Featured Alternative Evangelism

I can appreciate their hypothesizing and sympathize with their point, it just falls so far short of what God actually planned, carried out, and is still carrying out that there is no comparison. To put it mundanely, saying, “They were happy, and then they lived happily ever after,” hardly makes for a great story.

The article does not even come close to presenting an alternate but equal demonstration of God’s love. Don’t forget not only John 15:13 (dying for friends), but also Romans 5:10 (dying for enemies). Again, to say that sin is the focus is to entirely miss the Good News; it’s more like Bad News. Declaring God’s love is not alternative evangelism to the Gospel; it’s at the heart of it.

 

We declare that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, already are judged as sinners, and then the good news is really good news, as they have to be convicted of their sins first, and then get the Good news!

 

Earth, Wind, and Fire,

Your point about Augustine derives support from the insight that the story of Adam and Eve is not primarily about original sin, but rather about the birth of conscience through discernment of the psychodynamics of evil. I will defend this claim in my next planned post.

 

The Incarnation is essential to God’s plan for man. It’s just that all hypotheticals fall far short of God’s actual plan incorporating the Incarnation.

 

We only go to heaven ONLY because jesus died in our stead for our sins, and we must receive Him thru faith!

 

They became self aware due to them now having the sin nature!

 

The SEcond person of the trinity became fully man and walked among us, save that he was sinless humanity, and still fully God!

 

If there was no Fall, no need for a Savior?

 

The reality is that judgment is coming, God is going to destroy this earth and the people in it because of their sins. It will be a day of wrath.

The preaching of John and Jesus and of the Apostles was to "flee the wrath to come," and here is the Way.

That's the message. Anything that mitigates the certainty and finality and fearfulness of that day is diabolical.

 

God is our Father. Christ is our brother. That's the relationship and nothing changes that. Our fellowship begins with obedience. When we obey our Father is pleased. When we disobey, He chastises us. The relationship is right either way.

The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. It's all His work, and He first loved us.

But that's just for those who shall be heirs of salvation.

The earth and the people will not be saved because we have fellowship with God or one another, and even if the Gospel fills the whole earth, it will not delay the day of wrath and nor abate the fiery indignation of God.

Some will respond to compassion. Others to fear. Either way, it's right. Jude 1:22-23.

 

But, sin reigns in the earth, and all men are sinners. There is no one in the earth with whom God will walk and talk because of that one's goodness. It's always and anon because of God's response to sin.

 

Karl Barth was the most famous Protestant theologian of the 20th century. Once a literally-minded fundamentalist asked him, "Dr. Barth, was there really a snake in the garden of Eden or not?" Barth's witty but profound reply was this: "It's not important whether there was a snake there; what's important is what the snake said!" Your question nicely sets up my case for the story of Adam and Eve as primarily as the story of the birth of conscience rather than just the story of the origin of sin. Among other things, my case is based on these 3 points:

If Adam and Eve had not succumbed to the Serpent's temptation,
(1) they would not have become godlike
(2) and they would not know how to discern the difference between good and evil:
"Then the Lord God said, "See, now the man has become like one of us, knowing good from evil (3:22)."

(3) But God created us "in our image (1:26)" or "in the image of God (1:28)" and there always wanted us to become godlike; and surely God always wanted us to develop moral discernment, so that we could be morally responsible. Therefore, a key point implicit in the of Adam and Eve story is that it was God's will all along for humanity to eat the forbidden fruit. Paul recognizes this point in Romans 11:32:
"For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that He might be merciful to all."
Here humanity has no viable choice but to "fall" because they don't "imprison" themselves, but rather ut is God imprisons them. Why? So that our relationship with God will be based on His grace and mercy rather than on our merit.

In my view, (1)-(3) imply that Genesis 2-3 is primarily the story of the birth of conscience rather than of original sin. With this in mind, consider Adam's "curse," his need to work to survive (3:19). Surely it was God's plan from the beginning that humanity be would serve as custodians of the earth (so 1:28) and would therefore devote themselves to creative work to survive. The alternative is an eternal life of indolent leisure.

And why does God set up such a grueling earth testing system in which humanity is vulnerable to the subtle principles of evil? The value of our worship and service to God is a function of our free capacity with God's help to choose to overcome contrary inclinations that displease God.

 

The problem here is the over emphasis of one over the other. Doing this only presents a partial gospel.