Was Sin Inevitable? (page 3)

waton

Was sin inevitable? Also, I had thought about past Watchtower article --

P: No, how about today's wt study article? Par 11, what should Eve have said to the snake? --not the wt response-- but: Just hold it a moment, let me get my husband

It was not that Eve "did not love God" as wt asserts, but

"she was deceived" and Adam too did not worry about the big J, universal sovereignty, but was blinded by that expanse of the perfect skin / shape, -- and in jeopardy of withering and dying away from him .

Parker

quote by Anders Andersen

I always wonder how an act of disobedience and the resulting disturbed relationship between individuals (Adam/Eve vs JHWH) resulted into physical defects.
Were Adam and Eve not really perfect by themselves, but merely kept alive and healthy by God while they obeyed him?
Or were they perfect and healthy all by themselves, and God purposely put defects into them after they disobeyed?
And how is sin inheritable through DNA?
What are the mechanisms for this?
So many questions, so few reasonable answers....

Those are really good questions. You should start a thread on that.

Parker

quote by dothemath

Imagine if Adam + Eve hadn’t sinned, the whole world would be full of perfect people living in paradise. (This is what witnesses hear on a weekly basis)
what are the odds out of millions of people, that someone eventually eats the fruit? It would be inevitable. So now you’ve got perfect people alongside imperfect?
In all watchtower books talking about the original sin, they never mention any other possibilities.

Excellent point, dothemath, because there would have never been a "touchstone" for anyone to see the results of choosing moral independence from Jehovah.

Once this issue had been settled beyond any doubt, the vindication of Jehovah’s sovereignty would thereby stand proved for all eternity. This would be a touchstone against which any future challenge could immediately be tested and turned back.

Almost 6,000 Years of Witnessing for Jehovah

Parker

quote by Nitty-Gritty

With Eve, it is actually LOVE that would have made her choose the right thing, not "perfection". It is love, or lack of, that would make her decide what choice she made. Obviously perfect humans were made with that flexibility; to love or not to love.

Hmmm. But why would Eve lack love for God? But it's like the Watchtower quote that I made in my original post:

Was Eve’s sin inevitable? By no means! Put yourself in her place. The serpent’s claim completely distorted what God and Adam had said. How would you feel if a stranger charged someone you love and trust with dishonesty? Eve should have reacted differently. . .

Therefore, if the Watchtower could ask this question to its imperfect audience and we all know what the answer would be, why wouldn't the answer to that question apply more so to perfect beings? And yes, Eve should have react differently, therefore, this whole story and concept is flawed.

Parker

quote by wanton

P: No, how about today's wt study article? Par 11, what should Eve have said to the snake? --not the wt response-- but: Just hold it a moment, let me get my husband
It was not that Eve "did not love God" as wt asserts, but

Well, I don't know if that's new light, but all of that goes against the principle of love stated in the Bible:

4 Love+ is patient+ and kind.+ Love is not jealous.+ It does not brag, does not get puffed up,+ 5 does not behave indecently,+ does not look for its own interests,+ does not become provoked.+ It does not keep account of the injury.+6 It does not rejoice over unrighteousness,+ but rejoices with the truth. 7 It bears all things,+ believes all things,+ hopes all things,+ endures all things.+

1 Corinthians 13:4-7
Therefore, if Adam and Eve had love for Jehovah, then they never would have sinned against him. Because after all, how did Jesus remain obedient to Jehovah and endure each and every trial and tribulation? Therefore, the whole concept of Adam and Eve, along with the Watchtower's explanation for it is flawed.

Mr.Finkelstein

Human ignorance is not an accepted sin which the ancients had to endure to explain the world in which they lived, which is how the mythological story of Adam and Eve came about.

Carmichael

Inevitable?

The narrative is not considered history by Jews but a lesson. Unlike Jehovah's Witnesses that place the story in history and therefore raise a plethora of questions such as you raised, the story's original intention was to teach something about the Mosaic Law necessary for humans.

Remember this is the story of creation but within the Torah, the Law of Moses. Nothing in the Torah, from Genesis to Deuteronomy, is free from a legalistic meaning--at least the way Jews say they wrote it (and after all, the Jews wrote it).

Though there are a myriad of things that can be learned from this section of the Law (known as "Bereshit" after the first word of this section), the basic lesson is simple:

waton

if Adam and Eve had love for Jehovah, then they never would have sinned against him. Because after all, how did Jesus remain obedient

P: This was not a question of love, but of seduction, how to detect deception sprang upon

2 very young and inexperienced humans.

Eve should screamed, and have called Adam right away. (the 2 witness rule demands it anyway) A loving father would never have his young kids to be duped like that.

Compare Adam to Jesus: The first Adam was a newly fashioned, innocent, uneducated immature youngster.

Jesus: after his baptism, a spirit directed being, with at least 14 billion years of creative, moral experience with the best tutoring available.

what do you expect?

P.S. if the defence of your position depends of that kind of fire power, it must be on shaky grounds.

Parker

quote by Carmichael

The narrative is not considered history by Jews but a lesson. Unlike Jehovah's Witnesses that place the story in history and therefore raise a plethora of questions such as you raised, the story's original intention was to teach something about the Mosaic Law necessary for humans.

Interesting point, Carmichael. But it makes you wonder why Jesus seemed to refer to the Adam and Eve story as history, along with the Apostle Paul in some of his writings and who were both Jews. Also, you bring up a good point about how the Torah is not free from legalistic meaning, but I had been wondering about the notion of the legalistic aspect of Jesus' sacrifice with the whole concept of the first man Adam and the last Adam... even though among Christians it is viewed as grace. Although, that's a topic for another discussion.

Also, Carmichael, did you leave something out at the end of your post?

Parker

quote by waton

P: This was not a question of love, but of seduction, how to detect deception sprang upon

I don't understand what you are saying... That doesn't make sense.

Compare Adam to Jesus: The first Adam was a newly fashioned, innocent, uneducated immature youngster.

Jesus: after his baptism, a spirit directed being, with at least 14 billion years of creative, moral experience with the best tutoring available.

Now those are excellent points.

Was Sin Inevitable?

Share this