stone island soldes stone island soldes stone island soldes stone island soldes stone island soldes stone island soldes stone island saldi stone island saldi stone island saldi stone island saldi stone island saldi stone island saldi oil paintings for sale oil paintings for sale oil paintings for sale oil paintings for sale oil paintings for sale oil paintings for sale oil paintings for sale canvas oil paintings canvas oil paintings canvas oil paintings canvas oil paintings canvas oil paintings canvas oil paintings stone island outlet stone island outlet stone island outlet louboutin pas cher louboutin pas cher louboutin pas cher louboutin pas cher louboutin pas cher peuterey outlet online peuterey outlet online peuterey outlet online peuterey outlet online peuterey outlet online outlet moose knuckles pop canvas art oil paintings stone island outlet stone island uk

The Works of God Displayed – John 9 The Fall Reversed

chagall adam and eve expelled 150x150 The Works of God Displayed   John 9 The Fall Reversed

John 9:3 Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him.”

What happened to Adam and Eve in the Garden when they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil has continued to haunt my thinking. Something definitive happened while I have yet to hear a decent description. Well I’ve had a breakthrough of sorts. In all the accounts I have read as explanation, seemingly the disobedience, the nature of man, the effects of eating from the tree and sin are treated as one. In actuality, we have three separate conditions.

Relying on the definitions given by other people, doctrine, has been a problem. Straight from Wiki. “Original sin is, according to a doctrine proposed in Christian theology, humanity’s state of sin resulting from the Fall of Man. This condition has been characterized in many ways, ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a “sin nature”, to something as drastic as total depravity or automatic guilt by all humans through collective guilt.”

What happened to Adam and Eve when they ate from the tree? Did they become sinners, did a ‘sin nature’ enter the world? When they ate from the tree, decided to eat Jesus would say, they disobeyed God’s command. When they ate, Genesis 3:7 “Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.”

We first have two separate lines to explore; disobeying God and the effects of the tree. The disobedience led to the effects of eating from the tree. But, the disobedience did not cause the effect. The effect, ‘the eyes of both of them…opened’ was caused by the fruit of the tree.

Eve’s got a slightly different take on God’s command. Gen 3:3 “but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.” Eve hadn’t been created yet when God gave the command to Adam. Gen 2:16-17  “The LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.'”

We have three possibilities. 1) God added the ‘don’t touch’ clause. 2) Adam added it to the story when passing it along to Eve. 3) Eve added it to the story when telling the serpent.

This results in two options.
Option 1 – Direct disobedience to God in touching the tree was completely separate from the effects of eating the fruit. They could have stopped at touching, been in disobedience and never suffered the effects brought on by eating the fruit.
Option 2 – Man could lie before eating the fruit.
Either of the two possible options speaks to man’s nature. In the very least, given free will in the Garden, man’s disobedience was in his nature before the effects of eating the fruit.

(It also illustrates God’s glory and Grace, which makes me believe it was man who added to the command and not God who changed it. God promised that on the day they ate from the tree they would die. And that is what happened. They died a spiritual separation from God which is described further in Romans 5. But had they only touched it, had they simply lied as was the only other option, they would be in the Garden under God’s protection and the promise He made.)

Keeping Genesis 3:7 in mind, “Then the eyes of both of them were opened,” fast forward to John 9:39-41. “And Jesus said, ‘For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.’ Those of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things and said to Him, ‘We are not blind too, are we?’ Jesus said to them, ‘If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, “We see,” your sin remains.'”

This is the Genesis story in reverse! Jesus tells us in John 9 that He is here to open the eyes of those who are accustomed to sin to recognize it. For those who recognize sin, He is bringing them back to the state of Adam and Eve before the Fall. Note, the Pharisees in this section of the story are ‘with Him’, which could indicate they simply happen to be there or they are personally interested. This is in a different location than the accusatory Pharisees though some may be the same. They could have been asking a sincere question about their own position. It is unclear.

Back to the Garden, strange behavior happened when Adam or Eve touched the tree or when one lied. However it occurred, it was not a sin because they were blind to sin in the John 9 sense. If it is true that one of them lied, it was not a sin because they were blind. If it was touching the tree, while disobedience this was not sin because they were blind to sin.  Sin entered when their eyes were opened as a result of ingesting the fruit; the fruit’s efficacy if you will.

Their actions changed because of their knowledge of good and evil. Their nakedness in no way changed before or after they ate. They had gained the knowledge of good and evil. That knowledge told them it was evil to be naked. So did they have more or less of a propensity to be naked, and so do evil, after they ate the fruit? From the knowledge they gained which included a knowledge of what evil was, the Bible says they chose not to do evil and in fact, “sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings” to cover their nakedness.

Now I am not going to battle over whether being naked in the Garden before God was good or evil. They ate from the tree which imparted some kind of knowledge and that’s the knowledge they gained.

One thing is clear. Disobedience existed before sin existed. Are men enslaved to the service of sin after the Fall as Total Depravity would suggest? When I consider how God expected Cain to be his brother’s keeper, I would say no. God fully expected Cain to do good. More importantly, I don’t think the question has importance as we can never separate it from a more powerful force. We know from John 12:32 that all men are being drawn to Christ. Christ is sufficient to overcome all sin, and more importantly, to bring us back to our state prior to the Fall, as He states was his mission in John 9:39-41.

The story in John 9 tells of a blind man. Jesus applied mud to his eyes and he was healed. After his eyes were opened, he was questioned vigorously by the Pharisees. Who was this man who healed you? The formerly blind man sang Jesus-the-man praises saying anyone who performs such miracles must not be a sinner and must be from God. And the Pharisees cast the man out.

Hearing this, Jesus went to find him. Jesus looked for him! Verse 35, and Jesus asked, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” The formerly blind man asked, who’s he? When Jesus explained he himself was that Man, believing, the formerly blind man, verse 38, “worshiped Him.”

The blind man’s eyes were opened and now Jesus is leading him back to a state of blindness. This sin blindness is the answer to how as sinners, even if repentant, we can live with God again.

I’m pretty much exactly where the blind man was at the end of the story though. I kept re-reading that section of John and then it just screamed the Fall as I read. Man was able to disobey God before and after the Fall. Man’s nature remained unchanged before and after the fall. Man’s knowledge/sin/lifting of the blinders changed. But as with the free gift of Grace which changes our attitudes resulting in good works, this knowledge of not love but sin, a consciousness of sin, has the opposite effect in producing what has been mistaken as depravity. Now I really want to get back into reading Paul with this in mind.

Let’s not forget, before (Gen 1) and after the Fall (Gen 9) we are told we are created in the image of God. And in Psalm 139:14 we hear, we are “fearfully and wonderfully made.” God loved us so much, even when we were enemies, He sent His only begotten Son to save us through judgment and bring us back. The blind man of John 9 continues to display the works of God!

————————

Had the Pharisees who had been near Christ at the end of the story been there to persecute Jesus, Jesus calling himself the Son of Man and then letting the formerly blind man worship Him would have been the perfect opportunity.

Mark 2:17     And hearing this, Jesus *said to them, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Jesus railed against hypocrisy. There were plenty of examples of people in different classes who followed and supported Jesus. There is no reason not to take Mark 2:17 literally. While I am righteous through Jesus there is no reason to believe no one was not sincerely seeking God and was righteous through faith. What about John the Baptist? What about Jesus’ parents? I don’t have an exact verse yet, but it seems to me Jesus is not calling all the Pharisees his enemy.

——-

John 9:39-41 Traditional View

Jhn 9:39     And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.”

– The sinners will be made to see they are sinners and brought into reconciliation with God through belief in Jesus.

– Those who think they are reconciled to God, who are relying on their own works to be reconciled to God, will be brought into blindness; brought back to a place where they are lost in spiritual blindness or a point where they realized they don’t have all the answers and to a place where they can finally submit to God in faith for salvation not by their efforts. (But then shouldn’t it be those who believe, think, or under the delusion that they see? Like me?)
Jhn 9:40     Those of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?”

-The Pharisee self righteously believe they are perfect. As the traditional story assumes the Pharisees believe they are being spoken of in a derogatory sense in the story, why wouldn’t they assume they were those with sight in the story, and ask what he meant by bringing them to blindness?
Jhn 9:41     Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

-I simply don’t understand the traditional view on this story.The Pharisee say they have no sin, so they say they see.

What’s the opposite? I’m lost Lord, blinded in my sin. Can you please save me?

I’ve listened to several commentaries. This last verse is pretty much skipped over. How do the blind have no sin? This is not answered by the traditional reading of this verse.

Place Adam and Eve in this verse before the Fall. They were blind. They had no sin.

—–

Another question I have been asking is why did Jesus come? Abraham was saved by faith. Romans 1 says man can no God through His Creation and that we have no excuse. Certainly with flailing sinners, we needed God’s help. But everyone didn’t. Were the multitudes lost before Christ? Did his blood work in retroactive fashion as some claim? Were the men of Ninevah saved? People saved throughout the Bible before Christ’ resurrection. If you neglect that, you are the heretic, not me. Here we have Jesus telling us a specific reason he came.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>