Why I Am A Futurist

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

That Jesus paid the price of death for the sin we incurred is a given.

As for the mortality of Adam, well the Lord made a way BEFORE Adam was
created. Adam was created BEFORE the Law of Sin and Death, but AFTER the
Law of Grace.[/U] Therefore, Adam could be judged to be punished because of sin;
but the sins of man could eventually be remitted, if man obeyed!

I'll grant you man's spirit is immortal; his body, however, has always been mortal.

So the only mortal thing in Adam was his body, not his soul and spirit. So, what died when Adam sinned? If his soul was immortal did it lose mortality?

Christ's physical death would not be involved if physical death was not a result of sin.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

i have to agree. therefore, some version of
should be considered

I disagree.

When we propose evolution, then words of the Bible lose all meaning. Evening and morning mean nothing in Genesis 1.

The New Testament spoke of Adam as a man. Again, Christ is a man in whom we are born as much as we were in Adam. The antithesis is lost when Adam is not seen as an actual man.

[mfblume]

To say that God created Adam mortal in body is to mar scriptural comprehension and add to the word what is not there. What I mean is that we are going to receive immortal bodies according to 1 Cor 15. Saying that Adam was created mortal is to say that had he not sinned, we'd never get immortal bodies. And if man's soul and spirit were already immortal, just leaving the body mortal, then what benefit would the fruit of life give to man? Are you saying the fruit of life would make man's body immortal?

The fruit of Life must be understood as the antithesis of the forbidden fruit. The forbidden would give death and the fruit of life would give life. If the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil only brought spiritual death, since man would already die physically with or without the forbidden fruit, then only spiritual LIFE would be gained from the fruit of Life. And what is spiritual life? The opposite of spiritual life is obviously spiritual death, which is separation from God, right? But that means the fruit of life had nothing to add to Adam (unless you claim it was physical immortality) than what Adam already had, because Adam had a relationship with God and was not alienated from him in spiritual death.

So you have to tell us what you think the fruit of life would benefit Adam. There's currently too many gaps in what you've stated to be able to respond thoroughly to your thoughts.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

When we propose evolution, then words of the Bible lose all meaning. Evening and morning mean nothing in Genesis 1.

well, as i mentioned, "evolution" is now a loaded word, so go with "advancement" or something, so as not to get sidetracked by semantics. Argue why we have different dispensations, yet we know that it is not because God changed His mind about things. You lost me @ 'evening and morning," could you restate that thought? ty

Originally Posted by mfblume

The New Testament spoke of Adam as a man. Again, Christ is a man in whom we are born as much as we were in Adam. The antithesis is lost when Adam is not seen as an actual man.

Don't get me wrong; i don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with holding that Adam was an actual individual, in one's dogma--or iow "what the established church insists that you believe"--but we have just revealed how it breaks down under scrutiny. Wadr, we "read into" the NT that Adam was an individual, when the same passage may be read collectively; you will not die.

We are talking about ancient mythology anyway, in the early part of Genesis--oral traditions that were handed down over generations. No "proof" of either view is going to be obtained. At the end of the day, one may still include an actual "Adam" and "Eve" in their dogma, if they wish. But no antithesis is lost, imo, in supposing for argument's sake that "Adam" is a descriptive; Ruddy.

It makes him no less "real," it is just uncomfortable because our thinking naturally becomes rigid, as a form of self-preservation. Change your mind. Lightning will almost surely not strike you. If a slippery slope to the pits of hell opens up, you can always change your mind again--but see that no rebound--"repentance"--will even be necessary, as you will not have committed a sin or anything. It is an attempt at clearer understanding. Of God. This can only bring rewards to an open mind, imo.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

To say that God created Adam mortal in body is to mar scriptural comprehension and add to the word what is not there. What I mean is that we are going to receive immortal bodies according to 1 Cor 15. Saying that Adam was created mortal is to say that had he not sinned, we'd never get immortal bodies. And if man's soul and spirit were already immortal, just leaving the body mortal, then what benefit would the fruit of life give to man? Are you saying the fruit of life would make man's body immortal?

The fruit of Life must be understood as the antithesis of the forbidden fruit. The forbidden would give death and the fruit of life would give life. If the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil only brought spiritual death, since man would already die physically with or without the forbidden fruit, then only spiritual LIFE would be gained from the fruit of Life. And what is spiritual life? The opposite of spiritual life is obviously spiritual death, which is separation from God, right? But that means the fruit of life had nothing to add to Adam (unless you claim it was physical immortality) than what Adam already had, because Adam had a relationship with God and was not alienated from him in spiritual death.

So you have to tell us what you think the fruit of life would benefit Adam. There's currently too many gaps in what you've stated to be able to respond thoroughly to your thoughts.

ok i agree with almost none of this, so i'll bump it for someone else to address.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ok i agree with almost none of this, so i'll bump it for someone else to address.

My question is for folks who do not agree. What do you think the fruit of life would have awarded Adam, then, other than what he had upon creation?

[shazeep]

but for the record, i imagine that Adam "ate the fruit" of knowledge, or "developed/evolved" a frontal cortex, and did not eat of the fruit of life, or "repent," as that was too new a concept for an ego-filled person to immediately grasp, or something. God of course knew this was going to happen--the knowledge of good v evil brings shame, and guilt. Rebound brings life. Simple proof is observed in our anger at some perceived slight; but that anger evaporating if the other professes genuine remorse. Lots of shorthand there, so please get my meaning. Plus i just shot this from the hip, i haven't really thought about it or anything.

[mfblume]

You mentioned mythology. Shazeep, Jesus and his miracles are also considered mythology by some. It's not mythology.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

My question is for folks who do not agree. What do you think the fruit of life would have awarded Adam, then, other than what he had upon creation?

a very good Q. I'm totally guessing @ "rebound/repentance," which would have awarded him forgiveness?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

but for the record, i imagine that Adam "ate the fruit" of knowledge, or "developed/evolved" a frontal cortex, and did not eat of the fruit of life, or "repent," as that was too new a concept for an ego-filled person to immediately grasp, or something. God of course knew this was going to happen--the knowledge of good v evil brings shame, and guilt. Rebound brings life. Simple proof is observed in our anger at some perceived slight; but that anger evaporating if the other professes genuine remorse. Lots of shorthand there, so please get my meaning. Plus i just shot this from the hip, i haven't really thought about it or anything.

It was not the fruit of knowledge. There's a spiritual aspect here. Fruit of the knowledge OF GOOD AND EVIL. It works with what Paul taught about Law, an exhaustive source of the knowledge of good and evil. It is self making self improved before God, or righteous.

It was knowledge of what to do and what to avoid to make oneself righteous.