David Miller wrote:
DAVEH wrote:DAVEH: Kevin took the liberty of doing so already, DavidM.
> Like I said, Judy......the Bible never refers
> to Adam's Sin.....it is always Adam's Transgression.DaveH, is there some Mormon passage of Scripture that makes your point
about this? I would be very interested in reading it. Please provide
for us a reference.
I pointed out a passage before to you that referred to Adam'sDAVEH: Do you think there is a possibility that DEATH BY SIN could refer to spiritual death.....being separated from God? When Adam transgressed, the Lord told him........
transgression as sin. Maybe you missed it. I will discuss this in a
little more detail this time. Consider the following passage which
refers to it as sin several times:Wherefore, as by one man SIN entered into the world, and DEATH BY SIN;
.....in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
..........Since Adam did not die physically within the time frame of a day (earthly = 24 hours, but if figuring a day of the Lord's time = 1000 years......it is possible), he could have died spiritually (been separated from God) within that time frame. ......Just thinking out loud on this.
and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For untilDAVEH: That's a curious thing to ponder. To what law do you think he was referring......the Law of Moses? It doesn't seem likely he was speaking of God's command for Adam not to partake of the FF.....assuming sin did not exist until he did partake of the FF. Seems to me he was referring to the Law of Moses as the following would suggest.
the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no
law.
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them thatDAVEH: How do you see this (DEAD), DavidM.....spiritual or physical death? The free gift seems to be referring to the resurrection of a physically dead body.....would you agree? If so, you score a point on this, but then it brings up a possibly interesting dilemma about salvation from spiritual death requiring works.
had not SINNED AFTER THE SIMILITUDE OF ADAM'S TRANSGRESSION, who is the
figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the
free gift. For if THROUGH THE OFFENCE OF ONE MANY BE DEAD,
much more theDAVEH: So......does it seem to you the free gift is referring to a physical death, or do you think it applies to a spiritual death (which I see is the separation of God from he who dies)?
grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ,
hath abounded unto many. And not as it was BY ONE THAT SINNED, so is the
gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is
of many offences unto justification. (Romans 5:12-16 KJV)
You have previously agreed that transgression and sin often is usedDAVEH: Yes.....That has been my perspective.
interchangeably, but you claimed that such was not the case with Adam's
transgression.
In the above passage, it seems to me very clear thatDAVEH: You've made some good points above, but I can think of ways those passages can be interpreted that would not necessarily agree with you. Above I've done some thinking out loud to toss out some of those possibilities. I'm rather surprised you didn't quote vs 18, which to my mind would even be stronger evidence the above passages refer to physical death instead of spiritual death......
"sin" and "transgression" and "offense" are used interchangeably about
Adam's sin.
"Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of on the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto the justification of life."
.......Seems to me Paul clearly explains that all men will overcome physical death due to Jesus' resurrection. That would make my above suggestion that the death mentioned in vs 12 was probably referring to physical death rather than spiritual death.
Furthermore, it specifically calls Adam's transgressionDAVEH: Of course Adam sinned. The question is when did he begin sinning. Was it at the time of his first transgression, before he understood the difference between good and evil? Or, was it subsequently AFTER he knew the difference between good and evil? Perhaps I should ask you, DavidM....is there any suggestion by Biblical evidence that Adam committed no further transgressions/sins after his first one?
sin, when it says, "BY ONE THAT SINNED."
Substitute the antecedent ofDAVEH: Now ain't that interesting! Instead of calling Adam's Transgression a sin, he merely suggested others were sinning in the similitude of Adam's transgression. How could one possibly not understand that distinct difference after reading this, DavidM??? Because (IMO) Adam had not the capacity to sin (transgressing with a knowledge of the difference between good and evil), nobody (save your presumed example above of Paul) in the Bible called his transgression a sin. Yet when other's sinned who had the knowledge of the difference between good and evil, their transgressions are referred to as sins. Doesn't the dichotomy seem interesting to you?
"ONE" and this passage would read, "BY ADAM THAT SINNED." The passage
also calls Adam's transgression sin by saying, "SINNED AFTER THE
SIMILITUDE OF ADAM'S TRANSGRESSION."
Also compare the phrase, "throughDAVEH: That is a pretty good argument in your favor, considering vs 18's association of death with physical death.
the offence of one many be dead" with the earlier phrase, "DEATH BY
SIN." There you will see that "the offence" (Adam's transgression) is
used interchangeably with the word "sin" in "DEATH BY SIN." Comments?
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.
