standingfirminChrist said:
I have a problem with point #1 for this reason.
Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
By one man... Wasn't it the woman who disobeyed and ate of the fruit? In Genesis 5:2, we read:
If you rightly divide the word of truth (2Tim.2:15), you will note that it is speaking specifically of the sin of Adam. The first Adam is being compared to the second Adam, Jesus. Both are persons.
Genesis 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Called THEIR name Adam. So the Woman, because she was joined to the man and they became one flesh, was also Adam.
No the woman isn't called Adam. You have taken the verse out of context (not unusual for you). Chapter five is a genealogy where the names of men are predominant. Read through the whole chapter and see. It is the names of men that are mentioned. Eve is only mentioned in passing.
Sin was passed upon all the world because of the woman. And it is passed on to every child born of a woman.
Job 25:4 How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman?
Job 25:4 answers the second point as well.
This verse is so taken out of context, and your reasoning is ludicrous.
First, it is a book written in poetry using figurative language.
Second, it is an answer by Bildhad the Shuite condemning Job, and telling him why he is in such a bad situation. So you are taking the reasoning of a man who probably isn't even saved and is giving ungodly advice to Job.
Third, you are ignoring the context. Let's look at it, apply it consistently, and see what the conclusions would be:
Job 25:4-6 How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman?
5 Behold even to the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in his sight.
6 How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?
If we take a literal approach to this text as you do: that a man born of a woman is not clean, then what shall we conclude from a literal interpretation of verse 6?
"The son of man, which is a worm"
Do you actually believe that the son of man (Jesus) is a worm?? I would call that blasphemy, wouldn't you. But you insist on a literal interpretation here. Don't you see the absurdity of your literal interpretation in the Book of Job?