ECT Is "Original sin" Seen by Others as Intrinsic Potential or latent in Creation as Evil

[Derf]

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."

And yet
[1Co 11:7 KJV] For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

But I guess only Adam should not cover his head. And Paul was writing these words for no useful purpose, since Adam was not in Corinth.

Maybe this means that eternal life was not the aspect of God's image that God had in mind when He created man in His image.

 

[john w]

And yet
[1Co 11:7 KJV] For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

But I guess only Adam should not cover his head. And Paul was writing these words for no useful purpose, since Adam was not in Corinth.

Maybe this means that eternal life was not the aspect of God's image that God had in mind when He created man in His image.

I guess...Maybe this means...

First time you are correct....

 

[Derf]

First time you are correct....

I allow that I might be incorrect. (You ought to try it sometime.)

 

[john w]

I allow that I might be incorrect. (You ought to try it sometime.)

I once thought that I was wrong; but I was wrong about that.

So there.

 

[Derf]

I once thought that I was wrong; but I was wrong about that.

So there.

With that in mind...

[1Co 11:7 KJV] For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

 

[john w]

With that in mind...

[1Co 11:7 KJV] For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Genesis 1:26-27 KJV And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Genesis 5:1-2 KJV This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.


Here: Adam and Eve were "one," are "man," and were both created in the image and likeness of God.

1Co 11:7 KJV


Underline "but:"


7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.


In 1 Corinthians 11:7 KJV, it is the male who is in the image of God-not the female. So, you have a problem.

Pretty good article:


https://biblicalgenderroles.com/201...-more-like-woman-or-a-combination-of-the-two/


Time to move on...

 

[Derf]

Genesis 1:26-27 KJV And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Genesis 5:1-2 KJV This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.


Here: Adam and Eve were "one," are "man," and were both created in the image and likeness of God.

1Co 11:7 KJV


Underline "but:"


7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.


In 1 Corinthians 11:7 KJV, it is the male who is in the image of God-not the female. So, you have a problem.

Pretty good article:


https://biblicalgenderroles.com/201...-more-like-woman-or-a-combination-of-the-two/


Time to move on...

Move on if you need to, but you're moving on before you've convinced anyone of anything, making your inputs, while interesting, of little worth.

It's notable that the word "image" is not included in the description of the woman. Therefore 1 Cor 11:7 does not preclude its use in the image of God discussion. Nor have you explained what the "image" is if not the same image as was applied to Adam.

And your reference agrees with me.

 

[john w]

Move on if you need to, but you're moving on before you've convinced anyone of anything, making your inputs, while interesting, of little worth.

"Little worth," you muse, you snotty little punk? No, that would be you, as you are quite irrelevant on TOL, not in my league. I engage you, just to pass time, waiting for the real challenges. Plus, I'm out of beer. To wit:

Your "page:"
This page has had 128 visits

vs.



The great saint John W's page:

This page has had 16,760 visits

Quite a contrast-worthless Dirt, vs. the feared, respected saint John W

And your reference agrees with me.

Not many agree with you on TOL, you irrelevant twit. I posted it as "interesting," you loser. You're beginning to bore me. Move on.

 

[glorydaz]

Pretty good article:


https://biblicalgenderroles.com/201...-more-like-woman-or-a-combination-of-the-two/


Time to move on...

Sorry, I'm not a feminist, but this makes me laugh. Unconditional love and a higher sense of duty are masculine traits? :chuckle:

By “emulate men more”, I don’t mean women need to start dressing or acting exactly like men – we already have way too much that today! What I mean is that women ought to try and emulate the sense of duty that many men have, rather than living their lives completely by their feelings.

Do your duty toward God, even when you don’t feel like it, or don’t feel his presence.
Do your duty toward your husband, even when you don’t feel like it, or perhaps don’t feel an emotional connection with him.
Do your duties as mother toward your children, even when you do not feel like doing them, and even when you don’t feel appreciated by your children.
Do your duties toward your home, and keep up your home even when you don’t feel like it.
God’s love is more often seen as a love founded in a commitment of the will, a duty

When the Bible famously says in I John 4:8, that “God is love” it is literally saying God is “Agape”.

Agape love is a love of the will, of duty and commitment, and this is the way that God’s love is most often described, it is not a love based in emotion. It is the strongest kind of love, and an unconditional kind of love. The emotional type of love, Philia love, is used far less to describe the kind of love God has towards us, or that we are to have toward God.

This is another way in which women should try to emulate men more. Women most often love based on feelings, or how others make them feel. Men more often love from a sense of will, duty and commitment, this is the driving force of how God loves us. A woman should try to emulate this Agape love that men usually possess more naturally than women often do.

 

[GeoffW]

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.

I disagree. Your view is way to general in that you use the term 'mankind'. It can only be seen in the light you suggest by the addition of "still". It is not there.
God certainly did make man in his image, but the act of transgression changed that.
Every child born is made in the image of God, but the act of transgression (once he knows to choose the good and reject the evil) changes that. (Deut. 1:39,Mat.18:13,Isa.7:15-16)
We do have one continuing example in mankind though.
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person...

Geoff.

 

[GeoffW]

Maybe this means that eternal life was not the aspect of God's image that God had in mind when He created man in His image.

Without question. Subsequent actions demonstrate that.

Geoff.

 

[Derf]

I disagree. Your view is way to general in that you use the term 'mankind'. It can only be seen in the light you suggest by the addition of "still". It is not there.
God certainly did make man in his image, but the act of transgression changed that.
Every child born is made in the image of God, but the act of transgression (once he knows to choose the good and reject the evil) changes that. (Deut. 1:39,Mat.18:13,Isa.7:15-16)
We do have one continuing example in mankind though.
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person...

Geoff.

And yet, even sinful man was to be avenged. The admonition to avenge the death of men was not just for murdered children. We retain some aspect of the image of God into adulthood.

 

[Derf]

not in my league.

Thank God for that!!!

 

[john w]

Thank God for that!!!

Stumped me there, with that original zinger.

 

[GeoffW]

And yet, even sinful man was to be avenged. The admonition to avenge the death of men was not just for murdered children. We retain some aspect of the image of God into adulthood.

Are we to assume then that unless we "retain some aspect of the image of God into adulthood", God wouldn't have cared that we murdered our fellow man?
Wouldn't it be more likely that since God created 'every man' in his image, he nonetheless wanted 'every man' to have the opportunity to redeem himself, if it were indeed possible?
Why else would God give his laws to what he knew were sinful men if not that he wanted to give man the opportunity to redeem himself?
I'm not suggesting that it was possible that man could redeem himself back to God but I know of millions of people who seem to be trying to do that very thing, if you get my drift.



Geoff.

 

[Derf]

Are we to assume then that unless we "retain some aspect of the image of God into adulthood", God wouldn't have cared that we murdered our fellow man?
Wouldn't it be more likely that since God created 'every man' in his image, he nonetheless wanted 'every man' to have the opportunity to redeem himself, if it were indeed possible?
Why else would God give his laws to what he knew were sinful men if not that he wanted to give man the opportunity to redeem himself?
I'm not suggesting that it was possible that man could redeem himself back to God but I know of millions of people who seem to be trying to do that very thing, if you get my drift.



Geoff.

Good post!

Sure there are plenty of reasons God might not want men to kill each other. But if we acknowledge that he created "every man" in His image, the verse that was used to say we aren't born in His image, Gen 5:3, can no longer be used.

What you have said is indeed possible, but it doesn't fit with: "[1Co 11:7 KJV] For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man." which says man is already the image of God. While "[1Co 15:49 KJV] And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." suggests we are not yet bearing Christ's image, or at least some aspect of God's image.

Which part of His image are we already and which part are we not?

Are angels in God's image, if they do not sin? I'm just not sure that sin is the only thing that keeps us from being in God's image. And any act of justice could be considered to be achieving some aspect of God's image, including avenging your slain brother.

I will acknowledge that there are few verses that say we are currently God's image, but a number that say He made us in His image.

 

[GeoffW]

Good post!

Sure there are plenty of reasons God might not want men to kill each other. But if we acknowledge that he created "every man" in His image, the verse that was used to say we aren't born in His image, Gen 5:3, can no longer be used.

What you have said is indeed possible, but it doesn't fit with: "[1Co 11:7 KJV] For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man." which says man is already the image of God. While "[1Co 15:49 KJV] And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." suggests we are not yet bearing Christ's image, or at least some aspect of God's image.

Which part of His image are we already and which part are we not?

Are angels in God's image, if they do not sin? I'm just not sure that sin is the only thing that keeps us from being in God's image. And any act of justice could be considered to be achieving some aspect of God's image, including avenging your slain brother.

I will acknowledge that there are few verses that say we are currently God's image, but a number that say He made us in His image.

I'll spend some time considering this.
You make some good points.
Thanks.

Geoff.

 

[patrick jane]

"We shall be like Him" but not yet.

1 John 3:2-3 KJV -
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.


3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I will acknowledge that there are few verses that say we are currently God's image, but a number that say He made us in His image.

One thing that is certain is that we are created spiritually alive and the LORD is spirtually alive. In the following verse the Apostle Paul describes how he was saved by being made alive by the spirit:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).​

Joseph Henry Thayer says that the Greek word translated regeneration "denotes the restoration of a thing to its pristine state, its renovation" [emphasis added] (Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek - English Lexicon of the New Testament, 474).

The word "regeneration" is translated from the Greek word paliggenesia, which is the combination of palin and genesis.

Palin means "joined to verbs of all sorts,it denotes renewal or repetition of the action" (Ibid., 475).

Genesis means "used of birth, nativity" (Ibid., 112).

So when we combine the two words the meaning is a repetition of a birth. Therefore, when Paul used the Greek word translated "regeneration" to describe his salvation experience he was speaking of a repetition of a birth.

It is obvious that the reference is not to a "physical" rebirth, or the repetition of one's physical birth. Paul could only be speaking of a repetition of a spiritual birth. And the words that follow make it certain that the "birth" of which Paul is referring to is a "spiritual" birth--"renewing of the Holy Spirit."

Since the renewal of the Holy Spirit is in regard to being made alive spiritually then the previous birth of the Spirit must also be in regard to being made alive spiritually by the Holy Spirit. In other words, since a person is "regenerated" by the Holy Spirit then that means that one must have previously been born of the Holy Spirit. That happens at conception.

These facts alone destroy the theory of Original Sin because according to that theory all people emerge from the womb spiritually dead.

 

[GeoffW]

One thing that is certain is that we are created spiritually alive and the LORD is spirtually alive. In the following verse the Apostle Paul describes how he was saved by being made alive by the spirit:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).​

Joseph Henry Thayer says that the Greek word translated regeneration "denotes the restoration of a thing to its pristine state, its renovation" [emphasis added] (Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek - English Lexicon of the New Testament, 474).

The word "regeneration" is translated from the Greek word paliggenesia, which is the combination of palin and genesis.

Palin means "joined to verbs of all sorts,it denotes renewal or repetition of the action" (Ibid., 475).

Genesis means "used of birth, nativity" (Ibid., 112).

So when we combine the two words the meaning is a repetition of a birth. Therefore, when Paul used the Greek word translated "regeneration" to describe his salvation experience he was speaking of a repetition of a birth.

It is obvious that the reference is not to a "physical" rebirth, or the repetition of one's physical birth. Paul could only be speaking of a repetition of a spiritual birth. And the words that follow make it certain that the "birth" of which Paul is referring to is a "spiritual" birth--"renewing of the Holy Spirit."

Since the renewal of the Holy Spirit is in regard to being made alive spiritually then the previous birth of the Spirit must also be in regard to being made alive spiritually by the Holy Spirit. In other words, since a person is "regenerated" by the Holy Spirit then that means that one must have previously been born of the Holy Spirit. That happens at conception.

These facts alone destroy the theory of Original Sin because according to that theory all people emerge from the womb spiritually dead.

I have never liked the term "spiritually alive". It allows for a foot in both camps. You are either alive or dead (reflecting God or not). There is a "you", it's called a living soul. In my mind there is no such thing as a spiritual spart of us that can be alive while the "living soul" is dead (non reflective).
One can be "without knowledge of good and evil", "dead in sin" or "dead to sin".

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Paul isn't telling us that he is alive "spiritually". He's saying he's dead but alive in Christ.
What he actually means is that he is alive in the promise of Christ that he will raise him up in the last day. Since Christ is risen, so is Paul. The spirit has made him alive and his life now bears witness to the fact that the spirit demonstrates life in him.

Derf has forced the issue with me a bit. I have, for a long time, been aware that there is no way that Adam had the spirit of God in any way like Jesus since he chose to transgress. (my will not yours be done)
Therefore he wasn't alive, just innocent like children are born, therefore reflective of God in that there was no sin in him. (no knowledge of good and evil)

That bears no resemblance to "alive in the spirit".

I have no doubt that God's creation of Adam was for Adam to have the chance to do what all men believe, as evidenced in their actions... prove you can do what I know you cannot. No one will have an excuse.
The second Adam showed the way to life...

Joh 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
Joh 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

But he, like us, was merely born innocent.

Geoff.