Original Sin

[riley2112]

given that the command they disobeyed was to not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, one must presume that they had no knowledge of the goodness/badness of disobeying that particular command. One could argue I suppose that YHWH's statement to Adam regarding death as a result could be considered knowledge of the consequences, but I am not so sure. At the point that Adam was given the injunction, he had no knowledge of death, at this point the garden was uncorrupted and innocent of death, so Adam wouldn't have understood the concept. So I would argue that yes, Adam and Eve were like babies, they did not know of the consequences of their actions, therefore they were set up to fail. Notice that death was not an immediate consequence (Adam and Eve lived HOW long after the expulsion?) and that YHWH's stated purpose in expelling A&E from the garden was to prevent their immortality by eating from the OTHER tree, the one that was only forbidden AFTER they attained knowledge of good and evil.

. If God is all powerful , all knowing, then one must contend that in creating man and placing him in an environment where falling was the likely outcome, then obviously God would have had to have man’s fall as a part of His plan.
. Logic would render the suggestion that any plan that requires suffering to be not only inescapably unnecessary, but contradictory because of God’s ability to do anything. Leaving only the possibility that God created us to suffer for the purpose of suffering.

 

[waitasec]

Not really. Even if your interpretation was true, it still refers to human sacrifice, pleasing to the LORD. Even so, I'd argue "his seed" are Christians.

being a christian of course you do...but really it's about israel
and thats not creating a christian prophesy?
consider these passages
Isaiah 41:8-9 But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend. Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art my servant; I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away. Suffering servant

Isaiah 44:1 Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen...Thus saith the Lord that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant... Suffering servant

Isaiah 44:21 Remember these, O Jacob and Israel; for thou art my servant: I have formed thee; thou art my servant: O Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of me. Suffering servant

Isaiah 49:3 ...Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

It should be abundantly clear, then, that the servant is the nation Israel. When we combine these two facts, the fact that the theme of second Isaiah is the restoration of Israel after Exile, and the fact that the servant is the nation Israel itself, we then find that the meaning of the Song of the Servant, in chapter 53, becomes clear

Suffering Servant?

Also, not really. I don't know of any NT prophecies referring to Mormonism.

i also don't see any hebrew prophesies referring or point to jesus either...

 

[Duck]

I want to see if that thinking pattern actually exists with other people.

Maybe it is the Heathens that are thinking this way, because I completely agree with Heathen Hammer regarding your discussion. I read the passages as indicating death occuring on the same day as consumption of the fruit, if not as an instantaneous result, not as 'at some date to be determined', why else would YHWH justify kicking A&E out of the Garden before they could eat of the Fruit of the Tree of Life?

 

[Sleeppy]

And the snake was the only Being to tell the truth in this story. According to this "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." (Genesis 2:17 KJV) After finding Adam and Eve clothed and interrogating them YHWH says :"Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:" (Genesis 3:22 KJV). After the Expulsion, Genesis says that, "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died." (Genesis 5:5 KJV). How does one get around the dichotomy presented here?

For me, it's simple.

 

[waitasec]

. If God is all powerful , all knowing, then one must contend that in creating man and placing him in an environment where falling was the likely outcome, then obviously God would have had to have man’s fall as a part of His plan.
. Logic would render the suggestion that any plan that requires suffering to be not only inescapably unnecessary, but contradictory because of God’s ability to do anything. Leaving only the possibility that God created us to suffer for the purpose of suffering.

frubalicious

 

[Sleeppy]

being a christian of course you do...but really it's about israel
and thats not creating a christian prophesy?
consider these passages
Isaiah 41:8-9 But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend. Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art my servant; I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away. Suffering servant

Isaiah 44:1 Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen...Thus saith the Lord that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant... Suffering servant

Isaiah 44:21 Remember these, O Jacob and Israel; for thou art my servant: I have formed thee; thou art my servant: O Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of me. Suffering servant

Isaiah 49:3 ...Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

It should be abundantly clear, then, that the servant is the nation Israel. When we combine these two facts, the fact that the theme of second Isaiah is the restoration of Israel after Exile, and the fact that the servant is the nation Israel itself, we then find that the meaning of the Song of the Servant, in chapter 53, becomes clear

Suffering Servant?



i also don't see any hebrew prophesies referring or point to jesus either...

We could likely go on for quite a while. Back and forth. I'd rather do something else. This conversation is pointless.

 

[waitasec]

We could likely go on for quite a while. Back and forth. I'd rather do something else. This conversation is pointless.

i agree...

so what about the original sin...
was it a physical or a spiritual consequence?

 

[Sleeppy]

i agree...

so what about the original sin...
was it a physical or a spiritual consequence?

Physical and spiritual for Adam and Eve. Physical inheritance from Adam and Eve, not spiritual.

 

[Duck]

Physical and spiritual for Adam and Eve. Physical inheritance from Adam and Eve, not spiritual.

So at the risk of starting all of this over again and arguing from the assumption that the abrahamic faiths are true (something that I don't actually believe, at least not for myself) physical death is a punishment I have inherited from my progenitors, yes? I mean if physical (and spiritual) death was the consequence for Adam and Eve of eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, then why will I eventually die if not to be punished for their sin? And if spiritual death (which I believe was indicated as being sinful earlier in this thread) is supposed to be a consequence only for A&E why would the substitutionary atonement conducted by christ's crucifixion be necessary?

 

[waitasec]

Physical and spiritual for Adam and Eve. Physical inheritance from Adam and Eve, not spiritual.

why do you suppose that is?

 

[idav]

Physical and spiritual for Adam and Eve. Physical inheritance from Adam and Eve, not spiritual.

Wasn't the spiritual death of adam and eve separation from god? This does not apply to their decedents?

 

[waitasec]

Wasn't the spiritual death of adam and eve separation from god? This does not apply to their decedents?

i don't get that either?

if a baby is still born, was that still born child sinless and therefore not in need of atonement?

at what point does one need to claim christ's atonement in order to be forgiven?

 

[riley2112]

frubalicious

?????????????????????

 

[waitasec]

?????????????????????

i liked your post....

frubalicious just popped into my head

 

[riley2112]

i liked your post....

frubalicious just popped into my head

Thank you , I was confused for a moment. But it is not to hard to confuse me.:yes:

 

[riley2112]

i don't get that either?

if a baby is still born, was that still born child sinless and therefore not in need of atonement?

at what point does one need to claim christ's atonement in order to be forgiven?

That is a good question, It seems to come up alot and I have never seem a real answer to it .

 

[riley2112]

What is our punishment for sin?

 

[Katzpur]

The NT is more of a continuation of OT prophecy.. The Book of Mormon creates its own.

And you've obviously read The Book of Mormon. Otherwise, you wouldn't know what it has to say, right?

FYI, the first 600 years of the time period covered in The Book of Mormon is actually prior to the birth of Christ, and His coming is constantly foretold. The last 400 years of the period covered follows Christ's death.

 

[waitasec]

What is our punishment for sin?

hell
alright, i'm 45 yrs old...and i guess since i was about 8 i understood what wrong meant so if i die tomorrow that will be about 37 yrs of sin which hasn't been atoned for...is the payment for my sin really worth an eternity in hell

seems a bit drastic to me....
but of course i'm talking about me :angel2:

 

[idav]

i don't get that either?

if a baby is still born, was that still born child sinless and therefore not in need of atonement?

at what point does one need to claim christ's atonement in order to be forgiven?

I don't think that humans are bad by default. I believe humans have great potential to save themselves and i think Jesus was showing us how. In the NT Jesus had a love for children and said we should be more like them so to think he would throw any of them in hell is incorrect. IMO Jesus is a light which guides us to God. Same was said of the family of Jacob, a light for the Gentiles. People focus way too much on Jesus being a savior rather than a teacher to show us how. If Jesus really was just going to wash our sins away he wouldn't have told us to follow Gods commandments. There you go some more of my two cents.

/rant