The dilemma of being finite

The Dilemma of Finiteness

In order for the mind - us - to decide and choose the best course of action in a given a situation we must assess the environment via the senses only -- sight, hearing, smelling etc. But this assumes 3 things.

1.     The mind is unlimited in its ability to make a complete and accurate assessment of what is out there in order to make that right choice.

2.     We are only material and the observable physical world is the only reality we need to explore. Therefore our physical senses are all that is needed to make an accurate assessment.

3.     There are several possible choices that may be beneficial instead of only one “best choice” in any given decision made (i.e. there are no absolutes). Therefore making the “right” choice is not necessary or even possible. So just make the most of it -- if it feels good, do it -- and do the best you can. This, in essence, is at the heart of existentialism and our culture today. 

However, regarding the first assumption, our mind is finite. We are not all-knowing, all-seeing, or everywhere present at the same time. So how can we, unaided, know with certainty that we all the information needed to know if we are pursuing what is the most favorable course and option? We can not. There may be reality/truth out there needed - that we do not have access to because of our limitations - which might prove the course we have taken is not the best choice. Due to our finiteness, we can not make that determination unaided, i.e. alone. 

(Admittedly, I am assuming -presupposing - two things. There are absolutes, i.e. the universe has design. Everything - including us - operates best when operating according to that design. If we operate outside of that design, we do not function properly). 

Also, there is someone other than us that has infinite, absolute, and perfect knowledge. Since we do not, we must confide in this other person to know it ourselves. 

But we all must start somewhere precisely because we are finite. Every system posits (puts forth without evidence) certain presuppositions, whether you are a theist, atheist, or agnostic. I simply choose to start with the belief that there is a God who by definition is the first cause of all things (and therefore also design). But I don't pull that position out of the air. I think there is objective evidence to back it, more so than not (which is an entirely different discussion). One I allude to throughout many of my other posts and touch on some here. (I may post a more extensive blog on this in the future) 

Also because we are spiritually inert (though some deny that we even have a spiritual dimension. For more on this separate discussion click here) and are only left to depend on our physical senses and the physical world/universe to observe - or so we believe - we potentially dismiss a whole realm of reality that may exist and be crucial in order to make an accurate assessment of reality  i.e. the metaphysical or reality beyond the physical. It’s the admission that we are more than physical, as well as being spiritually inert, that we, in our postmodern world, have a hard time acknowledging. 

If we are a product of time plus chance, there is no absolute right or best way (except maybe "survival of the fittest" has resulted in some sort of consistency in how things operate). However, evolution is always progressing so in this sense it can't be absolute. This is the assumption we are only material and there is no other reality. 

But if we are the product of design, there must be a Designer who made things to operate according to design i.e. a specific purpose. That includes you and me. If so, then violation of that design results in things breaking down, just like putting water in the tank of a car instead of gas. The car was made - designed - to run on gas. Put anything else in the tank and you have problems. 

Some go to the other end of the spectrum and say we are only spiritual and the material world is basically an allusion. This, in essence, is Neoplatonism. This is a separate issue not addressed in this post. I don't fully address it but touch on it here.

I propose there are 3 significant realities many deny that we must acknowledge if we are to make an accurate assessment of what is true, and therefore the best course of action to take (at least practically if not intellectually).

1.      We are finite (few will deny we are physically unable to travel a million light years and back in the blink of an eye or be in two (or multiple locations) at the same time. Some may argue this is an unrealistic standard, however, this is actually as close as we can get to what God claims of himself i.e. omnipresence. If there is such a being, then this would be the standard by which we define being finite or infinite). 

2.     We are not just material. There is more to reality than just the material world e.g. what is love and where does it come from.

3.     We are created and not a product of chance, therefore we are designed with a purpose.. 

Because we are finite beings (something most people would agree with), and because we are more than just physical matter, if we were also created or designed—yet we refuse to acknowledge these realities—then our understanding of the world cannot be grounded in truth.

This means we are unable to accurately judge what is truly best or what is actually true. In other words, we act as if we can figure everything out on our own, without any help or limits, as though we ourselves were infinite. But that very assumption prevents us from seeing things clearly and making good decisions.

To say it another way, if we believe there is nothing outside of or beyond the physical world, we won't look or consider there is anything beyond the physical for any realities that might be there which are vital to making an accurate assessment of things/truth.

Because man is finite, he must always operate out of trust i.e. no one, including the atheist lives without faith; without trusting something or someone in order to function in the world with some level of direction, meaning, and purpose (whether that is subjective and created meaning as with existentialism or objective meaning).

Yet, if we believe we are a product of time plus chance, there is no absolute purpose or meaning to our existence (objectively anyway. We have to create meaning - a key tenant of existentialism). 

Also if we believe we can make an accurate assessment of reality on our own, we will not be open to or interested in looking outside of ourselves for information that may be vital to making that assessment and will therefore be unable to make the best choice i.e. a choice rooted in the reality of who we are and the world we find ourselves in.

So we have a dilemma. In order to know with certainty, we are pursuing what is the most favorable course of action we must assess all possible options. To make that assessment we must have access to all possible facts/reality i.e. we must have infinite knowledge of all realms, spiritual as well as physical. This requires our being everywhere, at all times in all realms, with an infinite capacity to take in all that we observe at any (or even every) given moment.

But how can we if we are finite? We can not be everywhere to assess everything in order to know with absolute certainty we are pursuing the best course. Nor can we be certain in our current state that the material universe is all there is. 

What do we do? We must trust. When all is said and done, no matter what world view you take, you must place your faith in something or someone, whether that be in yourself (with your limited ability to observe), other finite men/women (also with limited ability - even collectively) or a supreme Creator i.e. God, who by definition knows everything, is everywhere present and is obviously all-powerful... He did, after all, make everything. A basic tenant of the concept of God. 

Since all of us are finite we can never know for sure if we are making an accurate assessment of things and therefore whether our trust in ourselves or our fellow finite humans will lead to an accurate understanding of reality. We must look outside ourselves and depend on another. No matter which direction we go, we must exercise trust by the mere fact that we are not infinite but limited. Either we trust in ourselves and there is no reality out there that contradicts our conclusions (and hope we have it right) or we must find someone else we decide to trust in, count on, etc.

Of course the best person to count on would be someone who has complete knowledge (unlike us) of every possible reality (who must be everywhere present to do so) and has complete understanding of who we are (is all-knowing) and what is best for us and totally committed (all-loving) to what is best for us as well as the complete ability to give us what is best (all-powerful). Only then would we have any possibility of finding the truth or the best course to take. 

Side note: Christ also experienced this dilemma of being limited during His incarnation. He didn’t have infinite knowledge or power to know or take the best course of action (at least not solely within himself as a man. He did have access to all of this in his Father however). For the first time, in a new and different way, He had to completely depend on someone other then Himself. He had to depend on His Father in a way He never experienced before. But what was different about Christ compared to us or even Adam was in each instance He trusted His Fathers assessment and direction completely, even to the point of letting it kill him (how God would be loving and good in doing this is another discussion that has to do with man's rebellion. For more on that discussion click here and here). He believed His Father always directed Him with complete love, wisdom and power on the best possible course to take. And His trust proved to be well placed. When it was all said and done, He was resurrected to new life by His Father and to a state of existence possibly greater-richer than it was before becoming a man. 

The only way the mind can know for sure what is the most favorable course to take is to seek the direction and help of someone who, unlike us, does have infinite knowledge, not only about what is out there but about us. Someone who knows what it is we most need and most favorable to our well being, as well as the ability to obtain or provide it. We normally assume that person is us, but how can it be in light of our limits. 

The irony is many unbelievers assert the belief that there is nothing beyond this life i.e. we don't live forever, we come to an end, we are finite. While at the same time taking a position that our finite mind can somehow come to a place of absolute certainty (which requires infinite knowledge) i.e. the finite can make an infinite determination unaided by the infinite. So we contradict ourselves. We believe we are finite in saying life ends once we die while at the same time making assertions that requires infinite knowledge. 

Even when the agnostic says we can not know anything with certainty, he or she is making an absolute statement i.e. a statement of certainty. Maybe we can, in fact, know enough to know we are living based on truth/reality. It's just not knowledge we can arrive at and determine unaided. Nevertheless, this too is a position of faith (in someone outside of ourselves); only the object of faith has changed. 

Vital to our trust in someone else is knowing they care about us and have our best interest at heart at all times and in all circumstances and the ability to provide that best (typically we assume-believe this is us). And who would know better than the infinite Creator who made us? But if we do not acknowledge or believe there is such a being, we are alone to sort things out and can only hope we get it right at best. Otherwise, there simply is no point to existence at all.

A Shift…but related

This raises even more basic questions. Why do we choose or feel the necessity to choose at all i.e. to make the right choice? What is the end we are seeking in our choosing? Why do we even seek anything and what exactly is it we are seeking? What is it about us that drives us to seek and choose one direction over another?

If we are a product of time and chance (the atheistic evolutionist model), there is no explanation or point to our existence much less these longings for meaning/purpose i.e. our coming into existence was an accident at best and not deliberate, intentional, or with purpose, therefore our existence is meaningless. 

Yet everything about us says the opposite and cries out for an understanding of why we exist (Is this not the primary quest of science or space exploration or philosophical debate?). 

What is love, for example, and why do we enjoy loving and being loved. Where does that come from if we are a product of time and chance?

We are "haunted" by the question of why we are here. But why are we even haunted? What causes it... the "haunting?"

There is something about our makeup that cries out for meaning and purpose. In fact, studies have shown that a newborn's growth is stunted both physically and emotionally (and even death can occur) if an infant does not receive adequate attention (i.e. emotional support) through physical contact. Not unlike it would also physically suffer if it didn't have basic physical needs met, such as food, shelter, water, and air. Certainly, an infant isn't this way due to an errant or misplaced belief system. This occurs before they have completely developed cognitively. This occurs on an "emotional" or dare I say spiritual level and not an intellectual/rational level. 

This drive for meaning and the desire to choose or to understand what is the best course of action belies the assertion that we are merely physical and a product of time plus chance. It belies the assertion that life is meaningless and pointless. Where does this longing and drive for meaning come from?

Simply stated the best explanation for why we seek these things is because we are not a product of time and chance as the atheistic, evolutionist model suggests but we are the product of a real and personal Being who created us to have a real and personal relationship (i.e. love) by and with Him. And this is a being who not only made everything but on whom everything depends on for their day to day existence and operation. This means this being is of infinite value to everything else for without Him nothing would be that is; no air, no sun, no earth, no plants, no animals or no breath, no eyes, ears, touch, taste or smell to enjoy these external things. No loved ones, no love, no relationships. In short no “us” or anything else that we enjoy.

Some reject this notion of a Supreme Being/Creator outright and most reject it practically i.e. the majority live as if this is not true even when they give lip service to it (as is the case with a majority of those who self-identify as Christians). However, if they do reject this idea of a Creator, they again are left with the uncertainty of why they exist.

They also must deal with the enigma of why they even care about why they exist. Why do we feel this gnawing need to answer the question at all? (Of course many never even consider this question with any seriousness until they are facing the prospect of their life ending). 

If we are an accident i.e. the product of time and chance, we shouldn't even be asking the question much less wondering or caring what the answer is. The very desire to know the answer to the question betrays the assertion that we are the result of impersonal time and chance or that we just are here for a time and eventually cease to be. That’s it. We fade into infinite nothingness. There is no point to our existence, therefore stop asking the question and either just get on with your meaningless and pointless life the best you can or end it.

This is at the heart of existentialism. Since there is no meaning objectively i.e. there is nothing “out there” that explains or gives meaning to our existence, we are only left to create meaning subjectively. However, this again begs the question. Why do we feel the need to find and create meaning at all, so much so that we must create it when it doesn’t objectively exist according to this belief system? This is also why some existentialist suggest suicide is the only logical conclusion to their understanding of themselves and the world. There is no actual point to our existence, so why keep existing/living. We all die anyway so why prolong the misery; just end it and stop this maddening desire and pursuit for meaning. Ironic, if you think about it. If you say, "but I enjoy life." I say give me a good logical reason based on your view of the world. You have none. 

It is ironic that our need for meaning is such that once one concludes there isn’t any; we feel compelled to end our life to put us out of the pain of a meaningless and pointless existence. Why do we feel pain at all? Where does pain come from? That very compulsion to find meaning and avoid pain contradicts the conclusion that life is pointless and meaningless and screams we are designed to have meaning and if we can’t get it, then we feel compelled to just end our lives.

For a further discussion of pain, you may find the following worthwhile. 

http://thotsaboutgod.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-anatomy-of-pain.html

Glossary of basic terms and concepts touched on above:

Metaphysics - a branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world. Traditionally, metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the broadest possible terms:

1.      "What is there?"

2.     "What is it like?"

Ontology - the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence, or reality. It is part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, that

addresses questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist.

Cosmology - the philosophical study to understand the origin, progression, structure, and ultimate fate of the Universe at large and of us as individuals.

Epistemology - the study of knowledge

·        What is knowledge?

·        How is knowledge acquired?

·        To what extent is it possible for a given subject or entity to be known?

The Fall of Man. What exactly happened?

The Fall of Man

We may think our inclination away from God became a part of our makeup after our rebellion, which may be the case, however, if the capacity or potential ability to stray from God did not exist prior to the fall, Adam and Eve would have never strayed.

Is there a difference between inclination and capacity? The first is the actual direction one is inclined toward and the latter is the capacity to choose between different directions/ options, not the actual inclining.

Prior to the temptation, Adam and Eve had the capacity to choose more than one direction. Ultimately, there can only be ¹two directions on how we go about life; dependence/trust in God or independence from God, and trust in self. Either God is sovereign, or we are (¹for a fuller discussion of this point see The Dilemma of Finiteness).

It could be argued that they would not have strayed if not presented with the temptation proposed by the serpent. But whatever was in the makeup of Adam and Eve that allowed them to be enticed, it had to exist before the proposed offer. The serpent's proposal did not create the ability to choose or not choose God, it only brought it out in the open so to speak, where it could be tested to see if they would use that ability to choose to trust and submit to God, his wisdom, direction, and design or rebel and turn from Him. In short, if there was nothing within them (a capacity) that enabled or allowed them to be lured away from God and go contrary to his direction/ instructions to begin with, they would not have strayed.

So what exactly was inherent within Adam and Eve that enabled them to choose the serpent’s proposal over God’s command/promise/warning “do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil…if you do you will die?”

Gen 2:16  And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

The following passage gives us some clues.

Gen 2:9  And out of the ground the LORD God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant

to the sight and good for ¹food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

This verse tells us both trees were pleasant to the sight and good for ¹food. There was nothing inherently evil about the forbidden tree. The primary difference between the two trees is that one was forbidden. God created both trees, so there was nothing innately wrong with either. God Himself said that everything He created was very good. This included all the trees.

Gen 1:11  And God said, "Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth." And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good… 

29 And God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food… 31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning, the sixth day.

This was God's description of how things were before Adam and Eve's rebellion, not after it. 

Five things are evident from the above passages.

·    Adam and Eve existed, and trees existed, and all of it was good. They not only had the capacity to enjoy, but there were actual things present to enjoy, within and without. 

·   Adam and Eve were created with the capacity for pleasure; otherwise, they would not have experienced it when looking at and tasting the fruit upon the ²trees. 

·   Our capacity for pleasure, as well as the things that give pleasure, were created by God. In fact, this capacity is part of their (our) being in His image, designed so they might enjoy or find pleasure in God himself and his good gifts of creation that convey his love to and for them and us.

·   God uses created things to provide for us and sustain us… “every tree…good for food…” These were his splendid gifts conveying his love, care, and provision for us as his image-bearers. 

·  They could choose. The fact that there were alternate (or "competing") directions they could take, represented by two designated trees, shows that they were given the ability to pick one or the other.

Some call this ability “free will.”³  (I think free choice better conveys how we were designed and is more in line with what scripture presents. Click here for a discussion on the difference between free choice and free will). We do know we are created in God’s image, which includes at least the capacity to choose one direction over another, not unlike choosing “competing” alternatives.

If so, is “free will” sin? It could not be since God himself has a will and makes choices. However, it certainly was part of the attributes of Adam and Eve that made it possible for sin -- rebellious distrust (unbelief) -- to occur. 

However, the issue isn't choice but our ⁴limitations, i.e., our being finite vs God being infinite. God knows and can bring about all things, we can not. The notion of our being our own god (proposed by the serpent) simply doesn't fit who we are. It is contrary to our design as created finite beings.

For a brief discussion on the difference between will vs our passions,

click here. 

One thing from scripture we know with certainty is we are created in God’s image and part of our being like Him is our design for relationship; the giving and receiving of love, honor, and value. (This is what God is like and we are like Him - in His image). And not just any relationship, but primarily a relationship with God first, out of which all other relationships must flow to work properly as they were designed to. 

A key element of any relationship is trust. What was challenged by the serpent's proposal to our first parents was whether God was trustworthy in giving them what they needed i.e. did He really have their best interest in mind in forbidding them to eat from the tree of the ⁵knowledge of good and evil? At a minimum, the question was raised and entertained on whether God was doing what was best for them by denying them this one tree, i.e. was God “holding out” on them?  After all did God not say that every tree was good and available for food? This challenge or enticement by the serpent cast doubt on:

1.  Whether God really loved them and wanted what was best for them in forbidding them from eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. A question designed to undermine that relationship of trust in God, they experienced prior to this enticement.

2.  It also introduced the errant notion that they might be able to care for themselves better than God could.

3.  And that they would no longer need God to determine what was right or wrong since they would be “like God knowing good and evil.” They would no longer be bound by the dictates (law) of another but be their own "lawmaker."

The warning given by God to Adam was, "In the day you eat you will surely die." 

This was a promise/warning given by God they were given to believe or not since Adam had not observed or experienced death and therefore did not have a full grasp of the significance of what it entailed. We can assume all he knew at this point was it was not good only because God warned him it was something to avoid, i.e. he had not experienced evil (harm or loss, much less death) firsthand and therefore could not know (confirm) the consequences from personal experience. He was simply asked to trust God's assessment and directions regarding this one tree.

When Adam ate, he immediately broke away from trusting God and placed his trust in himself and in creation (of which Eve was a significant part), by separating himself from willful dependence on God as his Creator and Sustainer. Adam pulled away from trust in God, severing and killing the relationship with God held together by that trust. Immediately by this turning away, the union and relationship between God and Adam *died -- and so did Adam as a result, first spiritually than later physically. And, from that day to this man -- on his side of the ledger -- lives in an ongoing state of rebellious distrust, death, and separation from God.

*Some argue that the Spirit of God indwelt Adam prior to him breaking trust with God and left once Adam rebelled. 

Even for those of us who are now in Christ, there remains a strong inclination away from trust in God. It is this inclination that God is reversing through Christ. Or to say it another way, God is always working to restore and increase our trust in Him once we accept his offer of complete forgiveness and legal restoration in Christ. In fact, his giving us Christ to restore us is the first proof that he still loves us in spite of our rebellion and why we can trust him i.e. God never moved away from his love for us, we did. 

The act of God providing and assigning to us (in Christ) the status of being trustworthy and loyal to Him, which we had abandoned -- i.e. in Christ he now looks upon us as if we are trustworthy and loyal to him -- is clear evidence God still wants to be in a relationship with us i.e. even though we had abandoned him, he had not abandoned us but in fact, still loved us as much as he did before our rebellion. The legal consequences, however, had to be addressed and thanks to Christ they ultimately were. 

Christ’s nature vs. ours.

Can we get a clearer understanding of how we are wired by observing how Christ handled challenges, struggles, and temptations? Christ didn’t have the deeply imbedded 

·   “avoidance mechanism” that we now have. Christ was not naturally inclined away from God. He did not have a sinful nature or a distrust of God.

·   or a fixed state of unbelief or state of distrust. Discussed more below.

However, He was a man and operated as a man while on earth. By that I mean He was finite with limitations like every other man. He was the 2nd Adam. He was limited mentally (i.e. not all-knowing at all times, in all things) and physically (not everywhere present) and therefore he experienced areas of need, lack and loss (He got hungry, tired, experienced pain and so on) which he had not experienced as God the omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient Son prior to becoming a man.

Though he never broke trust with the Father, His trust in the Father was truly, genuinely, and severely tested. 

What is interesting is the only attribute he retained was his omnibenevolence, that he is “all good,” which includes, but is not limited to, his grace, love, mercy, kindness, and patience. This comes out of the core/ primary character quality of God who is love.

Because of His becoming a man, several things occurred. He experienced time. He experienced all those things mentioned above, hunger, fatigue, and pain. He had to learn to depend on His Father and for the first time he had to trust Him in new and different ways, i.e. as a man. We are told He became perfect and learned obedience through the things he suffered Heb 5:9, 2:10, and 7:28.

When scripture says Christ learned obedience, how can the all-knowing Creator and sustainer of all things learn anything? Because he set aside His divine attributes and was fully man while on earth. He operated as a Spirit lead man for the first time. He learned to depend on His father in ways he had not encountered before i.e. as a man. He limited himself by his own free choice ("...he emptied himself..."Phil 2:7; John 10:18) and experienced challenges that put His trust in His Father to the test in a different and new way; a way he had never encountered before. For the first time, he experienced things that appeared to indicate His father did not love Him ("...my God, my God, why have you forsaken me..."), so he had to trust in His father’s love even when it looked the opposite i.e. He had been abandoned. This was a new experience he had to go through or "learn." 

This test of trust is not unlike what Adam and Eve experienced in God's withholding of the fruit of the tree (or even what we experience when God withholds certain things from us). In forbidding the fruit it appeared God did not love them fully but was holding out on them. And this possibility was presented to them for the first time by the serpent. At least this is the notion they bought into and acted on (and the very same notion we now wrestle with). 

As well, when Christ suffered the loss of certain benefits (the fullness of his deity during the incarnation) or faced the prospect of future loss (the cross. "...if possible let this cup pass..."), He too was tempted like Adam to believe His Father did not fully love Him (and apparently felt the absence of his Father's love for the first time when he cried, "...my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"). 

But when challenged to make a choice, His trust never faltered, though it was tested, as demonstrated initially in his wilderness temptation, later in the Garden of Gethsemane and ultimately on the cross. Jesus never chose at any point not to trust His father, even though that trust we certainly and severely tested, eventually costing him his life. Unlike Adam or us, Jesus, the man, never actually entered into and participated in any behavior that sprung out of distrust for His father. We know this because we are told He was tempted in every way as we are, yet without sin (i.e. unbelief/distrust) (Heb 4:15).

Us vs Christ

We live in an ongoing, fixed state of unbelief and distrust, which is what I meant by the phrase “avoidance mechanism” used earlier. We go through life often questioning God's love when life gets hard. We like Christ must also learn obedience (actions grounded in trust of God and His goodness) through the things we suffer. 

God now constantly seeks to wean us away from distrust in Him and self-trust introduced by the serpent - which Adam bought in to - and reverse that condition by turning us back to complete trust in God and our acknowledging dependence on God again at ever-increasing levels or degrees. The bible describes this process as “… being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another.”

We are always being tested at every turn on whether we trust God or not (not because God enjoys our struggles but simply because we were designed to be in a trusting relationship with him and he's seeking to restore - and strengthen - the original relationship and the necessary dependence for that relationship, that we have rebelled from).

We are in a state of brokenness, but He is the great physician. The underlying disease, if you will (separation from God and his love), has been killed (though the symptoms linger). We are now reinstated, adopted, and beloved children of God in Christ. But we are still in ongoing rehab from the lingering symptoms of it and will not be fully mended until we leave the rehab center, i.e. this present state of existence.

God’s removing the just condemnation for our sin and putting that on Christ, then assigning His righteousness to our account and freely giving us His Spirit at our spiritual birth - thereby opening up our eyes and His words to us - were the foundation and beginning of that reversal process. 

2Co 3:16 But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed.

2Co 3:17-18  Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. ¹⁸And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the 

Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. (emphasis mine)

Now we have a new dynamic within us (His love-Spirit) in addition to the “avoidance mechanism” (distrust) still present. Now we have a view of God because the veil has been removed. We have been reborn and are spiritually alive whereas before there was no sight, no seeing spiritually (How can a dead and therefore blind man see after all?). Now we have been given an ever-increasing glimpse of his majesty, beauty, and glory and as a result, have a longing for Him that was not present before His Spirit of love and grace opened our eyes and came to live in us. The more of His majesty and glory we see the we change. God has opened our eyes to see what we did not see before, namely, who He truly is in the greatness of his glory, love, and majesty. 

Now, with this new dynamic of the Spirit - as we press into Him more and more - He shows us more of His beauty and majesty. Our desiring Him grows the more His Spirit reveals Him to us. And His Spirit reveals more of Him to us, the more we draw near to Him. The more we draw near the more he reveals. 

When Christ’s trust of His father was tested in new areas, there was the real struggle or temptation to choose to not trust His Father. (Mat 26:39; Mat 4:1-11)  This is similar to the state Adam was in when he was confronted with whether to trust or not trust God in Eden. Like Christ, Adam did not have an embedded inclination away from God (an "avoidance mechanism"), and as Christ, Adam was finite with the option and opportunity to become perfected in His trust of God in a fuller way or to not trust Him. Adam chose to not trust God. Christ chose to trust Him. Rom 5:17-19

To recap and sum up, there are 4 factors involved in our first parents being allured away from God, all of which were present before Adam’s rebellion.

1. The ability of choice to trust in, depend on, or pursue any particular person or object to derive our sense of meaning and purpose. We are not programmed like robots.

2. We are “wired” for relationship: To give and receive love, honor, and value. We are designed to love and be loved, to honor and be honored, to value and be valued. Therefore, we need and desire the giving and receiving that comes through relationship and cannot be complete without relationship.

3. We are finite and therefore dependent on someone or something outside ourselves in order to be whole and complete as we were intended and designed to be.

4. The presence of created things that have real value and use for us.

     By created things I mean everything that comes from God that is not God. Not just animal and plant life but everything; the air we breathe, the sun we enjoy and the functioning of all creation depends, fellow humans, the time we are allotted, our ability to think, choose, feel, taste, hear, see, smell, touch, consume, procreate, our very existence, everything. “… in Him, we live and move and have our being” Act 17:28. As well as all the innate abilities we are given to honor God with but use instead to exploit creation so we can maintain life without God.

The creation was also evidence of God’s care, creativity, power, and majesty and intended to point us to Him. Created things give glory to and display the worth and beauty of God (if the painting is beautiful, imagine what the wonder, variety, and creativity of the painter is like). Created things were not given to us to derive our ultimate, eternal, and permanent meaning from or to be used to that end but were designed to show His love and majesty and glory to us so that we would be drawn to Him and worship Him through them. Instead, we are now drawn away from Him by these things. Not because of the things, but because of our distrust of our Creator and life giving God.

Again, all the above elements were a part of our being creatures created by God that existed prior to the fall. Without any one of them, the rebellion of Adam and Eve could not have occurred.

Key reasons *created things will not and cannot give us what we need.

·   They are designed to display, demonstrate, express, declare, manifest the greatness and majesty of God and thereby point us to Him, the true source of life.

·    They are ultimately not life itself but sustained/maintained by God and given as gifts to sustain our lives i.e. they are the means of life...only God is the source of life.

·   creation is given for our sustenance and enjoyment to be received with thanks.

·   To demonstrate God’s love, power, wisdom, majesty to us and to others with and through them. 

·   We are designed for the eternal (God) and not the temporary (creation). The temporary, though very real and very necessary (we are and always will be created/physical beings) is a window through which we observe and receive the truly beautiful and majestic God himself. 

Even now, as fallen but redeemed men and women in Christ, we still must choose to trust God or not trust Him on a day-to-day, moment-to-moment basis. We are confronted with this choice of whether to trust or not trust Him at every turn. We are not fully aware of the extent to which we do not trust Him or when and where this takes place and how deeply we are still inclined away from trusting God. This is part of the maturing process; discovering how deeply we are inclined away from choosing to trust God and in turn abandoning our attempts at independence (self-trust).

The difference between Adam before he rebelled and us since that rebellion is we now carry around within us a natural inclination or bent away from God in a way we did not before we rebelled. This inclination away from God is now a core, deeply embedded, and fundamental part of our makeup and still with us even in Christ. What is the same however is we also still have choice. As before the fall, we still must choose or not choose God today on this side of the fall. We still must decide if we are going to trust God’s offer and direction for our lives and that it is better than our choosing our own direction, simply because we did not create ourselves and do not necessarily know what it is we need most to be all we were designed to be (though we tenaciously cling to the belief that we do). This is the exact opposite of what Adam did in his rebellion.

Since Christ, a new dynamic is also present within us. The Spirit of God and Christ, who reveals the love of the Father and the Son to us, enables us to understand, reveals His words to us, resurrects faith in us, and guides us among many other things.  God now woos us with his love and the greatest evidence is sending his son to restore us back to him

So is this capacity or ability to be drawn away, which we had from the beginning, the same as our current propensity to be drawn away, or are they somehow different?

It seems there is a deep-seated and fixed distrust in us now, that wasn’t present in Adam before the rebellion. That distrust appears to have become a part of our present and fixed state once Adam and Eve crossed the threshold of not trusting God in choosing to participate in what was forbidden by God, eating from the forbidden tree. Before the fall there was only the capacity to distrust. Now it is an embedded and ongoing part of our make up i.e. it is a present inclination within us, our nature. 

Though all the elements that made it possible for distrust were present, (the four listed above) something occurred once we crossed that line of actually choosing not to trust God, which has marked us in a way we weren’t before that choice. We know we spiritually died and we can speculate that the "breath of life" breathed into us at our creation, i.e. Spirit of God himself, left us at the rebellion. Even now, with the reintroduction of God's Spirit through our acceptance of God's offer of forgiveness for our rebellious distrust, we seem to have a new element I have called the "avoidance mechanism" that was not present in Adam. 

Unlike Adam, who had no natural pull away from God, we are inclined away from God even as His children. And unlike Adam when he was tempted, he did not have to fight this natural inclination away from God that permeates every part of our souls, as we do. So in some sense, it appears the trust required of us is greater than the trust required of Adam, as we are always fighting this embedded bent away from God.

However, at the same time, this condition results in a greater appreciation and experience of all that God is. This appreciation displays God more fully in all His grace and glory for where sin abounds, grace much more abounds, and to him who is forgiven much loves much. 

So what appears on the surface to be a disaster, the rebellion of Adam, in fact, turns out to be to our ultimate benefit and to God's greater glory.

Rom 11:33-36  Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! "For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?" "Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?"  For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

The trust required of Christ and what Christ gave up was far greater than Adam's. Adam was simply asked to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of God and evil. He actually did not know what he was being asked to give up since he had never experienced death or the knowledge of good and evil or even understand what it was.

Christ emptied himself of all His divine attributes, and in addition, suffered a cruel and shameful death He did not deserve. He took all of this on himself knowingly and voluntarily so that we might be bought back and restored to a relationship with our loving Creator and Provider we rejected, and still reject.

It is the inclination of this ongoing and subtle distrust of God that is deeply rooted within and throughout us that our loving Father seeks to remove and heal us.

God allows us to be sinful…

Today, the offer to remove the barrier and hostility between God and us as untrusting rebels (sinners) is available for anyone who accepts God's provision of an assigned right standing before God offered to us in and through Christ. Through Christ, we can be restored back to the full communion and relationship we had with Him before our rebellion. 

But once restored, He does not fully remove our inclination away from Him. But He does put his Spirit within us and places His “…laws into our minds, and write them on our hearts…” so that we now see him more clearly, desire him and come to Him freely as He reveals himself to us… as we see Him in the greatness of love and that He loves us even when we do not fully love or trust Him. (He does this because He wants us to come to Him out of choice, not as robots or mechanically. So we would freely choose Him because we love Him). We now relate to him only as his beloved children. So in the greatest sense (legally from God's point of view) our distrust of God no longer matters. God now sees us only as His perfectly beloved child. 

As we see His love for us more and more, regardless of distrust and unfaithfulness, it makes us want to conduct ourselves in such a way that brings Him honor, joy, and pleasure. We love him because He first loved us.

If our bringing honor to God was not something we freely chose out of love, trust, and gratitude for Him, it would not bring Him true honor. Honor is best brought about by those who freely choose to honor Him. They seek to honor Him because they love Him, because they want to honor Him, not because they have to honor Him. Christ met the obligation of having to. If they had to honor Him in order to be loved and received by Him, then it would be done out of threat, not love. We would obey Him out of threat of rejection, not out of love, gratitude, and appreciation.

_____________________________________________________________________

Footnotes:

See Chandlers “Explicit Gospel” on how God draws us by grace, not fear.

¹Implied and inherent in food is dependence. Adam and Even needed sustenance on a regular basis i.e. they were dependent on food as creatures prior to their rebellion not just to experience the pleasure of eating. Certainly for even life itself with the Tree of Life, otherwise why call it the Tree of Life. And ultimately God was the sustainer even though indirectly through food. 

²Adam and Eve had the capacity for pain before the fall but did not experience it as we do now because their spiritual, emotional, and physical needs were fully met by God. The experience of pain resulted from the absence of those needs being met and the absence of the pleasure he was experiencing in and through his union with God and God's complete provision before he rebelled from that union.

³In our present state of rebellion and separation from our Creator, we do not seek God on our own. So God must seek us. And He did initially and primarily through sending Christ to show His love and provision to restore us back to Him. In addition, he continues to do so now. By letting us experience the full brunt of the inadequacy of our living without Him i.e. our being finite. He either creates within us a complete dissatisfaction in the creation (in whatever form we are most dependent on it be that money, fame, pleasure, etc) or allows us to experience so much pain that His creation can not sustain us so we cry out and turn back to him.

⁴For a discussion on the difference between being finite vs sinful, click here. 

⁵For a further discussion of the knowledge of good and evil, click here.