08 Feb 07
Originally posted by josephwSadly, for you, just because you assert something does not make it true. Could you please explain to me how you can say that "God did not make Adam imperfect" when we can clearly see that Adam is capable of sinning?
You and the skipper are obviuosly confused. You either have not read the bible, or cannot understand it, or are deliberately being misleading. And not only that, but you and virtually everybody else I seek to have dialouge with in this forum fail to respond to the very simple statements I make or questions I ask.
Can't any of you follow the thread?
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by TheSkipperYou are right. Just because I make an assertion about something doesn't make it true. Truth is objective. If SOMETHING is NOT true than SOMETHING is a LIE.
Sadly, for you, just because you assert something does not make it true. Could you please explain to me how you can say that "God did not make Adam imperfect" when we can clearly see that Adam is capable of sinning?
Relitivism is a twisting of the truth. When one says, 'what may be true for you may not be true for me', one makes the truth subjective, and that kind of thinking leads one to believe there are no absolutes.
Now, be patient with this old man for a few momments and look at this thing objectively. According to "the book", Adam was created without sin. Right! He was in a state of innocents. That is how the story goes. Right! And then he sinned by disobeying God.
Just because Adam was "capable of sinning" does not mean he was created A sinner. Doesn't that sound like free will to you?
Man was created in the "image" and "likeness" of God. A triune being. Perfect, sinless, and wholly complete.
Just read the story. It's all there.
Think about this for a second, and judge for yourself; If one does not believe in ojective, exsternal, and absolute truth,(God), then one will believe anything!
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by josephwYou have not answered the one important question I have.
You are right. Just because I make an assertion about something doesn't make it true. Truth is objective. If SOMETHING is NOT true than SOMETHING is a LIE.
Relitivism is a twisting of the truth. When one says, 'what may be true for you may not be true for me', one makes the truth subjective, and that kind of thinking leads one to believe there are no abso ...[text shortened]... e in ojective, exsternal, and absolute truth,(God), then one will believe anything!
Is is possible for us to sin (disobey) when we ultimately are saved and are in heaven?
If it is not possible, then tell me what is different than befre when Adam was created perfect and sinned.
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by josephwI don't think I sad Adam was created "a sinner" I said Adam was created imperfect. My claim that Adam was imperfect is based on his sinning and basically condemning mankind for eons to come (that is what i call imperfect). How can a supposedly perfect being (God) create something so obviously imperfect and then still claim to be perfect himself?
You are right. Just because I make an assertion about something doesn't make it true. Truth is objective. If SOMETHING is NOT true than SOMETHING is a LIE.
Relitivism is a twisting of the truth. When one says, 'what may be true for you may not be true for me', one makes the truth subjective, and that kind of thinking leads one to believe there are no abso ...[text shortened]... e in ojective, exsternal, and absolute truth,(God), then one will believe anything!
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by VarqaThe answer is No. We will not sin nor will we ever want to. Let me explain why and how.
You have not answered the one important question I have.
Is is possible for us to sin (disobey) when we ultimately are saved and are in heaven?
If it is not possible, then tell me what is different than befre when Adam was created perfect and sinned.
Look at the big picture. This drama of life as we know it here on earth has unfolded before our eyes. We know the story. There is a purpose for this enactment. Consider how it began; God in eternity past created all the beings we call angels, and, by the way, they are all male, and chief among them is lucifer. He is described as the cheribim that covereth. He, lucifer, covered the throne of God, and derrected the praises of all creation toward God. You may not have ever heard of this before, but it is true, it's in the book.
And then the rebellion began when," eniquity was found in him", that is, lucifer. So then God planted a garden in the east somewhere and you know the rest of the story. Lucifers' name was changed to Satan and he tempted Adam and Eve, they fell, and that is where and when sin entered the human race.
Now, to get to the answer to your question. In this unfolding drama God does something to fix the problem. What's the problem? Sin is the problem. You see, God is holy, sin cannot be in the presence of God. Man originally had unbroken fellowship with God. Sin seperated man from God for the reason I just gave. God did a work in the person of his son taking upon himself the penalty for sin, that is death. God is now able to justify anyone on the basis of that provision. Offering the free gift of eternal life to all who believe.
It is a spiritual experience, a spiritual work of God, spiritually understood.
So, when the final curtain is drawn, and we enter into eternity, the very idea of ever joining in another rebellion is unfathomable. Just look at this place, the world, who would ever want to go through this again.
But, there is more. Read romans chapter 7. there you will read about the dual nature of the believer. this chapter and it's subject puzzeled me for years. You see, the sin nature is in the flesh. The believer, at the momment of conversion, now has two natures. The Adamic nature and the new nature which is the spirit of Christ. The new nature, the spirit of Christ, impowers the believer to " recon them selves as dead to sin". But none of us is perfect yet. But when we are taken to be with God the sin nature is gone. No tempter, no sin nature, no sin.
There is much more, but I just ran out of time.
08 Feb 07
2 edits
josephw:
"Look at the big picture. This drama of life as we know it here on earth has unfolded before our eyes. We know the story. There is a purpose for this enactment. Consider how it began; God in eternity past created all the beings we call angels, and, by the way, they are all male, and chief among them is lucifer. He is described as the cheribim that covereth. He, lucifer, covered the throne of God, and derrected the praises of all creation toward God. You may not have ever heard of this before, but it is true, it's in the book."
What the heck is that? Did you get your biblical "knowledge" from a Cracker Jack box? Are you aware that the word Lucifer appears only one time in the Bible and even then only in the King James Version (and other related versions)? Yes, Isaiah 14:12 is where you can find it and there is nothing to suggest that Satan and Lucifer are the same person/angel/being.
I don't want to be overly critical, I know all of this means a great deal to you and you claim to have studied but anyone who has done any meaningful study would know that many of the assertions you have made are highly debatable. It bothers me when Christians speak/type as if what they are saying is incontrovertible when it clearly is not. A little respect for the ongoing search for understanding that many of us are still engaged in would be nice. If you have given up on actually understanding these theological questions and would rather pick your favorite and run with it, go right ahead but please, at the very least, give a passing nod to those of us who would rather know the truth.
No disrespect intended and I'm sorry if this came off unnecessarily harsh.
EDIT: Here is a good article that sums up the debate about Lucifer and Satan quite nicely.
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/world/christ/xt-ibel2.htm
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by TheSkipperI'm not offended at all.
josephw:
"Look at the big picture. This drama of life as we know it here on earth has unfolded before our eyes. We know the story. There is a purpose for this enactment. Consider how it began; God in eternity past created all the beings we call angels, and, by the way, they are all male, and chief among them is lucifer. He is described as the cheribim ...[text shortened]... and Satan quite nicely.
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/world/christ/xt-ibel2.htm
I'll look at that web site and recheck my facts and I'll get back to you!
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by TheSkipperIf you have a bible I suggest you read Ezekiel 28:11-19.
josephw:
"Look at the big picture. This drama of life as we know it here on earth has unfolded before our eyes. We know the story. There is a purpose for this enactment. Consider how it began; God in eternity past created all the beings we call angels, and, by the way, they are all male, and chief among them is lucifer. He is described as the cheribim ...[text shortened]... and Satan quite nicely.
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/world/christ/xt-ibel2.htm
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by josephwNot sure what you want me to glean from this passage. It is about the fall of the king of Tyre, which clearly has nothing to do with our conversation. Some beleive that there is an allegory in the lamentation referring to the fall of adam like in verse 13
If you have a bible I suggest you read Ezekiel 28:11-19.
"Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God, and that in the day thou wast created."
which is interesting but I need some help figuring out what you want me to understand from this particular passage.
09 Feb 07
ahhh!
After digging out an old commentary my grandfather used when he was in seminary it seems that some people believe the allegory is referring to the fallen angels. I think the idea passes theological muster although you need to stretch the allegory pretty thin in places to make it work.
I assume this is what you wanted me to get from the passage. I think I see now what you are trying to make me understand but this is hardly the rock solid theological foundation you want if you are going to be making assertions as if they were undisputed fact...like you did in your post to varqa.
All I'm saying is that there are a lot of opinions out there about what the Bible says and what it means and many of them deserve respect.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by TheSkipperI see lot of references to the commentaries by the learned. I would like to raise a flag about the learned: In case you have forgotten, it was the learned that rejected Jesus. When it comes to searching for the truth, the religious leaders have the most to lose. Because if they were to accept a new idea, they will have to leave all their pomp and glory behind them and come down to earth to join the rest of us.
All I'm saying is that there are a lot of opinions out there about what the Bible says and what it means and many of them deserve respect.
The thing about the Bible is that it is a spiritual book. It is not a book by which we can decipher the age of the universe, the shape of the planet, or the size of the stars. I believe the six days in which the earth was made in, the pillars of the earth, and the falling of stars on it are all spiritual concepts.
Could we at last try to see if there is a spiritual angle by which we can look at the Adam, Eve, Sin, and salvation?
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by Varqa1 Cor. 2:9-12
I see lot of references to the commentaries by the learned. I would like to raise a flag about the learned: In case you have forgotten, it was the learned that rejected Jesus. When it comes to searching for the truth, the religious leaders have the most to lose. Because if they were to accept a new idea, they will have to leave all their pomp and glory behind ...[text shortened]... to see if there is a spiritual angle by which we can look at the Adam, Eve, Sin, and salvation?
But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
But God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit: for the spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the spirit of God.
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
In other words, if you don't have Gods' spirit you can't possibly know what you're talking about when you talk about God or the things of God!
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by josephwThat's a debate ender if their ever was one.
In other words, if you don't have Gods' spirit you can't possibly know what you're talking about when you talk about God or the things of God!
Translates (to me) as .. "I have Gods spirit and you don't so shut up. I'm right."
It was almost a debate for a minute their.