Hi steve7150,
On the surface, this may be true, however, God doesn't make mention of this imperfection as an impediment for fellowship. Only the action noted, The Garden, brought sufficient judgment. For all we know, God, could have been instructing both Adam and Eve on life, and as Graeme said, they deliberately sinned.
That's a good point Robby. Yet according to John , Eve committed all the sins of the world before she ate the fruit. As she gazed at the tree she experienced these emotions. "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes,the pride of life is not of the Father but is of the world." 1John 2.16
Agreed God did not punish them for this but IMO it shows they were just like us whether they were innocent or not. People like to distance God from anything perceived as negative and blame man entirely for "the fall" yet when God said everything was "good" i think He meant "good for His purposes."
Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
-
dizerner
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
Scripture is pretty clear that:
"through one man sin entered into the world"
People try to interpret that as "the potential to sin," but logically Adam always had the potential to sin, as someone pointed out.
I don't think a pre-fall Adam was sinless in a way that could atone for post-fall Adam. And the reason is the requirements for Redemption are greater than for the initial obedience of not eating the unlawful tree.
[Btw, I do think fall is a good term, and not all falls are accidental. If I jump off a building I fell, but I didn't trip. Fall indicates a drastic change in position from a higher to a lower one. What better word describes losing paradise? It's a fall from grace and glory. Even Lucifer's original sin is described this way: How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!]
"through one man sin entered into the world"
People try to interpret that as "the potential to sin," but logically Adam always had the potential to sin, as someone pointed out.
I don't think a pre-fall Adam was sinless in a way that could atone for post-fall Adam. And the reason is the requirements for Redemption are greater than for the initial obedience of not eating the unlawful tree.
[Btw, I do think fall is a good term, and not all falls are accidental. If I jump off a building I fell, but I didn't trip. Fall indicates a drastic change in position from a higher to a lower one. What better word describes losing paradise? It's a fall from grace and glory. Even Lucifer's original sin is described this way: How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!]
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
Hi Dizerner,
I was raised to believe in inherited sin/guilt. I don't know if I do anymore, but I'm not certain about that either.
I know I am miserable (Romans 7:24) but that's as far as I go with it. Either way, one could also say that through one man all humans came into existence, but it is merely a statement. Through one man sin entered the world. The mode or means of that entrance is not delineated. We assume inheritance. Could we be wrong?
Regards, Brenden.
I was raised to believe in inherited sin/guilt. I don't know if I do anymore, but I'm not certain about that either.
I know I am miserable (Romans 7:24) but that's as far as I go with it. Either way, one could also say that through one man all humans came into existence, but it is merely a statement. Through one man sin entered the world. The mode or means of that entrance is not delineated. We assume inheritance. Could we be wrong?Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]
-
dizerner
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
Hey, TheEditor.
I do see some very godly people who don't like original sin, because they feel it denies people of real responsibility for their actions. If you pressed those same people, you could say "Do you still need grace to do what's right?" Without exception all would answer yes, they need some measure of grace. So, um, once we get extra help from God, why do we still complain about not being able to do something without his grace? I don't want to see God's grace as the cherry on top of the Sundae of my efforts
. Reading Paul you've got to admire his consistently godly attitude about everything (not to say he was sinless but what low standards we have). Paul was tempted to be proud about his old Phariseeism, mustn't he have been tempted to be proud about his then-current righteousness (if anyone anywhere ever had the right to be). "I've kept the faith" he says, yet considers himself present-tense one of the worst sinners. What made the difference for Paul? "But God, who is rich in mercy called me by his grace." I'm not sure I see any room in Paul's life for an merit system, for salvation that God gave him 'cause he just tried to be a good guy.
And maybe, when we realize we are bad, that's when God can do something good for us... original sin is not really pulled out of thin air for me, it's more like a strand woven all through Scripture. You've got to notice the amazing parallel with the Romans 7 "no longer I but sin that lives in me" and the Galatians 2 "no longer I but Christ that lives in me." Isn't there a third option Paul, just the plain old "I"?
And Romans 7 might be where a lot of Christians live (indeed I did for many, many years) but there is a Romans 8 that follows after. You might even kind of see it like a death... and resurrection. But what did Paul die to in Romans 7? And what did he live to in Romans 8? Is this all just a sinister plot to take away the responsibility and morality of man? Or can I truly say "I thank my God through Jesus Christ our Lord." Because that kind of leaves me out of the picture, in the sense of meritorious works and efforts. So what is man judged for? "Judgment because they believe not in me," says Christ. Now that's odd—the works righteousness and moralist salvationists really hate the idea of "easy believism."
But is believing God can regenerate my sinful self really all that easy? Anyone that has a true faith that God will "do it all" in them, that is "finish the work he started," will tell you, it really isn't always easy to look at our failures and our sin and say "can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Why did Paul say "when God chose to reveal his Son in me" rather than "when I chose to get my act together and flight right." It would seem that Paul attributed all the "spiritual fruit" of his life, which still goes on today, as an act of the grace of God rather than something he sat down and realized one day. But then does man have responsibility? It was said even Paul kicked against the goads, or could refrain from preaching "his" Gospel. So I think the idea of "perfection" and "demand" symbolizes the spiritual function of Law, because it might seem harder for a man "rich" in moral good deeds to get enter the kingdom of heaven, than a camel going through a needle. And I'm not judging—I've truly tried to be that good man, that earns God's favor. Let's just say that the sincerity of my attempt was that "tutor" teaching me I need Christ. And like Paul, I just want to preach Christ and him crucified as the harbinger of new life in the human heart. The simplicity that is in Christ—imagine having all that was in Christ, for yourself.
But how can I receive what Christ has for me if I'm full of myself, what I can do, and my own goodness? It's funny because, for me, Job is one of the biggest books on original sin and redemptive grace in the Bible. The whole point of the book was Job did nothing wrong himself, until he was so pressured, that his deepest nature came out, and he cracked—Job was full of self-righteousness. And at the end he realized "All our righteousnesses are like menstrual rags" (notice the illusion to birth) and he said "I spoke too much, I am unworthy, I despise myself and repent in dust in ashes." False humility? Or is that the Summum bonum of understanding our relationship with God? Yet Job knew his Redeemer lived, and confessed that somehow he would one day see God. Like Paul, we can be intimidated by Job's visible righteousness. Yet in the end that was his one impediment to a radical experience with God and with regeneration.
I do see some very godly people who don't like original sin, because they feel it denies people of real responsibility for their actions. If you pressed those same people, you could say "Do you still need grace to do what's right?" Without exception all would answer yes, they need some measure of grace. So, um, once we get extra help from God, why do we still complain about not being able to do something without his grace? I don't want to see God's grace as the cherry on top of the Sundae of my efforts
. Reading Paul you've got to admire his consistently godly attitude about everything (not to say he was sinless but what low standards we have). Paul was tempted to be proud about his old Phariseeism, mustn't he have been tempted to be proud about his then-current righteousness (if anyone anywhere ever had the right to be). "I've kept the faith" he says, yet considers himself present-tense one of the worst sinners. What made the difference for Paul? "But God, who is rich in mercy called me by his grace." I'm not sure I see any room in Paul's life for an merit system, for salvation that God gave him 'cause he just tried to be a good guy. And maybe, when we realize we are bad, that's when God can do something good for us... original sin is not really pulled out of thin air for me, it's more like a strand woven all through Scripture. You've got to notice the amazing parallel with the Romans 7 "no longer I but sin that lives in me" and the Galatians 2 "no longer I but Christ that lives in me." Isn't there a third option Paul, just the plain old "I"?
And Romans 7 might be where a lot of Christians live (indeed I did for many, many years) but there is a Romans 8 that follows after. You might even kind of see it like a death... and resurrection. But what did Paul die to in Romans 7? And what did he live to in Romans 8? Is this all just a sinister plot to take away the responsibility and morality of man? Or can I truly say "I thank my God through Jesus Christ our Lord." Because that kind of leaves me out of the picture, in the sense of meritorious works and efforts. So what is man judged for? "Judgment because they believe not in me," says Christ. Now that's odd—the works righteousness and moralist salvationists really hate the idea of "easy believism." But is believing God can regenerate my sinful self really all that easy? Anyone that has a true faith that God will "do it all" in them, that is "finish the work he started," will tell you, it really isn't always easy to look at our failures and our sin and say "can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Why did Paul say "when God chose to reveal his Son in me" rather than "when I chose to get my act together and flight right." It would seem that Paul attributed all the "spiritual fruit" of his life, which still goes on today, as an act of the grace of God rather than something he sat down and realized one day. But then does man have responsibility? It was said even Paul kicked against the goads, or could refrain from preaching "his" Gospel. So I think the idea of "perfection" and "demand" symbolizes the spiritual function of Law, because it might seem harder for a man "rich" in moral good deeds to get enter the kingdom of heaven, than a camel going through a needle. And I'm not judging—I've truly tried to be that good man, that earns God's favor. Let's just say that the sincerity of my attempt was that "tutor" teaching me I need Christ. And like Paul, I just want to preach Christ and him crucified as the harbinger of new life in the human heart. The simplicity that is in Christ—imagine having all that was in Christ, for yourself.
But how can I receive what Christ has for me if I'm full of myself, what I can do, and my own goodness? It's funny because, for me, Job is one of the biggest books on original sin and redemptive grace in the Bible. The whole point of the book was Job did nothing wrong himself, until he was so pressured, that his deepest nature came out, and he cracked—Job was full of self-righteousness. And at the end he realized "All our righteousnesses are like menstrual rags" (notice the illusion to birth) and he said "I spoke too much, I am unworthy, I despise myself and repent in dust in ashes." False humility? Or is that the Summum bonum of understanding our relationship with God? Yet Job knew his Redeemer lived, and confessed that somehow he would one day see God. Like Paul, we can be intimidated by Job's visible righteousness. Yet in the end that was his one impediment to a radical experience with God and with regeneration.
-
willowtree
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 1:56 pm
- Location: Sooke BC Canada
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
I can see what you are saying here and really have no argument. What I have observed is that wherever Satan is cast in an unfavourable light in scripture, he rushes in to stir up confusion. And he also tends, as he did in Eden, to downplay the issues. "You will not surely die..." I believe we need to be vigilant in these situations, to keep from being deceived ourselves. The term 'fall' is something to be conscious of, lest we downplay disobedience to a mere mistake, a slip, or something we could not help.dizerner wrote: [Btw, I do think fall is a good term, and not all falls are accidental. If I jump off a building I fell, but I didn't trip. Fall indicates a drastic change in position from a higher to a lower one. What better word describes losing paradise? It's a fall from grace and glory. Even Lucifer's original sin is described this way: How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!]
Graeme
If you find yourself between a rock and a hard place, always head for the rock. Ps 62..
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
"through one man sin entered into the world"
"the world" does not mean "each man" but death and mortality was passed to each man.
"the world" does not mean "each man" but death and mortality was passed to each man.
-
dizerner
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
I think Paul seems to have something more in mind than simply the fact that everyone physically started dying. His use of sin has a thread throughout Romans that leads through an idea of marriage and slavery and up to:
God condemned sin in the flesh.
Notice also that this is linked to the thought "In my flesh dwells no good thing." Now if "through one man sin entered into the world" just means "through man physical death entered the world" it would seem a rather bland description of sin that doesn't fit into Paul's descriptions of it. In fact Paul makes an immediate point of separating the concept of death and sin:
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin
Could Paul possibly have meant: Therefore, just as through one man [physical death] entered into the world, and death through [physical death]
Or when he says just a few verses later:
So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it.
Could we possibly think that means anything like: So I am not the one doing wrong; it is [physical death] living in me that does it.
Sin has got to be separated from physical death, one of its consequences. Physical death cannot "live" in someone, nor can physical death be "condemned" in Christ. Therefore I think it's hard to say that "physical death" is what it means when it says:
"through one man sin entered into the world"
And again if we say it means that through one man the opportunity to sin entered the world, Adam always had that opportunity and it again becomes meaningless.
God condemned sin in the flesh.
Notice also that this is linked to the thought "In my flesh dwells no good thing." Now if "through one man sin entered into the world" just means "through man physical death entered the world" it would seem a rather bland description of sin that doesn't fit into Paul's descriptions of it. In fact Paul makes an immediate point of separating the concept of death and sin:
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin
Could Paul possibly have meant: Therefore, just as through one man [physical death] entered into the world, and death through [physical death]
Or when he says just a few verses later:
So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it.
Could we possibly think that means anything like: So I am not the one doing wrong; it is [physical death] living in me that does it.
Sin has got to be separated from physical death, one of its consequences. Physical death cannot "live" in someone, nor can physical death be "condemned" in Christ. Therefore I think it's hard to say that "physical death" is what it means when it says:
"through one man sin entered into the world"
And again if we say it means that through one man the opportunity to sin entered the world, Adam always had that opportunity and it again becomes meaningless.
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
Well, I don't believe in inherited sin/guilt either. But I do believe that though Adam and Eve's sin all of mankind has inherited a propensity for sin.Brenden wrote:I was raised to believe in inherited sin/guilt. I don't know if I do anymore, but I'm not certain about that either.
I believe that the enabling grace of God made possible by the magnificent sacrifice which Messiah Jesus made of Himself, we can overcome this propensity.
I also believe that non-Christian people can and many do work acts of mercy and self-sacrifice for the benifit of others, and some risk their lives or even give their lives to save the lives of others. So I think those who imagine that a non-Christian can do nothing but sin, are mistaken.
Having said that, I do think that without the enabling grace of God, no one can be consistently righteous. And to enable consistent righteousness is the very reason Messiah died for us:
He endured our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed [of sin-sickness]. (1 Peter 2:24)
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
-
jriccitelli
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
- Location: San Jose, CA
- Contact:
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
Editor, my typo made a previous post from pg 1 read wrong, I meant to use a small s for human spirit, so it should have read:
It ‘was’ a mystery, as it was to Adam and Moses, but it is no longer a mystery. It all makes sense now, and the meaning that His incarnation gives, has Great meaning. Jesus is not a mystery, a facade or a cardboard symbol of something created to tell a story. Although God could say ‘such a thing’ took the place of our own death and sins, it would not have much meaning nor make much sense or have a great impact on the soul of men. Maybe a man dying for you makes some feel forgiven, and no disrespect to many wonderful people who died serving or saving others, but to believe another being was so wonderful to remove all my sins, let alone the sins of the whole world, well that is not believable or feasible enough to make sense.
And God does make sense. The Gospel truly has great meaning as do all His ways! That is what draws me to love, adore and worship God. All His ways are true, and I can believe everything God does is done with the utmost sense, truth and perfection.
So anyways, does that make sense now? We are fully created, spirit and body, Jesus is from above.Jesus never did sin, and I believe that He would not sin because Jesus is a perfect Spirit, and spirit is ultimately what we truly are. We by contrast are completely of this earth and our spirit also is created and willing to sin'
What else could have overcome sin? Certainly not man. And I don’t believe we can trust Angels or other created beings are to be trusted, as sinless or perfect either. So, on that premise or precedent only God could truly overcome sin, in a way we can be assured of.I'm not sure what you base your thesis on? Jesus was "the Last Adam". It's fairly simple. This notion of Jesus perfect spirit overcoming sin comes from where exactly? (Editor, pg1 Apr 9)
These were ‘types’ not the actual sacrifice, just as we have crosses today. But, they foretold, or now represent the Actual Cross of history and the Actual redemption, atonement and sacrifice of the living Christ. They were saved by faith, faith in what God said would save them. Faith in what was unseen was enough to save them, but now it has been revealed: ‘… but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel’ (2Tim 1:10)‘We believe His Word on that, therefore we have a great hope, that we could not have in created beings or things’ (Me)
‘Were Moses and the copper serpent he erected "created things"? Did they not typify Jesus work? Is the arrangement of Jesus' Ransom that of God the Father and therefore does it not work because He declares it and accepts it? Then how can you say the above?’ (Editor, pg2 Apr 9)
It ‘was’ a mystery, as it was to Adam and Moses, but it is no longer a mystery. It all makes sense now, and the meaning that His incarnation gives, has Great meaning. Jesus is not a mystery, a facade or a cardboard symbol of something created to tell a story. Although God could say ‘such a thing’ took the place of our own death and sins, it would not have much meaning nor make much sense or have a great impact on the soul of men. Maybe a man dying for you makes some feel forgiven, and no disrespect to many wonderful people who died serving or saving others, but to believe another being was so wonderful to remove all my sins, let alone the sins of the whole world, well that is not believable or feasible enough to make sense.
And God does make sense. The Gospel truly has great meaning as do all His ways! That is what draws me to love, adore and worship God. All His ways are true, and I can believe everything God does is done with the utmost sense, truth and perfection.
-
jriccitelli
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
- Location: San Jose, CA
- Contact:
Re: Was Adam sinless before the Fall?
So again Paidion, are you adding that Jesus is not God, but rather God stuff that came out of God? And are you saying that 'enabling grace' does what 'The Holy Spirit and Christ Jesus' do in a believer?It may be because of the Father's capacity to love that He begat His Son before all ages, the first of His acts—in order to have someone to love. (Paidion, pg2 Apr 9)
'... Having said that, I do think that without the enabling grace of God, no one can be consistently righteous' (Paidion, above)
Albeit I agree with Paidion and others here that 'I don't believe in inherited sin/guilt either. But I do believe that though Adam and Eve's sin all of mankind has inherited a propensity for sin' I don't believe it is necessary to 'say' sin is inherited, as in having sin 'originally' imputed to us through Adam, although the idea can be argued for, I don't feel it is necessary to be dogmatic about it. What i would argue is that humans are created and capable of sin, and always do, and none have proved otherwise. Adam was capable of sin, he did sin, and in effect I would say humans are incapable of not sinning.
I will say that Jesus had a perfect 'will' and was able to be tempted in all ways just as we are (in the general sense of tempted yet not doing following through). You can be tempted to sin, but if you do not have a will to sin, you will not sin. And that is how Jesus was both man and God at the same time. And that is why and how I can say Jesus was a Perfect Sacrifice:
‘For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance’ (Hebrews 9:13-15)
‘For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified’ (Hebrews 10:15)
How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the … (Hebrews 2:3-4)
‘Whatever has a defect, you shall not offer, for it will not be accepted for you. 21 'When a man offers a sacrifice of peace offerings to the LORD to fulfill a special vow or for a freewill offering, of the herd or of the flock, it must be perfect (Tamin; blameless, complete, perfect) to be accepted; there shall be no defect in it’ (Leviticus 22:21)