Original Sin

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Secondly, your assertion that "Man was created by God's Word and has God's indwelling Spirit" is also erroneous, therefore misleading, especially so to "they that are unlearned and unstable," not being as knowledgeable as they ought to be about the Spirit's indwelling of human flesh. I think it important to always bear at the fore of our minds, that the things we publicly express, whether it be written or oral, are not only seen and heard by fellow saints, but visitors to this forum who know little or nothing about the truth.
And, as our Lord has warned, "That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned" (Matthew 12:36-37). I'm confident that you, like myself, desire to be justified by the things which we publicly express as truth, therefore we MUST exercise extreme caution to insure that we publish ONLY that which is true!
Are you yet ignorant of the scripturally stated fact that NO human being (excepting our Lord, of course) ever possessed the Spirit as an "indwelling" Entity in their mortal bodies until AFTER the Lord Jesus Christ was Himself glorified?
This indisputable fact is clearly shown in the words of John 7:37-39 ... "In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, 'If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.' (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: FOR THE HOLY GHOST WAS NOT YET GIVEN; because that Jesus was not yet glorified."
Unless one is willing to be so brazen as to insinuate that John the apostle, the writer of the gospel account which bears his name, has lied, then we MUST conclude that NO man was indwelt with the Spirit prior to that moment, when approximately ten days following the bodily ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ to His throne located in the invisible heavens, the Spirit was given tp about 120 disciples in an upper room in the city of Jerusalem (see Acts 2:1-4).
No one, and I do mean NO ONE, prior to this event, had been indwelt with the Spirit. But wait! That's not all there is to be said about the matter, as you'll discover in my next statements.
Lastly, your statement which asserts, "Therefore there is only one place that man will abide: in God," also stands in conflict with the inspired words penned by Paul the apostle, and found recorded in I Corinthians 15:24-28, most notably that small phrase which ended his description of the ending of the matter, that is, "that God may be all in all." Please note that Paul was NOT stating that after all has been said and done, and eternity shall be the fate of all of the righteous souls of men, that we are to be "in God," as you state, rather quite the opposite. Paul explicitly states that God (who is Spirit - John 4:24) will be "in" His saints, just as He was, and is, in the heavenly body of Christ Jesus!
This is why John the apostle was inspired to write and advise the saints, saying, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, WE SHALL BE LIKE HIM; for we shall see him as he is" (I John 3:2). God has affirmed John's proclamation by stating through the interpretation of a significant "message in tongues" received during a worship service at a renown UPCI assembly, "You will be Mine and I will be yours, and we will have the glory AND SHARE IT TOGETHER."
It is my sincere and prayerful hope that you will give due consideration to the scriptural worthiness of the things I've expended of my time and effort to compose and post here. May you be blessed in your continued effort to seek after the "righteousness" of God!

Lafon, Lafon, Lafon.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Lafon, Lafon, Lafon.

???? Surely you can say more than that!

Did you discover anything amiss in what I've written?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Let's deal with the issues in bold before going any further, OK? Just bear with me.

Sure.

(1a) How/why did God KNOW man would sin?
Now, did Adam and Eve sinned "willfully", as some denom's believe; or were they tempted?
If they sinned willfully then I would think they have no place with the Church, hence No
Church; but since there IS a Church, then Adam and Eve could not have sinned
willfully, but were tempted;

Well, not totally. Eve was deceived, but Adam was not. What does that say?

1Ti 2:14 KJV And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Granted, it may simply mean that the devil knew better than to go to Adam so went to the woman. And that would mean the devil knew the woman could actually tempt him more successfully than he could as the serpent.

(1b Now, if they (Adam and Eve) were tempted, it is because there was one who tempted.

Right.

So Lucifer was in the garden, either shielding himself behind the serpent or he was the
very serpent, itself. In other words, iniquity was present in the garden. Now if iniquity was
in the garden, then it stands to reason that Lucifer (Satan) had already been cast out of from
God's presence (God is eternal).

Amen, I've always believed that.

So now the question is: was man created AFTER iniquity

Yes.

was found in Lucifer, or before? I believe that the witness is after.

I agree.

(2) Man WILL NOT exist physically after the heavens (as we know them) are dissolved.

Okay. You just made a huge unjustified leap right there. Nothing about what you said that we agree upon earlier draws this as a conclusion.

Are you are saying man will get a PHYSICAL body but it will only be temporary? I am confident the new body is physical in 1 Cor 15. So, how in the world does anything you said before this point imply man was not intended to remain physically on the earth?

Man was created by God's Word and has God's indwelling Spirit. Therefore there is only
one place that man will abide: in God!

No, man did not have the Spirit in him when he was created. I believe that would have happened had he eaten of the fruit of life. Not before.

Now, the presence of the forbidden tree lets us know there was a test, Sin was in existence. God knew the serpent would come, but he told Adam what was His will.

But none of that implies anything about whether or not God intended man to remain physical.

And nothing you stated about Man created by the Word with God's Spirit in Him does either.

Man was not created with God's Spirit.

And abiding in God is not available only if man has no physical. We're in Christ now!

So, you seem to have some HUGE gaps here over which you make huge leaps of assumption, in all due respect.

Now , I might be wrong, but your points do not prove that.

[Esaias]

There is no scripture identifying the serpent as lucifer or satan or as being a tool of either. There is no scripture identifying lucifer as satan.

The whole "lucifer was a beautiful angel in charge of the praise service/music in heaven who rebelled and became satan" is a post-apostolic myth.

Any doctrine or theological discussion that assumes that myth is fact is flawed to begin with, and any conclusions reached are bound to br in error.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Sure.

Well, not totally. Eve was deceived, but Adam was not. What does that say?
1Ti 2:14 KJV And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Granted, it may simply mean that the devil knew better than to go to Adam so went to the woman. And that would mean the devil knew the woman could actually tempt him more successfully than he could as the serpent.
Right.
Amen, I've always believed that.
Yes.
I agree.
Okay. You just made a huge unjustified leap right there. Nothing about what you said that we agree upon earlier draws this as a conclusion.
Are you are saying man will get a PHYSICAL body but it will only be temporary?
I am confident the new body is physical in 1 Cor 15. So, how in the world does anything you said before this point imply man was not intended to remain physically on the earth?
No, man did not have the Spirit in him when he was created. I believe that would have happened had he eaten of the fruit of life. Not before.
Now, the presence of the forbidden tree lets us know there was a test, Sin was in existence. God knew the serpent would come, but he told Adam what was His will.
But none of that implies anything about whether or not God intended man to remain physical.
And nothing you stated about Man created by the Word with God's Spirit in Him does either.
Man was not created with God's Spirit.
And abiding in God is not available only if man has no physical. We're in Christ now!
So, you seem to have some HUGE gaps here over which you make huge leaps of assumption, in all due respect.
Now , I might be wrong, but your points do not prove that.

So far so good...oops!

You began reading my post with your premises.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

So far so good...oops!

You began reading my post with your premises.

Full us in with your actual beliefs, then. You're not saying enough. lol

I said IMPLICATIONS.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

There is no scripture identifying the serpent as lucifer or satan or as being a tool of either. There is no scripture identifying lucifer as satan.

The whole "lucifer was a beautiful angel in charge of the praise service/music in heaven who rebelled and became satan" is a post-apostolic myth.

Any doctrine or theological discussion that assumes that myth is fact is flawed to begin with, and any conclusions reached are bound to br in error.

That is true.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Esaias

There is no scripture identifying the serpent as lucifer or satan or as being a tool of either. There is no scripture identifying lucifer as satan.
The whole "lucifer was a beautiful angel in charge of the praise service/music in heaven who rebelled and became satan" is a post-apostolic myth.
Any doctrine or theological discussion that assumes that myth is fact is flawed to begin with, and any conclusions reached are bound to br in error.

"...or satan or as being a tool of either [the serpent or lucifer].

Would you remove the verses naming Lucifer, or rename the angel in Isaiah 14, et al,
"Heylel" or "star of dawn"? Or do you believe the whole episode in Genesis 2 is
only a myth?

[mfblume]

There is no strong connection with Lucifer as satan, or the king of Tyrus for that matter. That is tradition. Certainly not strong biblical connection. It may be correct. The only connection there is is when Jesus said he saw satan fall like lightning from heaven, and Lucifer is fallen from heaven. Nothing more. None of that makes Genesis 1 a myth,

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

"...or satan or as being a tool of either [the serpent or lucifer].

Would you remove the verses naming Lucifer, or rename the angel in Isaiah 14, et al,
"Heylel" or "star of dawn"? Or do you believe the whole episode in Genesis 2 is
only a myth?

The word "lucifer" does not appear in either the hebrew or greek. It DOES appear in the Latin Vulgate and the KJV. Lucifer is a latin translation for haylel which was the name for the planet Venus.

But all that is irrelevant for Isaiah 14 declares "lucifer" was the king of Babylon, not some fallen angelic choir director.

Genesis 2 speaks of the nachash (serpent). It says nothing of the devil, satan, or Lucifer. Paul spoke of the serpent as well but did not teach the serpent was Satan or that it was possessed by the devil.

Perhaps you believe there is a literal seed of the serpent which persecuted Christ and which are literally, physically descendants of the devil?