One of the Best Explanations I've seen on Satan's sin.

[marks]

I am guessing that is what you are doing. The scriptures identify who the prophets are talking about.....evil yes....Satan no. There are times I have described people as Satan, but that does not mean they are actually Satan.



LOL pascha nor pescha are Greek words. You might as well quit while you are not to far behind. Now if you want to discuss it, go look it up and come back with the facts.

It's like when Jesus said to Peter, Get thee behind me Satan, if you translate instead of transliterate, He was really saying, get thee behind me, adversary! Though saying it that way, would certainly be with a sting! But this doesn't mean Jesus was calling Peter the Devil, or "speaking to the Devil inside Peter", I've heard both those teachings.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Have you ever entertained the idea of what our lives would have been like if Adam and his wife had rejected the devil’s temptations like Jesus did?

Yes I have.

Do you consider that Adam in his original creation was a "stable" being? One that could remain unchanged, or only improving? I don't think so myself. I think that only One is intrinsically good, that being God Himself. And that while God is unchanging, the same can't be said for man, or anyone else.

Do you think it possible that Man could have resisted the temptation to sin indefinitely?

Much love!

 

[Grailhunter]

@Pythagorean12
[/QUOTE]Easter has nothing to do with Christ.
Easter is actually a redressing of the pagan spring equinox and the celebration of the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre.[/QUOTE]

Well we are digging. And we are headed in the right direction.
The Council of Nicea set the date for Easter in 325 AD.

Anglo-Saxon England or Early Medieval England, existing from the 5th to the 11th century.
The goddess Eostre is the origins of Easter?....No. What is wrong with this picture?
It is the origin of the word Easter. Germanic spring fertility goddess. This is where the egg and the rabbit comes from.

Emperor Constantine wanted to consolidate Pagan holidays with Christian holidays, so that commerce and government would not be disrupted all the time....so many of the Christian holidays of today coincide with Pagan holidays. But in this case, that had nothing to do with the dating of the day that Christ resurrected. How many ways do things get confused?

The Council of Nicea was tasked with setting the date to celebrate Christ's resurrection....nearly a no brainer.
So any explanation that connects the word Easter to Passover is incorrect. The ecumenical councils were not concerned with Passover or its dating....other than the final determination that Christ's resurrection occurred on the Sunday after the Passover.. Today Easter is always celebrated the Sunday after the Passover, but Passover can occur on any day of the week, because it is based on the full moon. And Easter occurs on different dates because it is pushed to Sunday.

So if you were on the Ecumenical Council, lets say a Bishop.....how would you refer to it....Christ's resurrection. The day that Christ resurrected? Here is the secret....it is not a word. The Jews had festivals and the Greco-Romans had festivals....that is how they worded things. We know of no Jewish Christians on the Council, they were Gentiles and they came form the Greco-Roman culture. But still ya gotta say what ya don't know....we had no microphones at the Council of Nicea. We can only say that they probably referred to it as the Festival of Christ's Resurrection. It could not be called Easter because that word did not exist yet.

Now because of the lunar calculation for Passover and the Sunday following that falls around the time of the spring festivals.... which the patron goddess of that Greco-Roman festival was Floria.... I bet that you have not heard that name associated with Easter! LOL But that is the festival that everyone trips out over. The Greco-Romans did not have a Germanic goddess in their mythology......bingo! Did the lightbulb turn on!

Around April 20th - 28th....or more accurately the Vernier Equinox, was the dates of the Floralia, a festival dedicated to the goddess Flora, the ancient Roman goddess of flowers and fertility. Flora was associated with Spring, the season of new life and color, and her feast days were celebrated as a lavish festival dedicated to honoring and celebrating the spring season.

All this concern over Easter being a Pagan holiday is something about nothing. It happened that Christ resurrected during the time of the spring festival. The word Easter just added to the confusion. So now you know.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Are you certain you understand and know the emotional lives of angels? I wouldn't think that really knowable, myself. But that's just me, perhaps you have some special insight into that.

I know that there is joy in heaven....do you think that is the only emotion that the angels feel? Are they not made in God’s image too? Angels are intensely interested in what their God is doing in the material realm....(1 Peter 1:10-12)

Have you ever notices that there are no mentions in the Bible of angels "singing"?

What about Revelation 14:1-5?
“Then I saw, and look! the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who have his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads. 2 I heard a sound coming out of heaven like the sound of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder; and the sound that I heard was like singers who accompany themselves by playing on their harps. 3 And they are singing what seems to be a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders, and no one was able to master that song except the 144,000, who have been bought from the earth. . . . These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb, 5 and no deceit was found in their mouths; they are without blemish.”

It looks to me like angels praise God in song just like we do...........so there is singing in heaven before God’s throne.....why wouldn't there be? Its a joyous thing to do...

 

[Aunty Jane]

Do you consider that Adam in his original creation was a "stable" being? One that could remain unchanged, or only improving? I don't think so myself. I think that only One is intrinsically good, that being God Himself. And that while God is unchanging, the same can't be said for man, or anyone else.

It is an interesting question to explore, isn't it?
Since humans are created in God's image, there was no defects in them. They were created sinless. Free will was the problem, and God put his own safeguards on that by having a penalty in place to act as a deterrent. Free will was meant to be a blessing that allowed free choice in so many ways, but it turned into a curse when the free will of one, overrode the free will of others. Add lies to the equation and satan deceived the woman, who in turn forced the man to divide his loyalties.
He chose to side with her, and this in turn affected their children (Romans 5:12)......and the devil had his worshippers, separated from God, just as he schemed. What wise course of action did God then take?

God gave Adam knowledge of many things but the one thing he would keep from the humans was a "knowledge of good and evil". The devil claimed that humans had a right to that knowledge, and so once it was unleashed by their disobedience (it was their choice) there was no sending it back.....they got to experience first hand why God wanted to keep that knowledge in his own jurisdiction. There is nothing like a first hand object lesson to get a message across.

It wasn't that the humans would not know "good", but that all 'opposites' have equals, and God never wanted to shield them from those logical equals in nature. Only this one thing had extremes that would bring harm to his human family. The greater the good, the worse was its equal opposite. Had the devil not succumbed to his own selfish interest....and had the humans just left that knowledge to God, we would never have been plunged into this mess. What a different life we would all be living...no ageing, no sickness, no pain or suffering...and NO DEATH. Living forever in paradise.....who could want for more?

So being without a sin nature, the first humans could have chosen to obey God...but like the devil, they chose not to, because the devil removed the penalty, telling the woman that she would 'not die'. But the moment that they disobeyed God's command, they unplugged from their life source and God barred the way to that source that he provided in the garden. They would die a little every day from that day forward.

Do you think it possible that Man could have resisted the temptation to sin indefinitely?

You have to look at Jesus for an example of that.....as a human he was as vulnerable to the use of his free will as any other human, but without sin. Why do you think the devil tempted him? He knew that he was the son of God who had a hand in creating him.

If the devil could tempt Jesus into disobeying God (as he had done with the first humans) that would have undone all of God's hard work in getting him to this point as Messiah. The salvation of the human race would have been thwarted....but Jesus answered every temptation with "It is written" using God's words to answer every temptation. If Jesus could do that, then so could Adam and his wife.

If there is no sin in your flesh, and everyone around you is doing good, there is little to no temptation to step outside of your assigned place in God's arrangement. The temptation comes from within. (James 1:13-15)

In the new world to come, under the rule of God's kingdom, any who then give way to temptation, will have no basis upon which to keep enjoying the gift of life.....they will not stay around long enough to become an influence on others. Isn't it true that we are influenced for good or evil by the company we keep?

 

[marks]

I know that there is joy in heaven....do you think that is the only emotion that the angels feel? Are they not made in God’s image too? Angels are intensely interested in what their God is doing in the material realm....(1 Peter 1:10-12)

What about Revelation 14:1-5?
“Then I saw, and look! the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who have his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads. 2 I heard a sound coming out of heaven like the sound of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder; and the sound that I heard was like singers who accompany themselves by playing on their harps. 3 And they are singing what seems to be a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders, and no one was able to master that song except the 144,000, who have been bought from the earth. . . . These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb, 5 and no deceit was found in their mouths; they are without blemish.”

It looks to me like angels praise God in song just like we do...........so there is singing in heaven before God’s throne.....why wouldn't there be? Its a joyous thing to do...

Where does it say angels singing there? Perhaps a more careful reading . . .

Everything little thing in Scripture matters.

If angels are never - never - said to sing in the Bible, what does that mean to us? Why should we care?

Zephaniah 3, God sings. And man sings. This is something we share with God, that angels are not said to share.

And who are the morning stars, singing as the foundations of the earth were laid?

And who were the kodesh who witnessed God giving the Law?

Much love!

 

[marks]

They were created sinless. Free will was the problem, and God put his own safeguards on that by having a penalty in place to act as a deterrent.

Are you sure that God intended His words to be a deterrant? We think of things that way, because we already think in terms of the knowledge of good and evil. Have you noticed how this knowledge infects our minds? So that we think of life in those terms?

Was this a "penalty to act as a deterrent", like in our form of jurisprudence, or was it an instruction, including the command to be kept, and the consequence of not keeping it? I suggest that an innocent mind doesn't think the same as the guilty mind, or the mind who already has the knowledge of good and evil.

Much love!

 

[marks]

So being without a sin nature, the first humans could have chosen to obey God...but like the devil, they chose not to, because the devil removed the penalty, telling the woman that she would 'not die'.

I'd say again that that this thinking points to one already having knowledge of good and evil.

Look at when she ate. When she saw that it was good for food, and pleasing to the eye, and desirable to make one wise.

Penalty is the spanking when he comes back from crossing the street by himself. Consequence is the car that hits him while he's doing it. Don't cross, car may hit you, compared to, don't cross, or you're gonna get it! The second only has meaning in context of someone who is already aware of right and wrong, which carries punishment and reward.

"Don't do that, you'll die, and I want you alive."

Much love!

 

[Pythagorean12]

@Pythagorean12

Easter has nothing to do with Christ.
Easter is actually a redressing of the pagan spring equinox and the celebration of the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre.[/QUOTE]

Well we are digging. And we are headed in the right direction.
The Council of Nicea set the date for Easter in 325 AD.

Anglo-Saxon England or Early Medieval England, existing from the 5th to the 11th century.
The goddess Eostre is the origins of Easter?....No. What is wrong with this picture?
It is the origin of the word Easter. Germanic spring fertility goddess. This is where the egg and the rabbit comes from.

Emperor Constantine wanted to consolidate Pagan holidays with Christian holidays, so that commerce and government would not be disrupted all the time....so many of the Christian holidays of today coincide with Pagan holidays. But in this case, that had nothing to do with the dating of the day that Christ resurrected. How many ways do things get confused?

The Council of Nicea was tasked with setting the date to celebrate Christ's resurrection....nearly a no brainer.
So any explanation that connects the word Easter to Passover is incorrect. The ecumenical councils were not concerned with Passover or its dating....other than the final determination that Christ's resurrection occurred on the Sunday after the Passover.. Today Easter is always celebrated the Sunday after the Passover, but Passover can occur on any day of the week, because it is based on the full moon. And Easter occurs on different dates because it is pushed to Sunday.

So if you were on the Ecumenical Council, lets say a Bishop.....how would you refer to it....Christ's resurrection. The day that Christ resurrected? Here is the secret....it is not a word. The Jews had festivals and the Greco-Romans had festivals....that is how they worded things. We know of no Jewish Christians on the Council, they were Gentiles and they came form the Greco-Roman culture. But still ya gotta say what ya don't know....we had no microphones at the Council of Nicea. We can only say that they probably referred to it as the Festival of Christ's Resurrection. It could not be called Easter because that word did not exist yet.

Now because of the lunar calculation for Passover and the Sunday following that falls around the time of the spring festivals.... which the patron goddess of that Greco-Roman festival was Floria.... I bet that you have not heard that name associated with Easter! LOL But that is the festival that everyone trips out over. The Greco-Romans did not have a Germanic goddess in their mythology......bingo! Did the lightbulb turn on!

Around April 20th - 28th....or more accurately the Vernier Equinox, was the dates of the Floralia, a festival dedicated to the goddess Flora, the ancient Roman goddess of flowers and fertility. Flora was associated with Spring, the season of new life and color, and her feast days were celebrated as a lavish festival dedicated to honoring and celebrating the spring season.

All this concern over Easter being a Pagan holiday is something about nothing. It happened that Christ resurrected during the time of the spring festival. The word Easter just added to the confusion. So now you know.[/QUOTE] Yes, I read that blog as well.
Jesus was crucified after the spring equinox and resurrected three days later.

@Pythagorean12

Easter has nothing to do with Christ.
Easter is actually a redressing of the pagan spring equinox and the celebration of the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre.[/QUOTE]

Well we are digging. And we are headed in the right direction.
The Council of Nicea set the date for Easter in 325 AD.

Anglo-Saxon England or Early Medieval England, existing from the 5th to the 11th century.
The goddess Eostre is the origins of Easter?....No. What is wrong with this picture?
It is the origin of the word Easter. Germanic spring fertility goddess. This is where the egg and the rabbit comes from.

Emperor Constantine wanted to consolidate Pagan holidays with Christian holidays, so that commerce and government would not be disrupted all the time....so many of the Christian holidays of today coincide with Pagan holidays. But in this case, that had nothing to do with the dating of the day that Christ resurrected. How many ways do things get confused?

The Council of Nicea was tasked with setting the date to celebrate Christ's resurrection....nearly a no brainer.
So any explanation that connects the word Easter to Passover is incorrect. The ecumenical councils were not concerned with Passover or its dating....other than the final determination that Christ's resurrection occurred on the Sunday after the Passover.. Today Easter is always celebrated the Sunday after the Passover, but Passover can occur on any day of the week, because it is based on the full moon. And Easter occurs on different dates because it is pushed to Sunday.

So if you were on the Ecumenical Council, lets say a Bishop.....how would you refer to it....Christ's resurrection. The day that Christ resurrected? Here is the secret....it is not a word. The Jews had festivals and the Greco-Romans had festivals....that is how they worded things. We know of no Jewish Christians on the Council, they were Gentiles and they came form the Greco-Roman culture. But still ya gotta say what ya don't know....we had no microphones at the Council of Nicea. We can only say that they probably referred to it as the Festival of Christ's Resurrection. It could not be called Easter because that word did not exist yet.

Now because of the lunar calculation for Passover and the Sunday following that falls around the time of the spring festivals.... which the patron goddess of that Greco-Roman festival was Floria.... I bet that you have not heard that name associated with Easter! LOL But that is the festival that everyone trips out over. The Greco-Romans did not have a Germanic goddess in their mythology......bingo! Did the lightbulb turn on!

Around April 20th - 28th....or more accurately the Vernier Equinox, was the dates of the Floralia, a festival dedicated to the goddess Flora, the ancient Roman goddess of flowers and fertility. Flora was associated with Spring, the season of new life and color, and her feast days were celebrated as a lavish festival dedicated to honoring and celebrating the spring season.

All this concern over Easter being a Pagan holiday is something about nothing. It happened that Christ resurrected during the time of the spring festival. The word Easter just added to the confusion. So now you know.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I know I too have read those same blogs.

Constantine and Easter | OUPblog

https://truthsnitch.com/2018/03/15/think-easter-pagan-part-2-constantine-conspiracy/

 

[Grailhunter]

@Pythagorean12
Yes, I know I too have read those same blogs.

LOL My sources for what I know is through an education, not the internet.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Where does it say angels singing there? Perhaps a more careful reading . . .

Everything little thing in Scripture matters.

But then we can be nit picking as well.....
The scriptures tell us that there is singing in heaven.....why not the angels? Why would God withhold such a privilege from them?

If angels are never - never - said to sing in the Bible, what does that mean to us? Why should we care?

Zephaniah 3, God sings. And man sings. This is something we share with God, that angels are not said to share.

Actually it doesn’t. Heavenly beings are seen by John singing in heaven.

Revelation 5:8-10....with regard to the scroll with the seven seals....Jesus is the one who was worthy to open the scroll....
“When he took the scroll, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, and each one had a harp and golden bowls that were full of incense. (The incense means the prayers of the holy ones.) 9 And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10 and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”

The living creatures around Jehovah’s throne are apparently Seraphs. These mighty heavenly creatures are angels, evidently of very high position in God’s arrangement, since they are shown in attendance at God’s throne.
Singing is heard in heaven.....Who is singing? There are even musical instruments involved.

And who are the morning stars, singing as the foundations of the earth were laid?

Since Jesus refers to himself as “the bright morning star” these can only be heavenly beings.

And who were the kodesh who witnessed God giving the Law?

What is the reference for this?
For Jews, ruach ha-kodesh refers to the divine force, quality, and influence of God over the universe or over God's creatures.....Their version of the Holy Spirit, which differs to Christendom’s version.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Are you sure that God intended His words to be a deterrant? We think of things that way, because we already think in terms of the knowledge of good and evil. Have you noticed how this knowledge infects our minds? So that we think of life in those terms?

We can see that a knowledge of evil affected them immediately in the way they reacted to their naked state, which did not affect them at all previously. This is apparently why God included so many laws regarding sexual matters....it was the act that was sacred in transmitting life, but now open to gross abuse.
Sin changed the way they lived in every way, for as long as they lasted. Close to the perfection of their creation, death took its toll gradually....as when a fan is unplugged from its power source....it gradually stops spinning till it stops. But Abel’s life was taken in an act of pre-meditated murder....just one generation into sin and a murder occurred...and by his own brother! Humans have been hating and killing each other ever since.

Was this a "penalty to act as a deterrent", like in our form of jurisprudence, or was it an instruction, including the command to be kept, and the consequence of not keeping it? I suggest that an innocent mind doesn't think the same as the guilty mind, or the mind who already has the knowledge of good and evil.

Yes, I believe it was meant to be a deterrent....why else would God tell them not to eat of that fruit under penalty of death? They knew what death was. And we can’t assume that they didn’t know right from wrong because God made it pretty plain in telling them all the things they could and should do....only this one restriction, the fruit of which they were not to eat, and which caused them no hardship or sacrifice whatsoever....was off limits. This one tree belonged to their Sovereign Creator, so stealing from him was a major offence. In this case “grand theft” incurring death.

It would probably never have occurred to them to disobey at all, if the devil had not lied to the woman. The woman then tempted the man, dividing his loyalties.....he chose badly.

Satan, by removing the penalty and telling her of the benefits that God was withholding from them, must have made sense to her....but this is why the devil loves to prey on the young and inexperienced. Had he made the same offer to Adam, I am sure there would have been a different outcome.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I'd say again that that this thinking points to one already having knowledge of good and evil.

Look at when she ate. When she saw that it was good for food, and pleasing to the eye, and desirable to make one wise.

Penalty is the spanking when he comes back from crossing the street by himself. Consequence is the car that hits him while he's doing it. Don't cross, car may hit you, compared to, don't cross, or you're gonna get it! The second only has meaning in context of someone who is already aware of right and wrong, which carries punishment and reward.

"Don't do that, you'll die, and I want you alive."

Free will was supposed to be a gift, but abuse turned it into a curse. Had the humans remained obedient, the gift of free will would have led them to good not evil.

But once disobedience led to sin, we had to learn how to drive our free will so as not to cause harm to ourselves or others.....or just like a vehicle in the hands of an inexperienced one, it can cause carnage. We learn by experience way better than from a book, or someone merely imparting head knowledge.

This object lesson, though painful, will take us into eternity with lessons learned the hard way, but they last so much longer....forever in fact. There will never be a time in the future where God will ever need to permit wickedness or disobedience again.

 

[marks]

But then we can be nit picking as well.....
The scriptures tell us that there is singing in heaven.....why not the angels? Why would God withhold such a privilege from them?

So that's a thing about me.

You can denigrate this as "nit picking". I call it holding tightly to the Scriptures. And I've learned some wonderful things. One is that it seems singing is something we share with God alone. Or so it seems. If you pay attention to the little details.

I don't really go much with the approach of, "Well, of course they can!" I prefer to see what is written in the Word.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Actually it doesn’t. Heavenly beings are seen by John singing in heaven.

Revelation 5:8-10....with regard to the scroll with the seven seals....Jesus is the one who was worthy to open the scroll....
“When he took the scroll, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, and each one had a harp and golden bowls that were full of incense. (The incense means the prayers of the holy ones.) 9 And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10 and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”

Interestingly, "singing" is in the masculine gender. The elders are masculine gender, and the living creatures are neuter gender. If John were saying that the living creatures and the elders where singing, that would be neuter gender "singing". However, since he used masculine gender, this tells us it is the elders who are singing.

Much love!

 

[marks]

But then we can be nit picking as well.....
The scriptures tell us that there is singing in heaven.....why not the angels? Why would God withhold such a privilege from them?


Actually it doesn’t. Heavenly beings are seen by John singing in heaven.

Revelation 5:8-10....with regard to the scroll with the seven seals....Jesus is the one who was worthy to open the scroll....
“When he took the scroll, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, and each one had a harp and golden bowls that were full of incense. (The incense means the prayers of the holy ones.) 9 And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10 and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”

The living creatures around Jehovah’s throne are apparently Seraphs. These mighty heavenly creatures are angels, evidently of very high position in God’s arrangement, since they are shown in attendance at God’s throne.
Singing is heard in heaven.....Who is singing? There are even musical instruments involved.


Since Jesus refers to himself as “the bright morning star” these can only be heavenly beings.


What is the reference for this?
For Jews, ruach ha-kodesh refers to the divine force, quality, and influence of God over the universe or over God's creatures.....Their version of the Holy Spirit, which differs to Christendom’s version.

Kodesh, the ordinary sanctified. God's "kodesh" were present at the giving of the Law. I've been trying to remember the reference. I think KJV translates it "holy ones". My understanding is that it means "ones made holy". I'll post it once I find it.

Much love!

 

[marks]

We can see that a knowledge of evil affected them immediately in the way they reacted to their naked state,

Yes, of course, but what I'm suggesting is that thinking in terms of "right and wrong" and "penalty" came after they ate from that tree, and therefore did not figure into their thought processes. I'm suggesting that the fallen state of man causes a mental state so thoroughly contrary to, opposed to, opposite of the innocence man was created in, and that Jesus is restoring to us.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Yes, I believe it was meant to be a deterrent....why else would God tell them not to eat of that fruit under penalty of death? They knew what death was. And we can’t assume that they didn’t know right from wrong because God made it pretty plain in telling them all the things they could and should do....only this one restriction, the fruit of which they were not to eat, and which caused them no hardship or sacrifice whatsoever....was off limits. This one tree belonged to their Sovereign Creator, so stealing from him was a major offence. In this case “grand theft” incurring death.

"Right and Wrong" and "Innocence" are very different.

This is how the Christian is told the two commands only, trust Jesus, and love others, and that in doing this, we fulfill all. If we DON'T make those two things our sole focus, that is, if we attempt to live by law, by our ideas of right and wrong, we're not living in the reconciliation Jesus provided for us, instead, we've returned to living according to the knowledge of good and evil, and making our choices based on our knowledge, but those choices always ALWAYS being countered by a hostile flesh.

We'll find ourselves engaged in a tangle with our flesh instead of simply trusting Jesus and loving others. When we could be living an innocent life of love and trust.

Much love!

 

[marks]

But once disobedience led to sin, we had to learn how to drive our free will so as not to cause harm to ourselves or others.....or just like a vehicle in the hands of an inexperienced one, it can cause carnage. We learn by experience way better than from a book, or someone merely imparting head knowledge.

I find this a very good analogy of dealing with our flesh. CS Lewis takes it a step further, bringing in the skill of the driver, or pilot of a ship in his example. An unskilled pilot of a wrecked ship can make for a very difficult voyage!

Much love!

 

[marks]

It would probably never have occurred to them to disobey at all, if the devil had not lied to the woman. The woman then tempted the man, dividing his loyalties.....he chose badly.

We know that Eve was deceived into eating, coming to believe that it was good for food, and she saw it was pleasing to the eye, and she believed it would give desirable wisdom, she ate. And giving to her husband with her, he ate. We don't know why Adam ate. But we know he was not deceived, he chose to eat knowingly. And that's just what he did, he made a choice, which resulted in Adamic Humanity, Man, living in the state of choosing between good and evil, our limited knowledge, our contrary flesh.

Now if we just choose to trust Jesus and love others, we can bypass the limits to our knowledge, and sidestep the agency of our flesh.

Much love!