Theologically, wounded means STILL ALIVE. The Bible is clear:
Eph 2:1-3
And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
NASU
1st this isn't about original sin. It's about personal sin. Also his audience were gentiles who were pagan and are now Christians. When a person sins they are dead in their sins.
They were probably worshiping pagan gods and were involved in pagan rituals.
We are NOT WOUNDED BUT DEAD.
Further, our nature IS indeed changed. Adam, Eve and Jesus are NOT
BY NATURE
It does not say that they were dead by nature. Rather it says that they were dead in their trespasses and sins. He's talking about their personal sins as a whole not about original sin. When a person sins they are dead in their sins.
Not dead as in having a dead nature. There is no such thing as a dead nature.
By nature they are children of wrath. Which mean that by nature they had a disposition to sin. Which is the effect(or affect?) of original sin.
Children of wrath, but children of FAVOR. When Adam and Eve fall, their nature IS changed from ALIVE and IN FAVOR, to death and IN WRATH.
Thus, the common spiritual state is DEATH which CANNOT BE WOUNDED. The philosophical contentions are at odds with one another and CANNOT be maintained from the texts. Sorry dude.
See above.
No it does not. I am not a "restorationist" in that the goal is a return to Eden.
Therefore this:
doesnt even apply. Original sin KILLS . . . what Jesus brings is something COMPLETELY NEW that Adam NEVER HAD . . . a union with God that Eden never even conceived of. It is NOW BLOOD BOUGHT . . . the New Heavens and Earth will be some much more than Eden ever was . . . and the human saved by grace will be much more than Adam ever was, even unfallen.
It was an analogy to make a point. Which seems I did not make clear. I guess that there are ppl out there that seem to think that things will be exactly like they were before fall.
Ok, here is where your assumption goes askew. He does not RENEW . . . HE RECASTS. We are NOT what Adam was, and we will never be what Adam was. We will be LIKE JESUS in His RESURRECTED STATE . . . which is something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. SO the whole concept that you have falls. The image of God that we will bear will be VASTLY beyond anything that Adam ever was because of the CROSS AND UNION WITH CHRIST which Adam never had in Eden. Redemption thru blood recasts the whole of creation . . . your concept doesnt even consider this.
I was just using what you said in an analogy to make a point.
You your self said that Adam, Eve and Jesus were the only one's that were the perfect image of Christ. I was just using that as an analogy to point out that we will like them in the fact that we will be the perfect image of God before the fall. Now your saying that we will be something beyond Adam and Eve.
Imperfect image of what? God? Brother, the ONLY humans to ever bear the image of God is Adam, Eve and Jesus . . . we bear the image of ADAM FALLEN which does NOT bear the image of God AT ALL. Hence Paul's whole concept of "in Adam" vs "in Christ." There is NO SUCH THING as an IMPERFECT IMAGE OF GOD . . . because God IS PERFECT. The moment that the image becomes imperfect, it ceases to be the image of God at all.
No we are not made in the image of Adam. We are made in the image of God.
Upvote
0
