ECT Classical Vs. Biblical Original Sin - Interlude & DIRECT ASSAULT (Part 3) :execute:

[glorydaz]

You are so dense.

The nature of Adam, as GOD created him, not only had the capacity to disobey GOD, but did disobey GOD.
The very same nature that GOD created him as, is the very same nature that disobeyed (unless you incorrectly think that GOD changed Adam's nature before he disobeyed).
The nature of man can still disobey GOD, so nothing has changed in that regard.

Exactly, and the law God gave Adam was given for the exact same reason the law is given to all men...whether that law be in our conscience or written down....it was to bring us to a realization that we are lost without God's direct intervention in our lives. We are to look to Him for our very existance. That's what faith is.

 

[glorydaz]

While Adam made a choice to disobey God everyone since Adam is going to die physically and Adam was created by God to live forever.

Man was never created to live forever in a physical body.

1 Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.​

 

[glorydaz]

EVERYONE since Adam will sin ADAM did not have to. See the difference ?

Begs the question WHY did God give Adam one rule ? All you are doing is marginalizing Adam's disobedience to God.

Adam had no excuse but we do. :chuckle:

So if you see a big juicy steak sitting on someone else's plate, you have no choice but to take it?

 

[dodge]

Man was never created to live forever in a physical body.

1 Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.​

If you would read Genesis 3 you would see that Adam was prepared to live forever in the garden of Eden ,and that changed when he disobeyed God.

 

[dodge]

Adam had no excuse but we do. :chuckle:

So if you see a big juicy steak sitting on someone else's plate, you have no choice but to take it?

You can't see what is not revealed to you by the Holy Spirit, obviously, as displayed with the way folks cannot see what is going on in Genesis 3.

 

[dodge]

Exactly, and the law God gave Adam was given for the exact same reason the law is given to all men...whether that law be in our conscience or written down....it was to bring us to a realization that we are lost without God's direct intervention in our lives. We are to look to Him for our very existance. That's what faith is.

Adam was not "lost" until he chose to disobey God. You are comparing apples and fruit cake. Everyone since Adam started off lost Adam didn't.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Everyone since Adam started off lost Adam didn't.

Here is how Adam started off:

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" (Gen.2:7).​

Here is how Job started off:

"The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life" (Job.33:4).​

 

[dodge]

Here is how Adam started off:

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" (Gen.2:7).​

Here is how Job started off:

"The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life" (Job.33:4).​

Yes, they were both alive Adam with a fallen nature and Job with the nature passed down as part of the condemnation of Adam for disobeying God. In Adam "ALL" die.

 

[Tambora]

And you still do not understand the signifiance of the "before" and "after" of Adam's nakedness.

There was no difference in his nakedness.
He was uncovered before he ate the fruit and he was uncovered after he ate the fruit.
His knowledge of his nakedness changed, his nakedness did not.
Scripture is very clear on this, and why you go against scripture about it is very telling.

 

[dodge]

Tambora;4986603]There was no difference in his nakedness.

Sure there was. Before he disobeyed God he did not even know he was naked and after the disobedience not only did he know he was naked he was ashamed of his nakedness.

He was uncovered before he ate the fruit and he was uncovered after he ate the fruit.
His knowledge of his nakedness changed, his nakedness did not.

He was obviously "covered" with something "before" he disobeyed God that kept him from being aware of his nakedness that he was not covered with "after" he disobeyed God and knew he was naked.
Scripture is very clear on this, and why you go against scripture about it is very telling.[/QUOTE]

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, they were both alive Adam with a fallen nature...

The verse i quoted is in regard to when and how Adam was created. Are you saying that he was created with a fallen nature, despite the fact that the LORD said that His creation is "every good"?

 

[dodge]

The verse i quoted is in regard to when and how Adam was created. Are you saying that he was created with a fallen nature, despite the fact that the LORD said that His creation is "every good"?

Jerry, it really is not that hard. Prior to the disobedience of Adam his nature was not fallen , and after the fall Adam had a fallen nature which he passed on to his progeny as in "all die in Adam".

 

[dodge]

There was no difference in his nakedness.
He was uncovered before he ate the fruit and he was uncovered after he ate the fruit.
His knowledge of his nakedness changed, his nakedness did not.
Scripture is very clear on this, and why you go against scripture about it is very telling.

Did Adam and Eve even know they were naked before Adam disobeyed God ? No they did not. It is obvious to anyone that is not a humanist that there was a change that Adam immediately recognized.

It is not me going against scripture it is YOU. God covered them with animal skins providing a sacrifice for them and you cannot even understand that.

What is telling is that you cannot even understand the before and after of their disobedience.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Hi Dodge,

When you get a chance I look forward to your reply to this...

I'll drop it in spoiler format if case you missed it.

Spoiler

Thank you I was distracted when I posted the sin nature comes through Adam and Jesus had an earthly mother NOT an earthly Father, and there was a reason for that.

I know you revere the very WORD of God and HIS Scripture, thus I was certain this was the case.

There was a reason Jesus had no earthly father.

God Fathered God. This is the very "reason". The Sin that is "passed" down idea is Augustine and not scriptural. God made us equal to Him as His "children" of "His Body", but the Patriarchal tradition in scripture is specifically to show us our "Not Like God" place and equality existing only through Love likened to intimacy that is beyond the consummation of a marriage.

I cannot emphasize how Calvinist and Augustine the idea is that we are imputed with "Adam's" sin or "sin nature". We make mistakes... God doesn't. That's the actual truth of the matter. We are not and never will be "like God".

Even though man is born with a sin nature there is still no real excuse ! Scripture says every man is drawn away through his "own" lust and when lust conceives it produces sin and sin produces death.....Where id man's lust come from I would argue it comes from his sinful nature.

In other words... the extra biblical concept of imputed sin and "sin nature, can go out the window and all is well in Jesus land. You see it... I can tell you see it.

Jesus was truly man without a sin nature just as Adam was showing that Adam chose to disobey God He did NOT have to sin.

If He was tempted in every manner we were tempted in scripture... this is misleading. What if I say...

Our 5 Star General gave each of us a shot to recognize that He deserved His supreme Authority, or challenge it and from the first Angel to the Last Human... none have "measured up". Would that be "fair" to say? Same rules... same playing field... Only ONE could Draw "Excalibur".

That is making an excuse to sin. Adam disobeyed God period.

So admitting that I have free will and screw up is making an "excuse for sin", while saying God "imputed" a Sin nature through Adam or I "inherited" a "sin nature" from Adam and can't help but sin isn't?

Did you ever tell your Drill instructor that you couldn't make your bunk properly because your Great-Great Grand Father couldn't make his bunk properly, thus you have a propensity to screw up your bunk?

How would that have gone?

Yes, I have read and prayed over the analogy of the bronze serpent many times.
Bottom line of the analogy is look to Jesus for forgiveness as they looked to the bronze serpent to be healed we look to Jesus and only Jesus to be saved from the sting and poison of sin.

Aha! AMEN.... :thumb: Fully Agree! Only One "Bright" ... and TRUE... "NORTH". We can either pull our compass and map out and measure the Klicks out for ourselves, or we can accept that "He" alone made it through this "Jungle" for us.

I dealt with all of that at the foot of the cross in 1978.

Amen and Praise Jesus! Hoo Yah! Well... ya know I shouldn't be saying Hoo Rah... but... didn't we both have the same insignia's on our pay-stubs?

Why was Jesus born without an earthly Father ? Surely there was a reason !

Only God can Father God. We addressed this earlier.

That death thingy came from Adam how do you explain that death is a result of sin. Even though babies die never having sinned ?

Aha... Now you speak of "Physical" death. Is this not the result of us being "Like God", thanks to the old Dragon's excellent (severe sarcasm) suggestion. He's that one guy in the ranks that screws it up for everyone! The old Dragon is essentially Full Metal Jacket's Pyle, eating a jelly donut while we all suffer!

offered the forbidden fruit to Adam and he ate HE DID NOT HAVE TO. You are placing the blame on Satan when it was Adam who DISOBEYED God.

I believe that Adam didn't want to live without Eve and took on her "Sin" in a literal fashion, while a very SUPER DUPER SQUARED AWAY SOLDIER ... Aced the coarse and then imputed HIS SUCCESS in place of "EVERYONE" else's Failures and sniped the Alpha TARGET in the progress (Heb. 2:14). Do I get points for literary creativity yet and does not the Groom "Lay" his life down for the "Bride"... per scripture, while the instigator of the conflict is FOOBARed and DOA?

Satan tempted Eve she chose to disobey God she did NOT have to. Eve gave the forbidden fruit to Adam and he chose to sin. Satan tempted Eve and Adam disobeyed.

Eve was "seduced" into feeling "lacking". Again... Did Adam think "Eve" was "lacking"? I'm fairly certain the whole cloths thing upset him in the long run. Just saying... Does not scripture say this.... (1 Peter 3:7)? Does it not also say this... (Eph. 5:25)? Do you really want to take the (1 John 4:8) and the (1 Cor. 13) out of the matter?

Can you think of a more God defining Statement than God is Love that makes the (John 5:39) of the matter even more clear in the Creation account? Christology... Christology... Christology!

We sin because that is our nature to sin but we are responsible because of our nature that is what we chose to do.

That's odd... because as long as I have known better, I do it because I willingly screw up and then reap the consequences which usually suck! As in... sin... in and of itself is an empty pursuit, but we aren't GOD and Sin is actually "Missing the Mark", so in reality... we were born different from God and always will be, because God never desired to "Marry" a "Clone" of "Himself". Does that make sense?

We agree Jesus is the only propitiation there is no other.

Well Amen to that! This is imperative and binds us as brethren in Him with the afforded enjoyment of discussing differing theological perspectives.

Like the experience of Adam disobeying God and with that experience would have been trapped in living in sin had God not covered him with animal skins.

I could push this point to say that God covered up the most beautiful things He had ever formed and was disgusted that Satan caused Adam and Eve to be ASHAMED of HIS Workmanship...

But... I mainly want to point out that you are looking at the "Flesh" of Adam and Eve and not their "Hearts". We can do this as we have All Scripture and on top of it... (1 Cor. 2:16, 1 John 4:8 and 1 Cor. 13)... but that's just me. Is the disobedience the "important" part? Or is the message of Love the important part?

Little children, I shall be with you a little while longer. You will seek Me; and as I said to the Jews, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come,’ so now I say to you. 34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”​

Again why do you suppose Jesus had no earthly Father there was a reason otherwise God what purpose did that serve ?

Again... Only God can Beget God. As for the "Flesh" of the matter... God is no cheater. I genuinely believe that He walked as a 100 percent Man, just like scripture says, because He alone can "Walk" Righteously and Good without screwing up. If any other being was "Perfect like God"... they would "Be God". And alas... since that whole "Be like God" ego trip of the Dragon didn't work out so well, I'm fairly certain the fate of anyone else who tries it will end up similar.

He alone is Holy and righteous.

Amen Dodge! Amen!

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

The Red and the Blue

The Red and the Blue

God has many attributes we will never share with Him. Immutability is one of them. The scriptures say that in the ages to come we will always be learning about the grace and kindness He has for us (Ephesians 2:7)

I do believe spiritual and moral perfection is being Christ-like because He is the template for how a man with God inside should be like. Christ came to earth to walk as a man so that we could follow Him (1 John 2:6). While He was here He took the subordinate position of being totally dependent on the Father, which is what we should do. He did not get through any temptation by using His divine nature.

I think one thing that has not been addressed on this thread is just what a "nature" is. Everyone talks about it but no one defines it. In Greek there are two words translated "nature" ousis and fusis. The first word means "essence" or "being." Nobody can share the divine essence. That would be like becoming God. The second word means the divine character or image which we are supposed to be partakers of.

We cannot share Christ's divine nature (of which immutability is an attribute) but we can and are supposed to be progressively being shaped into the Image of His character.

Hi Shasta,

I will tread light again, because I know you Love Jesus and are sincere and focused on His Love. I want to point out something that is the core reason I believe the topic of "Origonal Sin" is so critical to "Biblically" understand.

There is no easy way to say this... I highly recommend you evaluate the first OP in this series. The Link is HERE.

Let's do this the fair way... I'll give you the Red Pill and the Blue Pill.

You're going to have to "choose". The Red Pill is symbolic of blunt, biblical truth that is bound to all scripture but is enormously rugged to take in. The Blue Pill is symbolic of wanting a peaceful discussion on this matter without any abrasive scripture to your respectable perspective.

I can be a bit "theatrical"... so here goes...

First... the Blue Pill. (Open this Spoiler to choose the Blue)

Spoiler

I am a forgiven sinner and nothing more. My words are human and I only get matters correct by Jesus. (John 5:39) is the very heart of my personal, theological perspective. I was challenged by Arians to go deeper into the biblical doctrine about the "TriUnity" of God. In this study and debate, I believe we could mutually grow by discussing this matter. You are brilliant and you clearly are passionate about Jesus.

I have many verses and expositions on the matter that Glorify the very Supremacy of Jesus. We could approach this matter together in the future if you would enjoy the study

Now... [MENTION=9592]Shasta[/MENTION]... This will come off harsh, but I am sincere and I sincerely believe my initial suspicion about a matter has been revealed. Please do not open this coming spoiler if you would be hurt by my blunt reproof of your statement through scripture.

The Red Pill...

Spoiler

Shasta... I respect you as an Acts 11:26 follower, but... you are in grave doctrine error that gets covered over by much of Christondom....

You said this...

I do believe spiritual and moral perfection is being Christ-like because He is the template for how a man with God inside should be like.

Jesus is the Almighty... (Is. 9:6). Makes it clear that though He is the Son... He is the very presence and Glory of "The Mighty God" ... "Everlasting Father".

When you say that being "Christ Like" is attempting to accomplish Moral Perfection like Jesus, you are doing something you would never actually want to do... but you are indeed doing it.

Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’​

And again...

Gen. 3:5 For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”​

And again...

Ezek. 28:17 “Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty;
You corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor;
I cast you to the ground,
I laid you before kings,
That they might gaze at you.​

I could go on... (1 Cor. 5:5)

Jesus even specifies this...

John 8:15

15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one.​

Because we know Jesus only looked to the heart and is the "Supreme Judge"... we know that the judge of flesh is Satan and when we judge our flesh or another's in comparison to God... we are perpetuating the very lie of Satan that shames us by the standards of God, in place of our imperfection when held next to God.

God made us and He loved us as His from Adam to now. He has never, not Loved us. He counts us perfect "by His Love" and thus... we should too. His Love... His provision... His creation... His design... His "finished work"...

Shasta... His grace is sufficient...

If you weren't a "guide" to others, this would be a personal matter for you, but Shasta... you've been deceived into encouraging others to commit the true "Original Sin". You humble yourself and exalt Him. Your attempts at moral perfection impede His work and cause others to stumble. Your personal walk is yours alone... but you impact others. Grace is impeded when you focus on "obedience" and teach others to be "Christ-Like".

The scripture that uses this verbiage is being misunderstood by you. We are cracked vessels of clay... His Power is perfected in "weakness". This is not Antinomiansm... it is the Truth of HE who came for Sinners.

We are not He and We never will be. This is Good. He alone is GOOD.

I love you brother and have a way of offending those I see potential in... and since Jesus saw potential in ALL... I offend MANY.

All Grace, respect and recognition that I am a mere human expressing ideas... humbly awaiting your rebuke, inquisition, acceptance of what has been said here... or silence.

From my heart and prayerfully in the Spirit of Jesus...

- <(PW)>

 

[Tambora]

Adam lost not only the image of God, but His favour
and fellowship too

Mankind did not lose the image of GOD.

Genesis 9:6 KJV
(6) Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

 

[Nick M]

Do you accept the Bible books as arranged by "early church fathers"? I will explain it, I just need to know a few things from you first. Or do you think the books are out of order, and not necessarily divine inspiration.

Hi Nick...

I still didn't get an answer. I am going to show you why 1 John, 2 John, Peter, Hebrews...is not written to the Body of Christ.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, it really is not that hard. Prior to the disobedience of Adam his nature was not fallen , and after the fall Adam had a fallen nature which he passed on to his progeny as in "all die in Adam".

When I quoted these verses in regard to how both Adam and Job were created you spoke of Adam and his fallen nature:

Here is how Adam started off:

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" (Gen.2:7).

Here is how Job started off:

"The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life" (Job.33:4).​

Since Adam was created spiritually alive and Job was made by the Spirit and the LORD breathed life into him just as He did into Adam then it is obvious that Job emerged from the womb spiritually alive.

Thereby blowing the lid off of the myth of Original Sin.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

I still didn't get an answer. I am going to show you why 1 John, 2 John, Peter, Hebrews...is not written to the Body of Christ.

Bottom line... you did get an answer and didn't like it. It was right out of Pauline writings and you confirmed he was aware of both dispensations as he wrote what he wrote in 2 Tim. 3:16.

The full answer...

I already know exactly what you speak of and agree that those books are to the circumcision. I also defend this stance. However, Jesus' red letters bring understanding to the grace age meaning of the books. Please start another thread or bump an old one on why you believe Paul's use of the word "ALL" scripture doesn't mean all, even after you yourself acknowledged that Paul was aware of the Jewish dispensation of scripture and the Gentile dispensation.

You are working to prove a man made doctrinal point that is clearly refuted by Paul. (1 John 2:27) warns against this and I'm sorry you feel that parts of the Bible should be labeled Jew only.

I joked with you about "JewSoEver" and I fully agree that scripture is fully Divinely inspired.

I not only believe in Israels future prophetic implications, but I support the "persistent widow" of today. If it bothers you that I fully believe God meant for all scripture to be valuable to us, as long as it is dispensationally divided and understood... you'll have to bow out.

I want your input... but one last time... the books you mention are very valuable to us... especially those of us that understand the Tanakh.

Please understand that I respect you Nick and I agree with most of what you say...

However... the very books you claim are "locked" to us Goyum... are crucial for most doctrine and especially "original sin" and "the TriUnity" of God. The mechanism of the New Covenant is in those scriptures in ways that impede the gospel, if not taken into account.

You are the one claiming scripture is divinely inspired... and I agree. However... only men teach that this or that must not be read or utilized. Even the Torah carries Gospel material that was revealed from the New Testament and some material is not even expressed but through discernment of All scripture.

Please move forward and cease this tactic in this thread... as men that lock up scripture to others are extremely disillusioned.

Please show me where Paul corrected his ALL scripture as an error on another thread. But the topic here is original sin and how the "Sin Imputation" theory is counter to ALL scripture.

The matter is much more extensive and deserves further study.

- [MENTION=18375]Evil.Eye.<(I)>[/MENTION]

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

When I quoted these verses in regard to how both Adam and Job were created you spoke of Adam and his fallen nature:

Here is how Adam started off:

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" (Gen.2:7).

Here is how Job started off:

"The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life" (Job.33:4).​

Since Adam was created spiritually alive and James was made by the Spirit and the LORD breathed life into him just as He did into Adam then it is obvious that Job emerged from the womb spiritually alive.

Thereby blowing the lid off of the myth of Original Sin.

:thumb: