Why can’t they see?

If you are like me, one of the most frustrating things in sharing your Christian faith is having the message rejected, sometimes even “in your face.” Recently I had a pair of Mormon missionaries come over to my house, unannounced. We had a very good one-hour conversation. The elder who had been on the field longer wanted to leave after 15 minutes, but the new elder expressed his desire of staying and engaging. It was a friendly dialogue. As they left, the junior elder (who, at 21, had admitted that he had just received his testimony earlier that year) shook my hand. He looked me in the eyes and said that no matter what anyone said, nobody was going to be able to convince him that his testimony was not true.

Talk about frustration. This missionary had no answers as to how he “knew” that Joseph Smith was a true prophet. He couldn’t explain why he “knew” the Book of Mormon was true except he had a good feeling. And how did he “know” that his testimony was valid? Well, he just did. How is it even possible to communicate in an intelligent manner with someone who holds fideism so close to his heart?

The answer to my frustration is found, very clearly I might say, in the first two chapters of 1 Corinthians. Consider what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 1:18, 21, 25 (NIV): “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. . . . For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him; God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. . . . For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.”

According to the original Greek text, the word for “foolishness” is where we get the English word “moron.” Interesting choice of words, wouldn’t you say? According to the Bible, people left in their natural state are “morons.” Now, I’m not saying Mormons are morons. (Have you ever slipped on your computer and written “moron” instead of “Mormon”? The spell checker just won’t catch the mistake!) However, left to the unbeliever’s natural state, the cross and the heart of Christianity’s message will be rejected 100% of the time as being foolish. It just doesn’t make sense to them. This has been confirmed by the many conversations I’ve had with dozens of missionaries and thousands of other Latter-day Saints.

Paul goes on. He says in verses 27-30 that “God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.”

On the surface, the cross isn’t very exciting to those who believe that, somehow, their good works must be added to the payment owed due to sin. Even though Christ has paid it all, we naturally believe that somehow we must make our contribution, even if it just ends up being 1% of the total. But desiring to make a “contribution” means that a person has not fully grasped the idea that nothing more is owed once the gift has been accepted! Notice, Christ is “our righteousness, holiness and redemption.” It’s His work, not ours, that is needed. The debt is fully paid yet there is nothing you did to earn it.

In chapter 2, Paul explains that it wasn’t through earthly wisdom that he shared the gospel with the Corinthians, but rather “with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power.” Why? In verse 5, he explains “so that your faith might not rest on men’s wisdom, but on God’s power.” Otherwise, the individual would have room to boast on his or her own accomplishments. (See Ephesians 2:8-9.)

Be careful, because Paul is not saying that we should walk up to Mormons, touch them with a spiritual magic—no words necessary—and all of a sudden they will grasp the true gospel. This concept is certainly not supported in how he shared the gospel in Jewish synagogues or at Mars Hill in Acts 17. Verse 7 is important here in explaining “God’s secret wisdom,” which “has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.” In the Greek, the word “predestined” is used here. Translate it as you will, but understand that God’s sovereignty is the key for people to be able to know God. “God’s secret wisdom” will remain hidden unless, as verse 10 says, “God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.”

Do you grasp this? It’s hard, isn’t it? After all, if I had my way, every missionary and Latter-day Saint with whom I come into contact would comprehend the message of Truth that I’m trying to share. But Paul says I wasn’t ever supposed to understand how this all works. He said that just as no person can understand his own thoughts like the person himself, so “no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (v. 11).

For verse 13, let me quote the Contemporary English Version, for I think it grasps the concept of what Paul was communicating better than the KJV, NIV, and NASB: “Every word we speak was taught to us by God’s Spirit, not by human wisdom. And the same Spirit helps us teach spiritual things to spiritual people.” In order to be able to understand, those recipients must have wisdom—spiritual and not earthly. As verse 6 says, a person must be spiritually “mature” to understand the wisdom of God. Spiritual wisdom, not natural wisdom, is needed to fully understand this incredible message.

Finally, the killer point comes in verse 14: “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

How many ex-Mormons have you met who have said something like this: “For all those years, I just didn’t understand the gospel. Then (blank) happened and all of a sudden it made sense. How did I not see this before?” The answer, my friend, is found in these first two chapters of 1 Corinthians. The Holy Spirit is in charge of “secret wisdom.” The key to unlocking that secret wisdom involves more than just verbally sharing your Christian faith. Prayer on our part, both during and after the evangelistic encounter, will go a long way! After all, we’re not involved in a conflict of flesh and blood but with things involving the spiritual realm. (See Ephesians 6:12.)

I have to say, as the missionaries walked away, I silently admitted to God that I was frustrated. But as my friend Bill McKeever likes to say, “We’re only in sales. God is in production.” When presenting the gospel, some of us are involved in planting seeds and others are in charge of watering, “but God made it grow” (1 Cor. 3:6). I have been commissioned to present truth to the lost, however that might be, but I must always remember that it’s the Holy Spirit’s job to bring people to Him. I encourage you to continue sharing your faith and don’t let rejection affect you personally. You just never know who God is going to touch next, even if it’s not in your presence!

This entry was posted in Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

95 Responses to Why can’t they see?

  1. Rick B says:

    Clyde,
    Here one to think about, then maybe answer, if you can.
    Mormons deny original sin and claim we wont be punished for Adam’s sin, so if that is true, then God punished Adam and Eve, for something He wanted us to do all along, yet lied to us about. How is that fair?

    Then the Bible states we are enemies of God,

    Rom 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

    So you mean to tell me that as the result of God wanting us to fall, we would be enemies of His? And the only way to solve that problem was for Him to send His son to die a brutal death for us to be reconciled to Him? How does any of this make sense?

    Sadly you feel it does make sense, yet you cannot show me from Scripture where I am wrong, so you avoid these questions and keep giving “what if” Questions. How about honest answers instead of what if questions? O-yea, I forgot, Your prophet has not spoken on this issue so you cannot answer me.

  2. Mike R says:

    dba.brotherp, welcome. You asked some good questions and Eric can answer those for you .
    When I use the term ” conversion” , it means that a person has been “saved” . This is a miracle
    that takes place in a person’s life when they admit they are a sinner incapable of gaining eternal
    life with God by their own works/ righteousness , they admit this to God and then ask Him to
    forgive them . It is then that they are “converted”or ” saved”, ( saved from what the penalty of
    being a sinner brings—eternal separation from God .) Thus this miracle takes place immediately.
    Then begins the Christian life , a lifelong journey of not only following Jesus’ as exemplar as
    recorded in the scriptures but also a very intimate relationship ( direct interaction ) with their
    new found Savior who is alive and deserving of their attention . By directing praise to Jesus and
    worshiping Him through a heart filled with gratitude at being being pardoned of their sin
    debt is the essence of a daily walk as a follower of Jesus . Jesus is the way to the Father,
    and that “way” is through a personal relationship with His Son when we are ” converted ” —
    Jn 14:6 . The Holy Ghost plays an important role in our conversion as well .
    That’s all I have to say on this issue at this time . May you peruse the articles that MRM has
    to offer on this , they can articulate it a lot better than I .

  3. 4fivesolas says:

    dba.brotherp
    I would not argue with what you said in terms of the timing of how God works. God’s Word of Law – condemning us in our sin and God’s Word of gospel – Christ crucified and resurrected for our justification goes out – and people hear this good news and respond in different ways. Some hear the law (basically the 10 commandments) and respond that they are undone, they despair, and say no to God’s gift of salvation. Some hear the law and think – this is how I am saved – I must be good and do all that God has commanded, I can earn my own justification. They too reject God’s offer of salvation in Christ’s death and resurrection. And some hear the law, are crushed, realizing they are sinners, and believe God’s promises – His gift of Jesus. This is simple saving faith. They receive God’s gift of baptism into the triune God, which Scripture indicates is how God brings us into the Church – you can know that Jesus death and resurrection is for you. God uses these means to create this simple saving faith in our hearts – this simple trust in God’s Son and His promises. This can happen suddenly or over time. Sometimes dramatically, sometimes slowly and without much fanfare. The blood of Jesus covers our sins – and He wishes all to trust in His finished work on the cross. The timing or exact process are not important – the focus on Jesus and what He has done for us is central.

  4. Rick B says:

    dba.brotherp,
    Everyone is different. I was raised atheist and was very hateful growing up. My mom and dad were raised in Catholic schools and as a result of abusive nuns both now want nothing to do with God. I was around 21 years old when I came to know Jesus.

    I have meet people who came to Jesus when they were younger and many when they were a lot older. Pretty much everyone comes when they are ready, otherwise they reject Him and never come to Him and will die in their sins and face eternal damnation.

  5. Clyde6070 says:

    Falcon
    I don’t know maybe I do need a hug. Here are some for you. XOXOXOXOXOXO I GET THE KISSES AND HUGS MIXED UP SO DON’T TAKE THE KISSES. I maybe should tell that I hab a code and Mynode get tuff up so be carpul ob de hugth too.

  6. Clyde6070 says:

    Rick
    I hope you see the humor in my posting to Falcon. It may not be to funny but some people may see the humor in it. I am trying to point out that God has a reason for doing everything He does. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was there for a purpose. When this fruit was eaten the realization of what was Good or evil came with it. Hopefully you realize how good or how bad my humor is.
    Falcon it is also past my bed time and I get very irritable so Good night

  7. Rick B says:

    So Clyde, You still cannot answer my questions, but also your saying God has a reason for lying? The Bible says He cannot lie.

    Also your saying God has a reason for Creating eternal damnation and allowing billions or more to burn for all of eternity, When the Bible clearly says, It is not his will that anyone should perish?

    I really think you need to stop listing to your false prophets and read the Bible, What you say not only is false, but cannot be proven by the Bible, that is why you have been unable to answer me.

  8. 4fivesolas says:

    Clyde,
    As a Christian I hold the account of Genesis to be God’s divine revelation of what occured at the fall of man. The question to ask is not “what do you think about the tree in the garden?” but rather “what does God reveal in Scripture about what happened in the garden?” God has revealed that the fall of humanity was evil and brought both physical and spiritual death. It was a BAD thing. If we speculate beyond what Scripture says and come up with our own reasoning it is just the wisdom of men and foolishness.

  9. shematwater says:

    Pi[filtered profanity or slur]ta

    I understand very well what you are saying. I just have one issue with it. That is simply this, if God knows everything, than he knew Adam and Eve would eat the fruit and fall. If this is the case than even by your reasoning he planned it, as he put everything into motion that lead to the Fall. If he did not want us to fall he would not have placed that tree there, or would not have commanded Adam and Eve not to eat of it.
    What it seems to boil down to is this: From your explanation God knew that his plan would not work, and yet did nothing to fix the problem. On the other hand, we see this same event as an intricate plan of God; knowing that Adam would fall He purposely placed the tree then to bring about the fall that He knew needed to happen.
    Now, more can be said on this topic, and I say some of it here http://shematwater.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/the-fall-of-man/ on my blog, if you are interested. As I say, I understand your doctrine, but it does not fit well with an all knowing God.

    Rick

    The problem with all your questions is that you are asking them in the context of your doctrine, and not in the context of ours. These things make perfect sense when we come to understand the plan of salvation and the final goal that God has in store for us. I agree that none of it makes sense when seen through your doctrine, because your doctrine is not capable is making sense of these things.

    Now, on a more personal note, I would appreciate it if you would stop with your false accusation and outright lies concerning me, my words, and our discussions. Of course that is what you do, and when people simply get annoyed at you leave you claim it is due to your superior intellect; that they were intimidated away. Honestly, I have felt like leaving on several occasion due to your continued misrepresentation of my words, your personal attacks against me, and you constant ignoring of what I and others say.

    Then you have the arrogance to claim that “It is not a matter of me being frustrated with Him or other Mormons that I say things that way, it is a matter of I say them because they are true.”

    Yet you know full well that if I or anyone else said this of you you would be up in arms screaming your head off at how we just can’t answer your questions and so we are forced to resort to rudeness and mockery to hide the fact. Maybe you should take some of your own advice.

    TO ALL
    From the Bible we read “cursed is the ground for thy sake” (genesis 3: 17). Notice here that it is not Adam that is cursed, but the ground. Notice also that it is “for thy sake” or for the benefit of Adam that this curse was laid on the ground.
    You may also take note that in verse 16, when God addresses Eve, he never says she is cursed, but that God would increase her conception, or make her to have more children. Yes, it would be in sorrow, but it seems to me to be more of a blessing than a curse, as we read in Proverbs 17: 6 “Children’s children are the crown of old men” indicating that the more children (and thus grandchildren) that you have the more honor and glory you have.

    Lastly read verse 22 in which God states “Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil,” showing clearly that Adam and Eve gained an understanding of what is good and what is evil after partaking the fruit, and not before.

    I do not claim that all details of the creation and subsequent fall of man can be found in the Bible. However, I have yet to have any non-LDS address these three verse in a way that makes sense with the rest of their understanding of the Fall.

  10. grindael says:

    That is simply this, if God knows everything, than he knew Adam and Eve would eat the fruit and fall. If this is the case than even by your reasoning he planned it, as he put everything into motion that lead to the Fall. If he did not want us to fall he would not have placed that tree there, or would not have commanded Adam and Eve not to eat of it.

    Actually, Christians see this totally differently:

    In the garden Adam and Eve possessed what is called unconfirmed creature holiness, but it was not his possession for an eternal state yet. Man was made in the image and likeness of God he was unmarred and had original righteousness. Man being the ruler over the earth and the other creatures was higher in intelligence and he alone had a relationship to his creator that no other creature enjoyed. But there was a need to be tested. So mankind was given the ability in our nature to choose. To sin or not to sin. God gave Adam specific instructions what he was and was not to do. So a simple test was given to see whether man will obey God or not.

    He was also given dominion over the earth, specifically the garden (Gen.1:26; Ps.8:58; Heb.2:5-8) His responsibility was to cultivate (have dominion) to dress and keep the garden in the order it was made in (Gen.2:15). In this period before the fall the labor was easy the land yielded its crops easily. At this time he had in his state perfect fellowship with his creator, in the cool of the day, each afternoon God would come to the garden and speak with Adam. (Gen.3:8)

    Man was first created alone, as one of a kind in his species, while the animals and creatures were created in numerous numbers of both male and female. In Gen. 2:18-22 by God bringing the beasts to Adam He gave him an opportunity to develop his intrinsic intellectual capacity, which constitutes a humans mind making him superior to the animal world. “Adam sees the animals, and thinks of what they are and how they look; and these thoughts formed into words. He is a creature gifted with the faculties both of reason and speech, able to give expression in the names that he gave them. Language is merely thoughts cast into articulate sounds or words for communication. Job 35:11Who teaches us more than the beasts of the earth, And makes us wiser than the birds of heaven?” (Adam didn’t call the stars by name God did. He was limited to the rule over the garden section God gave him).

    When Adam named all the animals and saw what they were none there for him. God saw there was none suitable for him (Gen.2:18). So God put him to sleep and did an operation on him taking from his side bone and flesh, making another like him. Adam was made from the ground formed into a body and God gave him life by breathing into him His spirit. Eve was taken from Adam and he called her (Isha) woman, at first as they were one. So having a wife is a natural thing in the order of God. After the fall the woman is then called Eve as she became the mother of all living. As we inherit our physical features from our line, our sinful nature is to be passed on too, this is attributed to the man not the woman. Gen 2:18-22 The woman was created, not of dust of the earth, but from a rib of Adam, because she was formed for an inseparable unity and fellowship of life with the man.

    God put man in the garden to tend to it. “This was like a park (Gen 2:8) paradise, by which it is rendered in the Septuagint, gives the more precise idea of a spacious enclosure-an extensive park, like those in which Eastern monarchs enclosed their palaces, and which abound with every species of trees, flowers, and garden culture, enlivened besides by numbers of choice animals, which are kept there for pleasure.” (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary)

    God had pointed to one tree in the garden to present a test for man and woman. He did allow them the freedom to choose as was done in heaven by Satan before. God gave two commands to Adam and Eve to obey to prevent this from occurring. The commands God gave Adam were to be fruitful and multiply and keep the garden Gen. 1:28 and a do not command of not eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge Gen. 2:17. Two do’s, and one don’t commandment.

    Eve is made after Adam and she too is instructed by God not to eat of the tree. The Bible makes it clear that she is aware of the commands instruction (Gen. 3:3). They can eat from all the different trees but one. There was no special property in this tree except that it was named as a test to train them to become mature in their obedience.

    Man was on probation he needed to obey God, this centered mostly around the command thou shalt not eat of the tree of good and evil because when he eats it he will definitely die. This prohibition was given to Adam before Eve was taken from his side(Gen.2:16-17).

    If Adam and Eve had passed the test it would have confirmed them in creature holiness, and his offspring would inherit a nature of holiness. (The angels had this occur in Lucifer’s rebellion. After one third rebelled they were confirmed in their decision never able to change back.) If Adam passed he would then have access to the tree of life and live forever as eternal life would have been given to him. But a temptation to disobedience came from an outside influence. From one who already fell the same way in heaven, by disobedience, pride. This particular fallen angel comes and delivers information contrary to what God has already spoken.

    When Adam failed the temptation from the source of the Devil through Eve, it confirmed him in his change of nature, unholiness. Sin entered into his nature and spread to the offspring of all people. Now disobedience comes from our nature that is fallen from its original state. The first man was potentially the race of all people, our natural headship. Being the natural headship of humanity his actions did not only affect him as the individual, but of the race. If he was the last of the race and fell, he would not involve any other in his descent. But being the first of a race when he fell before he had any offspring, the whole race has fallen. As Paul says “in Adam all sinned”, because of his choice it changed the whole character and condition of mankind throughout all time. Just as Paul said a little leaven leavens the whole lump. (1 Cor. 5: 6, 7) Only one sin made us all sinners but only Adam became a sinner by sinning. The sin nature affects the immaterial part of man, which consequently affects our outward actions. Death is the consequence of sin. This is the very reason why we need to be born again. Our dead spirit needs to be regenerated (Rom. 8:1, Gal. 5:24) by the Spirit of God. One is made alive spiritually to God and is able to have a vital relationship through Jesus Christ. We need a new nature.

    Satan’s attack was on God himself as the kingdom of the earth was taken from Adams hand and Satan’s. Satan’s attack against man was fueled by his hatred toward God, not only by the hatred of the new human creatures that were placed in the garden, like a park and given dominion. His purpose was to divorce man from being in the will of God through disobedience to one command. Just as Satan had led the other angels to believe him and rebel, he would do the same for man.

    God made the tree of life to grow in the midst of the garden, among all the other trees; by eating the fruit of this tree the immortality of Adam would had been secured. When Adam transgressed, he was expelled from this garden, and not permitted to eat of the tree of life; he became necessarily mortal, death came to him and all his offspring. He is then forbidden to eat of this tree he once enjoyed. This tree is secured and restored to man again in the true garden in heaven by the gospel — the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. In Rev.2:7 we see a parallel to this tree.

    The tree of life is representative of immortality, and a final state of blessedness. Whatever it is it was to make the life of man perpetual. We find the tree of life is in the ultimate paradise, heaven, where those who obeyed the gospel on earth will live. http://www.letusreason.org/doct36.htm

    You may have forgotten that God put two trees in the Garden, thus indicating that there would be a choice involved. The garden was a test, and to pass it meant immortality, but they failed it and that was death, and obviously NOT what God planned for mankind. God’s knowing what the future is, doesn’t mean that God intends that future. This is common sense. BTW Shem, why did God place the Tree of Life in the Garden if he always meant for them to partake of the tree of Knowledge?

    Numbers 23:19: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?”

    1 Samuel 15:29: “And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent.”

    Psalm 92:15: “To declare that the Lord is upright; He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.”

    Malachi 3:6: “For I am the Lord, I do not change.”

    Romans 3:4: “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.”

    Titus 1:2: “[I]n hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began.”

    Hebrews 6:18: “[I]t is impossible for God to lie.”

    James 1:17-18: “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.”

  11. SR says:

    grindael said: God’s knowing what the future is, doesn’t mean that God intends that future.

    To me this brings up the most interesting point. Most of us know and understand the words “free will”. To me, God’s omniscience isn’t meant to show that he CONTROLS every action but rather than he KNOWS about them before, after, during, etc. He is, was, and always will be. God is outside of the bounds of time.

    So grindael’s point here makes sense — yes it was a test. Yes it was a choice for Adam & Eve to make. Yes God knew what would happen in the future. But he did not control the outcome. He still gave the CHOICE. He directly commanded Adam and Eve that they not eat from one of the trees. They directly disobeyed him. Did he intend for this to happen? Did he control that it happened? Did he do it on purpose so that man could fall?

    No, I don’t believe so.

    Because to believe so would mean that free will doesn’t exist. That God controls every action we ever take and predestines us along life’s paths. I don’t believe He does this. I believe He KNOWS the choices we’ll make and what effect they will have, but He doesn’t manipulate them.

    It’s hard to understand; I know. It’s all jumbled up in my head right now, to be honest.

    But the most interesting thing to me is that Mormonism teaches “agency” as a key element of human life on Earth. The LDS wiki states: “In essence, agency is the ability to make choices for oneself, as well as the ability to learn the difference between right and wrong and to make ethical and moral decisions.” (Sorry, I didn’t go to mormon.org to grab it, wiki came up first.)

    To argue that the fall of man was God’s plan all along is, in essence, to remove our free will or, in Mormonism’s terms, our agency.

  12. Rick B says:

    Shem,
    I agree with what has been said by Grindael and SR said, so on the issue of the Fall, I have nothing more to really add.

    Now you said

    Rick

    The problem with all your questions is that you are asking them in the context of your doctrine, and not in the context of ours. These things make perfect sense when we come to understand the plan of salvation and the final goal that God has in store for us. I agree that none of it makes sense when seen through your doctrine, because your doctrine is not capable is making sense of these things.

    Now my problem is not that I am asking questions in context of my doctrine, It is your problem that you cannot support your view from the Bible. The Burden of proof is upon you to prove your doctrine true, I dont believe your doctrine, So no I wont use your false doctrine to ask questions.

    Shem said

    Now, on a more personal note, I would appreciate it if you would stop with your false accusation and outright lies concerning me, my words, and our discussions.

    Well Shem, If your going to claim I am doing these things, then back it up. It is easy to say I am doing stuff and since some people dont agree with how blunt I can be, it would be easy to assume if You say I am saying something about you, then people will believe you.

    So How about you cut and paste things you have said, then cut and paste my responses and tell me exactly where and how I am doing the things you are accusing me of.

    I recall you saying that you feel God could tell someone what brand of Vacuum to use to clean the temple and it has probably been done at least once. Now this is a paraphrase by me of what you said, but you implied it might have been done.

    So I said something to the effect of, well If God can direct someone through Revelation on what vacuum to use to clean the temple, them how come these so called prophets cannot go to God and ask for something like, Proof the BoM is true, or maybe where the battle of the hill of Cumorah took place. These are important issues and sadly many dont believe the BoM to be true since there seems to be so many problems, yet according to the Bible God wants all to be saved. So if God wants all to be saved, then why would God not speak to the Prophets and get all these issues cleared up and then more would be saved.

    I know that not everyone would be saved since we have evidence of the Bible being true, and we have atheists. But I know more people would be saved if the prophet could get answers to these questions. But sadly this has never happened and never will.

  13. shematwater says:

    Rick

    “It is your problem that you cannot support your view from the Bible.”

    The problem here is that I can support it from the Bible; but, since you refuse to see anything accept through your doctrine nothing I could say on that point would make any difference. If you were truly interested in learning you would not have asked me for proof from the Bible, but simply asked what passages in the Bible I see as affirming it. This kind of questioning allows for honest discussion and dialogue. Demands for proof only show your unwillingness to except proof, even if given.

    You say “Well Shem, If your going to claim I am doing these things, then back it up.”

    Why? You never back up any of your claims concerning us. So why should I have to back up any claim concerning you?
    However, I will point out a few things, though cutting and pasting is far too time consuming.
    On the thread of Mormonism and Behavior (a few threads back) I stated at least twice that murderers will eventually be redeemed by Christ and thus are not guilty of the unforgivable sin mentioned in Matthew 12. However, at least twice, and most likely more than that, you claimed that I said murder was the unforgivable sin. Thus you ignored direct statements from me and in so doing misrepresented my words.
    Then we can go back to the thread on the Second Annointing we have this post from you:
    January 16, 2013 at 6:21 pm
    Kate said
    While you continue to post your “unofficial” opinion.
    According to Shem he is speaking the truth, but I guess we must assume it is the truth since he feels the need to not provide evidence.
    Because of this false accusation I reposted all the evidence and references I had provided on that very thread, which can be read in the very next post. The evidence I provided totaled close to 1,000 words. Yet you claimed I did not provide any.

    Of course the list could continue, but I think any honest person who went back and read any of our little discussions would likely find evidence of you ignoring my, misrepresenting me, and making false accusations.

    I have no doubt that you will conveniently forget all this very shortly, but it is still true.

    SR

    The problem with this is that it allows the plans and designs of God to be frustrated by men, and by Satan. Again, if He knew it was going to happen, and let it happen, then it has to be part of His plan. If it is not then His plans are not perfect and can be disrupted by others. It still does not fit.
    I agree with you that knowing what will happen and causing it to happen are two different things. However, just because you do not cause it to happen, if you knew it would and did nothing to stop it than it was still part of your plan. It just doesn’t make sense to say that something you knew would happen was not planned for, and nothing quoted answers this point at all.

    It makes far more sense to say that God planned for us to fall, and so he set up the conditions in which such would happen. He did not force Adam to eat the fruit, but he set the conditions that would allow for such to happen. This is the same with everything else. Take Moses and Pharaoh as an example. I think that the ten plagues were part of God’s plan, and so he chose a man who would harden his heart against Moses to be the Pharaoh. He said “I need such and such to happen, and I know this man will act in such a way as to bring it to pass.” And so he placed the man and his intended purpose was fulfilled. It was not fulfilled because he forced Pharaoh to harden his heart; it was fulfilled because set up the condition in which the Pharaoh would harden his heart.
    This does not negate our agency. I do not think that Adam and Eve ate of the fruit for a good long while. I also do not believe that it was done in a moment, but over a time of consideration, in which they formulated the idea and then chose to act on it.
    It is like giving a child the choice between a candy bar and broccoli, while all the time knowing that they will choose the candy bar. You are not forcing them to choose the candy bar, but you are setting up the conditions in which they will act in the way you want them too.

  14. Clyde6070 says:

    Rick
    It is interesting what seems to be happening here. I try to explain a concept with a simple question. You seem to blow it off with an unusual response then ask questions and when I don’t you don’t answer mine. In the end we make assumptions and come away with no understanding of the others ideas.

    You said you sold happiness. If someone dies from it, then how is it happiness?

  15. Rick B says:

    Clyde said

    You said you sold happiness. If someone dies from it, then how is it happiness?

    Well first off, no one has died yet, then the entire label says, Happiness is… Making grown men cry.
    So if you dont understand what your getting when buying it, well then I’m still happy since I am making money and making grown men cry.

  16. Clyde6070 says:

    Rick
    So if you dont understand what your getting when buying it.
    Wow, You really don’t care. Sure does explain a lot.

  17. Rick B says:

    Clyde,
    My dry spices are listed as “Hot”. The name alone, Sorrow, or, Eternal suffering should be a clue.
    Then the ingredients are listed for people to read. So how is it my fault if you dont understand what your buying? People can also ask questions. This sounds a lot like Mormonism, You blindly believe with out looking into things. Then when you understand what you got and realize what you got, then you end up throwing it away and leaving for good.

    Unlike JS and MM who dont state up front all the facts, and avoid answering questions with, milk before meat, I state everything up front and answer questions asked.

  18. Clyde6070 says:

    rick
    If a person is not able to tell the difference between your products then what good are they to him?

  19. Rick B says:

    Clyde,
    Any person that buys spices or sauces knows what they are doing, you never get someone thats honestly says, I have never had a hot spice or hot sauce in my entire life, Know nothing about them and yet I feel like buying one knowing nothing about how hot it is or whats in it, I will blindly buy it, wont ask any questions and just hope for the best. Please Clyde, no one is really that dumb.

    Also I really only cater if you want to call it that to people who know what they are buying. I either have people buy them and give them out as gifts, or are what we call, Chili Heads. The Culture of people who lives to eat fiery hot food. If you really are so ignorant as I described, Then thats still your fault not mine.

  20. Clyde6070 says:

    I am not too sure but is the heat unit for a pepper called a scovil? If it is wouldn’t it be dangerous if a person who could not tell the difference between a sauce with 1000 scovil units and one with 10000 scovil units. Do you label your sauce with scovil units? I once ate a taco casserole made with Watkins inferno sauce. Two inches thick 5X5 square Had to drink 5 sodas just to quench the heat. Is your sauce hotter?

  21. Rick B says:

    Clyde said

    I am not too sure but is the heat unit for a pepper called a scovil? If it is wouldn’t it be dangerous if a person who could not tell the difference between a sauce with 1000 scovil units and one with 10000 scovil units

    They are called Scoville heat units. Here is sample of levels.
    Bell Peppers, Zero units, No heat.

    Pimento, Peperoncini, Banana pepper 100-900 units

    Anaheim pepper, Poblano pepper, 1000-2500 units

    Jalapeño pepper, Chipotle, 3000-8000 units

    Serrano pepper, 10,000-23,000 units

    Cayenne pepper, 30,000-50,000 units

    Habanero chili, Scotch bonnet pepper, 100,000-350,000 units These are my personal favorites

    Red Savina habanero 350,000-580,000 this is also in my Favorites.

    Naga Viper pepper, Bhut Jolokia chili pepper, 855,000-1,463,700

    Most law enforcement grade pepper spray, Trinidad Moruga Scorpion, 1,500,000-2,000,000

    They seem to vary in heat, and they do. This is based upon many factors.

    Most places do not list the units, they just assume you understand what your getting thats why your buying it. Most places state they are “Hot sauces” Some do list the units but that is rare.

    When you go and either buy these extreme sauces or do extreme hot wing challenges you must sign a waiver, You know what your doing. I went to a place here in MN and did a wing challenge, the wings were rated at 4.8 million units. Me and two friends did it, we each at one and that was enough. The hottest thing I ever ate.

    This is just like the issue with the tree, God commanded them not to eat of the tree, he said if you do, you will die. They did not listen, how was/is that Gods fault? I and others sell hot dry spices and sauces, we all state these are hot and are extreme heat. When it comes to heat, we (Chili heads)/I do not play games and we warn people, these are no joke. They can blister your mouth or take your breath away. Go to You tube and type in Ghost pepper, or eating hot peppers and watch some funny videos. But anyway, it is not my fault if you dont know what your getting into since people warn you and I do.

  22. shematwater says:

    Rick

    But since you provide the service then you must expect someone to get into it, and in truth want people to get into it. If you didn’t want people to eat these sauces you wouldn’t provide the service.
    This is also just like the Tree. God provided the opportunity, which indicates that he not only expected it to be used, but in truth wanted it to be. However, just like your sauces, he new how intense it would be and so gave them fair warning.

  23. Rick B says:

    Shem, You not very smart are you?
    If people read my spice labels and say, wow these sound hot, I want some, then they know what they are getting.

    If they dont understand how hot they are, they can ask. But unlike the tree, God commanded then NOT TO EAT OF IT, LEST THEY DIE.

    Funny how with Mormons it is a win win, God said dont do it, but really He wanted us to so we get what we want, yet when it comes to modern day stuff, God says, Dont do it and thats ok, we did not want it anyway.

    Just like in these other topics, Lets lie and say it’s OK to lie and God said we could lie, as long as we get what we want, Like JS getting all these women to sleep with him, he want Sex, and he got it, he was a porn star before the term was invented, and lied to get what he wanted it.

    When does it ever end?

  24. Clyde6070 says:

    The devil did not completely lie when he told Eve that they would not die. The death that came upon them was spiritual death-a separation from God. Mortality came because they could not eat of the tree of life.

  25. shematwater says:

    Rick

    I read it very clearly, and it actually proves my point. God never says that in eating the fruit of that tree they will be condemned. He instead gives a warning that they will die. As you put it, “Do not eat of it, least ye die.”
    So, God understood the consequences of eating the fruit, and thus gave them fair warning. However, he provided the tree in the first place, and thus planned for it to be used.

    Let us put it this way: After you have given fair warning about your sauces, and then a man eats them anyway and leaves, do you ban him from your establishment because he ate it against your warning?

  26. Rick B says:

    Shem, Nothing proved your point, you really want to believe what you want and again reject the truth.

    When God said you will die, He meant both physical and spiritual. And as a result unless they are born again as the Bible says, they will end up being sent to the lake of fire for all of eternity. Also if you read the entire Bible, We are also as I showed before, Enemies of God. These are a few reason why He died for us and also said, Do not eat of the tree.

  27. Rick B says:

    Shem,
    As I already pointed out, God commanded them not to eat of the tree, So if according to LDS He really wanted us to do that, then why do we get punished for something God wanted us to do all along?

    Then the Bible says God cannot lie, and it is Impossible for God to lie. Yet God lied if He really wanted us to eat from the Tree, but claimed we were commanded not to.

    Then the Bible also says,

    Proverbs 6:16 These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:

    Proverbs 6:17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

    Proverbs 6:19 A false witness [that] speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

    God hates these things, yet God lied according to LDS logic, then He also bore false witness by telling us not to do something, but wanting us to do it, then that means He used the serpent to lie and deceive Eve and Discord was sown among us a s a result. Yet you go ahead and tell God that he is a liar and He will say to you, I never knew you, depart from me you worker of Iniquity.

    Hell was not created for us/you or any human, the Bible says so. But according to LDS logic and the fall, it was. It was never Gods plan to tell people, I never knew you, He wants us to have a relationship with Him, thats why we were created. Yet when we fell we became His enemy. Yet you would know all of this if you read your Bible.

    But You will claim you do, but then LDS teach the Bible cannot be trusted, so why read a book you dont trust? And you have the J.S.T. to give the correct verse, yet you never quote from that and LDS dont trust or use that either. So how can I trust you to claim you know what your talking about when you clearly dont trust the Bible and you dont even trust or use the “Correct, Inspired” Version. So much for inspiration.

  28. shematwater says:

    Rick

    You really don’t get it do you?

    God set it up, but he never lied. And God has never punished anyone for the Fall. Again you fail to grasp the truth of the doctrine because you are mingling it with your doctrine rather than trying to understand it as it is.

    You see this life as a punishment when it is truly a great blessing. You see God’s words as a direct command, when they are in truth a warning of the consequences.
    We are all blessed because of the Fall, and that is what God knew had to happen. I do not think he wanted us to suffer, that he wanted all the sin and evil that we are subjected too. However, he knew that if we did not experience it we would be unable to progress to be like him, which is what he wanted. So, he did not want the Fall to happened because of the suffering that it would cause, but in spite of that suffering, because it was the only way for us to progress.

    I have read the entire Bible, and this is the message that I see in all its words. The love of a Father who is willing to have us pass through this mortal life in order that we might become like him.

  29. Rick B says:

    Shem, you cannot support what you claim to believe from the bible. If you think you can then show me from the bible only, not your false prophets claiming this, or the book of fiction you call scripture. You claim you read it in the bible, so use that only to back it up.

  30. grindael says:

    But since you provide the service then you must expect someone to get into it, and in truth want people to get into it. If you didn’t want people to eat these sauces you wouldn’t provide the service.
    This is also just like the Tree. God provided the opportunity, which indicates that he not only expected it to be used, but in truth wanted it to be. However, just like your sauces, he new how intense it would be and so gave them fair warning.

    So it’s only “intense” to be warned that if you eat this, you will die? The real truth is, God told them not to eat of the tree or you will die. And they did. Spiritually. You can spin it any way you want, but this is what the Bible says. Nowhere in the Bible does any prophet or apostle or even Jesus himself affirm that what Adam did was a good thing. They all affirm that what he did was a bad thing. The only one affirming that Adam did a good thing was Jo Smith.

    http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2568/jewish/The-Tree-of-Knowledge.htm

  31. shematwater says:

    Grindael

    Nowhere in the Bible does any prophet or Christ condemn what Adam did either. Quite honestly, the Bible is very silent on this particular point. All it does it give the circumstances, but that is it. It tells the effects of the Fall, but not once does it ever claim that the Fall was a bad thing, or that life would have been better without it. In the Bible the Fall is simply an event that brought about certain consequences.

    Rick

    I know you like to demand a proof from the Bible, but what would be the point. Every verse that I give you would simply tell me that I am interpreting it wrong, and thus once again make your false accusations that I don’t read the Bible.
    This is why I try to stay away from proofs of this kind. It is impossible, and thus a waste of time.

  32. grindael says:

    Quite honestly, the Bible is very silent on this particular point.

    Then stop telling people what God intended, for you sure don’t know, and it’s not what you say it is. And yes, Adam sinned, and was called out on it:

    When Adam sinned, sin entered the entire human race. Adam’s sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned (Romans 5:12 )

    Or is sinning good? (It probably is to Mormons) I can quote more, but I’m tired after debunking Smith’s Civil War “prophecy”.

  33. Rick B says:

    Shem,
    I was also going to Point out Romans But was beaten to it.

    As to the issue of you saying why bother giving evidence since we will ignore it. Well it’s like this, stop claiming the Bible says things, but then say you wont provide evidence. Either provide it and back up what you say, or dont say anything.

    I never say to you, you ignore what I say, or you tell me I am ignorant so why bother. I know you will do that and I simply expect you to act that way, but I dont provide evidence believing you will come to your senses, I believe you are lost and will go to the lake of fire for all of eternity and you dont care. I provide evidence and quotes for all the people that are lurking and really do care and want to know the truth. If this was just us and no one was reading what we right, I would tell you what I think in no uncertain terms and leave. But their are people who dont know Mormonism and I cannot sit here and let you say what ever you want with out countering it with Scripture.

    I will let other decide for themselves. Unlike you, I wont make excuses for not giving evidence even if you ignore it or tell me I am wrong.

  34. Clyde6070 says:

    But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things. This is from the Book of Mormon. It reminds me that God is wiser than we are. To me the original sin is our separation from God.
    To use what seems to be your logic we would not be here. Or else this is a secondary plan of God. If it is then god is not wise and does not Know all things.

    Grindael

    The real truth is, God told them not to eat of the tree or you will die. And they did. Spiritually. I am glad you added Spiritually because satan did not lie to Eve because she did not die physical. Satan did not differentiate. God also said ‘Look man has become like us’. So we would not eat of the tree of life we got kicked out. If we use Rick’s logic we should all be Gods now. Wow some how I think one of us is using bad logic.

  35. grindael says:

    The real truth is, God told them not to eat of the tree or you will die. And they did. Spiritually. I am glad you added Spiritually because satan did not lie to Eve because she did not die physical. Satan did not differentiate. God also said ‘Look man has become like us’. So we would not eat of the tree of life we got kicked out. If we use Rick’s logic we should all be Gods now. Wow some how I think one of us is using bad logic.

    I’m just not following your logic here Clyde (and hello by the way, It’s rare you directly comment to me). Question, if someone told you that you would die if you ate poison, (and this poison was deadly – but slow acting) and you ate it, and you didn’t die right away, would you think that person had lied to you? Would you think that there was another agenda? The fall physically and spiritually killed Adam & Eve. Physically, they were condemned to die once the tree of life was taken from them (Genesis 3:22-24). They did die spiritually, when they sinned against God, they were separated from Him. (Don’t eat, don’t touch). Eve was to bear children, Adam was put over Eve and they had to now work by the sweat of their brow.

    Satan also told Eve that they would be like God (Genesis 1:5). Were they like God? They were afraid of Him. Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you?” So he said, “I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself.” Adam and Eve were not elevated to the position of being deity. They were still part of God’s creation.

    Satan also told the man and woman that they would know good and evil (verse 5). This part is true. Adam and Eve realized they were naked and were ashamed. They were afraid of God for they realized they had done that which was forbidden. However, having an “element” of truth in a statement does not change a lie into the truth. Abraham told Pharaoh that Sarah was his sister (Genesis 12:13). Such was intentionally misleading for God brought a plague upon Pharaoh. Upon learning the true relationship between Abraham and Sarah, Pharaoh said, Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, ‘She is my sister’? I might have taken her as my wife. Now therefore, here is your wife; take her and go your way (Genesis 12:18-19).

    What was the result of Adam and Eve eating of the forbidden fruit? They were punished by God. To argue that Satan told them the truth and they then did what Satan wanted them to do means one must also argue that God punishes those who believe and obey the truth. Such is totally ridiculous. The way that Mormonism gets around this is simply to say that God didn’t really want them to stay in the Garden, and wanted them to break his commandments.

    What did Jesus say about this event in the Garden of Eden? In John 8, Jesus told the Jews they were children of Satan. He said, You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he a liar and the father of it” (John 8:44).

    First of all, Jesus says there is no truth in Satan. The devil may state part of the truth, but he intentionally misleads people. False teachers will often use Bible passages to support their doctrine, but that does not make them right. Calling Satan the father of lies is like saying, Satan was the first liar.

    The Apostle Paul in Romans 5 compares Christ to Adam. Notice some of the things he writes about what Adam did in the Garden. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all man, because all sinned (verse 12). Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam who is a type of Him who was to come (verse 14). Let me make the point again. Satan said they would not die when they ate of the forbidden fruit. But, Paul said death entered the world when Adam sinned against God.

    The results of Satan’s lies in the Garden of Eden and the disobedience of the man and woman remain to this day. When we sin, we die spiritually (Romans 6:23)

    We are all dead spiritually until we take upon ourselves the name of Christ, and are reborn spiritually and allow his grace to rectify us with God. This is all pretty simple to me. No two-steps by God, no hidden agenda, just God giving a commandment and Adam & Eve breaking it and having to pay the price for doing so.

    Smith’s teachings about Adam lead down the wrong path, to such a self aggrandizement of man, that he was put on the same level as God. This led to all kinds of false teachings, like Adam being God himself.

    I often hear Mormons say that hey, this is all simple and we have faith and believe that we will someday be reunited with God and that all of those teachings don’t really matter. But they do. It goes to intent, and again self aggrandizement, like this statement by Smith,

    “But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together. The Holy Ghost does, anyhow, and He is within me, and comprehends more than all the world: and I will associate myself with Him.”

    I find this hard to believe from a man who chose John C. Bennett as a counselor, allowed Doctor Philastus Hurlbut to deceive him (allowing him back in the church after he had been kicked out once), set the redemption of Zion in 1836, tried to translate the Kinderhook plates, and a whole host of other things that would take me too long to recount.

  36. shematwater says:

    Grindael

    “Then stop telling people what God intended, for you sure don’t know, and it’s not what you say it is.”

    I know exactly what God intended. But I do not know from the account given in the Bible, nor can anyone else make this claim. The Bible is insufficient to determine this matter, which is why I am thankful that we have been given additional light and knowledge in these last days, for it clears up these points that men who have no business teaching the things of God have invented to fill in the wholes.

    Romans 5: 12
    KJV “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned”
    Young’s Literal Translation “because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin”

    Funny how neither of these translations say that Adam sinned. I also looked up the Greek text for Romans 5: 12, and then ran it through an online translator and got basically the same thing. Through the actions of Adam sin entered the world, but the actions of Adam are not themselves referred to as a sin.
    After the account of Adam in the first five chapters of Genesis he is only mentioned 4 more times in the Old Testament, and seven times in the New Testament. Once Job speaks of him covering his transgression (Job 31: 33), and once Paul refers to his actions as a transgression (Romans 5: 14). Of course, Paul also says that it was Eve, and not Adam, who was in the transgression (1 Timothy 2: 14). Now, Adam did transgress, but as he was in a state of innocence at the time, it did not constitute willful rebellion, and thus was not a sin.

    Rick

    Psalms 147: 5 “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.”
    Acts 15: 18 “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.”
    Romans 11: 33 “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!”
    Colossians 2: 3 “In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.”

    As I have said before, your doctrine does not square with the idea of an omniscient and omnipotent God. These attributes are taught so perfectly in the Bible, as seen here, that they are not disputable if you are to believe the Bible. If God possesses both these qualities than the Fall must be part of his plan, because otherwise one of the two would be proven false. It is simply a matter of logic.

  37. grindael says:

    Shem: I know exactly what God intended. But I do not know from the account given in the Bible, nor can anyone else make this claim.

    That is non-sequitur. We are speaking of the Bible. You don’t know “exactly” what God intended Shem, you think you do based on the teachings of false prophets.

    Shem: The Bible is insufficient to determine this matter, which is why I am thankful that we have been given additional light and knowledge in these last days, for it clears up these points that men who have no business teaching the things of God have invented to fill in the wholes.

    I reject your rejection of the Bible. It is sufficient to determine this matter, as you will see.

    Additional “light and knowledge”? More like additional speculation and heresy. And I agree, your “prophets” are men who have no business teaching the things of God for they only give additional darkness and ignorance.

    Shem: KJV “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned”

    Young’s Literal Translation “because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin”
    Funny how neither of these translations say that Adam sinned.

    You may have looked it up, but you obviously don’t understand the Greek. Let’s go there shall we? It reads in the Greek,

    ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατεστάθησαν οἱ πολλοί, οὕτως καὶ διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί.

    Take note of the word parakoēs, or παρακοῆς, which means “disobedience”. This means that the “one man” disobeyed God. He broke a direct command. How did he do so? Yes, through his action, of which you said,

    Through the actions of Adam sin entered the world, but the actions of Adam are not themselves referred to as a sin.

    But your conclusion is faulty. You want to credit Adam, but not have him be responsible for his own action, or label it what it was. But the Greek does. The word παρακοῆς shows that you don’t know what you are talking about. And this plays into something else you mentioned (You will see how this is all tied together if you take it in CONTEXT). You said,

    After the account of Adam in the first five chapters of Genesis he is only mentioned 4 more times in the Old Testament, and seven times in the New Testament. Once Job speaks of him covering his transgression (Job 31: 33), and once Paul refers to his actions as a transgression (Romans 5: 14).

    Of course, Paul also says that it was Eve, and not Adam, who was in the transgression (1 Timothy 2: 14). Now, Adam did transgress, but as he was in a state of innocence at the time, it did not constitute willful rebellion, and thus was not a sin.

    Why did Paul say that Eve was “in the transgression”? Because Eve was deceived and transgressed; Adam was not deceived and transgressed. It is very simple.

    Paul saw it by revelation and described it in his letter to the Romans in chapter 5:12-14:

    Διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ δι’ ἐνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον•

    ἄχρι γὰρ νόμου ἁμαρτία ἦν ἐν κόσμῳ, ἁμαρτία δὲ οὐκ ἐλλογᾶται μὴ ὄντος νόμου,

    ἀλλὰ ἐβασίλευσεν ὁ θάνατος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ μέχρι Μωϋσέως καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς μὴ ἁμαρτήσαντας ἐπὶ τῷ ὁμοιώματι τῆς παραβάσεως Ἀδὰμ ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος.

    “Therefore, just as through one man, sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned. – For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam…”

    What is the “likeness of Adam’s transgression.”? We already know what Adam’s trangression was not like; it was not like Eve’s – because she was deceived and he was not. Eve transgressed because she was deceived into doing so, but Adam sinned fully knowing what he was doing.

    That is why Paul wrote this, which underscores the truth in the Greek you need to learn:

    “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made [were constituted] sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made [will be constituted] righteous.”

    The likeness of Adam’s sin is described here as DISOBEDIENCE – παρακοῆς – not as having been deceived.

    The Greek language makes it even more clear by Paul’s use of the word “parakoēs”. (para + akoēs). This word literally means to “hear – aside”. The Greek word for “obedience” (ὑπακοή) is to “hear + under”. (hypa + akoēs) The difference between Adam who “heard aside” and Jesus who “heard under” is this; the first Adam constituted many men sinners by his hearing aside and the last Adam constituted many righteous by His hearing under. (turning aside from God, or being under God).

    Eve was deceived by the serpent and transgressed God’s commandment; Adam was not deceived by the Serpent but chose to IGNORE God’s commandment. He “refused” to hear the commandment, and he did so without being deceived in any way. This word “para + akoēs” (disobedience/hearing aside) is also used in Matthew 18 in this way: “But if he will “NOT HEAR” [parakoēs/hears aside], take with you one or two more….And if he “REFUSES TO HEAR” [parakoēs/hears aside] the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.”

    The action was the same – Eve -”she took some and ate it” – Adam -”and he ate it” but the heart behind the action is altogether different. There are several Greek words used to describe the full grown attitude of “hearing aside” [parakoēs]. One of them is “ungodliness” (ἀσέβειαν) from the Greek word [a (negative) + sebo - to revere or asebeian (literally "to refuse to fall back")]. Refusing to “fall back”, to recognize the authority and sovereignty of God is to become “ungodly/asebia.” This word describes more of the heart attitude of defiance towards submitting onesself to God by falling back, “hearing under” [obeying] His word rather than “hearing aside” [disobeying] it. The other Greek word used to describe parakoēs, “hearing aside”, in its adult stage is “Lawlessness”. (ἀνομίαν) Lawlessness is a description of the relationship with the defiant individual to The Law of God which he so disregards that he defiantly transgresses it without repentance or remorse.

    The Greek shows that you are totally wrong. Totally. Adam was in “willful rebellion”, that is why Adam’s transgression is called an “offense” or “trespass” (παραπτώματι) in Romans 5:17. (paraptōmati) English definition, “an unlawful act committed on the person, property, or rights of another; especially : a wrongful entry on real property”. The thrust of this is WRONGFUL.

    For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) KJV

    For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. NIV

    Transgressions may look the same on the outside, but it is what is on the inside that counts. There is a sin not unto death, and there is a sin unto death. They may not look all that different on the outside, but that’s not where God is looking is it?

    “The word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

    The difference between Adam’s and Eve’s transgression can be seen in several other places as well.

    “If we sin willfully after having received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no sacrifice, but a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the adversaries.” (Hebrews 10:26)

    In the same book of Hebrews we also read

    “For if the message spoken by angels proved steadfast and every transgression AND DISOBEDIENCE [parakoēs] received a just reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?”

    Adam knowingly sinned. He turned aside from the commandment of God. He was not innocent, and it was his sin (transgression), that brought sin into the world, not being deceived by Satan, but guilty nevertheless of offending God. (thanks to makrothumia for the logic of this argument)

  38. shematwater says:

    Grindeal

    There is one major problem with your whole idea. In 2 Timothy Paul never once says that Adam transgressed the Law. He is, in fact, putting all the blame on Eve. Yes we need it in context. And the context of this statement by Paul is that women are not to have authority over man because it was Eve’s actions that instigated the Fall, and not Adam’s. The man was formed first, and it was the woman who transgressed the law; for these reasons women are not to have authority over man, but are still saved if they obey the laws of God.
    This fits perfectly with the Genesis account in which God tells Eve that because of her actions she would be under the authority of her husband. (Genesis 3: 16)

    The reasoning of Paul is directly contrary to what you are claiming. If Adam had truly committed the greater offense than God would not have made him the ruler over Eve, and Paul would not be using their actions to explain why women do not hold authority in the church.

    I am no Greek scholar. I do not have an intimate knowledge of that language. However, just going off your explanation of the various words I have seen nothing to contradict this reasoning of Paul’s, and thus nothing to contradict anything I have said. You may have a literal translation of words, but your interpretation of them makes no sense.

  39. grindael says:

    There is one major problem with your whole idea. In 2 Timothy Paul never once says that Adam transgressed the Law. He is, in fact, putting all the blame on Eve. Yes we need it in context.

    Yes he did. In verse 17. TRESPASS is an UNLAWFUL ACT. It’s also in the original Greek in other verses which you obviously don’t (or more likely won’t) understand. Did you even read my posts? Why don’t you take a course in Greek and get back to me. Or rather, don’t, because you won’t understand it, because the process of logic and evidence escapes people like you. I said noting about Adam’s authority over Eve, and that has nothing to do with what Paul was saying. Eve was deceived, Adam was not, but willingly chose to break a commandment and therefore transgressed one of God’s laws to him. It’s all very simple to those that don’t live in a Mormon bubble.

  40. grindael says:

    I am no Greek scholar. I do not have an intimate knowledge of that language. However, just going off your explanation of the various words I have seen nothing to contradict this reasoning of Paul’s, and thus nothing to contradict anything I have said. You may have a literal translation of words, but your interpretation of them makes no sense.

    Because you don’t want them to. Everything Paul says contradicts what you said. Everything. You are wrong, and you can’t and won’t comprehend the evidence that shows that your are.

  41. shematwater says:

    Grindael

    There is no verse 17 in 1 Timothy 2, which is what I was talking about. In this Paul never says that Adam transgressed.

    “I said noting about Adam’s authority over Eve, and that has nothing to do with what Paul was saying.”

    It has everything to do with what Paul was saying. Paul, in 1 Timothy 2 declares that women are to be subject to men. As he puts it:
    “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
    But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
    For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
    And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”

    What do you think Paul is talking? No, he does not directly mention that God placed Eve under Adam, but he does declare that because of the actions of Eve women as to be subject to men, or not to hold authority over them. This is a direct reference to what God declared at the time of the Fall.

    However, the main point is that your claim that Adam’s actions were worse than Eve’s makes no sense given the fact that Eve was made subject to Adam, and because of Eve’s actions women are not to hold authority in the church. You cannot escape that. Adam, who was more wicked, was made a ruler over Eve, who was less wicked? It makes no sense.

  42. grindael says:

    Shem,

    Paul said Adam transgressed the law as explained in Verse 17 of Romans 5. Take note of the word parakoēs, or παρακοῆς, which means “disobedience”. It’s right there. (Unless you are going to deny this part of the Bible.)

    As for 1 Timothy, yes I already stated earlier in the conversation that Adam had authority over Eve. He was formed FIRST. If Adam’s sin was no big deal than why does Paul state that because of the transgression of one MAN, sin entered the world? Because Adam knowingly sinned against God. He was not deceived as Eve was by Satan. Because Eve was deceived, she was put under Adam’s authority. Where did I once say that Eve’s sin was WORSE than Adam’s? I didn’t, you put those words in my mouth. I said that their sins were DIFFERENT. Eve allowed herself to be deceived by Satan, Adam knowingly rebelled against God, perhaps because he knew that Eve would die and did not want her to die alone, who knows? The Greek says that he TRANSGRESSED. You are totally wrong to say that he did not. Paul is not putting ALL the blame on Eve, he is describing her sin in 1 Timothy:

    For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

    It only says that Adam was not deceived, it does not say he didn’t transgress, which it does say he did in Romans. It does not say that Adam was blameless or that Eve was the ONLY ONE who sinned. Adam was formed FIRST. He was FIRST. Eve SINNED FIRST. Adam was just not deceived by Satan, but when he CHOSE to touch and eat the fruit, he WILLFULLY REBELLED against God. It also says that Eve will be saved by her seed, because thorough her seed, Jesus was born. It’s right there in front of you. You are reading into it what is not there.

  43. Clyde6070 says:

    Grindael
    Well should Adam have said to Eve good bye nice knowing you hope the next rib doesn’t hurt as much as the first one did.

  44. grindael says:

    Clyde,

    That was my whole point. I know that I would have wanted to be with my wife. Didn’t you read my comment where I addressed that? And how do you know that it hurt him to have his rib taken out? Wasn’t Adam asleep at the time? I have more faith in God than that.

  45. shematwater says:

    Grindael

    “Where did I once say that Eve’s sin was WORSE than Adam’s?”

    I never said that you did, so please stop putting words into my mouth. This is what I said:
    “If Adam had truly committed the greater offense than God would not have made him the ruler over Eve”
    Thus I never once claimed that you said Eve’s actions were worse, but that Adam’s were worse, which makes no sense. Now, if this was not your intention I apologize. It is just that knowing and willful actions have always seemed to be of a greater nature than those made out of false understanding. Thus when you tell me that Adam was not deceived but willfully rebelled I naturally conclude that Adam’s actions were worse than Eve’s, unless there is some explanation as to why this is not the case. You did not provide such an explanation.

    Now, I am in agreement that Adam was not deceived, and I also would agree that his actions were motivated in part by a desire to stay with Eve. However, none of this changes the fact that it was Eve’s actions that instigated the Fall, and thus that event is credited to her. This does not absolve Adam of all responsibility, but it does place a greater responsibility for the event on Eve, thus placing everything into proper perspective.

    Also, I never once indicated that the actions of Adam were no big deal. They were a huge deal. They brought about spiritual death, or separation from God. They brought about physical death, or the separation of body and spirit. They also brought the knowledge of Good and Evil to all men, thus creating a moral agency by which we are able to act and decide our own actions. Lastly they brought about physical birth, allowing us all to be born into this world and receive physical bodies. The action of Adam and Eve was a huge deal. So huge that I cannot believe an all knowing God did not plan for it to happen.

Leave a Reply