not live by bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.


I will bless those who bless you(Abraham)---Gen 3:15
The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham--Mt 1:1

 

[URAVIP2ME]

"Perhaps the snake (in the grass, so to speak) told her that he could talk because he ate from the forbidden tree."
And if Eve had no knowledge of evil/bad, how would she even understood the concept of someone being untruthful? And if God was going to allow this snake (or Satan in snake form) to enter the garden of Eden, why didn't God warn Eve that the snake might try and deceive her? This all-powerful all-knowing God would surely be aware that His creations would face a deceptive snake/Satan and would succumb to his lies, but STILL chose to create her gullible enough to be fooled.

First of all to me, according to Genesis 2:17 Eve did have knowledge (education) of what was evil/bad because it says that there would death if they ate from the forbidden tree. The good part was that Eve could live forever by avoiding that tree.
True, Eve saw No human die, but everything else Eve saw did die off. Just stepping completely on a bug would demonstrate death.

Satan also, like us, has free-will choices. That means God was Not in control of what Satan would do, that he would lie. Jesus called, Not God, but Satan the ' father ' (life giver) of the lie according to John 8:44, so God was Not responsible for Satan's free-will choice to take up lying.
Satan was drawn out by his very own desires - James 1:13-15.

I think Satan, Adam and Eve chose to disobey by misuse of their own free-will gift.
Without free-will choices we would be automatons, or robots.
So, we are Not programmed to obey God. We are Not forced to love or serve God.
But, God does forewarn about the bad consequences of breaking God's law ( sinning ).
Doesn't a loving parent forewarn that playing in traffic could cause death.
So, God forewarned that the forbidden tree would cause: death.
Whereas, the ' tree of life ' would represent life for them ( everlasting life on a beautiful paradisical Earth ).

Why did Satan become a rebel, in my view, it certainly was Not because he was persecuted or tempted to do wrong.
Satan simply failed in having any love for God or for mankind (us).
If Satan loved Eve he would Not have wanted to see Eve dead.- Genesis chapter 3.
Satan implied to Eve that she would Not die. ( Meaning God was lying to her )
Satan implied to Eve that she would be better off by Not listening to God. ( Dead Eve is Not better off )
Satan implied to Eve that she could be a 'goddess' (choosing for herself what was good or what was evil/bad).
By free-will choosing to obey, or to listen to Satan, then Satan became their ' god '.
Adam set up Satan as the 'god' of this world of badness - 2 Corinthians 4:4.
So, Adam took the Law out of God's hands and placed the Law into Satan's hands, into fallen man's hands.
Adam thus set up People Rule as superior to God Rule as the best way of governing.
The passing of time has allowed for us to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.
Mankind's history (People Rule ) has proven that man can Not establish Peace on Earth, but God has provided Jesus to be King of God's Kingdom in order to undo the temporary damage Satan and Adam brought upon mankind.

 

[QuestioningMind]

First of all to me, according to Genesis 2:17 Eve did have knowledge (education) of what was evil/bad because it says that there would death if they ate from the forbidden tree. The good part was that Eve could live forever by avoiding that tree.
True, Eve saw No human die, but everything else Eve saw did die off. Just stepping completely on a bug would demonstrate death.

Satan also, like us, has free-will choices. That means God was Not in control of what Satan would do, that he would lie. Jesus called, Not God, but Satan the ' father ' (life giver) of the lie according to John 8:44, so God was Not responsible for Satan's free-will choice to take up lying.
Satan was drawn out by his very own desires - James 1:13-15.

I think Satan, Adam and Eve chose to disobey by misuse of their own free-will gift.
Without free-will choices we would be automatons, or robots.
So, we are Not programmed to obey God. We are Not forced to love or serve God.
But, God does forewarn about the bad consequences of breaking God's law ( sinning ).
Doesn't a loving parent forewarn that playing in traffic could cause death.
So, God forewarned that the forbidden tree would cause: death.
Whereas, the ' tree of life ' would represent life for them ( everlasting life on a beautiful paradisical Earth ).

Why did Satan become a rebel, in my view, it certainly was Not because he was persecuted or tempted to do wrong.
Satan simply failed in having any love for God or for mankind (us).
If Satan loved Eve he would Not have wanted to see Eve dead.- Genesis chapter 3.
Satan implied to Eve that she would Not die. ( Meaning God was lying to her )
Satan implied to Eve that she would be better off by Not listening to God. ( Dead Eve is Not better off )
Satan implied to Eve that she could be a 'goddess' (choosing for herself what was good or what was evil/bad).
By free-will choosing to obey, or to listen to Satan, then Satan became their ' god '.
Adam set up Satan as the 'god' of this world of badness - 2 Corinthians 4:4.
So, Adam took the Law out of God's hands and placed the Law into Satan's hands, into fallen man's hands.
Adam thus set up People Rule as superior to God Rule as the best way of governing.
The passing of time has allowed for us to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.
Mankind's history (People Rule ) has proven that man can Not establish Peace on Earth, but God has provided Jesus to be King of God's Kingdom in order to undo the temporary damage Satan and Adam brought upon mankind.

Here you say that Eve DID have knowledge of evil/bad; yet in your previous post you surmised: " ...then Eve could have concluded that she wanted to experience ( have knowledge ) of that 'evil/bad '" If she already had knowledge of evil/bad then she wouldn't have been tempted to eat from the tree in order to have knowledge of evil/bad.

My children have free will as well and there's nothing I can do if they choose to climb into a car with a stranger offering them candy. But as a responsible parent I do my very best to warn my children about the possible dangers that strangers might pose. Before I'd ever dream of allowing them to go out into the world where such dangerous characters lurk, I would lecture them endlessly about how strangers can lie to you and try and trick you into thinking you're doing something good (like helping them find a lost puppy), when really it would be very bad for them. I know as a parent that if I completely shelter my children from all adversity, that when they are finally faced with it they will be far too naive and gullible to make responsible choices.

Yet an all-powerful all-knowing God simply warned His children to stay away from the forbidden tree. He didn't lecture them on the dangers of the other creation He'd made that possessed the free will to try to trick and deceive them. He didn't provide them with any experience with lies or deception so that they'd know how to even recognize an untruth. In fact He didn't even make an effort to keep His deceptive creation away from A&E, even though an all-knowing God would have KNOWN that Satan would enter paradise with his evil lies. Since God did create A&E with free will He had a responsibility to teach them how to exercise their free will in a responsible manner.

As a parent if I fail to properly educate my children about the possible danger that strangers might pose and my child gets lured into some pervert's car, the child can definitely be blamed because he/she had free will. But at the same time I as the parent would deserve the majority of the blame for having failed to better teach my child about the possible dangers that they might face. It would be all the worse if I were all-knowing and knew that this pervert Satan was out there just waiting to get his hands on my kid.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Here you say that Eve DID have knowledge of evil/bad; yet in your previous post you surmised: " ...then Eve could have concluded that she wanted to experience ( have knowledge ) of that 'evil/bad '" If she already had knowledge of evil/bad then she wouldn't have been tempted to eat from the tree in order to have knowledge of evil/bad.
My children have free will as well and there's nothing I can do if they choose to climb into a car with a stranger offering them candy. But as a responsible parent I do my very best to warn my children about the possible dangers that strangers might pose. Before I'd ever dream of allowing them to go out into the world where such dangerous characters lurk, I would lecture them endlessly about how strangers can lie to you and try and trick you into thinking you're doing something good (like helping them find a lost puppy), when really it would be very bad for them. I know as a parent that if I completely shelter my children from all adversity, that when they are finally faced with it they will be far too naive and gullible to make responsible choices.
Yet an all-powerful all-knowing God simply warned His children to stay away from the forbidden tree. He didn't lecture them on the dangers of the other creation He'd made that possessed the free will to try to trick and deceive them. He didn't provide them with any experience with lies or deception so that they'd know how to even recognize an untruth. In fact He didn't even make an effort to keep His deceptive creation away from A&E, even though an all-knowing God would have KNOWN that Satan would enter paradise with his evil lies. Since God did create A&E with free will He had a responsibility to teach them how to exercise their free will in a responsible manner.
As a parent if I fail to properly educate my children about the possible danger that strangers might pose and my child gets lured into some pervert's car, the child can definitely be blamed because he/she had free will. But at the same time I as the parent would deserve the majority of the blame for having failed to better teach my child about the possible dangers that they might face. It would be all the worse if I were all-knowing and knew that this pervert Satan was out there just waiting to get his hands on my kid.

Mr. and Mrs. Adam (and Eve) to me were married adults - Genesis 2:24. They were Not minor children.
They were forewarned about the danger about the forbidden tree. -> You eat, You die.
There was good and plenty in the paradisical Garden of Eden with only one stipulation only on one tree.

I think Satan did Not start out a dangerous stranger (Ezekiel 28:13-15). Danger started later with Satan's angelic free-will choices, and that is when things went bad. That one tree stood for or represented respect for God's authority.
Mr. and Mrs. Adam (and Eve) could have simply told Satan to go away.
( even minor children have been taught to tell strangers to go away )
Satan disguised himself: As a ventriloquist throws his voice, that snake (in the grass) was Not really a talking snake but cunning Satan just using that serpent.

Unlike with a minor child being lured with candy, Satan used cunning lies to attract (Not kidnap) Eve - Genesis 3:1-6.
( the Bible is silent as to how long a time passed by as Satan worked on Eve to believe him over God and Adam )
He told Eve her eyes were bound to be opened and she would be like God ( or in Eve's case as a goddess )
In other words: Who is this God over you Eve, Who is He to tell you what to do, Why not rebel for your own good.
Eve was already told what the evil/bad would be according to Eve's words at Genesis 3:3 "death".
Remember too that megalomaniac Satan lied to Eve that she would Not die. - Genesis 3:4
That is why I was trying to convey Eve may have concluded (have knowledge from Satan) that she could experience the evil/bad without really dying. Bottom line: Eve was deceived, Adam wasn't - 1 Timothy 2:14.
So, the blame is placed upon husband Adam's headship because Adam was Not deceived - Romans 5:12