by booby 102 Replies latest watchtower bible
Perhaps it's because you hit the nail on the head, dear DD (peace to you!). Why, really, would a man who all ready has a wife... and one he truly loves (so as to give his life for her... unlike Adham, who was willing to give the life of his wife, Eve, to save his own)... need another? My Lord saw his marriage afar off... and kept himself chaste for that Bride. GREAT answer, dear one!
Peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
SA
i certainly did not mean over my head in a bad way, as in, I didn't like what happened to the thread. The origin of the thread was the THE WATCHTOWER ? JANUARY 1, 2011 11 and was the first paragraph. The second paragraph was my simple musings on the statement contained in the watchtower. To say that Jesus succeeded where adam failed we must state how adam failed and how jesus then succeeded.
The point about "That's why the Church is called the "Bride" of Christ." might well be a bible truth but how is this related to what jesus achieved that adam did not. Can you say that jesus was thusly faced with a similar dilemma as adam. Part of the reason for saying it is over my head is the complexity that develops if we do not address the original question. For me it was a 'what say' moment when I read the statement from the watchtower and did it really make any sense. And even after all the good points and rhetoric in the thread I don't think it does. It is simply too narrow.
Same as the thought as were adam and eve perfect. What say you Aguest.
Well, Jesus was "the last Adam"; he succeeded where Adam had failed.
Wouldn't Jesus of had to have had a wife to lose by his choosing obedience to truly succeed where adam had failed? Was it not ultimately the decision adam had to make; remain faithful and lose his soul mate, the love of his life (I would assume), or transgress to keep her and stand by her. And standing by her was a mandate of the marital vows, no?
I hate to supply the doctrinal Christian answer, but to get past this point, I will.
The Christians will say that Jesus was faithful to his "bride" class and to God, but stood by his vows to "her" by not throwing her sinful ass under the bus, but offered his life in exchange for hers.
Still all kinds of problems with that answer that take all kinds of additional doctrine, but the Christians will say "No other problems with that."
Hi Mad Dawg,
No, I did not mean that Adam and Jesus had the same mission. Just that both men were perfect and Adam had an easy life in Eden but did not stay faithful to Jehovah (or loyal to him) where as Jesus had the exact opposite type of situation to live through and did remain loyal and faithful to Jehovah.
Did Jesus "clean up Adam's mess?' I don't know. If what wt teaches ever becomes real then yes!
Was it fair of Jehovah to put such a severe penalty on Adam? I don't think so.
It certainly was not fair to punish his offspring- all of us, with suffering, sin and death because those two chose to disobey and eat some fruit.
Adam knew that if he ate that fruit he would die. Did'nt he realize that if he did so all of his offspring would die too? Is it that he just did'nt care or he was not thinking that far ahead? Also, after living for so long in paradise was he just so willing to give up his life for the freedom to eat the fruit that was forbidden?
What say you Aguest.
Oh! This is directed specifically to me, dear booby (the greatest of love and peace to you!)? Well, okay, then... I will share what my Lord has given me on the matter, ifyou will permit me. Thank you!
how is this related to what jesus achieved that adam did not.
The response I hear from my Lord is that the question is invalid... as some have already responded. Because Adam did not have to make the "decision" the WTBTS presumpptuously teaches - that Adam's choices were to "remain faithful and lose his soul mate, the love of his life... or transgress to keep her and stand by her". Those were not the issues requiring a decision but only what has been made up/adopted by the WTBTS and others.
The word of my Lord is that the issue was whether Adam WOULD indeed give all that he had... including his wife... and his progeny... in behalf of HIS sorry, puny life. His answer should have been "No, I would never do that!" of course. And he could have evidenced this by doing the exact opposite of that accusation: giving HIS life... for hers (and theirs)... even though SHE had sinned/disobeyed. Did he love her... enough... to offer HIS life to "cover" hers? Apparently, not. Adam did not "achieve" the law of love... which means showing GREATER love. Rather than give HIS life on behalf of the one who was supposed to be not only his friend, but his own flesh... Adam chose to give HER up as the cause of his choice. Even though he KNEW the Most Holy One of Israel could... and WOULD... have brought him back to life. He gave Adam life to begin with - He knew good AND bad. Death had no hold on Him... and by means of Him would have had NO hold on Adam, either.
Christ, however, absolutely DID achieve what Adam did not: he FULFILLED the Law... of love. He gave his life... on behalf of his "friends"... those who were 'promised' to him in marriage. By means of his sacrifice... these, his Bride, will not only have their error atoned for and thus removed, but will be restored BACK to the life Adam lost... for himself and HIS wife, Eve.
Adam could stopped ALL of this, starting with atoning for the error of his wife... who did NOT sin purposefully, but was tricked into doing so (and so, I wouldn't entirely write Eve off, for those who have. Nor Adam, really, but certainly not Eve... as she did not sin willfully). He didn't stop it... because of the "bargain" that he made for his OWN skin.
Can you say that jesus was thusly faced with a similar dilemma as adam.
The word of my Lord is that we absolutely can because they were exactly the same and if ones would come to him and buy "eyesalve" from him... instead of blindly following... and so speculating as to... the false teachings of men, they would "see" this truth... clearly and plainly.
Same as the thought as were adam and eve perfect.
The word of my Lord to me is "What is 'perfection', child? It is not simply being without sin... and death... IN one?"
Adam and Eve were without sin. There was no sin or death IN them. There was sin... and death, yes... but not in THIS world. Because sin and death had not yet ENTERED into this world. They entered... through Adam.
I hope this helps, dear booby, and again, peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
SA
I don't know if the Bible always gives us the complete details of every encounter it relates, such as what all God told Adam.
That said, I have strong feelings about what is just and what is unjust, and I have had many occasions in my life in which I have questioned the justice and/or wisdom of God.
However, as the ending of the book of Job highlights, there are so many things that I don't understand about the physical universe around me, it's quite possible that my understanding of all the variables that affect cosmic moral judgments may likewise be deficient.
did jesus really succeed where adam failed?
I'm looking around the World Right Now....................
NO!
Jesus reminds me of a Politician..... Promising everything and Giving Nothing.
But alway asking please be Patient Change doesn't happen overnight or 2000 yrs or..... Longer.
4 MORE YEARS 4 MORE YEARS
I bring up here a few points and quotes. The quotes are from the 1901 ASV because it uses the old English thou (singular) and ye (plural). The NWT distinguishes between the singular and plural pronouns as well. There are Christians who feel that Adam and Eve were inexperienced and more like children than adults. I don't see where in the text that thought is supported. God treated Adam as an adult. He gave him adult tasks and requirements and dealt with Adam's failures as an adult would be dealt with not a child. To believe that Adam did not understand death is to make God a monster, for telling Adam death would be a consequence of disobedience yet knowing that Adam did not understand what death was is monstrous. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Adam and Eve were not able to understand exactly what was expected of them, and the consequences of failing to do as God had instructed them.
I believe that scripture was written, as written, for a purpose. If something is not stated there is a purposeful reason for it (in other words, it was not an accidental omission or something overlooked) and what is included also has a purpose as well. I understand that those who do not believe in the Bible as anything more than fairytales etc would not agree with my premise and that's fine. We are all free to believe as our hearts and minds impel us to.
An excellent point was brought up that God gave the instructions on the Tree of Knowledge only to Adam, Eve was not present having not been as yet created.
"And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou (singular "you") mayest freely eat: but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
This command was given directly to Adam alone, the thou was Adam. Eve was not present to hear the command. This is not reading something into the text, it is directly evident. After Adam and Eve eat the fruit (btw the NWT makes it seem that Adam was not with Eve when the serpent was speaking but other translations do not agree) God says to Adam (note the pronoun):
"And Jehovah God called unto the man, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?"
Here God is again addressing the man only even though, unlike when the command was first given, Eve was at this time present when God spoke to Adam. (It should be noted that when Eve repeated the command not only was an addition made, do not touch, but also the singular pronoun was changed to a plural one, she, though not present when it was given, was included under the command)
And so she was included, the result of disobeying God was an increase of pain in childbirth and the fact that her fallen husband would rule over her whether by her permission or not, it seems, depending on the translation. But unlike Adam, Eve's punishment for disobeying did not mention death. Only Adam was given a direct sentence of death. Only Adam had direct communication with God in the garden and only Adam heard the voice of God directly giving him the command. Was that the reason Eve was not given a direct punishment of death? we must all decide for ourselves.
It was to Adam alone that God said, "...in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
It is interesting that while Adam was, according to Genesis 2, made from the dust of the ground Eve was not. She was made from Adam's side therefore when God pronounced this sentence on Adam, God was going back to the beginning of Adam's creation and the direct command he gave to the man alone, Adam. From dust he came and to dust he will return. Eve did indeed die but God did not say to her that in dying she will die nor did he even mention death in connection with Eve. She was deceived, Adam was not. The deceived of mankind do not deserve eternal death, only those who willfully and knowingly disobey God's commands. And what are God's commands today? I'll let Jesus' words speak for themselves:
"Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, and fed thee? or athirst, and gave thee drink? And when saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? And when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me."
