• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Through one man, sin entered the world.

The law is meant to expose the Jews complete inability to live up to its just demands.
Yes. That was one of its purposes.
But that’s not what brought death to them.
No it isn't. They were already dead in their trespasses and sins. But it is by the Law they were being judged in the covenant relationship.
They die because they are like Adam. It was Adam that brought death to all of humankind.
Yes. So exactly what is your beef? What point are you arguing against?
 
Jesus wasn't made---he was born under the law. The Law---Mosiac Law---is not what MAKES man sinful ---otherwise it would be God making man sinful. That very question came up as an anticipated question in Romans 7:7-25 to which Paul replied "By no means!"

Flesh in not inherently sinful. That is a belief in some branches of Gnosticism. It became sinful by Adam breaking faith with God in disobedience. Jesus was not born in Adam. His Father is the Holy Spirit. That makes Jesus God. He was born of a woman. That makes him human, but not born in sin.

That is so derogatory and blasphemous it should be deleted. I am leaving it and responding to it for a purpose, but don't make a habit of it.

Everything created including man is of necessity created under law. You have simply limited law to the Mosaic covenant legal code ----which most of Israel did and certainly the Pharisees did as Jesus pointed out with a whole series of woes on them.
I was speaking sarcastically against those who claim Jesus’ flesh was not like ours.
 
Yes. That was one of its purposes.

No it isn't. They were already dead in their trespasses and sins. But it is by the Law they were being judged in the covenant relationship.

Yes. So exactly what is your beef? What point are you arguing against?
My argument is against all who claim Adam’s nature changed after he sinned.
I just posted some comments from commentators who would agree that both Adam and Eve lusted or desired the fruit.
They show that their sin relates to how we sin. The lust of the eye, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life.

It was true for them and is true for us. So how is it these teachers say “No, their nature was not like ours”?
 
They are not accountable to God because God never said to them “thou shall not”
He never told the serpent “thou shall not”
To say they are not accountable to God is misleading. There is an implied do and don't within breathing things, but it is PUT in their nature.

And the serpent is a manifestation of Satan. That is revealed to us in Rev 12:9 but also in other places in Scripture. So it is not to be classified among the animal kingdom. He is a moral creature.
 
To say they are not accountable to God is misleading. There is an implied do and don't within breathing things, but it is PUT in their nature.

And the serpent is a manifestation of Satan. That is revealed to us in Rev 12:9 but also in other places in Scripture. So it is not to be classified among the animal kingdom. He is a moral creature.
Are you saying the serpent was not a beast of the field the LORD God had made?
 
Paul believed the serpent was a beast of the fiield. Namely, a snake.

2Co 11:3 - But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty,so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

 
Are you saying the serpent was not a beast of the field the LORD God had made?
That is what Scripture says, not me. Beasts of the field can't talk in the same way as we do---unless of course God gives them that ability for a short time and for his purposes as with the talking donkey. Even if that is the case here, it was Satan speaking through the serpent, not the serpent speaking on his own.
 
My argument is against all who claim Adam’s nature changed after he sinned.
I just posted some comments from commentators who would agree that both Adam and Eve lusted or desired the fruit.
They show that their sin relates to how we sin. The lust of the eye, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life.

It was true for them and is true for us. So how is it these teachers say “No, their nature was not like ours”?
To desire something is not sinful in and of itself. The fruit of the forbidden fruit was desirable. It was good for food and pleasing to the eye. There was nothing about it that made it undesirable to look at. Where Eve got into trouble was believing the lie of the serpent. "You will not die but will become wise like God." Even that sounds desirable.

4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise,[b] she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths.

It is questionable since she did not know good and evil that she had no clue what evil was. She only knew the command, and if she didn't know evil how was she to know that the serpent was lying to her. There is speculation in all that of course, though it is speculation that is logical from a human viewpoint. When the serpent told her that God knew her eyes would be opened and she would know good and evil can we say for certainty that she did not even know evil was a bad thing?

It was gaining this knowledge of evil that changed a human form being a creature without sin abiding in them, to one who is a being who does have sin (evil) abiding in him. He still had the same flesh, but now that flesh has something it did not have before.

I know you will have a comeback denying what was said. I have said it to you before, others have also done so. You have already agreed with the OP in principle, so there is no need to go further into this off topic conversation.

Please understand and respect that.
Thanks.
 
To desire something is not sinful in and of itself.
So lust is not a desire? ... or lust is not sinful?

It is questionable since she did not know good and evil
So Eve did not know it is sinful to disobey God? ... which is equivalent to evil.
 
It was true for them and is true for us. So how is it these teachers say “No, their nature was not like ours”?
I suppose they assume that, being creature, Adam was subject to change and something of his nature must have changed such that he developed evil desires that he executed. People read the God looked at His creation and said "it was/is good" implying no evil where evil is defined as the absence of good; thus, Adam did not have an evil nature at one time and could walk with God and live in Eden. Then things changed ...
Now what/who caused Adam's nature to change? :unsure: ... one can follow one's desires but one cannot choose one's desires.
 
That is what Scripture says, not me. Beasts of the field can't talk in the same way as we do---unless of course God gives them that ability for a short time and for his purposes as with the talking donkey. Even if that is the case here, it was Satan speaking through the serpent, not the serpent speaking on his own.
God allowed Satan to speak by the serpent and then punished the serpent but not Satan?
 
So lust is not a desire? ... or lust is not sinful?


So Eve did not know it is sinful to disobey God? ... which is equivalent to evil.
To desire salvation is not sinful. To desire the fruit was.

But the churches say “No, it was not sinful for Eve to desire the fruit”
 
So lust is not a desire? ... or lust is not sinful?
To desire something is not sinful in and of itself.
Desire is not always a sin. We desire God. It depends on what we desire.
So lust is not a desire? ... or lust is not sinful?


So Eve did not know it is sinful to disobey God? ... which is equivalent to evil.
She knew nothing of sin. All she knew was God told her to not eat of that certain tree. Disobedience to God does not require man's knowledge that it is a sin for it to be a sin. We do know now of course. But did Eve? Scripture is silent on that, only to say that she was deceived. We simply cannot relate her world to our world. We simply believe what God says. That is not to say, that applications to our world cannot be made.
 
I suppose they assume that, being creature, Adam was subject to change and something of his nature must have changed such that he developed evil desires that he executed. People read the God looked at His creation and said "it was/is good" implying no evil where evil is defined as the absence of good; thus, Adam did not have an evil nature at one time and could walk with God and live in Eden. Then things changed ...
Now what/who caused Adam's nature to change? :unsure: ... one can follow one's desires but one cannot choose one's desires.
As I’ve been saying, all was very good. Then what happened?
God gave command to Adam….. Uh oh

Adam! Cut off your members before it’s too late
 
God allowed Satan to speak by the serpent and then punished the serpent but not Satan?
What makes you think Satan wasn't punished? Read the end of the Bible. This punishment was announced and promised in Gen 3 when God said the seed of a woman will crush your head.
 
What makes you think Satan wasn't punished? Read the end of the Bible. This punishment was announced and promised in Gen 3 when God said the seed of a woman will crush your head.
Actually the devil was destoyed by the death and resurrection of Christ. Heb 2:14
 
To be perfectly honest, I don't know what you or most others mean by will. It always seems to end up meaning whatever the user wants it to mean, probably in my own case. But particularly so in the case of God's will, Jesus' will or the Holy Spirit's will. I suspect that most people wouldn't credit the Holy Spirit with a will.

That said, I believe Jesus' will, whatever that might mean, was not limited by sin. But neither do I believe that our own wills, again whatever that might mean, are limited by sin. I believe that sin in our lives can be and often is influential in our decisions, but it never presents a limit to our will.
Why does Paul say we are slaves to sin and that we are slaves of the one we obey?
 
Actually the devil was destoyed by the death and resurrection of Christ. Heb 2:14
Would you consider that punishment?
 
Would you consider that punishment?
God sent His son in the likeness of sinful flesh so the sin in the flesh could be condemned. “He” was destoyed when the flesh of Christ was destoyed. But “he” still lives in our flesh.

“In me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing”
 
Back
Top