Christian Gnosticism - Hidden Treasures?

[Yeshua1]

Sorry. I don't think I was clear in my reply.

I am refering to gnosticism (possessing knowledge, especially esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters) not Gnosticism (capital "G").

I should have been more careful and used "Christian gnosticism", making sure I used the lower case "g".

Words do have meanings and my error of capitalizing "Gnosticism" indicates the cult whereas gnosticism refers to the charastics to which I am pointing.

Thanks for pointing that out. I do stand corrected on my poor habit of capitalizing first letters willy nilly (I do it with commas too).

Are you referring to when you say Calvinists are "reading something into the text" that is not there?

 

[Iconoclast]

It also doesn't say anything about spiritual death.The Word just says Adam will surely die.

The Holy Spirit had not been given to Adam or Eve. It is the indwelling of the Holly Spirit that regenerates men. Adam wasn't as yet an eternal being because if he had been we would have him still alive today. The whole reason he was put out of the garden was so that Adam did not also eat of the tree of life and live for ever in sin.
MB

1)in the DAY you eat of it, dying you will surely die.....MB, something died that day and then assured his physical death.
Biblicist has explained this at length.
2) Adam had a living spirit that was able to communicate and fellowship with God.
Why would he need regeneration ?
3) Adam as all men are was eternal.
We either live in the realm of eternal life,
Or eternal death.

 

[Yeshua1]

1)in the DAY you eat of it, dying you will surely die.....MB, something died that day and then assured his physical death.
Biblicist has explained this at length.
2) Adam had a living spirit that was able to communicate and fellowship with God.
Why would he need regeneration ?
3) Adam as all men are was eternal.
We either live in the realm of eternal life,
Or eternal death.

Adam was in spiritual relationship with God before the fall in a perfect fashion, as the promise of the Messiah was not given nor needed until after he fell, so something happened to his spiritual condition!

 

[MB]

1)in the DAY you eat of it, dying you will surely die.....MB, something died that day and then assured his physical death.
Biblicist has explained this at length.
2) Adam had a living spirit that was able to communicate and fellowship with God.
Why would he need regeneration ?
3) Adam as all men are was eternal.
We either live in the realm of eternal life,
Or eternal death.

Icon His explanation is not from scripture. Adam did not die spiritually before his physical death. Adam with out the tree of life would not live for eternity. No where is it seen in scripture that Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of life and after he sinned God put Adam out of the garden to keep him from eating it's fruit and living for ever. We have to have the Holy Spirit living inside of us for eternal life.
MB

 

[Yeshua1]

Icon His explanation is not from scripture. Adam did not die spiritually before his physical death. Adam with out the tree of life would not live for eternity. No where is it seen in scripture that Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of life and after he sinned God put Adam out of the garden to keep him from eating it's fruit and living for ever. We have to have the Holy Spirit living inside of us for eternal life.
MB

Adam was in a spiritual state with God by virtue of God creating Him and calling Him good and in His very Image! He died spiritually to God, severed his relationship connection, as soon as he sinned!

 

[MB]

Adam was in a spiritual state with god by virtue of God creating Him and calling Him good and in His very Image! He died spiritually to God, severed his relationship connection, as soon as he sinned!

You have no scripture to back up your claims neither does Biblicist. I see no reason to believe you. I've shown scriptures to back up what I am saying. I have even shown where Adam and Cain both walked and talked with God after sinning and they spoke with God something your doctrine says is impossible when spiritually dead. No where does scripture say that Adam had eternal life this is only assumed.
The term "spiritually dead" is a metaphor and men being unable to hear or understand because spiritual death is false.
MB

 

[Yeshua1]

You have no scripture to back up your claims neither does Biblicist. I see no reason to believe you. I've shown scriptures to back up what I am saying. I have even shown where Adam and Cain both walked and talked with God after sinning and they spoke with God something your doctrine says is impossible when spiritually dead. No where does scripture say that Adam had eternal life this is only assumed.
The term "spiritually dead" is a metaphor and men being unable to hear or understand because spiritual death is false.
MB

If we are not effected by the fall of Adam ourselves, and not spiritually dead in our sins, why must we be born again then?

 

[JonC]

Are you referring to when you say Calvinists are "reading something into the text" that is not there?

Not necessarily.

We all depend on interpretation and to an extent read into a text. This is a part of understanding, even if it is merely mental pictures that form in our minds.

I am talking about building theory on theory.

Here is one example:

1. Adam's nature changed with the Fall
2. Spiritual death is a separation from God
3. Adam experienced spiritual death
4. At judgment sinners will experience spiritual death
5. Divine justice is retributive justice
6. Sin can be punished without the one who actually sinned bearing that punishment
7. Jesus could bear our sins in the context of God viewing Jesus as if He were guilty
8. God has to exercise punishment on sin
9. God punishes Jesus for our sins instead of punishing us
10. Jesus had to experience this spiritual separation in order for divine justice to be satisfied
11. God had to separate from Jesus for three hours on the cross

Notice that none of those eleven statements are actually in Scripture. Several of those comments are interpretations or theories directly from Scripture. A few are philosophical ideas. But none are actually found in the biblical text. So if you put all of those together you end up with a narrative that, if true, was hidden rather than presented in the actual text.

Here is another example (Origen's view)

1. Because Adam sinned death entered the world.
2. God put enmity between Satan and mankind
3. Christ had victory over sin and the grave
4. We were ransomed by the blood of Christ.
5. God paid this ransom to Satan

All but the interpretation is actual Scripture. While you and I would agree the interpretation is wrong, it is an interpretation of Scripture rather than a systematically derived narrative built on theory.

 

[Iconoclast]

"MB,
Hello MB,

Icon His explanation is not from scripture.
Adam did not die spiritually before his physical death.

Several men responded as to the entry of spiritual death, Reformed posted this;

It stems from a reasonable deduction of Ephesians 2:1 and Colossians 2:13. It is not that complicated. Paul uses the word nekros (νεκρος) to describe the spiritual state of the individual prior to their conversion. He cannot be using it to describe their physical condition, for they were very much alive physically. This is not fiction, nor is it a story. It is also not mythology in any sense of the word. Using your method of reasoning the Trinity can be called Chrisitan mythology. The term is not found in scripture. Neither is the hypostatic union. The term used is less important than the biblical truth conveyed.,

Biblicist offered this;

That spiritual death is fully described as occuring in Adam at the point of sin experiencing spiritual death occurred (separtion from God spiritually), and that state of spiritual death is "passed" to all mankind and that is why the scripture never describes a spiritual death in any of Adam's descendents is because it occurred in Adam and was passed to them. Just that simple.

What is pure mythical thinking, totally oxymoronic is to admit that "spiritual death" exists in all men but there is no cause for that death, meaning there is nothing that caused that death - that is what is mythical and oxymoronic.

Romans 5:12 demands the entrance of "death" with that act of sin and that "death" event is what is spiritual separation is a "spiritual death" and it is "passed" down and that is why all descendent are in that state of spiritual death. So simple, so clear, but your view demands death without any beginning point of death and that is pure mythical.

Adam did not die spiritually before his physical death

.
gen.2
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

The only death that day was spiritual death, physically he lived for many years after

 

[JonC]

"MB,
Hello MB,


Several men responded as to the entry of spiritual death, Reformed posted this;



Biblicist offered this;


.
gen.2
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

The only death that day was spiritual death, physically he lived for many years after

I think he is pointing out that Scripture itself does not say Adam died spiritually. The wording "on that day you shall surely die" does not dictate that the death is spiritual or even that it will be compleated that day. The word rendered "surely" is the word "die". The text could also be translated that on that day dying you shall die (on that day death will enter the world - it will be appointed Adam to die).

The text itself does not indicate that Adam experienced a spiritual death or even that he died on the day he sinned. If we allow scripture to interpret scripture, I believe you will end up with death entering the world and Adam's death being certain in that day he would sin.

 

[Iconoclast]

Most see it,ie,spiritual death with physical to follow....dying.
..thou shalt surely die.
Moses was not there JonC....so his writing was given to set up the rest of biblical truth.
Moses was not given to be mysterious but instructive.

You say it does not speak of spiritual death,and yet it does not use the word physical either. It does not ignore the spirit of man as if it is not part of the man as your posts offer.
That is why you struggle with this truth where most everyone has no struggle
Because others you read or quote offer other ideas does not make those ideas valid.
Your attempt to suggest nothing died that day is a denial of....in the day you eat, dying, thou shalt surely die.

 

[kyredneck]

The only death that day was spiritual death, physically he lived for many years after

7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons. Gen 3

Their eyes opened and they died.

9 And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; Ro 7

 

[JonC]

Most see it,ie,spiritual death with physical to follow....dying.
..thou shalt surely die.
Moses was not there JonC....so his writing was given to set up the rest of biblical truth.
Moses was not given to be mysterious but instructive.

You say it does not speak of spiritual death,and yet it does not use the word physical either. It does not ignore the spirit of man as if it is not part of the man as your posts offer.
That is why you struggle with this truth where most everyone has no struggle
Because others you read or quote offer other ideas does not make those ideas valid.
Your attempt to suggest nothing died that day is a denial of....in the day you eat, dying, thou shalt surely die.

Moses was not there but those words are "God breathed" (I do not think they are subjective).

Perhaps your reply is related to an ignorance of other interpretations, but it is not relevent. "Most Christians" believe in infant baptism. That does not make the doctrine correct.

Many accept your view and many reject your view. My point us that we need to rely more on scripture (what is "God breathed" - the text - to include the choices of words) and less on tradition (the theories you are reading into the text).

More to the point is that the actual text you provide (the scriptures) do not even come close to the conclusions you reach. At some point you have to consider exactly how much of your theology is actually "God breathed" and how much is humanistic philosophy.

If you were to do what I advocated (the exercise you seem to find silly) and erase the points of your theology that are not actually stated in scripture, how much would be left? Very little I suspect.

 

[Iconoclast]

Moses was not there but those words are "God breathed" (I do not think they are subjective).

Perhaps your reply is related to an ignorance of other interpretations, but it is not relevent. "Most Christians" believe in infant baptism. That does not make the doctrine correct.

Many accept your view and many reject your view. My point us that we need to rely more on scripture (what is "God breathed" - the text - to include the choices of words) and less on tradition (the theories you are reading into the text).

More to the point is that the actual text you provide (the scriptures) do not even come close to the conclusions you reach. At some point you have to consider exactly how much of your theology is actually "God breathed" and how much is humanistic philosophy.

If you were to do what I advocated (thest what e exercise you seem to find silly) and erase the points of your theology that are not actually stated in scripture, how much would be left? Very little I suspect.

I did not suggest what Moses wrote was subjective. In fact just the opposite. God gave us all we need to know about the fall of mankind

Body soul and spirit died in that day in Adam.
I will remain ignorant of all the failed theories that you relish as I do not want to keep falsehoods in my head.
Roman's 16:17-20 give me instructions on this.
That some person somewhere comes up with a novelty does not mean it is valid.
You like that kind of thing and hold onto it.
I look at some of those writings but reject them right away when they cross the line.
I have enough to do to read solid material and grow, rather then to let strange fire occupy any space in my head.
I read enough on the cults to refute them, but I do not spend extra time exegeting the false book of nephi.
The other day you posted something about how pagans view the temple....I go right past that as their view has nothing to do with my teaching lost persons with Gods truth.

 

[Iconoclast]

[QUOTE="JonC,

If you were to do what I advocated (the exercise you seem to find silly) and erase the points of your theology that are not actually stated in scripture, how much would be left? Very little I suspect.[/QUOTE]
Put the scriptures we offer on the right side, and your theories and speculations on the left and you would be erasing the whole left side of the board,lol

 

[JonC]

[QUOTE="JonC,

If you were to do what I advocated (the exercise you seem to find silly) and erase the points of your theology that are not actually stated in scripture, how much would be left? Very little I suspect.

Put the scriptures we offer on the right side, and your theories and speculations on the left and you would be erasing the whole left side of the board,lol[/QUOTE]
At one time, yes. I held your view. And that was exactly what I did.

 

[Yeshua1]

I think he is pointing out that Scripture itself does not say Adam died spiritually. The wording "on that day you shall surely die" does not dictate that the death is spiritual or even that it will be compleated that day. The word rendered "surely" is the word "die". The text could also be translated that on that day dying you shall die (on that day death will enter the world - it will be appointed Adam to die).

The text itself does not indicate that Adam experienced a spiritual death or even that he died on the day he sinned. If we allow scripture to interpret scripture, I believe you will end up with death entering the world and Adam's death being certain in that day he would sin.

You also have to conclude that something happened to Adam, as he did not need to have a savior before the fall, was in harmony relationship withy God, but after the fall, broken fellowship and now the need for a savior!

 

[Yeshua1]

Put the scriptures we offer on the right side, and your theories and speculations on the left and you would be erasing the whole left side of the board,lol

At one time, yes. I held your view. And that was exactly what I did.[/QUOTE]
Those views you once held would be the majority of Reformed and Baptists of History!

 

[JonC]

Those views you once held would be the majority of Reformed and Baptists of History!

Yes, they would. That is probably why I held them. That was the tradition I was raised in.

 

[JonC]

You also have to conclude that something happened to Adam, as he did not need to have a savior before the fall, was in harmony relationship withy God, but after the fall, broken fellowship and now the need for a savior!

No, this iui s not true at all. There are some who believe it was always God's plan to redeem mankind (they call Jesus the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world"). These people believe Adam's transgression demonstrated what Adam would do when faced with the choice.