On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 21:58:53 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 2/9/2005 10:31:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The first Adam chose to do it without any propensity.
No he didn't. One is tempted and then sin occurs.
Eve was deceived, for Adam it was a rational choice; he chose to disobey.
Are you saying that Eve had a "fallen nature," not Adam? If not, why on earth would you make such a distinction?
In a message dated 2/9/2005 10:31:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The first Adam chose to do it without any propensity.
No he didn't. One is tempted and then sin occurs.
Eve was deceived, for Adam it was a rational choice; he chose to disobey.
Are you saying that Eve had a "fallen nature," not Adam? If not, why on earth would you make such a distinction?
No, I'm saying both of them
were made in God's image which is pure, holy, and unblemished. Eve
took the bait and became deceived because she listened to the wrong
voice. Adam chose to go down with her rather than obey God and take a
stand for righteousness. So whereas they had been naked and unashamed before God
in the garden, they were now full of guilt and shame and trying to hide and
cover themselves.
He sinned exactly like all of us do. His nature was the same.
So Jesus was born full of guilt and shame with the propensity to blame others, point the finger, and hide from God? According to the gospel of JD maybe but not according to God. In creation God said it was "very good" He did not create a "fallen Adam"
Understand that your entire argument here is a combination of two things: a put down of my argument (which is completely unnecessary but OK - obviously something you think you must do) and the subtle assertion that your logic on the matter is of spirit-filled proportions.
John how is it you never give me a
well thought out argument from scripture - and why does it always turn
personal (ad hominem) at some point? My argument has nothing to do with
putting you or anyone else down; I just happen to believe that you
are wrong. I am making no assertions about anyone's logic my own included.
And I say "your logic on the matter" because you offer nothing
else - simply "logic." No scripture. Just a reasoned
position. In your mind, Judy cannot imagine a god who creates with
anything less than perfection in mind. Therefore, Adam HAD to be
perfect -- created with no capacity for sin.
If you want chapter and verse John then
I will look them up for you when I get a spare moment. God's creation
was good and man was created (rather than procreated) in His image which is
pure, holy, and separate from sinners. For some reason you have embraced a
gospel that teaches that God's image is less than pure and holy both at the
beginning in the Godhead and later in the person of
Jesus.
You see, "capacity for sin" and "fallen nature" are the same
in my mind. As we stand, face to face with the creation
circumstance, we see it very differently. You see it as a completed
task, on every level and I do not. The "day" in the Genesis record is not a 24 hour period of
time, if for no other reason than the fact that it would never take God 24 hours
to say "let there be light."
Capacity for sin and fallen nature are
NOT the same John. Adam was created in God's likeness - Fallen mankind is
the seed of satan (and in his likeness) the seed of the woman is
Christ (God's likeness). I don't know why you would not think of a day
as 24hrs when Genesis 1:5 says clearly "and God called the light day, and
the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning,
one day" (or the first day). How could it be more
clear?
More than that, not a single creation [primary] event was
completed on the same "day" it was presented. A careful reading of
the text will varify this.
You are being "too careful" John because
God can use any timeframe he wants to and none of us were there were we? No it
wouldn't take God the Word 24hrs to make a statement. However you don't
know how long it took God the Spirit to bring it to pass do you? We can only
know what has been revealed, the secret things belong to the
Lord.
So why is the creation of Adam any different. I believe
in the "fall." I do not believe in a fallen
nature. Adam was always going to sin. Christ
was always going to come to his rescue. And that is why I believe
that to disbelieve in the eternal Sonship of the Christ is to deny what
was destined to happen, appointed to happen, provided for in the creation
of Adam before the worlds were.
Then you have embraced a gospel very
similar to that of Mormonism. I don't see a whole lot of difference. You
are in effect making God responsible for the fall and saying it was appointed
and predestined all along. No wonder you are so hung up on this eternal
sonship doctrine.
When we say, "God is not finished with me yet," we speak
the very thing that was true for Adam and Eve.
This is heresy John. Adam and Eve
were complete; they were innocent and pure, naked and unashamed. They
fellowshipped with God in the cool of the day and needed absolutely nothing;
their job was to be good stewards over what God had already given
them. The saying "Be patient with me God is not finished with me yet" is
an excuse for our offences toward Him and others because of our own sin,
selfishness, and unbelief which is our problem,
not God's.
At the moment of their creation, they were in need of the
resurrected Christ. The creation event, for man, is not completed
outside the reception of the Christ,
Heresy. They needed nothing before
the fall John, Christ included because they were already in complete and
full fellowship with Him since He is God the Word who spoke them into existence
and who they fellowshipped with every day in the garden. The reason we need
Christ today is because there is a breach between us and God which we have no
ability in and of ourselves to mend.
His ministry of reconcilition and the spirtual process we know
as "growth" resulting in a spiritual home with God in Christ. The "fall"
makes this conclusion irresistable. But the "fall" did not mark the
beginning of a different kind of existence for Adam, himself.
It most certainly did mark the beginning
of a different kind of existence for Adam and for the whole creation along with
him, all of which had known only life but now had to cope with the advent of
death and destruction spiritually, mentally, and
ultimately physically.
Look at the record of the fall. See there in its
pages, the very same processes we, you and I, go through before a sin
event. We have the association with evil influences, an
intellectual openness to the consideration of sin, the act of
justification, the sharing of evil opinion with others, the denial
of the truth of God ("you will surely die"), the reaching out for sin, the
act of taking into your possession the very opportunity for sin (plucking
the fruit from the tree) all before the actual sin
event. How is all this possible if they did not have the same
capacity for sin, the same human nature, as we?
The example of how it is possible is in
all four gospels where the second Adam, the Lord Jesus Christ - "just said NO"
using the sword of the Spirit against the voice of the enemy. The first
Adam could have done the same but unfortunately he chose differently, but the
second Adam left us an example so that we can follow in His
steps.
Remember -- without propensity, there can be no propooperty and sin is poop. JD
There can be whatever God says there can be and Adam sinned by choice without any propensity. Jesus OTOH refused to sin aside from any propensity. JT
Now, you know that Jesus was "tempted." God is not temptable. What is the difference between Jesus and God? His flesh.
God is Spirit. Jesus had a flesh
body with physical needs. God can not be tempted with evil but for us he
makes a way of escape. Jesus layed aside his former glory so he was not on this
earth as God and in his day of temptation in the wilderness He chose
obedience to God and used the sword of the Spirit against the voice of the enemy
leaving us an example.
He became like us in every respect. The fact is
this: Christ could have sinned and chose to do otherwise, condemning
all those who say, "I am flesh, I have no choice." When it comes to
sin, it is not that we can or cannot sin; rather, it is that we will or will
not. I do not sin because I have to. I sin because I
want to. An ugly fact that condemns us all. God has not
propensity for sin, and, consequently will never sin. He cannot
sin.
All true but Jesus did not come here as
God. He layed aside his former glory and took upon himself a body of
flesh made in the likeness of men. He is called the second Adam and
he demonstrated how to pass the test that the first Adam failed none of
which proves that either the first or the second Adam was already fallen at
the time of their creation.
Grace and Peace to you
JD,
Judyt
