The human effect

I am curious about why Adam and Eve disobeyed God after they walked and talked to him and knew he created them? The first commandment in the bible was not to eat of the tree of knowledge, being it was the knowledge of good and evil. I would venture to say Sin is a human action to choose either good or bad. But if the person does not know the difference between them they cannot sin.

A baby is innocent until it accepts that knowledge. I understand the human condition because it makes perfect sense (to me). There are coincidences from sin. I am also confused with the words perfect and divine concerning the human being. Am I looking at this point from the wrong perspective? Thoughts please. Paul

1 member likes this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by William John Meegan on September 17, 2013 at 7:42am

John Mead:

First of all I am never quite up to the internet slang w.r.t. so writing it out is more appropriate for my understanding.

This problem you mentioned above is quite on par with what I am dealing with in my paper; however, I do not use the phrase 'born again'; though, maybe I should - at least in the footnotes.

The new born baby is diametrically opposite to the Born Again Christian (Orenda: Holy Spirit): spiritual state. That is a state you would be without sin. I believe that Orenda is a state of spiritual purification: total acceptance of the divine. Up to and just before obtaining the gift of the Holy Spirit (Orenda) the human being uses reason and logic attempting to understand God. And that is a necessity or prerequisite staging process "suffer it to be so now" as John the Baptist learned from Jesus Christ. Notice how John had all of the knowledge that Christ was entering into: knowledge of the sacred scripture: Baptism. John's baptism was with water; whereas, Christ's baptism was with Fire and Water. For truly baptism is that necessary stage of understanding the tenants of one's religion. It is not a state of blind obedience to bible tenants nor what the elders of the Church tells us. That is not FAITH. FAITH is the things that reason and logic tells us must be (those things hoped for) and FAITH is that evidence of those things that reason and logic tells us is true. Reason and logic do not offer up absolute proof of those things it witnesses: their is eternal doubt and confusing. Human reason and logic can only go so far and anything beyond such as FAITH is a leap across a vast chasm. Hence forward when using reason and logic there is no longer the pangs of doubt and uncertainty reason and logic is coupled with FAITH: the evidence of the things not seen.

Early on in my researches I had cross over into FAITH (Orenda) and at the time I had no real understanding of Christianity. I had gone from a diehard atheist to an absolute certainty that there was a God in less than four years. From that point forward everything I seem to touch on a religious matter appear to be the evidence of the things not seen. I was very fortunate to have obtain pattern recognition at the time where I discerned the Universal Mathematical Matrix: the evidence of things unseen. Anybody else that sees that matrix or even the evidence it exudes that shows it is the origins of the sacred scriptures will not truly believe unless they are in a state of Orenda. It is a matter of which side of the divide you are on.