David Miller wrote:
DAVEH wrote:DAVEH: That is pretty much correct, as far as my knowledge allows.
> The difference between A&E and God is that A&E were
> not 'God' from the beginning. God knew the difference
> between right and wrong without partaking the fruit,
> whereas A&E did not.So your basic idea is that God has always known the difference between
right and wrong,
whereas Adam and Eve never did.DAVEH: Correct. At least up to the point where they partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good & evil.
How does God know about right and wrong?DAVEH: If I were to ask that question of you, would you not say that is the definition/nature of God? If God does not know the difference between right and wrong, he wouldn't be in a position to create our existence.
Is it because he has seen theDAVEH: I suppose that could be a possibility, but I don't subscribe to it.
wrong in others?
In other words, perhaps Adam and Eve only did not knowDAVEH: Not quite, DavidM. I believe A&E would have seen transgression in the pre-mortal existence when Lucifer fought against the Lord. Their knowledge of such was clouded when they were placed in the garden of eden.
about right and wrong like God because they had never seen anyone sin or
transgress whereas God did see it in others.
If this is true, maybe itDAVEH: I don't believe they knew/understood the difference until AFTER they partook of the fruit. I would be surprised if Reformed theology teaches they knew the difference BEFORE. (Please let me know how most Protestant thinking views this.) How about you, DavidM? Do you really think A&E could have known right from wrong before they partook of the forbidden fruit?
was not that Adam & Eve had to transgress themselves in order to know
good and evil, but maybe it was their encounter with Satan that brought
them that knowledge.
I'm still having trouble following your idea that transgression and sinDAVEH: OK.....I know you are chomping at the bit to discuss this. (And I do want to do so....I just am not very knowledgeable, nor do I have a lot of time to study it, let alone reply to as much traffic is coming to my inbox!) But....Let me stick my neck out a little more....just be gentle with me if I make a big mistake! :-)
is not the same.
Let's start with Adam's transgression. Is it ever referred to as Adam's sin in the Bible? If not, why not? Doesn't that seem a little peculiar? Once Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, I believe Adam was compelled to do likewise. IOW.....he willingly transgressed. Had he not, we (mankind) could not have come into existence. Let me ask you, DavidM.......do you believe Eve could have had children IF Adam had not partaken of the FF (Forbidden Fruit) after Eve had done so? I do not believe it would have been possible. (Furthermore......LDS theology teaches they could not have had children prior to the fall anyway.)
Second, have you ever wondered why it is Adam's transgression, and not Eve's transgression? Was not Eve the first to partake of the forbidden fruit? If so, why would the transgression not be attributed to Eve instead of Adam? As I suggested above, Adam may not have had much choice.....
Maybe you can deal with that Romans passage that usesDAVEH: ???......
the terms interchangeably (Romans 5:20).
"Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound."
........I'm a bit slow, DavidM. As I read this, it seems Paul was suggesting the Lord gave a law that was meant to be transgressed so that grace could transcend the transgression.
I think if you examined thisDAVEH: In most cases it is the same. I just don't think there is a definitive statement saying it's always the case. You could have quoted 1Sam 15:24.......
passage and came to agreement with me that sin and transgression is the
same,
"......I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the
Lord,......."
.......as evidence they are related, but from a logical standpoint
I don't think one can conclusively say that all such transgressions are
sinful. As I intimated previously, a young child may transgress a
law, but IMO that hardly means he sinned. I assume you would disagree
with that, DavidM?
then we could examine the event of Adam and Even in a more unifiedDAVEH: I actually started this weeks ago, but am just now taking the time to give you a few of my thoughts. I'd like to study this a bit more and continue the thread if you wish. I haven't taken much time to look into it yet, but felt I needed to reply as I've been putting a lot of stuff ahead of this.
light.
Peace be with you.--
David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
