Our conclusion leads us to understand that the original parents offended the Creator, who is the author of life, and consequently deserved to lose eternal life. At the same time, they were privileged to receive a promise from the Creator to offer a suitable sacrifice of life. This promise prompted the original parents to continue with life on earth, bearing offspring, and abiding by the expected preconditions concerning their sibling relationships with one another and their relationship with the Creator. These relationships required worship, homage, and sacrifices, including life, to symbolize it as a standing prerequisite on their behalf and to signify the Creator as the author of everything, including life and eternal life.
Furthermore, after reflecting on the various possible options, we narrowed down the replacement for capital death to rest solely on the Creator, regardless of how profound and startling this conclusion may lead us. Additionally, our reflections concluded that the original parents had multiple potential relationships with the Creator, resembling friendship, teacher-student, Creator to creatures, Father to children, and even as strong as the expectations of spouses.
We also concluded that it was evident the Creator desired the original parents to bring forth faithful siblings, as it was obvious that the original parents did not shorten their lives to prevent a percentage of their siblings from disqualifying and losing eternal life. This insight underscores the complexity of the Creator's expectations and the deep interconnections between divine command, human action, and the overarching narrative of redemption and sacrifice. These dynamics illustrate not only the responsibility placed upon the original parents but also highlight the continuous opportunity for redemption and fulfillment of divine promises through subsequent generations, emphasizing the ongoing nature of the Creator's engagement with humanity in the quest for eternal life.
Reflecting on whether both original parents offended the Creator or only one did leads us to consider complex scenarios about sin, punishment, and inheritance. If only one parent offended the Creator, then we are faced with a situation where one parent would bear the capital punishment and eventually die, while the other, having remained faithful, could continue to live eternally. This scenario forces a division between the two parents, as one is clearly an offender deserving of capital death, and the other is faithful and eligible for eternal life. This stark contrast between the two parents mirrors the stark contrast between the treasure of gaining eternal life versus the limitation of aiming only for transient goals and rewards during earthly life. The contrast is as sharp as life and death, or total darkness compared to total light.
Furthermore, given that the Creator desired children, it would be fundamentally unfair and unjust for the children of the parent with eternal life not to inherit eternal life. If only half the children were to inherit eternal life, it would constitute an unfair, unethical, and unjust distribution of eternal life, as some would have gained it inherently and not need to worry about death. Moreover, after the death of the offending parent, one might question whether it would be better for the parent with eternal life to marry another spouse of like eternal characteristics and conceive offspring who would inherit these eternal life characteristics.
However, this scenario seems unlikely, as observed facts indicate that all siblings of the human race inherited death and are in search of eternal life. This suggests a more inclusive fault or a collective heritage of mortality, reflecting a universal need for redemption and the overcoming of death through means beyond simple biological inheritance. This universal inheritance of death highlights the need for a redemptive solution that addresses all of humanity, not just individuals or certain lineages, and underscores the importance of a collective return to the principles laid out by the Creator to regain eternal life. Thus, the narrative points to a more complex interplay of divine justice, mercy, and the ongoing human quest for redemption and eternal life, involving all descendants and not just the original pair or their immediate offspring
In the scenario where both parents faulted and transgressed equally, with the same intent, and therefore deserved death equally, logic and observed evidence appear to lean in this direction. To transgress against the Creator, logic indicates that one must have committed the disobedience of their own free will, making a free and informed choice. As such, they must have been aware of the potential to avoid the offense or, at the very least, been capable of pre-reflecting on the expectations, concluding, and even expecting that committing such an offense would merit death and risk losing the most valued inherited eternal life.
In this scenario, although we can expect that both original parents committed the punishable offense knowing the expected severe consequences, surely the original parents were together before committing the offense, as they are the original parents. Nevertheless, if one parent committed the offense and the other parent was away, the opportunity for the second parent to see that the Creator punished the first spouse would teach the second parent to avoid committing the transgression. In other words, the choice not to transgress by the second parent, although a free choice, would not be totally free as the fear of observed punishment would alter and force the choice not to transgress. This would make it unfair and unjust, as the Creator’s swift intervention would have played a part in manipulating the obedient parent’s choice, which we can reject as we concluded that such an action is unfair and unjust.
Therefore, we expect that both parents must have been together and transgressed one after another before the Creator declared the verdict of capital death, ensuring that the choice of both parents was made of their own free will. This discussion leads us to the realization that one parent’s choice to disobey should have given the other parent, who still had eternal life, a clear indication and reason to halt and choose not to disobey. The logic prompting the second spouse to choose similarly to disobey and deserve death equally is astonishing.
This reflection suggests that the dynamics of choice, temptation, and consequence were intricately linked between the two original parents. Their joint decision to transgress, and the resultant equal punishment, underscores the profound implications of their actions, not only for themselves but for all their descendants. It highlights the shared responsibility and the collective fallout from their decisions, framing the narrative of human origin within a context of shared failure and the universal need for redemption.
The most important point to keep in mind while reflecting on the situation is that we anticipate the Creator to possess free will, particularly concerning the second parent's decision after the first parent chose to disobey. The disobedience of the observing second parent is startling, given there is no guarantee that the Creator would elect to offer an adequate substitute sacrifice, enabling the offending parents and a percentage of their compliant siblings to inherit eternal life.
For the first parent, risking the loss of eternal life is severe, but it is even more critical for the second parent, as there is no assurance, nor can they be certain, that the Creator would choose to gift them eternal life. The Creator desires faithful children who possess eternal life to enjoy the Creator’s companionship, which might be better achieved by creating a new original parent who raises faithful children already destined to inherit eternal life. However, the exception occurs if the second parent's disobedience qualifies as a form of obedience.
For example, in most legal systems, if one sibling kills another, the offender is guilty of a crime punishable by death or a long imprisonment. However, an exception exists if the killing was in the act of self-defense or protecting another innocent person. In other words, if the act of killing one sibling was a conscious decision made under stressful circumstances with a desire to live or save the life of another innocent, forcing a choice of killing. Similarly, the second parent's choice to disobey and earn death might have been a conscious and intentional choice, yet as a loving and sacrificial choice to obey the Creator’s command, wish, and desire to bring forth siblings.
This choice by the second parent would be the most logical and motivated decision, taken with the understanding that it involved a high risk but also knowing that the Creator’s essence of justice would, while punishing the original parents and siblings with death, recognize the personal sacrifice of accepting capital death to uphold the Creator's command and desire for children. This unusual sacrificial disobedience could potentially gain a promise of a design to satisfy the Creator's requirement for capital punishment.
It seems the first parent did not disobey as a form of sacrifice, and there was no need as avoiding disobedience remains the best choice to maintain marital bonds and the ability to conceive offspring. Therefore, the first parent must have disobeyed either due to deception or for certain attractive gains, which, regardless of the nature of these gains, dwindle when compared to the loss of eternal life. On the other hand, the second parent's disobedience cannot merely be attributed to a deceitful trick, as it maintained the marital situation and the possibility of having offspring, suggesting that the choice must have been made to save the first transgressed spouse through the offering of the ultimate sacrifice.
Therefore, it appears that the first parent disobeyed to gain certain values, thereby offending or disobeying a specific command of the Creator. In contrast, the second parent transformed their choice into an offering of homage, worship, and sacrifice to the Creator by abiding by the Creator’s commandment and desire to remain in marriage and conceive siblings, which served as honors and homage. Moreover, the offer of sacrifice, including life for the Creator, acknowledged Him as deserving of sacrifice—even life itself—as a testament that the Creator is the originator of life and eternal life. Therefore, the second parent's choice was a loving sacrificial choice of their own life as a gift of oneself to another, including their own life as a free conscious choice, which would likely have garnered admiration from the Creator and received favor that might compel the Creator not to punish them with the deserved death or create new obedient parents, but instead declare a profound loving promise to reward such a sacrificial offering from the second parent to the Creator and also to the spouse, echoing the sentiment, “with such profound love, I accept to die just as you did, and lose eternal life.” This profound exchange of sacrificial gifts must be rewarded by the Creator with at least an equal gift of a sacrificial life—an incredible conclusion our reflection has led us to. All other scenarios of possible followed choices lead to doubt and illogical conclusions, except for this choice, although the conclusion is profoundly significant.
As we discussed, the Creator needed someone to be offered as a sacrifice for the parents who deserved capital death, yet made an exceptional, honorable choice that included homage and the ultimate sacrifice of one's life for the Creator. We discussed that offering an animal or any creature less than human does not equate to the sacrificial offering gift of the parent to the Creator, as the human possesses higher value and sacrificing eternal life is not the same as sacrificing an animal without eternal life, which can be sacrificed for food and is entirely offensive and below the eternal life sacrifice. Likewise, the offering of another human is not suitable, nor even a higher being than human, as they have free choice and should choose freely without the Creator influencing it, and they did not receive the gift from the parent to warrant them to pay back the gift with at least an equal gift. The logical case with gift exchange is to receive at least a fairly equal gift or much better, depending on the ability of the gifter.
Thus, the logical conclusion is that the Creator is the one to make a free choice to gift them eternal life by serving their own sentence of death to satisfy the decree of punishment the Creator announced, as the value of the disobedience. The Creator’s offer is adequate for all siblings who qualify and much more in value. This assured promise is also the ultimate gift of love and an incredible design that creatures who were disobedient could never imagine such a design and sacrificial love that the Creator Eternal Living would enact, yet it is expected. Remember that the Creator is just, fair, ethical, and wise to the highest levels, and realize that the ultimate sacrifice and love is the sacrifice of oneself, and this sacrifice carried with it the sacrificing of the ultimate treasure and value that surely the second parent understood. This, at the very least, equals the gift of sacrifice, including a share of eternal life itself, and we expect in generosity no human or any being can out-generous the Creator.
Furthermore, given that the Creator is the source of life and the harbinger of desires for eternal life, the promise is understood as a gift of at least equal value, which in this scenario, involves an offering from the Creator who holds much higher value. As a result, this conclusion leads us to expect that somehow the Creator would serve our capital punishment, which is to say, the Creator would assume the burden of capital death. Yet, since the Creator lives eternally and is expected to offer us eternal life, it is also anticipated that the Creator would remain alive after serving this symbolic death, in order to judge our merit and determine who among us since the original parent to the end of earthly life has gained eternal life. This expectation is incredible and logical, yet it is shrouded in the mysterious details of when and how the Creator would arrange this 'death,' who could possibly execute such a punishment, and how all these details unfold when we do not physically see the Creator, and if we were certain of the Creator’s presence, wouldn’t that alter our choice? These are profound questions, the answers to which only the Creator could design and plan with majesty, just as the design of humans, the earth, the seasons, all creatures, the stars, and the sky are so majestic and wise.
Reflect on the generosity with which the Creator gifted us the earth and all its wealth and compare it to how the ultra-rich and powerful of the world—including government officials, earthly presidents, and kings—gift us or their sacrificial guards, soldiers, and protectors in comparison to the Creator's gift of equal sacrificial love and eternal life. The Creator has already gifted and offered humanity abundantly, gifting them the earth and its treasures, including the air and the light, before we ever gifted anything to the Creator. Therefore, it is expected that the original parent, all siblings, and all beings offer back to the generous Creator homage, love, worship, and sacrifices, even from the first day of existence.
When we reflect on the world—not the things made by man, but what the Creator has offered—one cannot help but realize that it is just, deserving, rightful, and expected to offer our love in homage, worship, and sacrifice to the Creator. This realization fosters a profound sense of responsibility and gratitude towards the Creator, highlighting the deep reciprocity embedded in the relationship between the Creator and creation, a dynamic of giving that enriches our understanding of divine love and justice.
Therefore, the sacrifices required by the original parents, even after the issue of disobedience and the Creator’s promise, will continue to necessitate offers of homage, worship, and sacrifices to the Creator. We have pursued a path guided by logic and observed evidence, reflecting on various possible choices to dismiss the illogical options and to build upon the logical expectations. Furthermore, we anticipate that the unfolding of this narrative will be replete with details and points that are difficult to extract without direct communication from the Creator. However, we expect the Creator’s unfolded design to adhere to logic and to embody the main logic expected of such a divine plan.
We should maintain curiosity, remain open, and actively seek to understand the Creator's design so we can abide by any requirements related to our relationship with the Creator and our siblings, and the preconditions before the fulfillment of the Creator's plan to satisfy the capital death and any subsequent arrangements that govern our sibling relationship and our relationship with the Creator after the joyous completion of the pre-requirements, and how to continue the homage, worship, and sacrifices, as the Creator will always require such rights from the creatures as the Creator of life and eternal life.
In our journey, we need to examine the faith stories, beliefs, and religions, especially the oldest, as the design begins at the time of the creation of the original parents. Faiths or explanations that significantly diverge from this framework should be carefully examined, and the reasons for how their logic differs or contradicts should be scrutinized. The opportunity to gain eternal life is the highest treasure possible; therefore, taking the time to study, discuss, reflect, and exchange thoughts is crucial for understanding and making an informed choice. This process may require us to let go of and change our previous understandings, opinions, or faiths, which is a small sacrifice compared to the sacrifices we have reflected upon and concluded.
Remember, adhering to any faith or opinions by themselves cannot overcome death nor offer the opportunity of eternal life. Thus, be courageous and willing to change your opinions, as no living goals, opinions, or anything else can equate to eternal life or are worth sacrificing eternal life for. Likewise, following false requirements or requirements that are incorrect and do not align with the Creator's design, although by themselves do not overcome death, may distract us and busy us chasing false directions that may ultimately lead us to lose eternal life. Therefore, close examination and maintaining logic and logical reasoning are essential.