Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Gina B, Jul 1, 2003.
Would we be able to truly love God or understand his nature?
We understand so much more about God's grace that we never would have known.
Rom 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:
Don't blame or give credit to Eve, it wasn't her fault. She was wrong, but, this whole thing was caused by Adam not Eve (or Steve...oops, wrong thread )
The Sin of Adam was not eating the fruit. That was the Sin of Eve. That, in and of itself, God might have forgiven (just speculating here). The Sin of Adam was not taking responsibility for his actions of doing wrong. The first thing Adam did, when caught, was say "Hey God, don't blame me, it was the woman's fault, not mine. She made me do it". Indeed, it's our nature to sin. But it's moreso in our nature to ratiionalize our destructive behavior and pass the blame.
By one man sin entered the world. Could that be referring to Eve? I know it says man, but man includes Eve in the creation.
Adam sinned eating the fruit. The action was wrong. Not taking responsiblity was another wrong, not the first one.
Would we understand more about God or love Him more had sin not entered the world? No way! It is our sin natures that separate us from Him in the first place. The more we know Him the more we will love and appreciate Him. Sin gets in the way of that; it does not help the process in any way, shape, or form.
IMO, no, we wouldn't. The Bible is filled with examples that demonstrate that God wants us to know the His glorious character. We all know that mercy is part of God's glorious character, but I'd like to add one that we don't tend to recognize -- wrath. Yet God clearly wants to demonstrate His wrath, so He obviously believes it is an important attribute (visible wrath against unrighteousness).
So the question is simple? How could we possibly know His righteous wrath and loving mercy without disobedience?
This should be obvious, but just to head off any misunderstandings, of course I'm not advocating disobedience. See earlier passages in Romans as an answer to that objection.
Whew!! I'm in agreement with Helen on this one.
Adam and Eve walked with God in perfect bliss. In the cool of the day. They talked to Him face to face.
We don't have that. Sin separates us. Even as Christians. Yes, we know the mercy and grace of God and we can have a personal relationship with him, but Adam and Eve knew God the way we shall know him when we reach heaven.
If Eve hadn't sinned, would we even be here?
It would seem that the future generations were a direct result of Eve's punishment for her sin.
It would seem that the future generations were a direct result of Eve's punishment for her sin. </font>[/QUOTE]I think the punishment is sorrow, not conception or child birth. Imagine punishing Adam and Eve by giving them children.
On second thought, maybe you're right!
I Eve sins, Adam does not:
Perhaps Eve could have been forgiven, and things would remain "perfect", since the command (as I understand it) was given to Adam as the "head of the first family"!
II Eve sins, Adam also; But confession is given and forgivness requested:
Aossibly God forgives both, and they stay in the garden, but NOW denied the fruit of the "Tree Of Life"!
B:Still removed from the garden, but the provisions of Genesis 3:17-19 did not apply.
III Eve sins, Adam also; no confession, no seeking forgivness:
Well, we know the scenario of that set of circumstances!
Eve sinned. What if Adam had not, had simply fallen on his face before his Creator and pleaded for grace. Could God have judged Eve and then taken another rib from Adam and made a GOOD wife?
Boy, I know some ifb churches where that would preach! It's all them women's fault.
Actual answer? Moot. Before the foundation of the world Jesus was the lamb slain. God's will of taking sin from the abstract spirit world (satan et al) into the physical realm (Eve and Adam) can not be thwarted.
Thanks Dr. Bob for that great answer, , except it wasn't to the actual question.