Adam and Eve: Original Sin

[O'Dannyboy]

What of those who reject Jesus? Where is their redemption? Jesus is not blanket redemption for all but an offer of redemption from God. We who receive Jesus in faith are redeemed and those who don't are not. This is the test, the choice we must all make.

Who said Jesus provides blanket redemption for all? I did not say that. Maybe you need to read instead of react. I was responding to your incorrect statement about God giving mankind a chance to redeem themselves. I said that Jesus came to redeem those who could not redeem themselves. Redemption is open to all, but not all are redeemed.

Let's start over since it seems we are debating semantics. We agree that only through Jesus can we be redeemed. Right? Okay. If so, then would you not also agree that we have a choice whether to receive Christ Jesus as our Lord and Savior? The point I am making is that is it is our CHOICE to receive Christ, and only through Jesus can we be redeemed then it must follow that it is our choice to be redeemed. If it is our choice then we are given the opportunity (...read chance) to redeem ourselves.

Do you understand what I'm getting at? Jesus is God's offer of redemption. Interestingly enough the choice is one of faith. To receive Christ we must believe in him and submit to him. Perhaps this is not a test for mankind as a whole but for each person. Mankind cannot redeem itself any more than we as individuals can, but it must also be understood that redemption would not be an option were it not for Jesus, whom God sent unto us.

16

[Guest shiloh357]

What of those who reject Jesus? Where is their redemption? Jesus is not blanket redemption for all but an offer of redemption from God. We who receive Jesus in faith are redeemed and those who don't are not. This is the test, the choice we must all make.

Who said Jesus provides blanket redemption for all? I did not say that. Maybe you need to read instead of react. I was responding to your incorrect statement about God giving mankind a chance to redeem themselves. I said that Jesus came to redeem those who could not redeem themselves. Redemption is open to all, but not all are redeemed.

Let's start over since it seems we are debating semantics. We agree that only through Jesus can we be redeemed. Right? Okay. If so, then would you not also agree that we have a choice whether to receive Christ Jesus as our Lord and Savior? The point I am making is that is it is our CHOICE to receive Christ, and only through Jesus can we be redeemed then it must follow that it is our choice to be redeemed. If it is our choice then we are given the opportunity (...read chance) to redeem ourselves.

Do you understand what I'm getting at? Jesus is God's offer of redemption. Interestingly enough the choice is one of faith. To receive Christ we must believe in him and submit to him. Perhaps this is not a test for mankind as a whole but for each person. Mankind cannot redeem itself any more than we as individuals can, but it must also be understood that redemption would not be an option were it not for Jesus, whom God sent unto us.

16

[Massorite]

I've been looking at Adam and Eve in an allegorical sense, and have come to the conclusion that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil represents the Law. They existed in the garden in innocence through Faith in, and under the Grace of God. By eating of the tree they became aware of their own sinfulness by God's Law, and were ashamed at being found naked, requiring the covering provided by God, just as we are covered by the blood of Jesus Christ.

Romans 5:12-13 NIV Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned - for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.

Romans 7:9 NIV Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died.

Galatians 3:10-11 NIV All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith."

I can see some thought went into this but it is flawed. Adam and Eve were the epitome of innocence and there was no sin at all in their mind or souls. They knew nothing of sin and there was no sinful nature in them before they eat of the fruit. If you will notice, their eyes were not opened to sin after Eve had eaten of the fruit. It was only after Adam eat of the fruit that their eye were opened to sin and their complete and total innocence was gone for ever. If Adam had said no ???????

It had nothing to do with the law and everything to do with the spiritual nature of sin. The law did not open their eyes. It was their disobedience/sin against God that opened their eyes.

[Massorite]

I can appreciate your intentions, but somehow it doesn't make sense that The Law of God was forbidden fruit.

Where does man's knowledge of good and evil come from?

Genesis 2:16-17 NIV And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Genesis 3:4-5 NIV "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

What makes us "righteous" before God? What brings death

2 Corinthians 3:6 NIV He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant - not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Only the shed blood of Jesus makes us righteous before God.

[Massorite]

It was not just knowing about the difference between good and evil. It was having personal experience with evil.

Great point Erich.

[O'Dannyboy]

What of those who reject Jesus? Where is their redemption? Jesus is not blanket redemption for all but an offer of redemption from God. We who receive Jesus in faith are redeemed and those who don't are not. This is the test, the choice we must all make.

Who said Jesus provides blanket redemption for all? I did not say that. Maybe you need to read instead of react. I was responding to your incorrect statement about God giving mankind a chance to redeem themselves. I said that Jesus came to redeem those who could not redeem themselves. Redemption is open to all, but not all are redeemed.

Let's start over since it seems we are debating semantics. We agree that only through Jesus can we be redeemed. Right? Okay. If so, then would you not also agree that we have a choice whether to receive Christ Jesus as our Lord and Savior? The point I am making is that is it is our CHOICE to receive Christ, and only through Jesus can we be redeemed then it must follow that it is our choice to be redeemed. If it is our choice then we are given the opportunity (...read chance) to redeem ourselves.

Do you understand what I'm getting at? Jesus is God's offer of redemption. Interestingly enough the choice is one of faith. To receive Christ we must believe in him and submit to him. Perhaps this is not a test for mankind as a whole but for each person. Mankind cannot redeem itself any more than we as individuals can, but it must also be understood that redemption would not be an option were it not for Jesus, whom God sent unto us.

16

[Guest shiloh357]

In what way is it flawed?

Because there is no chance of us redeeming ourselves by accepting Christ. Redemption is not a partnership between us and God. I am not redeeming myself. That does concept does not extist in the Scripture. Redemption is work of God from beginning to end.

This sentence of yours: "If man God meant to teach mankind a lesson then it also stands to reason that he would also offer them a chance to redeem themselves."

That sentence is theologically flawed. God has never given man a chance to redeem himself. Rather God redeemed us and gives us the opportunity to accept or reject it.

Am I to understand that you believe we don't have a choice in the matter?

No, I never claimed that we have no choice. I have already said that redemption is availabel to all, but not all will accept it. You obviuosly are not reading my posts, but are reacting to what you think I am saying.

In my eyes God sent Jesus to us, as in, "gave his only begotten son". This is God's offer of redemption to us. All we need to do is accept his offer.

yes, but that is not the same as claiming that God gave mankind a chance to redeem themselves. I am simply took issue with that one sentence.

[O'Dannyboy]

In what way is it flawed?

Because there is no chance of us redeeming ourselves by accepting Christ. Redemption is not a partnership between us and God. I am not redeeming myself. That does concept does not extist in the Scripture. Redemption is work of God from beginning to end.

This sentence of yours: "If man God meant to teach mankind a lesson then it also stands to reason that he would also offer them a chance to redeem themselves."

That sentence is theologically flawed. God has never given man a chance to redeem himself. Rather God redeemed us and gives us the opportunity to accept or reject it.

Am I to understand that you believe we don't have a choice in the matter?

No, I never claimed that we have no choice. I have already said that redemption is available to all, but not all will accept it. You obviuosly are not reading my posts, but are reacting to what you think I am saying.

In my eyes God sent Jesus to us, as in, "gave his only begotten son". This is God's offer of redemption to us. All we need to do is accept his offer.

yes, but that is not the same as claiming that God gave mankind a chance to redeem themselves. I am simply took issue with that one sentence.

I am trying very hard to understand your way of thinking. Your statements regarding whether or not I have been reading your posts and simply reacting are hurtful. I've already said it once and I will say it again that I am reading your posts and considering my words carefully. Please be kind enough to extend me the same consideration.

I do think I understand what you are saying though. We do not redeem ourselves by receiving Christ since the ransom has already been paid. Even so I cannot help but dwell on the fact that God sent him to us for this very purpose. God knowingly sacrificed his Son to pay his own ransom for our redemption. Try as we may to remove God from the redemption equation and the fact remains that he, God, made our redemption possible. Like the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he has also placed salvation within our grasp.

I did not, until now, stop to consider that Jesus was fully man and fully God and so was uniquely qualified to redeem mankind in the eyes of God.

I still have so much to learn and I hope those who are more learned than myself will find the patience to guide me when I find myself off course.

[canuckamuck]

The law was necessary to teach about sin and man's sin nature. The tree represented something that was unnecessary, the knowledge of good and evil. And it was the transgression that made the bible so thick, especially the first parts.

Edited June 20, 2009 by canuckamuck

[OneLight]

The law was necessary to teach about sin and man's sin nature. The tree represented something that was unnecessary, the knowledge of good and evil. And it was the transgression that made the bible so thick, especially the first parts.

Was the tree something that really was not necessary? Think about it ... when has God made anything that was not necessary? Could it be that you do not understand why the tree was there?