The Total Depravity of Man....

It is in the same place, in the midst of the garden of God (aka "Paradise").

It certainly survived, or it could not be much of a "tree of life," now, could it? It at least survived long enough to be around in the Book of Revelation in the future.

What "other tree"? I find no further indication in scripture that the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil has survived, like the Tree of Life has done. But anyway, yes, God removed it, or more appropriately, guarded it and kept it safe. He set angels at its gates. This garden that the Tree of Life is in the midst of seems to be moveable by God, occupying no less than 4 different locations through the course of Scripture.

Well, let's see now, what was it you said that I missed? This does not indicate that they had been eating already, for God had not yet made Eve! Furthermore, This is God's initial commandment to man. Get real Pappabear! Take the BEAM out of you eye before you try to take the splinter out of mine!</font>[/QUOTE]What does God making Eve have to do with eating of the Tree of Life? Anyway, it was this command that Eve was trying to repeat to the serpent. Remember?

Yes, it does indicate that they had been eating. Or do you think that man had already sinned before partaking of the forbidden fruit? Was the word "commanded" lost on you in Gen. 2:16 which you quoted? Do you think that Adam had already began disobeying God's commands? Had Eve not eaten of the other trees in the garden when she told the serpent in Gen. 3:2 that they could?

Something else to consider: What was Eve doing in the midst of the garden near the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to begin with? Remember that the Tree of Life is also in the midst of that same Garden at that time. It is quite likely that since Satan tempted Christ first to eat forbidden bread when the LORD was hungry, he had practiced that tactic successfully before. The best time for him to tempt Eve with forbidden fruit to eat would be when she was gathering fruit to eat. Make sense to you? It does to me.

I take it then that you do not believe in hell? I am perplexed at just what you think the point is that is supposedly being illustrated in Luke 16:1-18 that the Lord would use a so-called "myth" to illustrate it with? Are coins also unreal, as in the lost coins? Are sheep also unreal, as in the lost sheep? Are prodigal sons also unreal, as in the prodigal son? I do not believe the Lord was conjuring such details out of thin air merely to make some point. There is a hell, and it is a place of torment as described by Jesus Christ in Luke 16.

There may have been many beggars named Lazarus. The important point is that Lazarus was named, and therefore this is not a parable, but an actual story about real people. Only one Lazarus laid at the Rich man's gate full of sores that the Rich man would recognize. Only that Lazarus would have Father Abraham's "son remember ..." statement about him in Luke 16:25 make sense. Irregardless, it names a member of the story, and that is not done in parables.

Since this is the final discussion of the Tree of Life, it seems to me important to focus thereon!

So help me out here Pappabear, Make the connectios for me. The tree of life in the midst of paradise is not the same as the tree of life in the midst of the Garden. The paradise that the thief and Jesus will be together is after the death of the flesh. The tree of life on the banks of the River of life in Rev 22 is in the New Jerusalem which is on the New Earth. </font>[/QUOTE]Incorrect. You need to make some connections. The Tree of Life in the midst of paradise is the same tree that is in the midst of the garden. BOTH ARE IN THE MIDST.

The Tree of Life is eternal. It is in the midst of Paradise which was once located in the earth. Eden was specifically called the "Garden of God" (Gen 13:10; Is 51:3; Ezek 28:13), and the flaming sword was set to specifically guard the way of the Tree of Life.

According to Easton's Revised Bible Dictionary, the word "Paradise" is "A Persian word (pardes), properly meaning a 'pleasure-ground' or 'park' or 'king’s garden'." Interesting -- Paradise is a garden? And the Tree of Life is in its midst according to Rev. 2:7? Yes, this is the same tree, same garden.

Now, as you have pointed out, the Lord told the thief on the cross that "today thou shalt be with me in paradise." Today? According to John 20:17, Jesus told Mary not to touch Him because He had not yet ascended and this was 3 days after. Also, we have this scripture passage:

Christ descended into the lower parts of the earth BEFORE He ascended, but He told the thief that it would be that same day he was in Paradise? Therefore -- making the connections -- Paradise (in the midst of which resides the Tree of Life) was in the heart of the earth. So, when God set the Cherubims to guard the eastern entrance to Eden, and a flaming sword to guard THE WAY OFthe Tree of Life (not the way TO it, but the way of it), it appears God moved it to a place of safekeeping in the earth, with only one entrance on its eastern side. I believe that is where Lazarus was, also known as "Abraham's bosom." There, it was protected from the entrance of strangers, and from the catastrophe of the Flood.

According to the Ephesians passage, captivity was led captive when Christ did ascend. In 2 Cor. 12:4, Paul says that a man was "caught up into Paradise." So, its direction is no longer down. It appears the Garden of God was moved once again when Christ ascended.

In Revelation 22, it appears in the midst of the New Jerusalem. Apparently, God's garden and the eternal tree shall once again be moved to what will then be its 4th location. The description of it as "in the midst" and bounding a river matches the description given in Gen. 2:9,10 where a single river flows out of Eden and then branches into 4 heads.

No, you have yet to prove that idea from scripture. And as russell55 has pointed out to you scriptures that plainly contradict that, and I have pointed out scriptures such as God cursing the ground in the curse because of man's sin that contradicts that, you will not be able to prove it. You keep appealing to natural revelation, what we can now see by way of decomposition, decay, and death, but ignore the many changes that have occured from creation to now and the truth that the written Revelation is a "more sure word."

I leave you with this post as my last discussion in this matter.

 

Being as that is your "last", does not mean it is correct! Which it is not! Only that you refuse to continue.

 

Hi John V;

Even Adam before the fall wasn't perfect other wise he wouldn't have fallen.
Mike

 

*choke* Adam wasn't perfect

the uncorrupted creation of Almighty God was not perfect

the image of God not perfect

unless Adam was perfect - you have even MORE of a problem with representative or substitutionary headship

Adam was perfect

but we dont inherit sin - we inherit the desire to sin

There exists a time where we are not holy - but we lack sin - in the instant we know right and wrong in the simplest terms and violate that - then we are condemned

This is known as the age of accountability

Thus many children between the ages of 1-2 might be damned

 

Adam was perfect alright, Just exactly as God made him, but he was not God! Only made in the image, that is having many of the same attributes and abilities that God himself has. But he was not made an eternal being as God is eternal. He was not made omniscient as God is omniscient, he was not transendent as God is transendent, he was not omnipresent as God is omnipresent, He was not all seeing as God is all seeing, I think you get the message.

Adam was perfect God said that His creation was "indeed very good". If it was Good to God, that means that it met God's pleasure. It conformed to God's specification!

I am convinced that God did not intend to make Man into Gods, nor allow them to become Gods! God made man to be man, and as such Adam was perfect!

 

sorry i thought someone would get back to you

Simply put - Does God create sin?

NO

Is Sin good or perfect?

NO

Thus when God created/creates man - sin was/is not part of the picture - sin nature however did become part of the picture - not unto condemnation - but lets just say it gives us giant pushes as soon as it can.

 

Hello Sularis. I haven't been around the board for quite some time, so, I do not know you. Because of this I may be answering things that you said in a sarchastic way. Be that as it may, I would like to take issue with some of the points in your above post. Some comments may agree with your position; some may disagree with your position.

1. Adam was created in a state of perfection. To say it another way, he was not created sinful. This is evident because whenever the Bible speaks of Adam relating to any type of imperfection it is always related to sin. Therefore, Adam was created sinless and chose to sin thereby become sinful and imperfect.

2. We DO inherit sin, not just the desire to sin. Romans 5 clearly states this: Romans 5:12-14 (ESV)
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— [13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

Sin came into the world through Adam. It became the inheritance of his progeny, namely us. Notice how Paul structures his arguement:

V.12 Paul's thesis: Sin came; Death, as a result of sin, came too; Death, the result of Adam's sin, was transfered to all men (humans).

V.13-14 Paul's commentary and proof of thesis: Sin was in the world before the law was given; Sin is not counted against humans, because there was no law given; Yet people died.

Therefore, because people died from Adam to Moses, it is demonstrated that each person bears the actual guilt in themselves for Adam's sin. Why? If sin is not counted against someone, how could they be held guilty and die? They can't unless they are held guilty for Adam's federal sin.

Furthermore, death's reign over all of humanity is proof that all inherit Adam's sin.

This is not to say that our own sins are not taken into account--they are, to be sure. However, the sin that we are primarily held responsible for is that of Adam. Our sins are secondary but no less damning.

I look forward to your response.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

well yer wrong Archangel

first of all we cannot inherit sin

that would violate Scripture

the father's sins are his own and not his child's and vice versa

I really havent gotten much sleep tonite ;(

But we inherited the affects of sin - that is death

We also inherit a corruption that leads us to sin - that is the sin nature

ill try and string a coherent argument

If all through Adam sin is passed on - then why is not life as easily pass onto humanity through Christ?

Both actions are being protrayed as equal events - but yet something is left out

We add in choice for salvation - but we are afraid to admit that choice exists for damnation

 

I can feel your pain at not gettin much sleep! I've done that for too many days to count!

However, look at the Pauline arguement in Romans 5 Again:

Romans 5:12-14 (ESV)
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— [13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

Sin came into the world through Adam. It became the inheritance of his progeny, namely us. Notice how Paul structures his arguement:

V.12 Paul's thesis: Sin came; Death, as a result of sin, came too; Death, the result of Adam's sin, was transfered to all men (humans).

V.13-14 Paul's commentary and proof of thesis: Sin was in the world before the law was given; Sin is not counted against humans, because there was no law given; Yet people died.

Therefore, because people died from Adam to Moses, it is demonstrated that each person bears the actual guilt in themselves for Adam's sin. Why? If sin is not counted against someone, how could they be held guilty and die? They can't unless they are held guilty for Adam's federal sin.

Now I understand your lack of sleep. Please take some time and respond to Paul's arguement in Romans.

SOME RANDOM NOTES:

Please explain this, with chapter and verse, that we may discuss it Biblically "the father's sins are his own and not his child's and vice versa


You wrote: "If all through Adam sin is passed on - then why is not life as easily pass onto humanity through Christ?

Actually, it is the case that some, through Christ, are made alive. Romans 5:19 (ESV)
For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.

This is dealing with the term "Imputation." Imputation is important to us, not because the sin of Adam is imputed to us, which it is, but because the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us when we are saved.

If you claim that Adam's sin is not imputed to us, how, then, can you claim that Christ's righteousness IS imputed to us? This is a logical inconsistency. Please explain why you think this way.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

Archangel,

Then I take it you do not believe that Jesus was victorious over sin and conquered death.

Man is not held accountable for sin anymore. Jesus paid the penalty for sin!

Man remains, as designed, subject to the death of the flesh. "for it is appointed unto man once to die, then the judgment". It doesn't say those before the law are exempt form death. Nor does is say that those since Jesus are exempt from death, even though Jesus Conquered death. So all men must die in the flesh. but we know that physical death is not the end of man, for there is judgment to follow.

Jesus, paid the penalty for the sins of the world, All of them for All times. Therefore our judgment is not based on sin, because sins have been dealth with. Besides, sins are legally and technically, DEEDS, Works is another term for deeds. So we know that our salvation is not of works lest any man should boast.

So, then what is Judgment? There are two. One is the judgment of our deeds, both good and bad. the other is our life, that is, whether we live or die (Revelation 20:14,15). The first determines any rewards "due us" and the second determines our eternal destiny.

Jesus told us in John 3:18, that whosoever believeth is NOT JUDGED! But, whosoever believeth not IS JUDGED ALREADY! You will notice that He did not say anything about deeds, but only about belief in Him.

Therefore, It matters not what Paul or Peter says about works or deeds, Our salvation is a matter of FAITH. Not faith plus or minus anything...But FAITH ALONE!

Now, that does not give us license to believe in Jesus, but live like hell! It simply reduces the Salvation equation to the least common denominator and looks like this:

FAITH IN GOD = SALVATION

Remember, as humans, we are obedient to that in which we have FAITH! That is a "built-in" fact of life. We are loyal to that which we 'know' to be right! If not, we experience guilt, speaking from a human point of view! Which coincidentally appears to be the same as from God's point of view. If we know something to be wrong, but do it anyway, we are overshadowed by a sense of guilt. If we continue doing the wrong thing, over time we become desensitized to the sense of Guilt. Then we lose the sense of right and wrong. If what we do causes us to lose our faith, then we lose our salvation too!

So we must behave in accordance with our faith, or we will lose our faith! Really simple isn't it!

 

Yelsew,

I grow increasingly tired of this...it is like talking to a post. If you are going to make claims such as this: Man is not held accountable for sin anymore please do make a scriptural arguement.

Your pontification, without scripture, is as useless as spitting into the wind.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

Archangel,

Scripture says that our faith is imputed, or accounted, as righteousness, not that righteousness is imputed. I'm amazed that people ignore this or just don't get it.

 

Thank you Michael,

Faith cometh by hearing and Hearing by the WORD of God! Thus faith is imputed by hearing the word of God!

 

Archangel,
Well You wanted scripture relative to sin not being held against man any more? FEAST ON THESE!

Parens and Bold are mine.

Archangel, Is that enough scripture for you to understand that MAN IS NO LONGER HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR SINS? Jesus paid the penalty for ALL SINS IN ALL TIMES. Therefore with Sins dealt with MAN IS NOT CONDEMNED BY SIN. But instead,

Does that give us license to continue sinning? Paul said, "God forbid". I say that scripture reveals it is not that sin condemns us, but rather what continuing to sin does to our faith. It erodes our faith in the manner that cancer eats our bodies.

Jesus said that Faith is what saves us, so if sinning erodes our faith even to causing us to lose faith, it is imperative that we STOP sinning (repent from sinning) so that our FAITH in God remains strong. We need strong faith to overcome the trials that life brings our way, and in order to persevere to the end.

Here are some definitions to aid your understanding. If this offends you, my apology, but if you look at Matthew 9:13 (posted above) you will see Jesus' admonition to know the meaning of the words. So I've included some of them here.

 

Yelsew,

First of all thankyou for posting scripture in this matter, althought you copped-out in the other thread about Jesus not being able to sin.

Exodus 30:10 is a good passage. However, it says nothing of sins NOT being held against people.

The OT sacrifical system did not remove sin--it merely covered it.

Look at Hebrews 10:1-4 (ESV)
For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. [2] Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sin? [3] But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sin every year. [4] For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

The old system is imperfect in that it couldn't take away sin--otherwise a new system (or covenant) would not have been needed. Hebrews is very clear that the Sacrificial system, which you point to in Exodus, is ONLY a yearly reminder of sin. Verse 4 of the Hebrews passage is more explicit: It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

The Matthew 9:12-13 passage is not dealing directly with sin. It is intended, by Jesus, as a slap-in-the face to the pharisees.

The Matthew 12:7-8 passage is dealing with the pharisees and their condemnation of Jesus taking grain from the grain fields on the sabbath. Again, nothing dealing with sin, per se.

Romans 3:25--

Romans 3:25 (ESV)
whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.

God put Jesus forward as a propitiation. What is Propitiation? Propitiation goes into Christ's penal, substitutionary atonement. Saying that Christ is a propitiation is to say that He took, on Himself, our sin and then bore God's wrath for that sin as He, God, punished it.

Now, the verse expalains why: To show God's righteousness. Why? Because He had passed over former sins. What sins? Probably the OT sacrificial system. As the above Hebrews passage states, this sacrificial system did not forgive sin. In short it was a foreshadowing of Christ's death. So, the sins comitted that were thought to be atoned for were placed on God's proverbial credit card. The debt was then settled when Christ died. God punished those sins--thereby proving Himself to be righteous.

I'll skip the rest since it would only be a re-hash of all that I've already written.

You write: Archangel, Is that enough scripture for you to understand that MAN IS NO LONGER HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR SINS? Jesus paid the penalty for ALL SINS IN ALL TIMES. Therefore with Sins dealt with MAN IS NOT CONDEMNED BY SIN.

If, as you say, MAN is not held accountable for sin (Which, by the way, those verses do not claim--except for the Christian) why will some be sent to hell?

Further, if Jesus paid the penalty for all sin in all time, why will some be sent to hell?


Please answer these questions.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

I'm sorry Michael but that is not correct.

Please allow me to explain...Actually, please allow me to quote John Piper Crossway Books Interview with John Piper

By imputation I am referring to the act in which God counts sinners to be righteous through their faith in Christ on the basis of Christ's perfect "blood and righteousness," specifically the righteousness that Christ accomplished by his perfect obedience in life and death.

Piper continues:

Romans 4:2-6 is the primary passage for considering the evidence that the righteousness imputed to us is external and not our faith. When Paul says of Abraham, or of those who believe like Abraham, that their faith "is credited for righteousness," he does not mean that righteousness consists of faith. He simply means that their faith connects them to the promise of God's imputed righteousness.

When you examine the flow of thought from Romans 3:20 to 4:6, it also becomes apparent that the external righteousness credited to us is God's. We have strong contextual evidence not only that Paul conceived of justification in terms of an imputation of external righteousness, but also that he thought of this righteousness as "the righteousness of God" that has been manifested now through the work of Christ and is received through faith as the remedy for us who cannot perform our own righteousness by works of the law. God reveals his own righteousness that we receive through free and gracious imputation by faith.

And continues

As to the question of whether the divine righteousness that is imputed to believers is the righteousness of Christ, I would go to Romans 5:12-19. This is one of the most crucial texts for the traditional Protestant teaching that Christ's righteousness and obedience are the expression of God's righteousness that is imputed to us by faith. This passage brings Paul's exposition of justification in Romans 3-5 to a climax with a stunning comparison between the effect of Adam's disobedience on those who are in him and the effect of Christ's obedience on those who are in him.

Romans 5:12-19 (ESV)
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— [13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
[15] But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. [16] And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. [17] If, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
[18] Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. [19] For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.

This passage in Romans is very clear. It begins by discussing the imputation of Adam's sin to all humans (v.12). This is further explained in v.13 when Paul says that there was no law to transgress and, therefore, no sin to commit. However, men still died. Therefore, the sin of Adam (which is exemplified in death) was passed on to all men.

The rest of the passage talks about our sin being imputed to Christ and Christ's righteouness being imputed to us.

Paul further explains this in Philippians:
Philip. 3:9 (ESV)
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—

His righteousness is not his own. Whose is it? It is the righteousness of God. Therefore it is called, by theologians, an "Alien" righteousness.

So, it is Christ's righteousness that we have as an imputation.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

You are mistaken, ATONEMENT is ATONEMENT.

The penalty for sins in the Old Testament was Death. The penalty for sins in the New Testament is Death.

Blood sacrifice in the OLD Testament was made as a form of PAYMENT FOR THE PENALTY OF SIN, and it carried the Same weight with God that Jesus' "blood sacrifice" in the New Testament carries as PAYMENT FOR THE PENALTY OF SINS.

No one is saved by Jesus' Atonement! But EVERYONE's SALVATION is ENABLED by it. You see, sin's penalty has been paid so that sins are no longer part of the Salvation Equation. You have heard that Salvation is "not of works" so with sins dealt with, and Works not included, that leaves FAITH all by itself as the reason or condition of man that causes God to save each individual man. ALL who are Saved are Saved through their FAITH in God. Those with faith are not even judged according to Jesus (John 3:18) But, those who lack faith are judged (Revelation 20:14,15) and upon judgment, the sentence is carried out and all unbelievers are cast into the lake of fire.

 

ATONEMENT was never intended to "TAKE AWAY" sins from the sinner. The definition of "Atonement" does not include removal of sin from the sinner, but it does include PAYMENT of the debt incurred by the sinner because of sin. The Taking away of sin as in, "He taketh away the sins of the world", is from the perspective of God. That is, because of Atonement God does not hold the sinner accountable for sin, thus taking sin out of the individual's SALVATION EQUATION. Thus, Jesus' atonement for the sins of the world, ALL Sins for ALL times, does in truth remove sins from each individual's SALVATION EQUATION.

Besides, the fallicy of thinking the Atonement took away the sins of the World, is that no one could sin because there would be no sin, God the Son took them away? But alas, we all struggle with sin every day! Why is that if Jesus took the sins of the World away?

The reason there is a new system at all is because God says it is not sacrifice that pleases him, it is mercy.

What better way to have mercy than to not hold the death of His only begotten son against those who believe in HIM.

 

It's the principle that Jesus declares, not the method of declaration, that is important.

Again, it is the principle that Jesus declares, and not method of declaration.

Romans 3:25--

Atonement, Propitiation, was not intended for the forgiveness of sins, but for the PAYMENT OF THE PENALTY of sin. Sins are forgiven when they are confessed and repented from. If Forgiveness was the issue, Jesus would not have needed to die. But the Penalty of sin is death, so someone or something had to die so that the blood of the sacrifice could atone for the sin.

My word, can't you read?

Jesus died on the cross to ATONE for the SINS of the World, that is ALL sins for ALL times, everywhere on this world. Atonement means PAYMENT FOR THE PENALTY of SIN!

We Know from Scripture that No man can do sufficient works to merit SALVATION. All works, be they good works or bad works (sin) are judged as if by fire. Good works survive the fire as in the manner that Gold, Silver, and Precious stones, survive fire. Gold and silver, even when molten, remain Gold and Silver. Precious Stones are generally unaffected by fire, and that is why people who lost their homes in the fires here in California, went sifting through the ashes in order to find any Gold, Silver and Precious stones. Sins on the other hand are works that get consumed by the fire in the manner that wood, hay, and stubble get consumed, leaving only ashes.

Now, with sins dealt with by Jesus' Atonement, and Works not a factor, That leaves only FAITH by which God judges man. Jesus said, [John 3:18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

That leaves one to conclude that the Equation for Salvation then is FAITH = SALVATION. You should be able to figure out the answer to your questions based on this information. But just in case, People go to hell, not because of sin, but because of unbelief.