Humankind was not created immortal

[moorea944]

Humankind is created mortal in Genesis. Humankind becomes mortal in Romans after some sin.

Oh, ok. Adam was not mortal or immortal at creation. They were neither. So what were they? It doesnt say.

They werent immortal, because if you are immortal, you dont die or sin. The angels are immortal, they dont die or sin.
And they werent mortal, because they didnt sin yet.

 

[Pegg]

Get off the "sin" kick. No sin is mentioned in Genesis 3. Sin isn't mentioned until Genesis 4. Why do Christians LOVE SIN so much?

Genesis 3 tell us the story of their disobience and expulsion from Eden.

Why do you think they were expelled if it were not for their sin? Sin is disobedience btw.

 

[Kolibri]

mortal life is merely destructible life. It does not mean that the life will be destroyed. Satan, an angel, has destructible life, or he could not die as foretold in Re 20:10,14. All of the other rebel angels - in fact all angels - have been destructible. Jesus too was mortal in that his life was ended when he was hung upon the stake. It was only as Jesus was resurrected back to spirit life that he was said to put on immortality. The Greek work for immortality literally means "deathlessness." As Hebrews 7:16 states Jesus now has "indestructible life." Only those who had pre-spirit life as humans (the Christ and his anointed brothers) are given this indestructible life upon their resurrection to spirit life.

What this means is Adam was always mortal. And yet he could have lived forever in that state. All he needed was protection and support. Same for all human life. We do not need immortality to live forever. All we need is an all powerful and indestructible benefactor.

 

[Politesse]

Genesis 3 tell us the story of their disobience and expulsion from Eden.

Why do you think they were expelled if it were not for their sin? Sin is disobedience btw.

Not a very Biblical definition of sin, actually. God's commands aren't to be obeyed just because they are commands, the prophets and Christ cried out against such hollow obesience. Sin is unrighteousness. The purpose of Torah was to lead people to righteousness, so transgressing its boundaries was also seen as unrighteousness. But it is really wisdom and righteous behavior that were being transgressed. Adam and Eve, by acquiring moral senses, were now accountable for their actions in a way that other animals are not; with moral discernment comes moral responsibility. They chose to "leave the garden" of their own accord when they ate the fruit of knowledge. At least, so I see things. I don't think God was actually angry with them for it; in the story he just says "What have you done?" and tells them what the consequences will be. He also takes care of them from then on. But not in the garden, with the Tree of Life.

 

[Pegg]

Not a very Biblical definition of sin, actually. God's commands aren't to be obeyed just because they are commands, the prophets and Christ cried out against such hollow obesience. Sin is unrighteousness.

true. The actual definition of the Hebrew term translated “sin” is chat·taʼth′ and it means “miss,” in the sense of missing a goal. It interesting when you think of it in that way because instead of getting the ball inside the goalposts, you get it outside of the posts and thus get no goals for missing.
Its easy to see how sin is most certainly unrighteousness.

God's commands aren't to be obeyed just because they are commands, the prophets and Christ cried out against such hollow obesience. Sin is unrighteousness. The purpose of Torah was to lead people to righteousness, so transgressing its boundaries was also seen as unrighteousness.

Yes i agree with that. The law was certainly designed to keep the nation on a righteous path. But it actually had another purpose too...and that is spoken of by Paul in the book of Galatians 3:20 “The Law has become our tutor leading to Christ....19 Why, then, the Law? It was added to make transgressions manifest,+ until the offspring* should arrive+ to whom the promise had been made; and it was transmitted through angels+ by the hand of a mediator.

No Israelite could perfectly keep obedience to the law. They all failed in some areas of the law....thus the law highlighted that they were sinners (missing righteousness) who needed a savior.

But it is really wisdom and righteous behavior that were being transgressed. Adam and Eve, by acquiring moral senses, were now accountable for their actions in a way that other animals are not; with moral discernment comes moral responsibility. They chose to "leave the garden" of their own accord when they ate the fruit of knowledge. At least, so I see things. I don't think God was actually angry with them for it; in the story he just says "What have you done?" and tells them what the consequences will be. He also takes care of them from then on. But not in the garden, with the Tree of Life.

I would say that Adam and Eve became less moral after the incident. The lives of mankind show, even today, that morality is very poor. It hasnt improved, its gotten far worse.
So the event in Eden could not have been something which gave them a moral sense....it actually diminished their moral sense which is why there is so much unrighteousness in the world.

 

[Politesse]

I would say that Adam and Eve became less moral after the incident. The lives of mankind show, even today, that morality is very poor. It hasnt improved, its gotten far worse.
So the event in Eden could not have been something which gave them a moral sense....it actually diminished their moral sense which is why there is so much unrighteousness in the world.

I think you may have misunderstood; by moral sense I meant only that, as the story says, they became capable of distinguishing between right and wrong. Not that they were necessarily aided in choosing the right.

 

[Kolibri]

I think you may have misunderstood; by moral sense I meant only that, as the story says, they became capable of distinguishing between right and wrong. Not that they were necessarily aided in choosing the right.

From what I understood, it was not that they now became capable. They were always capable. Look at Jesus. He was capable. But the difference was they now were left to make their own decisions as to what was right and what was wrong. They chose independence and now had to attempt to figure it out on their own.

 

[Pegg]

I think you may have misunderstood; by moral sense I meant only that, as the story says, they became capable of distinguishing between right and wrong. Not that they were necessarily aided in choosing the right.

they were already capable of distinguishing between right and wrong though.... Eve was even able to state what the consequences would be if she ate from the tree. So she knew it was wrong, and she knew the consequences would mean death. That sounds like a person who already has a moral sense.