DAVEH wrote: > That is correct, DavidM. How could A&E have sinned, IF > they did not know right from wrong? Once they transgressed > by partaking of the forbidden fruit, they then had acquired > knowledge of 'good and evil' and were capable of sinning.
Wow! Let me say that again. WOW! :-) This is a major problem in Mormon theology. I think I need to go order my plane ticket right now for the April Mormon convention to set you guys straight on this. :-) Hang on. Let me catch my breath. I cannot believe this. All these years we have conversed, and look what Kevin exposes in just a matter of weeks. Thank you Kevin. One does not need to know right from wrong in order to sin. Lucifer is a prime example of this. Furthermore, Mormon theology here is very suggestive of something even more shocking. God himself has a knowledge of good and evil, how? BY SINNING HIMSELF! Is that what you believe? Do you believe that Father God has sinned? Do you believe that Jesus Christ has sinned? DaveH wrote: > Until then, they merely transgressed, with the (pre-explained) > resulting effect being death. I haven't studied this to much > depth, so I am sticking my neck out......please be gentle when > you lop it off! I'm trying, but it is hard! I'm on the edge of my seat here, Dave. :-) It does not help that this is one doctrinal area wherein I have received divine revelation and if I shared that revelation right now, you could not bare to hear it. DaveH wrote: > But.....is there any place in the Bible where A&E's eating > of the forbidden fruit is referred to as a sin, or......do > the Bible authors simply refer to it as a transgression? A transgression is sin. Consider the following passage to see how the Greek words used here are interchangeable. Moreover the law entered, that the offence (paraptoma) might abound. But where sin (hamartia) abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin (hamartia) hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 5:20-21 KJV) The Greek word "paraptoma" corresponds to our word "transgression" or "offense." In the above passage, you can see that it speaks about the offence or transgression ABOUNDING, then in the next phrase, it interchanges the word usually translated sin (hamartia) and speaks about it abounding. Now back up a few verses and you will see that it speaks about one man's offense. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. (Romans 5:17-19 KJV) Also consider that this same Greek word translated as "offence" or "transgression" also is translated as sin in the following passages: In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; (Ephesians 1:7 KJV) And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; (Colossians 2:13 KJV) DaveH wrote: > It seems to me that (original) sin was attributed > to Adam's transgression in post Biblical traditions > of the apostate church. The term "Original Sin" refers to the idea of a sin nature passed on to Adam's descendants. DaveH wrote: > Look at it another way, DavidM. If you tell your 3 year > old child that they should not pet a particular dog even > if it looks friendly and fun to play with. But the choice > is theirs....IF they pet the dog, the dog will bite them. > So.....the dog looks so inviting, you kid goes ahead and > pets the fluffy critter who then bites your child. Would > you consider their desire (and resulting action of petting > the dog) to be a sin??? Yes. Men try to define sin by motive and attitude, but I believe that is a big mistake. Sin is defined by its negative effects. So a child petting a dog and getting bit because of that is a sin regardless of motives, in my opinion. We might not ascribe the same amount of culpability when evil motives are not involved, but it is still sin. DaveH wrote: > Now let me ask you a question, DavidM.....Do you believe > in the original sin of Adam? It is my understanding that > this is a Catholic doctrine. Has it been widely adopted > by Protestants too? Yes, I believe in the concept of original sin. Most Protestants believe in original sin. It is an important doctrine of Calvin and so those who associate with Reformed theology certainly believe in it. There have been some who have not believed in original sin. They are called Pelagianists after the monk Pelagius of the fourth century who articulated the view and was the brunt of Augustine's many rebuttals. Now there is a major difference between the way that many Protestants think about original sin and the Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics believe that original sin brings guilt upon the descendants of Adam. Some Protestants believe this also (hence the idea of infant baptism continuing among them), but many Protestants do not believe that original sin brings guilt. They would say that it refers only to the sin nature which we have received, and we do not incur actual guilt until we follow that sin nature and commit actual sin. I am of this latter camp in my theology. John Wesley's theology is an interesting one to study in this regard. While he articulated a difference between the effect of original sin and actual transgression in regards to guilt, he still practiced infant baptism to deal with the problem of original sin. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
