Slower still: I do not debate admitted bible correctors/mystics/agnostics,and humanists old man, such as yourself; I only attempt to persuade, dispute with bible believers. That excludes you.
Check.
ECT Is "Original sin" Seen by Others as Intrinsic Potential or latent in Creation as Evil
- Thread starter popsthebuilder
- Start date
Slower still: I do not debate admitted bible correctors/mystics/agnostics,and humanists old man, such as yourself; I only attempt to persuade, dispute with bible believers. That excludes you.
Check.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I am the person who believes what is written in the following verse and sonny boy denies what is written there:
"Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17; KJV).
Don't let johnny boy trick you into thinking that he actually believes the Bible because even though he is aware of Hebrews 2:17 he denies that the Lord Jesus was made like His brethren "in all things."
Slower still, gay old man Jerry: No, you are not a bible believer; Therefore, I do not debate admitted bible correctors/mystics/agnostics,and humanists, gay old man, such as yourself; I only attempt to persuade, dispute with bible believers. That excludes you.
Check.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Sonny boy lives in a fantasy world because he thinks that he actually believes the Bible even though he denies that the Lord Jesus was made like his brethren in all things:
"Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17; KJV).
johnny boy prefers the teachings of Augustine when he taught that "If Adam had not sinned, he would not have been despoiled of his body, but would have been clothed with immortality and incorruptibility."
David certainly did not believe his body was despoiled, writing the following:
"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well" (Ps.139:13-14).
Slower still, gay old man Jerry: No, you are not a bible believer; Therefore, I do not debate admitted bible correctors/mystics/agnostics,and humanists, gay old man, such as yourself; I only attempt to persuade, dispute with bible believers. That excludes you.
Check.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Here we can see that mankind was made upright:
According to the false theory of Original Sin all people emerge from the womb totally corrupted in both body and soul.
I cannot understand why anyone would ever defend that deplorable theory, especially since it makes the LORD the author of sin. And who in their right mind would ever think that the LORD would hold infants responsible for the sins of Adam?
"So I turned my mind to understand, to investigate and to search out wisdom and the scheme of things and to understand the stupidity of wickedness and the madness of folly. I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare. 'Look,' says the Teacher, 'this is what I have discovered: Adding one thing to another to discover the scheme of things--while I was still searching but not finding--I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all. This only have I found: God created mankind upright, but they have gone in search of many schemes'" (Eccl.7:25-29).
According to the false theory of Original Sin all people emerge from the womb totally corrupted in both body and soul.
I cannot understand why anyone would ever defend that deplorable theory, especially since it makes the LORD the author of sin. And who in their right mind would ever think that the LORD would hold infants responsible for the sins of Adam?
popsthebuilder
New member
It is defended so people can not work and feel secure.
If children ate initially innocent and we are to be childlike as believers then that doesn't leave much room for knowing sin or greed or promoting confusion or contention.
peace
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
GeoffW
New member
It is strange, but most fail to see the connection.
Just as it is also strange that 'original sin' can still be imagined as being possible when we read:
Deu 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
It really isn't that hard to comprehend when you see it.
Geoff.
I wish God would have had a good serious sit down with Adam and Eve where God tells them how serious the death is that comes from the tree. Tells them that something or someone would try to deceive them, warning them to be aware. But, I supposes that would have required them knowing good and evil, to be told about upcoming deceptions.
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
:think:
What is to know enough Alex?
Isaiah 7:16
16for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.
GeoffW
New member
Derf
Well-known member
Do you think they didn't realize the seriousness of "death"? That suggests they didn't have full command of the language God used to speak to them. Which would suggest God is either a poor communicator or that the language capacity He gave them was not "very good". Either way, it makes God out to be less than what He is.
I think rather that God must have gotten across the message to them, because they were scared enough of the commandment to add to it--they put an additional barrier into the commandment not to even touch the tree.
[Gen 3:3 KJV] But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Compare with:
[Gen 2:17 KJV] But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
But if the issue were merely whether they ate of that tree or not, surely God could have prevented them from doing so in more forceful ways, like putting angelic guards around the tree like He did the tree of life later on. The issue surely was that God was showing the utter seriousness of disobeying Him, and how that relates to eternal life. If we can only live eternally with His help, and we refuse His help by disobeying Him...
derf
Derf
Well-known member
I didn't see anyone else respond to this aspect of your post, so I'll throw this in:
While Adam begat Seth in his own likeness, the image of God still exists on/in mankind. We see God condemning murder after the flood for the very reason that man is <still> made in His image.
[Gen 9:5 KJV] And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.
[Gen 9:6 KJV] Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
While one might say that the reasoning in vs 6b only applies to Adam (and Eve), they were no longer alive, and thus the "man" of vs 6b had to be Noah or later.
Made up-no "half and half:"
Genesis 5:3 KJV And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
Genesis 9:6 KJV is referring to Adam/Eve, and the LORD God is merely drawing a doctrine from this fact.
for in the image of God made he man
vs,
begat a son
Details.....
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Exactly, but don't get your hopes up that anyone will believe that. We also know that the Lord Jesus was made like His brethren "in all things" (Heb.2:17) but there are people on this forum who say that He was made like them in only some things. They would rather believe John Calvin when he said the following:
"Everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion;2:1:8).
Right, john w?
Derf
Well-known member
I addressed that in my post. It can't be just Adam and Eve, because God is using the logic of man being made in His image to tell Noah not to allow murder to go unpunished. If all the men/women after Adam and Eve were merely made in Adam's image, God could not use this logic.
Not to mention the fact that God's use of "man" in vs 6a, is consistent with His use of "man" in vs 6b. So if "man" means "Adam" only, then only Adam is protected, and only Adam can do the revenging, but that's only after someone kills him.
But the word for "man" in all three uses in vs 6 is "adam". Which means "man".
I'm not disagreeing with your 'no "half-and-half"' statement, though. I'm completely satisfied with the idea that we are fully in Adam's image and fully in God's image, at least to the point scripture allows. Thus, when Jesus came to save mankind, or "adam-kind" if you will, He was also saving those with the image of God. Is that a problem?
Made up-no "half and half:"
Genesis 5:3 KJV And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
Genesis 9:6 KJV is referring to Adam/Eve, and the LORD God is merely drawing a doctrine from this fact.
for in the image of God made he man
vs,
begat a son
Details.....
Genesis 5:1-32 KJV
"...and he died.....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died."
Derf
Well-known member
I addressed that in my post. It can't be just Adam and Eve, because God is using the logic of man being made in His image to tell Noah not to allow murder to go unpunished. If all the men/women after Adam and Eve were merely made in Adam's image, God could not use this logic.
Not to mention the fact that God's use of "man" in vs 6a, is consistent with His use of "man" in vs 6b. So if "man" means "Adam" only, then only Adam is protected, and only Adam can do the revenging, but that's only after someone kills him.
But the word for "man" in all three uses in vs 6 is "adam". Which means "man".
I'm not disagreeing with your 'no "half-and-half"' statement, though. I'm completely satisfied with the idea that we are fully in Adam's image and fully in God's image, at least to the point scripture allows. Thus, when Jesus came to save mankind, or "adam-kind" if you will, He was also saving those with the image of God. Is that a problem?
(Wow! Isn't this fun!)
Slower: I only debate bible believers, not admitted bible correctors/mystics/agnostics/blenders.
Made up-no "half and half:"
Genesis 5:3 KJV And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
Genesis 9:6 KJV is referring to Adam/Eve, and the LORD God is merely drawing a doctrine from this fact.
for in the image of God made he man
vs,
begat a son
Details.....
Genesis 5:1-32 KJV
"...and he died.....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died....and he died."