A Good God--An Evil World
Order The Master Plan $17.95 website special!!
Chapter Three
Galatians 5:13
You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love.
Many Christians believe that man fell because of freedom, or man’s “free will agency.” He, simply, chose evil. How could a being of goodness corrupt himself? How can corruption enter into goodness?
Adam and Eve had the potential to be corrupted because they were not yet one with God. They were born flawlessly but not in the state of maturity. Adam and Eve had to grow to gain the qualification to eat from the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is a symbol of the ideal of the unchanging, eternal state of relationship with God. It is indicative of perfection or maturity. Because Adam and Eve were to ultimately become one in love with God, they had to grow in love, to become givers of love.
To become givers of love, Adam and Eve must dwell in an environment that incorporates creativity, freedom, and free choice. Implicit within a free environment are particular responsibilities. Freedom is conditional relative to the degree one adheres to the moral laws that define the limits of freedom. Without taking an active role in self-government (discipline) no being can maintain freedom. For example, the speed limit is posted, but it is the responsibility of the driver to apply that standard to his driving decisions.
By giving Adam and Eve the commandment, God was positioning them to play an active role in their own government and completion toward perfection. The fundamental reason God gives to Adam and Eve the responsibility to achieve faith in the commandment was so that in fulfilling that condition they could form the moral foundation for freedom and the life of love. Because the experience of love for Adam and Eve was meant to be a genuine experience, their responsibility to apply the moral law, likewise, had to be genuine.
For their responsibility to be genuine, then, the possibility of failure had to be a potential in the role of responsibility. The potential for failure is present not so that it would be substantiated, but rather, to give definition and authority to the role of responsibility. It is the shadow that gives clarity to a lighted form. It is in this potential for failure that the possibility exists for the corruption of Adam and Eve. Although that outcome was a potential, its substantiation would stand in total contradiction to God's purpose for them.
With regard to free choice, as was mentioned; freedom for Adam and Eve is conditional. That is, Adam and Eve can enjoy the benefits of freedom and free choice as long as free choice is subjected to the standard of righteousness (in the garden, it was the commandment). As Reverend Moon and St. Paul point out, the purpose of freedom is so that sacrificial love can be exchanged. Adam and Eve would have to maintain the condition of faith (their responsibility) in order to maintain the environment of freedom and love.
If they lose faith in the commandment, they will automatically lose the environment of freedom. The loss of freedom results in the rise of uncontrollable excessive desire. This is the character of sin. The cause of sin, then, is not free choice but rather the loss of freedom resulting from losing faith in the commandment. It is why all sin has the nature of habit and addiction, making sinners “slaves to sin.”
In other words, man fell not because of freedom but because of the loss of freedom and the rise of inordinate, uncontrollable desire. We lose freedom when we break the condition upon which our freedom rests: faith in the word. In Romans 6:20 Paul teaches,
When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin. . . You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.
The truth is that when we maintain the conditions for freedom (faith in God’s word), the Lord’s presence becomes an integral part of our experience with freedom. In fact, God created us and set up the conditions for us to live in freedom. We need freedom, not for sin to take place, but rather for building the ideal of love.
On this foundation we can begin to understand why God did not unconditionally control man and prevent the fall. Humans fulfilling their God-given responsibility is the essential condition for them to be able to rise to the position of descendant of God. Thus, we can begin to find an altruistic motive for God not to alter or intervene upon man’s role and portion of responsibility.
There is a principle by which God intervenes in human affairs. God will not dehumanize us by treating us like helpless victims. Thus, a central component of that principle is that man must cooperate with God by fulfilling a portion of responsibility. It then affirms that God, as a God of principle, would not intervene in a way that would violate his own principle or render us dependent victims.
The analogy that comes to mind and is often cited is of a small child walking to the end of a pier with the parent fifty feet away sitting on a blanket. It wouldn’t be reasonable for a parent, who has already warned his child not to go near the water, to conclude that by jumping up and grabbing his child before he plunges headfirst into the drink, he would be in violation of a principle. This analogy often comes to people’s minds, even ministers, as we teach this particular section. It is very important to understand the flaws in this example.
Adam and Eve were not “little children. They were maturing adults. God was not ignoring His children; He was relating to them based on trust, responsibility and love. The important point is that Adam and Eve were not helpless toddlers. They were maturing young adults. Also, the responsibility with which they were grappling was not some mundane instruction regarding personal safety, but rather was their core responsibility in the path toward co-creatorship.
You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love.
Many Christians believe that man fell because of freedom, or man’s “free will agency.” He, simply, chose evil. How could a being of goodness corrupt himself? How can corruption enter into goodness?
Adam and Eve had the potential to be corrupted because they were not yet one with God. They were born flawlessly but not in the state of maturity. Adam and Eve had to grow to gain the qualification to eat from the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is a symbol of the ideal of the unchanging, eternal state of relationship with God. It is indicative of perfection or maturity. Because Adam and Eve were to ultimately become one in love with God, they had to grow in love, to become givers of love.
To become givers of love, Adam and Eve must dwell in an environment that incorporates creativity, freedom, and free choice. Implicit within a free environment are particular responsibilities. Freedom is conditional relative to the degree one adheres to the moral laws that define the limits of freedom. Without taking an active role in self-government (discipline) no being can maintain freedom. For example, the speed limit is posted, but it is the responsibility of the driver to apply that standard to his driving decisions.
By giving Adam and Eve the commandment, God was positioning them to play an active role in their own government and completion toward perfection. The fundamental reason God gives to Adam and Eve the responsibility to achieve faith in the commandment was so that in fulfilling that condition they could form the moral foundation for freedom and the life of love. Because the experience of love for Adam and Eve was meant to be a genuine experience, their responsibility to apply the moral law, likewise, had to be genuine.
For their responsibility to be genuine, then, the possibility of failure had to be a potential in the role of responsibility. The potential for failure is present not so that it would be substantiated, but rather, to give definition and authority to the role of responsibility. It is the shadow that gives clarity to a lighted form. It is in this potential for failure that the possibility exists for the corruption of Adam and Eve. Although that outcome was a potential, its substantiation would stand in total contradiction to God's purpose for them.
With regard to free choice, as was mentioned; freedom for Adam and Eve is conditional. That is, Adam and Eve can enjoy the benefits of freedom and free choice as long as free choice is subjected to the standard of righteousness (in the garden, it was the commandment). As Reverend Moon and St. Paul point out, the purpose of freedom is so that sacrificial love can be exchanged. Adam and Eve would have to maintain the condition of faith (their responsibility) in order to maintain the environment of freedom and love.
If they lose faith in the commandment, they will automatically lose the environment of freedom. The loss of freedom results in the rise of uncontrollable excessive desire. This is the character of sin. The cause of sin, then, is not free choice but rather the loss of freedom resulting from losing faith in the commandment. It is why all sin has the nature of habit and addiction, making sinners “slaves to sin.”
In other words, man fell not because of freedom but because of the loss of freedom and the rise of inordinate, uncontrollable desire. We lose freedom when we break the condition upon which our freedom rests: faith in the word. In Romans 6:20 Paul teaches,
When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin. . . You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.
The truth is that when we maintain the conditions for freedom (faith in God’s word), the Lord’s presence becomes an integral part of our experience with freedom. In fact, God created us and set up the conditions for us to live in freedom. We need freedom, not for sin to take place, but rather for building the ideal of love.
On this foundation we can begin to understand why God did not unconditionally control man and prevent the fall. Humans fulfilling their God-given responsibility is the essential condition for them to be able to rise to the position of descendant of God. Thus, we can begin to find an altruistic motive for God not to alter or intervene upon man’s role and portion of responsibility.
There is a principle by which God intervenes in human affairs. God will not dehumanize us by treating us like helpless victims. Thus, a central component of that principle is that man must cooperate with God by fulfilling a portion of responsibility. It then affirms that God, as a God of principle, would not intervene in a way that would violate his own principle or render us dependent victims.
The analogy that comes to mind and is often cited is of a small child walking to the end of a pier with the parent fifty feet away sitting on a blanket. It wouldn’t be reasonable for a parent, who has already warned his child not to go near the water, to conclude that by jumping up and grabbing his child before he plunges headfirst into the drink, he would be in violation of a principle. This analogy often comes to people’s minds, even ministers, as we teach this particular section. It is very important to understand the flaws in this example.
Adam and Eve were not “little children. They were maturing adults. God was not ignoring His children; He was relating to them based on trust, responsibility and love. The important point is that Adam and Eve were not helpless toddlers. They were maturing young adults. Also, the responsibility with which they were grappling was not some mundane instruction regarding personal safety, but rather was their core responsibility in the path toward co-creatorship.
