The Evangelical Universalist Forum

God does not create, commit, or allow evil!

I think we “common men” look to Christian leaders (present and past) who have shown the fruit of the Spirit in their lives; we learn from them, as a starting point. Of course, the Shepherd of our souls will, in his own way, lead us to the best available fellowship.

And the Holy Spirit within us will guide us and “bear witness” to the truth of new ideas we are prayerfully considering. Jn 16:13, 1 Jn 5:6. And he may lead us to new fellowship more in harmony with his song of love and life, as it becomes available.

But I can testify that religion (which I am still being painfully purged of) long impeded my way to a hermeneutic of love. As R. Murray says,

Blessings.

I searched the first chapters of Genesis again, and I fail to find that God had said that the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, was not good.

As I see it, God commanded them not to eat from it, not because its fruit was bad, but because they were not yet mature enough to gain the knowledge it provided. For that reason God knew that the death process would begin in them on the very day that they ate the forbidden fruit.
After they had matured, and eaten from the Tree of Life, they would have benefitted from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. It would no longer have had the propensity of giving them death.

Knowing good and evil is not intrinsically bad. Indeed, having the ability to distinguish between them is the mark of a mature person:

Hebrews 5:14 But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.

Paidion, in thinking about what you have said, I did come up with another possibility for the TKGE. If it was good, then it could be talking about the law. The law and the church are both good, but I think they are always to be kept separate from one another. The mixing of the two seems to be a deadly combination. I suppose that the only way they can ever come together is on the inside of an individual who follows God.

I throw this out as a reflection and question:

I also like the Protestant site Patheos article at Solo Scriptura vs. Sola Scriptura. I don’t mind Sola Scriptura that much - it’s an established view. But I do share the author’s concerns with “Solo Scriptura”.

If we ignore what the author is saying, then we end up with what I call “Twilight Zone Theology”. Twilight Zone Theology can be very compelling. And can have a Biblical sound and compelling logical exegesis. Like:

Christian Science with Mary Baker Eddy, where all is mind and ideas
Puppet on the String theology - no free will and God manipulates everything
Universalism and P-Zombies, in the Left Behind Tribulation
Satan as the Cosmic Bad Dude, wrecking havoc on all
The garden of Eden had smoking herbs
The OT Nephilim were space aliens
Trump is the anti-Christ
Etc.

So to everyone out there. If we have no standards, other than the bible - then answer this. How do we distinguish between “normal” and “Twilight Zone” theology?

See, the problem I have with these questions are that they assume someone can prove to another or find some formula for the herd. People are so obsessed with making others believe the same way they do. They don’t allow the Freedom of Christ to teach men. Let me be clear: Randy, I have no interest in convincing you (or anyone else) to hold any of the same opinions as me. If you happen to come to those conclusions yourself, after weighing the evidence, then we have communion together (no, not the breaking of bread) on that particular viewpoint. We must allow God to teach people. We need to let go of trying to control others and their opinions. We must stop devaluing others because they don’t believe the same way as we do. Now, replace “we” with “I” and imagine if everyone followed that? We can certainly share, tells others what we think, but in the end, it is up to them and God and we should respect and appreciate that God deals with each of us on an individual basis.

Of course, there is room in the body of Christ - for conflicting opinions. Like we might have a Baptist, RC, EO, Lutheran, etc., opinion. And still be brothers and sisters in Christ. It was my bad. I posted this in the wrong thread. Blame it all on multitasking.

But why ignore what the Church fathers and reformers, bring to the table? And we do try to convince others here, of the soundness and correctness - of our viewpoints.

Anyway, I’ll continue this discussion, in the hell thread.

[tag]Paidion[/tag]That doesn’t make sense. If A&E were immortal at creation then the verse you posted Gen 3:22 would not make sense. How can they be immortal if they had eaten from the ToL and achieved immortality there? If eating fruit from ToL makes one immortal then they would have been mortal to begin with.

Wow!. I just reread the main topic sentence. God does not create, commit, or allow evil!. If we add disease and matter - to the sentence. Guess what? We have Christian Science - in a nutshell. :wink:

But what about the tribulation and the Zombie Apocalypse? It’s ALL perspective. :laughing:

Which is actually the subject, of a Twilight Zone episode at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eye_of_the_Beholder

Here’s the full 22-minute episode - commercial free.

For probably a little over a year I was 90% on board with the assertions of this thread. I had pretty much thought capital punishment was wrong, that violence always begets more violence. To be sure, I still believe that senseless violence is wrong, but am now in clear support of the death penalty (provided we are sure the person is guilty, as sure as one can be).

After stepping back from a forum and asking some hard questions, looking outside of Christianity, I learned some new things. Things that cast doubt on a lot of things in the New Testament. While I know that sits very uneasy for some in this forum, and will probably just assume the worst of me, I care not. I’d share an article that had a great influence on me, it was short, but interesting article from Robert M Price. A guy, who, upon face value appears like a lunatic hillbilly, but is actually a very kind, thought provoking. He is also quite charitable towards those who disagree with him… Something I wish others were. A lot of conjecture on his part about many things, but that is the work of a curious mind. One phrase that really stuck out from something he wrote was this:

full publication here: robertmprice.mindvendor.com/art_sheep_wolves.htm

Oh, and this is special shout-out to Randy- Robert M. Price has two PhD’s, one in systematic theology and one is new testament. I know Randy puts stock in only those with a PhD… :slight_smile:

I think the reason I ever embraced pseudo pacifism is because I had become soft and cowardly. I didn’t want to do the hard thing, to make a decision about terminating someone’s life, who no longer has a right to it, because they gave it up the moment they took someone else’s right to life. If there is a God, he can sort it out. If there isn’t a God, good riddance of a human being who ceased to be a human being.There is no need to reform what isn’t eternal, anyway. Still on fence, still a doubting Thomas over everything, but no matter what vantage place I look at it, I am comfortable with the death penalty and violence to restrain people who wish to harm others. Zero guilt here.

Still on fence, still a doubting Thomas over everything, but no matter what vantage place I look at it, I am comfortable with the death penalty and violence to restrain people who wish to harm others. Zero guilt here.

Study everything, join nothing - my motto. (borrowed from MavPhil)
The problem of pain and evil - will not be solved by us.

Actually, the consequent of your final conditional sentence doesn’t follow from its antecedent. Adam and Eve were not mortal to begin with. They BECAME mortal when the ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God had said, “In the day you eat from it, you shall surely be dying.” The death process began at the moment of consumption.

If they were immortal(and that’s a different discussion)then what benefit would they have if they have eaten from the ToL if the fruit of ToL gives out immortality? You have to remember that God told them they could eat from that tree just not the ToKoGaE.

He told them that they could eat from ANY tree except the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. So they had God’s permission to eat from the Tree of Life. But there’s nothing in the record that indicates that they ever did.

I’m sure there were many good fruit trees in the garden but just ONE Tree of Life. Perhaps they never came across it.

…Gabe then goes on to quote from “Robert M. Price,” who talks about, for example, what should be done if someone was about to rape your wife; the wrongness of equating the victim with the victimizer; the demonstrably poor judgment of appeaser Neville Chamberlain, etc.

But Gabe, I think you are misinterpreting me. I am talking about action, not passivity; living as victors, not victims. I am talking about the supernatural, versus the natural. Spirituality vs. carnality. Trusting in the Lord, instead of leaning on our own understanding.

I am not talking about the work of presidents and policemen and soldiers—although I thank God for them. I am talking about the unlimited resources of the Kingdom of Heaven, and our work, as Christians.

We should be supernatural. We should be prophetic:

-We have the keys of the kingdom: we are to bind death and loose life. What about Psalm 91 angelic protection being loosed over our homes? --And prophets shouldn’t be taken by surprise by bad guys breaking into their homes (see 2 Kings 6:9-12).

-And as to the cost of feeding prisoners, instead of executing them, we Christians are to be channels of heavenly financial resources—the same as we should be for an unwanted baby to come full term, instead of being aborted because there is apparently not enough money to maintain it.

God is only about life, even abundant life (John 10:10). He is well able to care for everything His hand has made, and He wants to use us, the Church, to help do that. As for resources, the Father told the older brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son: Everything I have is yours.” Luke 15:31. Believers are not to be limited by the laws of physics, the laws of economics, the laws of medicine, etc.

If someone breaks into my home and attacks my wife, I will certainly fight for her (although hopefully I won’t kill the attacker). But I am not called to be a policeman. If someone attacks my country, I will pray for the military. But I am not called to be a soldier. As a praying Christian, I know how to use my time better than being a policeman or a soldier. “Our struggle is NOT against flesh and blood,” and “The weapons of our warfare are NOT carnal.” Ephesians 6:12, 2 Corinthians 10:4.

As my friend Richard has said, “We have downloaded into our hearts a HUGE Satanic lie.”

Foundational to a correct understanding and practice of spiritual warfare, I offer you a refutation of the primacy of morality (from Richard Murray’s book, God vs. Evil):

From the foregoing, allow me to offer another, possibly more accurate, name for the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil:

The Tree of Greater and Lesser Evil.

After all, it was a forbidden tree. So how could it offer anything genuinely “good”?

But if they had what would the fruit have done to them since according to you that they already had immorality and if they ate from the tree they would live forever(meaning they would become immortal)? If the fruit from the tree gives immorality again what would the fruit done to them if they had eaten from it while they were already immortal?

I have never said that they had immortality to begin with. If they had been truly immortal then nothing could have caused them to die.

After eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, they then had immorality, but they didn’t have immortality.

Before eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, they were in a state that was neither mortal nor immortal. It could go either way.
They made a choice that began the death process. Had they eaten thereafter from the Tree of Life, the death process would have ended, and they would have been immortal. So God prevented them from re-entering the garden and eating from the Tree of Life.

Well here is what you said:

God didn’t create them mortal, but they became mortal through disobedience”

So if God didn’t create them mortal then He created them immortal or are you backtracking here?

I am not backtracking in any way. I still hold the same position I held from the beginning.

Have you not read what I said in my most recent post above? Here is your illogical clause:

As I said earlier, the consequent of this conditional clause does not follow logically from its antecedent.
You presume incorrectly that “mortal” and “immortal” are collectively exhaustive. They are not.

As I said in my previous post, they were created NEITHER mortal no immortal. “Mortal” means “subject to natural death,” whereas “immortal” means “not subject to death of any kind.” They were created NOT mortal, and NOT immortal. They BECAME mortal immediately after they ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil—subject to natural death. If they had afterward eaten from the Tree of Life, they would have become immortal—not subject to death of any kind.

You are not alone qaz; as you are aware, there are good and sufficient explanations for why the A/E story could very well be ‘true myth’.

Why is the story of Adam and Eve implausible? To me, everything fits–

-…The son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. Luke 3:38.

-Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come. Rom. 5:14.

-For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 1 Cor. 15:22.

-*So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. * 1 Cor. 15:45.

-For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 1 Tim. 2:13.

-Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones….” Jude 1:14.
Once you start snipping at the miraculous historicity and the predictive prophecy, can you stop yourself :question:

Noah? “You’re kidding, right?”

Samson? “Puh-LEASE!”

Daniel? “Historical events post-dated (ex eventu) to look like genuine predictive prophecies, with some fairy tales thrown in.”

Angels? “The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits.” Acts 23:8.

Satan? “A personification of human evil.”

Antichrist? a.k.a. “The one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders”—see above.
Blessings.