GOD CREATED MAN (ADAM) SINFUL

[jeremiah1five]

Nope. God created Adam good. God even said so Himself

So, sin comes from good.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Calvinism is a very interesting thing, when we reconcile it to the rest of the Truth of the Bible...

Monergism is great and true, we can defend it and accept Synergism, where Synergism is due...

But since only Jesus could Keep the Synergistic Mosaic Covenant of Works Monergistically, Synergism CAN'T be true. The New Covenant is a Covenant of Grace, and Grace by definition MUST be Monergistic; or Grace is no longer Grace...

The Covenant God made with Abraham was monergistic.
Abraham had been put to sleep and unconscious of what was taking place while he dozed.

 

[ReverendRV]

Where did sin come from with regard to Adam?

Sin came to Adam externally from the Temptation of Eve...

 

[fastfredy0]

@jeremiah1five

Where did sin come from with regard to Adam?

Sin came to Adam externally from the Temptation of Eve...

Sin is not a thing. It is not external. It does not come from anywhere.
Evil is nothing. It is not a thing that has existence. It is an action of something that is a thing. When I do something that is not good, then I am doing something that is evil, but evil then is an activity of some being. It has no being of itself. In biblical terms, evil is defined by words like ungodliness, unrighteousness, injustice, so that the term is used as the negation, the opposite of the positive thing that is being affirmed. Author Unknown

_______________________________
Two Aspects of the Problem Source: https://www.str.org/articles/augustine-on-evil
The problem of evil can be phrased in several ways. One approach addresses the origin of evil, prompting the syllogism:
1) God created all things;
2) evil is a thing;
3) therefore, God created evil. If the first two premises are true, the conclusion is inescapable.
This formulation, if sustained, is devastating for Christianity. God would not be good if He knowingly created evil.

Augustine realized that the solution was tied to the question: What is evil? The argument above depends on the idea that evil is a thing (note the second premise). But what if evil is not a "thing" in that sense? Then evil did not need creating. If so, our search for the source of evil will take us in a another direction.
Augustine approached the problem from a different angle. He asked: Do we have any convincing evidence that a good God exists? If independent evidence leads us to conclude that God exists and is good, then He would be incapable of creating evil. Something else, then, must be its source.
If Augustine's approach is fair, it prompts a pair of syllogisms that lead to a different conclusion.

First:
1) All things that God created are good;
2) evil is not good;
3) therefore, evil was not created by God.

Second:
1) God created everything;
2) God did not create evil;
3) therefore, evil is not a thing.

The key to success here, is the truthfulness of two premises. If Augustine can offer evidence through natural theology that God exists as Creator and also that God is good, making everything He created also good, then the conclusion--evil is not a thing--automatically follows.

 

[fastfredy0]

Where did Adam's sin come from?

This is the Achilles’ heel of Christianity .... does hard determinism supply an answer?

 

[ReverendRV]

@jeremiah1five



Sin is not a thing. It is not external. It does not come from anywhere.
Evil is nothing. It is not a thing that has existence. It is an action of something that is a thing. When I do something that is not good, then I am doing something that is evil, but evil then is an activity of some being. It has no being of itself. In biblical terms, evil is defined by words like ungodliness, unrighteousness, injustice, so that the term is used as the negation, the opposite of the positive thing that is being affirmed. Author Unknown

_______________________________
Two Aspects of the Problem Source: https://www.str.org/articles/augustine-on-evil
The problem of evil can be phrased in several ways. One approach addresses the origin of evil, prompting the syllogism:
1) God created all things;
2) evil is a thing;
3) therefore, God created evil. If the first two premises are true, the conclusion is inescapable.
This formulation, if sustained, is devastating for Christianity. God would not be good if He knowingly created evil.

Augustine realized that the solution was tied to the question: What is evil? The argument above depends on the idea that evil is a thing (note the second premise). But what if evil is not a "thing" in that sense? Then evil did not need creating. If so, our search for the source of evil will take us in a another direction.
Augustine approached the problem from a different angle. He asked: Do we have any convincing evidence that a good God exists? If independent evidence leads us to conclude that God exists and is good, then He would be incapable of creating evil. Something else, then, must be its source.
If Augustine's approach is fair, it prompts a pair of syllogisms that lead to a different conclusion.

First:
1) All things that God created are good;
2) evil is not good;
3) therefore, evil was not created by God.

Second:
1) God created everything;
2) God did not create evil;
3) therefore, evil is not a thing.

The key to success here, is the truthfulness of two premises. If Augustine can offer evidence through natural theology that God exists as Creator and also that God is good, making everything He created also good, then the conclusion--evil is not a thing--automatically follows.

Amen Brother...

 

[jeremiah1five]

Sin came to Adam externally from the Temptation of Eve...

So it was the act of sin that made him a sinner?
How does that fly with regard to imputation?
Did Christ die for the acts of sin?

 

[jeremiah1five]

@jeremiah1five



Sin is not a thing. It is not external. It does not come from anywhere.
Evil is nothing. It is not a thing that has existence. It is an action of something that is a thing. When I do something that is not good, then I am doing something that is evil, but evil then is an activity of some being. It has no being of itself. In biblical terms, evil is defined by words like ungodliness, unrighteousness, injustice, so that the term is used as the negation, the opposite of the positive thing that is being affirmed. Author Unknown

_______________________________
Two Aspects of the Problem Source: https://www.str.org/articles/augustine-on-evil
The problem of evil can be phrased in several ways. One approach addresses the origin of evil, prompting the syllogism:
1) God created all things;
2) evil is a thing;
3) therefore, God created evil. If the first two premises are true, the conclusion is inescapable.
This formulation, if sustained, is devastating for Christianity. God would not be good if He knowingly created evil.

Augustine realized that the solution was tied to the question: What is evil? The argument above depends on the idea that evil is a thing (note the second premise). But what if evil is not a "thing" in that sense? Then evil did not need creating. If so, our search for the source of evil will take us in a another direction.
Augustine approached the problem from a different angle. He asked: Do we have any convincing evidence that a good God exists? If independent evidence leads us to conclude that God exists and is good, then He would be incapable of creating evil. Something else, then, must be its source.
If Augustine's approach is fair, it prompts a pair of syllogisms that lead to a different conclusion.

First:
1) All things that God created are good;
2) evil is not good;
3) therefore, evil was not created by God.

Second:
1) God created everything;
2) God did not create evil;
3) therefore, evil is not a thing.

The key to success here, is the truthfulness of two premises. If Augustine can offer evidence through natural theology that God exists as Creator and also that God is good, making everything He created also good, then the conclusion--evil is not a thing--automatically follows.

The word "good" in the Genesis account does not mean "morally good" but it means "good enough" or "to specification."

God was saying that His creation was "to specification" as to His plan of creation. He was satisfied with the result.

 

[jeremiah1five]

This is the Achilles’ heel of Christianity .... does hard determinism supply an answer?

God employs hard determination when He commands THOU SHALT NOT eat of it.

 

[ReverendRV]

So it was the act of sin that made him a sinner?
How does that fly with regard to imputation?
Did Christ die for the acts of sin?

Some people think Adam ate of the Fruit, to Die for Eve; a Type of Christ Dying for the Church. This isn't Orthodox, but it would fit. If so, he chose to Sin; if not, he chose to Sin. He was externally influenced to Sin. Sin wasn't Imputed to Adam; he Died...

 

[jeremiah1five]

Some people think Adam ate of the Fruit, to Die for Eve; a Type of Christ Dying for the Church. This isn't Orthodox, but would fit. If so, he chose to Sin; if not, he chose to Sin. He was externally influenced to Sin. Sin wasn't Imputed to Adam; he Died...

If sin wasn't imputed to him then by what grounds did he die "on the day [thou] eatest of it" and later to die physically which is the definition of sin.

 

[ReverendRV]

If sin wasn't imputed to him then by what grounds did he die "on the day [thou] eatest of it" and later to die physically which is the definition of sin.

He died that day due to Separation with God, he Died Spiritually that day. He would die Bodily near a Century later. His Soul never Died; this is the part of him that went to Paradise...

 

[jeremiah1five]

He died that day due to Separation with God, he Died Spiritually that day. He would die Bodily near a Century later. His Soul never Died; this is the part of him that went to Paradise...

Then if sin was imputed to him because of Eve's sin where did Eve's sin come from? From whom was Eve's sin imputed if imputation of Adam's sin from Eve occurred?

 

[fastfredy0]

He died that day due to Separation with God, he Died Spiritually that day.

Agreed. And Adam was separated from God as a result of his sinning.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Good to see you my old friend !!!

Well HOWDY!!! Seems we've got a whole new ball-park o play in.

 

[civic]

Well HOWDY!!! Seems we've got a whole new ball-park o play in.

Play nice in the sandbox

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Because you don't understand that Adam's sin is imputed to all mankind (Ro 5:12-14, 18).

TOTALLY WRONG!!!! Everybody is only responsible for THEIR OWN SIN. Adam "imputed" NOTHING. If you read your scripture WITH UNDERSTANDING you'll see that it's our OWN SIN that condemns us.

 

[ReverendRV]

Then if sin was imputed to him because of Eve's sin where did Eve's sin come from? From whom was Eve's sin imputed if imputation of Adam's sin from Eve occurred?

That was going to be my next point; Sin wasn't Imputed to Adam through Eve eating the Fruit. Eve was Deceived, and Adam chose to eat with her...

What's at the heart of your clinging to their Sinfulness before they Sinned?

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Stayed sinless?
There was no way the Son of God could sin.

Then obviously the BIBLE IS A lie when it says that Jesus was TEMPTED IN ALL RESPECTS AS WE ARE.

 

[fastfredy0]

TOTALLY WRONG!!!! Everybody is only responsible for THEIR OWN SIN. Adam "imputed" NOTHING. If you read your scripture WITH UNDERSTANDING you'll see that it's our OWN SIN that condemns us.

Explain:

• Psalm 51:5 I was brought forth in [a state of] wickedness; In sin my mother conceived me [and from my beginning I, too, was sinful].
• And Psalm 58:3
• and Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners;