It's normal human nature to DESIRE what's been forbidden - the existence of a LAW creates the human desire to break it.
All you've done is post another statement needing proof of its correctness.
"Lust" (personal desire) defined perfectly.
Not for the pre-disobedient good and sinless Adam. You keep begging the question, Bob. Stop assuming that which you're supposed to be proving: Adam "
responded to 'temptation' (James 1) in exactly the same way we all do."
Eve was LUSTING about what had been forbidden - plain as day!!
Eve is not Adam.
And to MY SATISFACTION, I have.
You spend a lot of time in multiple forums decrying the practice of personal opinion, personal interpretation, and personal satisfaction, especially that which cannot and will not be supported with well-rendered scripture.
Nope FOUR options. You forgot: "decide that the whole thing is a lost cause because of conflicting Theological fixations", and walk away. I'm done here.
No. Three options. The above is a red herring. I haven't posted any "
conflicting theological fixations." What I did do was ask you to prove Adam (not Eve), "
responded to 'temptation' (James 1) in exactly the same way we all do." Adam was not the same as us prior to Genesis 3:6. That's not a "theological fixation." God Himself called Adam good and God's word explicitly states he was unashamed and sinless prior to Genesis 3:6.
But you have come along and made a statement that warrants proving. How can you say a good, unashamed, and sinless man living in a good and sinless world where nothing sinful exists say his experience is exactly the same as the person who has sinned, had his flesh corrupted by sin, living in sin-saturated world where nothing good exists apart from Christ? How can you compare the good and sinless man that doesn't Jesus with the man who knows Jesus and is filled with His Spirit?
I did ask.
What I first received was reckless eisegesis. Now fallacies of logic are posted (shifts in the goalposts, false equivalences, begged questions, and red herrings).
Yup that's what I said, and that's what I meant.
No problem!!! It's normal human nature to DESIRE what's been forbidden - the existence of a LAW creates the human desire to break it.
Chuckle!! "Lust" (personal desire) defined perfectly. Eve was LUSTING about what had been forbidden - plain as day!!
And to MY SATISFACTION, I have.
Nope FOUR options. You forgot: "decide that the whole thing is a lost cause because of conflicting Theological fixations", and walk away. I'm done here.
Wasting both our time. You said what you said and said you meant what you said but have not proved the claim correct beyond you own satisfaction. I have now asked thrice.