Immortality of the Soul

Originally posted by galveston75
No they were not perfect in their decisions in serving god, but they were perfect physically as God meant for us all to be. Adam and Eve would still be alive today if they had not chose to comment sin. They did not by accident do wrong, they made the decision to do that.
Yes many were described as being perfect in their actions especially compaired to ...[text shortened]... t all of mankind has lived in sin and all the bad things that has resulted from his leaving God.

Did Christ die for the sins of Adam and Eve?

Originally posted by Rajk999
Did Christ die for the sins of Adam and Eve?

No, how could he? Again the scripture I should you says he came for many, not all. If it were for all it would say that so there has to be exceptions to that.

You have to understand what a ransom is and how that applies to humans and why it doesn't apply to all. If it did apply to all that wouldn't be justice.

"RANSOM"

"A price paid to buy back or to bring about release from some obligation or undesirable circumstance. The basic idea of “ransom” is a price that covers (as in payment for damages or to satisfy justice), while “redemption” emphasizes the releasing accomplished as a result of the ransom paid. The most significant ransom price is the shed blood of Jesus Christ, which made deliverance from sin and death possible for the offspring of Adam.
In the various Hebrew and Greek terms translated “ransom” and “redeem,” the inherent similarity lies in the idea of a price, or thing of value, given to effect the ransom, or redemption. The thought of exchange, as well as that of correspondency, equivalence, or substitution, is common in all. That is, one thing is given for another, satisfying the demands of justice and resulting in a balancing of matters."

So how does the word redemption fit here? What was lost and who lost it? Who was the first Adam and who was the last Adam?

Rom 5: 12-19:

12 "When Adam sinned, sin entered the entire human race. His sin spread death throughout all the world, so everything began to grow old and die,[a] for all sinned. 13 We know that it was Adam’s sin that caused this[b] because although, of course, people were sinning from the time of Adam until Moses, God did not in those days judge them guilty of death for breaking his laws—because he had not yet given his laws to them nor told them what he wanted them to do. 14 So when their bodies died it was not for their own sins[c] since they themselves had never disobeyed God’s special law against eating the forbidden fruit, as Adam had.

What a contrast between Adam and Christ who was yet to come! 15 And what a difference between man’s sin and God’s forgiveness!

For this one man, Adam, brought death to many through his sin. But this one man, Jesus Christ, brought forgiveness to many through God’s mercy. 16 Adam’s one sin brought the penalty of death to many, while Christ freely takes away many sins and gives glorious life instead. 17 The sin of this one man, Adam, caused death to be king over all, but all who will take God’s gift of forgiveness and acquittal are kings of life[d] because of this one man, Jesus Christ. 18 Yes, Adam’s sin brought punishment to all, but Christ’s righteousness makes men right with God, so that they can live. 19 Adam caused many to be sinners because he disobeyed God, and Christ caused many to be made acceptable to God because he obeyed."


So again Adam forfeited his right to life and to legally make it so we can one day gain that life back that Adam lost, Jesus gave his.
So Jesus's life would not cover Adams sin and will have no chance or the payment required to gain his life again. Jesus ransom does not cover it as it's only power or price is to cover most of his offspring.

Originally posted by galveston75
No, how could he? Again the scripture I should you says he came for many, not all. If it were for all it would say that so there has to be exceptions to that.

You have to understand what a ransom is and how that applies to humans and why it doesn't apply to all. If it did apply to all that wouldn't be justice.

...[text shortened]... n. Jesus ransom does not cover it as it's only power or price is to cover most of his offspring.

Where did everyone go? 🙂

Originally posted by galveston75
No, how could he? Again the scripture I should you says he came for many, not all. If it were for all it would say that so there has to be exceptions to that.

You have to understand what a ransom is and how that applies to humans and why it doesn't apply to all. If it did apply to all that wouldn't be justice.

...[text shortened]... n. Jesus ransom does not cover it as it's only power or price is to cover most of his offspring.

Makes perfect nonsense.

Nothing you quoted can support the statement that Christ did not die for Adam. The quote that Christ died for many cannot give you the leeway to pick those Christ did not die for.

In fact Christ died for all men and that is in the Bible. But all men would not necessarily benefit from his sacrifice.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Makes perfect nonsense.

Nothing you quoted can support the statement that Christ did not die for Adam. The quote that Christ died for many cannot give you the leeway to pick those Christ did not die for.

In fact Christ died for all men and that is in the Bible. But all men would not necessarily benefit from his sacrifice.

No it says "many".

Perhaps the issue is you always need to see "the scripture that says this or that" which is not a bad thing, but there isn't always a scripture that says what you want.

Maybe this is the problem?

Hebrews 5:12-14New International Version (NIV)

12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

As I said it is good when the Bible says exactly what we'd like for it to say, but it doesn't always do that for us. Verse 14 is the verse I'm really pointing out here which says we need to be able to "distinguish" issues in the bible. Some bibles say "power of perception" which does help ones to eventually get the meanings of a subject that is not in black and white in the Bible.

But again you need to understand what the ransom by Jesus is and who exactly it is for.

Sometimes it by adding many scriptures together to finally get the picture of the answers we look for and one has to be able to be taugth. These are the ones Jesus is searching for.
Are you willing to learn?

Originally posted by galveston75
No it says "many".

Perhaps the issue is you always need to see "the scripture that says this or that" which is not a bad thing, but there isn't always a scripture that says what you want.

Maybe this is the problem?

Hebrews 5:12-14New International Version (NIV)

12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to t ...[text shortened]... to be able to be taugth. These are the ones Jesus is searching for.
Are you willing to learn?

Are saying the Bible did not say that Christ died for all people?

And now you are saying that I need you or the JWs to teach me about the truths of God?

That Christ died for all of mankind is clear in the Bible. That not all will benefit from his sacrifice is also clear.

You excluding Adam from resurrection is unBiblical. There is no good reason to do that. Why not allow Christ to decide who gets resurrected and who does not.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Are saying the Bible did not say that Christ died for all people?

And now you are saying that I need you or the JWs to teach me about the truths of God?

That Christ died for all of mankind is clear in the Bible. That not all will benefit from his sacrifice is also clear.

You excluding Adam from resurrection is unBiblical. There is no good reason to do that. Why not allow Christ to decide who gets resurrected and who does not.

No I'm not saying that. Yes the bible does say that but it is still not all inclusive. How could it be?
A person has to qualify in a sence and there are a few things they can not do such as the blasphemy issue or the point that if they've known the truths in the Bible but turn their back on them, they may not be given life again. Does the Bible not say this?
So no not all that have died die will be resurrected. This gift of life is just that a gift and not every that has died deserve that gift.
But it is still up to God to decide on everyone.
No where does the Bible say every single person that has died will be resurrected, does it?
I'm willing to learn.....

Again as far as Adam goes there is no redemption for him. The redemption is only for those who inherted sin which Adam did not...

Originally posted by galveston75
No I'm not saying that. Yes the bible does say that but it is still not all inclusive. How could it be?
A person has to qualify in a sence and there are a few things they can not do such as the blasphemy issue or the point that if they've known the truths in the Bible but turn their back on them, they may not be given life again. Does the Bible not say ...[text shortened]... is no redemtion for him. The redemtion is only for those who inherted sin which Adam did not...

...or the point that if they've known the truths in the Bible but turn their back on them, they may not be given life again.

If this is correct then the parable of the prodigal son makes no sense.

Originally posted by DeepThought

...or the point that if they've known the truths in the Bible but turn their back on them, they may not be given life again.

If this is correct then the parable of the prodigal son makes no sense.

Tell me how?

Originally posted by galveston75
Tell me how?

Well you seem to be saying that someone who is brought up a Christian and then ignores the belief they were brought up with cannot hope for redemption even if they return to the church at some later date. Which strikes me as contrary to the message in the parable of the prodigal son.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Well you seem to be saying that someone who is brought up a Christian and then ignores the belief they were brought up with cannot hope for redemption even if they return to the church at some later date. Which strikes me as contrary to the message in the parable of the prodigal son.

Thanks for your input. But if you'll look back I didn't exactly say that. I said they "may not" recieve life again. I hope I'm not misrepresenting my thoughts and If I am I'm sorry but again only God knows who will gain life.
In the case of your example I'm sure it all depends on what they do while away from God and his standards and rules.
In the case of the prodagal son he no doubt did a few things God did not approve of but did he blaspheme against God? Probably not. Was he truely sorry for leaving God and his own family? It appears so.
The point is God is the reader of everyones hearts and see's to the core of who they are and how they would be if they did come back to him. Many things to consider.
But if one leaves God's ways and really does bad things that brings reproach on God and his people and hurts others and does things God can not forgive, then yes there is probably no hope for them.

Originally posted by galveston75
Thanks for your input. But if you'll look back I didn't exactly say that. I said they "may not" recieve life again. I hope I'm not misrepresenting my thoughts and If I am I'm sorry but again only God knows who will gain life.
In the case of your example I'm sure it all depends on what they do while away from God and his standards and rules.
In the c ...[text shortened]... d hurts others and does things God can not forgive, then yes there is probably no hope for them.

The religion I'm agnostic about is Christianity, so in a sense this applies to me. What I got quite strongly when I was dragged to church as a child (low church Anglican mostly) was that the important thing was repentance so that someone who returned to faith and was genuinely trying to live a better life would be saved. In the Gospels, which I regard as the important part of the Bible, the only sin I can remember as being unforgivable was corrupting "one of the little ones". So (modulo my doubt) I find that the evidence in the Bible is that someone who turns his back on "the truth" but later genuinely returns to it will gain nothing other than eternal life.

Regarding my misunderstanding of your post, in my defence it was slightly ambiguous "may not" has two meanings:

1) Possibly not (as you meant) - e.g. It may not happen.
2) Definitely not (as I understood) - e.g. May I have some more? No you may not.

Originally posted by DeepThought
The religion I'm agnostic about is Christianity, so in a sense this applies to me. What I got quite strongly when I was dragged to church as a child (low church Anglican mostly) was that the important thing was repentance so that someone who returned to faith and was genuinely trying to live a better life would be saved. In the Gospels, which I regard ...[text shortened]... ay not happen.
2) Definitely not (as I understood) - e.g. May I have some more? No you may not.

Thanks. Going to bed but will be back tomorrow.

Originally posted by galveston75
No I'm not saying that. Yes the bible does say that but it is still not all inclusive. How could it be?
A person has to qualify in a sence and there are a few things they can not do such as the blasphemy issue or the point that if they've known the truths in the Bible but turn their back on them, they may not be given life again. Does the Bible not say ...[text shortened]... s no redemption for him. The redemption is only for those who inherted sin which Adam did not...

It must be worrying to your conscience to have to sell the JW doctrine when deep down you know that it is not Biblical.. I dont envy you.

Originally posted by DeepThought
The religion I'm agnostic about is Christianity, so in a sense this applies to me. What I got quite strongly when I was dragged to church as a child (low church Anglican mostly) was that the important thing was repentance so that someone who returned to faith and was genuinely trying to live a better life would be saved. In the Gospels, which I regard ...[text shortened]... ay not happen.
2) Definitely not (as I understood) - e.g. May I have some more? No you may not.

Only God determins that, as no one earns salvation. Being dragged or forced into a religion is never good no matter the religion...