Temptation of Jesus?

[Nimos]

In God's dealings with humans, his faithful ones have never been in the majority...just the opposite in fact. (Matthew 7:13-14) Running with the crowd has never been an option for those who want to remain loyal to God in a world ruled by the devil. (1 John 5:19) Being the odd man out is a test all by itself.

I purely base it on how the text is written, like how Jesus talk about God, How God talk to Jesus etc.

You might remember that Jesus was not raised in a wealthy family. They were in fact, quite poor. But their spirituality made them rich in God's eyes. Therefore satan's temptations would have been very real to Jesus.

But again I think one have to take into account who Jesus is, and who he knows he is. Not sure exactly how old he is suppose to be in this story, but personally I see him as being in mid twenties. So a lot of years after he decided as a twelve year old to give a lecture in the temple, and refer to that as his "Fathers home". Even at this point he supposedly had a lot of knowledge of the scriptures, God etc. that it would be a bit weird, that he would find something as wealth important compared to what he knows. Therefore I don't think that him being poor is especially relevant for this.

Yes, but growing up in a poor Jewish family taught Jesus the value of faithfulness to his God. It was only at his baptism that his former life in heaven was revealed to him. He retreated away into the wilderness for 40 days and nights in order to commune with his Father and receive his instructions. Up until then he was just plain old Jesus, firstborn son (as the opinion was) of the carpenter Joseph.

I don't really think that is supported by scriptures. Because as mentioned above and how he speaks in Luke:

Luke 2:41-49
41 Every year Jesus' parents would go to Jerusalem for the Passover Festival.
42 When Jesus was twelve years old, they went up to the festival as usual.
....
46 Three days later they found him in the Temple sitting among the teachers, listening to them, and posing questions to them.
47 All who heard him were amazed at his intelligence and his answers.
...
49 He asked them, "Why were you looking for me? Didn't you know that I had to be in my Father's house?"

And if we go back before this Passover festival event.

Luke 2:39-40
39 After doing everything required by the Law of the Lord, Joseph and Mary returned to their hometown of Nazareth in Galilee.
40 Meanwhile, the child continued to grow and to become strong. He was filled with wisdom, and God's favor rested upon him.

So why does he point out that he continues to grow strong and being filled with wisdom and that God's favor rested upon him? From an historical point of view, the chance of Jesus being able to read or write is immensely low, as hardly anyone could. And being raised in a poor family, its doubtful that Mary or Joseph could either. So at least to me, what is pointed out here, is that Jesus is being taught by God, angels or at least receiving this wisdom from somewhere, that he need later on in his life. So when he goes to the passover festival as twelve years old, he can impress the rest with all the knowledge he have.

Again as I pointed out in the last post, about staying as true to the characters as possible. So based on Jesus knowledge, his ability to impress in the temple, isn't it more likely that he have this wisdom or at least is in the process of getting it, at this point?
Because its highlighted that Jesus is sitting among the teachers, and not just in the crowd, both listening to them, which could indicate that he doesn't have all the knowledge yet, but also being asked questions, which he can then answer and which amazed them.
At least to me, that make for a lot more consistent and logic presentation of Jesus, based on what the scriptures tell us and where this story is going, as it's setting up Jesus as this person with amazing knowledge, that even as a twelve year old kid is sitting among the teachers, that actually cares to listen to him.

I think Jesus would have been able to know where this wisdom came from, again he tells Mary and Joseph that he have been at his Father's house, and he knows that the poor Joseph doesn't own a temple.

He is as powerful as any other angel but he's been around since the beginning of creation so he knows exactly how to milk any situation to further his own agenda. His presence in the garden was an assignment of responsibility as a guardian, but his observations there only fueled his desire for what God had.....he wanted to be a god and no one in existence could see him as such because they were either his equal or his superior....but humankind!....here were intelligent creatures of lower station to whom he could become a god.

Maybe, Im not sure where you get the infomation from, that he was assigned as a guardian, Just don't recall that being mentioned anywhere?

But even if he were, that shouldn't really change the fact, that God wouldn't have known that something was wrong. To me the most obvious answer to this, is that God changes nature or abilities throughout the story. And that he is simply not omniscient in the creation story, but is something that is added to him later. Again that is purely based on how the scriptures present him.

Like him asking where Adam and Eve is and them hiding from him. Having spend X amount of time in the garden with God walking around there, they must have known that they could not hide from him. At least to me, that seems to not really be consistence in regards to God, if he is omniscient at this point.

Just because God is Omniscient, doesn't mean that he chooses to know everything. If you were a Master Locksmith and you had a key that could unlock every lock in the world.....would you have to unlock every lock just because you could?

No, but again. Choosing not to know where Adam and Eve is, seems rather strange. Because what would it change?

Besides that, if God expresses the same amount of love as a mere human, or at least the majority of humans does, for their children. Then one would assume that God is also interesting in making sure that nothing bad can happen to them. So him just doing a quick check if something is about to happen to them in the future, seems like a pretty natural thing to do, if one had such abilities and therefore also the ability to prevent it.

So again as I said, God is not really taking all that good care of them, as he maybe should, at least not in my opinion. He wouldn't have to tell them anything and they would still have been running around being happy.

Since Jesus was in every way human, he was in the same situation as Adam and his wife. He had God's instructions but he did not deviate from them. Adam and his wife had one simple command that did not cause them any hardship whatsoever...and yet they still couldn't obey it. Given a temptation that the good life they had been given could be even better, they fell for the devil's deception.

It only make sense, if you know the difference. Because God couldn't explain to them that not keeping the command would be bad. It would have made no sense to them. Its like telling a baby that they shouldn't eat sand, and they just look at you like a complete idiot with sand in their mouth, and then turn around and keep eating. It makes no sense to them what you are telling them, except maybe what they can hear from the tone of your voice. So what most parents do, is to take the baby away from the sand, because its probably not all that healthy if they eat to much of it. Yet, God keep the tree there, right in the center for them to see.

Don't forget that satan has been able to tempt the majority of mankind to defect from the Creator....to invent other gods and to practice false worship....but when he comes across someone like Job.....he wants to break him. Job is there representing all of us because satan's challenge was....

But Job hardly represent all of us. He is living a good and wealthy life. How is that equal to someone living from day to day, which have nothing?

Continue..

 

[Nimos]

Again satan's accusations were proven false but this time it wasn't just Job under trial...he said..."Skin for skin. A man will give everything that he has for his life." Not just that 'Job would give for his life', but "a man" including all men...humankind....all of us.

We are all under the same test, from the same enemy. Will we pass?

But wouldn't you agree that there is a huge a difference, between one that have nothing and one that have everything? Obviously any person will try to do what they can to survive, unless their life is so messed up, that they commit suicide. But if a person have all their needs furfilled, like don't have to think about where their next meal comes from, doesn't have to worry about their health, where they need to sleep, whether they will be warm enough, have friends that won't backstab them or take advances off them and so forth. Then there is a huge different.

If Satan had been a bit clever, he would address those people which suffers due to these things everyday and with very little hope in their life and tell them, I will improve your life beyond what God does, so you can live without a care in your life. All you have to do is worship me rather than God. Then Im not so sure God would do as well, as he did with Job.
But Satan doesn't seem to be intelligent enough to figure that out. Because clearly if all those that are suffering, look at someone suddenly living a very good and happy life, worshipping Satan, then clearly that can't be any worse than God, which just looks on, not seemingly caring about them at all anyway.

And since there are far more poor people in the world than those of very furfilled one, Satan could wiped God off the table rather easy. And since a lot of Christians (Don't know about you) say that it have nothing to do with the afterlife and not why they believe or follow God. Then it ought to make no difference anyway, if Satan can't provide them that.
So they would be happy to live a good life anyway, Satan would be happy for being worshipped. It seems like a pretty decent deal for all parties, wouldn't you say?

If I as a mere human can figure that out on a forum, then clearly Satan with far superior intelligence would be able to figure that out as well. So again, when we look at Satan as character, he just doesn't appear to be represented very consistent with such attributes. The assumption is, that in order for Satan to be worship, he has to cause as much pain and suffering to all those around him, as humanly possible. Because, why?.....Well the bible need a counterpart to God and an excuse for humans to turn to him.

Because what is fairly interesting when one read the story, is that God is basically "taunting" or bragging to Satan about Job. Which makes him react to it.

Job 1:7-9
7 The LORD asked Satan, "Where have you come from?" In response, Satan answered the LORD, "From wandering all over the earth and walking back and forth throughout it."
8 Then the LORD asked Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on earth. The man is blameless as well as upright. He fears God and keeps away from evil."
9 But in response, Satan asked the LORD, "Does Job fear God for nothing?

If we are to believe this dialog, then clearly, Satan originally doesn't seem all that interested in Job, before God ask if he "Have considered his servant Job?", to which Satan then take an interest. Would this story play out like this, had God not mentioned or bragging about Job? I really doubt it, based on the dialog at least. Because Satan just say that he have been wandering all over the Earth. Don't imply that he have been up to no good or anything really.

Then he starts to question God about Job, to which God, at least in my opinion reacts like a child would, sort of like "My dad is stronger than yours!!":

Job 1:12
Then the LORD told Satan, "Very well then, everything he owns is under your control, only you may not extend your hand against him." So Satan left the LORD's presence.

Keep in mind, God brought up Job in the first place, not Satan. But again, Satan evil and God is good, so that detail is not important in regards to the point the bible is trying to make to the reader.

When Jesus became our redeemer, all he had to do to pay Adam's debt was to pay a "life for a life" which was stipulated in God's law.
Jesus paid the price by laying down his perfect life for the perfect life Adam lost for his children. In paying the debt there was no reason for him to remain in the grave. As his Father's most trusted servant, and commander of the angelic forces, he still had a lot of work to do. Part one of his mission was completed but it was not over by a long shot.

But that logic makes little sense. Because God decided all the rules in the first place and is the only one who can decide them at any point there after. So what prevent him from changing them if he pleases?
And Im talking from a rational point of view here, in regards to what we know as it is presented in the bible. And not especially what story or morality the bible is trying to get across here. I want to stress, that I think its important to make this differentiation between these things. Because looking at the text and what it actually say, is very different, compared to talking about what the authors were trying to tell. I hope, I explained that well enough?

Continue..

 

[Nimos]

Their destiny was already written.....death. But the devil and his cronies will take as many down with them as they can.

Again that depends on what Satan is trying to achieve, if he want to show that he is better than God and how people will worship him over God. Then simply wanting to kill everyone doesn't seem all that hard, Satan being a fallen angel should have no issue just running around smacking down humans left right and center. But since he doesn't seem to do that, his purpose does not really seem to be of that nature.
Another possibility could be to cause as much suffering to humans ending up in hell, if one believe in that. But that makes little sense either, because it is God who decide who end up there anyway, so he could just say that no one should go there and Satan would be screwed. So at least to me, the most logic answer is, that Satan probably want to be worshipped or show God that he is better. But his approach of achieving it, as explained above, just doesn't seem to be very well executed, if he is said to be as intelligent as we are to believe.

In regards to Adam and Eve, weren't they always going to die? Otherwise why would God say this:
Genesis 3:22-23
22 Later, the LORD God said, "Look! The man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, so he won't reach out, also take from the tree of life, eat, and then live forever—"
23 therefore the LORD God expelled the man from the garden of Eden so he would work the ground from which he had been taken.

So God throws them out, so they are not going to also live forever, which seems to indicate that they original were not meant to anyway.

It was the devil who told that lie...remember? God placed the decision of judging what was good or evil in his own jurisdiction....humans were to rely on God to tell them what was good and what was not....deciding for themselves has never worked. If they had just listened and obeyed, we would not be having this conversation.

Again, it makes not sense in regards to rational thinking, that humans should rely on God to tell them what is good and evil, when they have no clue what it is. Exactly as the example with the baby above eating sand. You wouldn't expect a baby to be able to do this either. Which is why parents take responsibility for it and make sure that it is not put in harmful situations. You as many other believers, seem to look at Adam and Eve as you would an adult having a clear understanding of what is meant with good and evil, right and wrong. When what you should compare them to is that of baby having no clue what is going on, but just crawling around and enjoying life, not knowing that sticking a finger in an outlet would probably kill them or drinking from a bottle of acid is not good either. They have no clue what these things are or that they could be dangerous.

It wasn't that they didn't "know" what was good and what was bad, they had just never experienced what it meant to decide those things for themselves . Eve knew that disobeying God was bad...but she did it anyway because she believed a lie and abused her free will. Was there any excuse for what she did? I can't find one. If you know the penalty before you commit the crime, why complain when it is implemented?

But that is simply not possible from a rational point of view. If they know what good and bad is, clearly they must know what is meant with good and evil as well or you would be unable to make such judgement in the first place.

Even if Eve knew that God had said that she couldn't eat from it, there is no reason for her to assume that it was either right or wrong to do so. Exactly why a baby will keep eating sand, even after you have explained that there could be bacteria and showed it all the chemical and scientific explanations in the world, why its bad. It still have no idea what you are on about, and will go straight back eating it.

Eve was the newest member of the human race which made her more vulnerable to the temptation that the devil offered....but he knew that, and used the woman to get to his prime target....the man.

Or maybe it was because she were a woman and seen as the "weak" one and able to deceive men. Woman are not really portrait all that equal to men in the bible as one would assume, and even throughout history they have had their struggle with being treated equally to men in general. Like the right to vote, equal wages etc. So that could be an explanation as well. Not saying that it is, but based on what we know about how women have been treated, that its plausible.

That is exactly what the Bible says. Both of them knew God's law, and broke it. That tree was not given to them and they had been warned about the penalty, so there was no excuse. It wasn't a mistake...it was willful and deliberate sin and it cost every human on earth their life.
"Underdogs"? I don't think so. Traitors...yes.

Exactly because that is what the authors want the story to tell, it doesn't mean that it also make sense when one think of it from rational point of view. I don't disagree with you one bit, that the purpose or point they have with this story, is to show how Adam and Eve disobeyed God and how selfish and bad these were and that our punishment is deserved. But it is not justified in any way, when the text is analyzed and one look at it from an objective perspective and that is my point.

Obviously we look at this differently, because as you say "That is exactly what the Bible say" and to you that is proof that, then it is also correct. But to me, its not. Just because it is written in a book doesn't mean that it is then also correct, in regards to whether its morally justifiable or even true in the first place.

Adam and his wife were not babies. They were created as perfect, intelligent adults with a brain and a mental capacity for infinite learning.

But that is simply impossible, because its an absolute necessity to even be close to being considered perfect, that you know the difference between right and wrong or good and evil. Adam could have slapped Eve over and over again, without any knowledge of it being wrong, why would he even consider it to be that? Causing suffering to others, is one of the ways we can categorize evil.

Just as refusing to let a child eat sand is Trubilizian, but since we don't know what that means, then we don't know whether, we should let them keep eating it or even encourage them to eat more, or whether we should be better at preventing them from eating it. How would we know if we don't know what it means?