Theologically stuck on something

Jamdoc · May 2, 2020

coffee4u said:
Many things are sinful.

Adultery is as sinful as homosexual behaviour
Fornication of the unmarried is every bit as sinful as homosexual behaviour
Watching inappropriate contentography is every bit as sinful as homosexual behaviour
Lusting after a woman who is not your wife is every bit as sinful as homosexual behaviour
Do you see where I am going with this?

So do you hate inappropriate contentography, lusting and fornication as much as you hate homosexual behaviour? Because if you don't it is hypocritical. All are sexual sins.
Also if it is other people doing these things, this sin isn't against you, it's actually against themselves.
1 Corinthians 6:18
Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.

I think sometimes it is very easy for us to say "Well at least I don't do that"
Kind of makes ourselves feel justified or better than 'that other person'. But we all sin and all fall short.
Romans 3:23
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Also lets separate out homosexuals from homosexual behaviour.
I believe someone who identifies as homosexual but is living celibate is following what God wants for them.
A person might struggle with a sin as an addiction. Maybe it's drugs, alcohol, gambling or perhaps it's inappropriate contentography or homosexuality. Addictive sins of which I do think sexual sins can be, must be incredibly difficult. If they struggle and don't want to do it, this is quite different from engaging in it and calling it fine.
Romans 7:15-20
15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
If you have no particular sin that you struggle with daily think yourself blessed rather than condemning those who do. My dad has a saying and it's "There for the Grace of God go I" Meaning given a different life or circumstances maybe we might be the ones struggling with some of these things and that we should be both glad and humble that we are not.

I'm condemning the act rather than the person when it comes to homosexuality, I'll admit with transgendered I could do better about loving the sinner and hating the sin. But if a person is homosexual but does not act on it, they live a celibate life, then there's no reason to hate them, the homosexual orientation to me, is like a mental illness, they need compassion and not hate. But if they willfully engage in homosexual relationships, if they get into a homosexual "marriage" for instance, that's where it can make me feel angry and you just want them to flee that sin!

coffee4u · May 2, 2020

Jamdoc said:
I'm condemning the act rather than the person when it comes to homosexuality, I'll admit with transgendered I could do better about loving the sinner and hating the sin. But if a person is homosexual but does not act on it, they live a celibate life, then there's no reason to hate them, the homosexual orientation to me, is like a mental illness, they need compassion and not hate. But if they willfully engage in homosexual relationships, if they get into a homosexual "marriage" for instance, that's where it can make me feel angry and you just want them to flee that sin!

I believe both the homosexual and transgendered had something go wrong, either in how they were raised or a mental disorder.
I just think we need to be careful not to single out and make a bigger deal out of homosexuality than any other sexual sin, which is often what I see.

We do need to be careful of being in the world but not of it because bad company does corrupt good character, but that the same time we know that Jesus ate with sinners including prostitutes. There is a fine line between being loving without accepting the sin and being judgmental and hateful.

Jamdoc · May 2, 2020

coffee4u said:
I believe both the homosexual and transgendered had something go wrong, either in how they were raised or a mental disorder.
I just think we need to be careful not to single out and make a bigger deal out of homosexuality than any other sexual sin, which is often what I see.

We do need to be careful of being in the world but not of it because bad company does corrupt good character, but that the same time we know that Jesus ate with sinners including prostitutes. There is a fine line between being loving without accepting the sin and being judgmental and hateful.

You do bring up a good point though I guess that fornication and adultery have been so normalized in culture that it's something that you avoid doing yourself but if you had to condemn the behavior of everyone who committed those sins you'd be shutting out a lot of the world, and inappropriate contentography is so readily available and addictive that if you were to condemn everyone who viewed inappropriate contentography well, you'd basically be alone, and in a lot of people's cases, outright a hypocrite. It's something that people struggle with even when they hate doing it, and unlike fornication or adultery which are relatively easy to avoid doing the acts, inappropriate contentography can be very hard to keep away from, it doesn't require another person's consent to do, it doesn't require any violence on your part, and it's readily available at your finger tips any time you have an internet connection, and lust and covetousness don't even require that, those just require not being in a coma.
That said, I don't think all sins are equal. I think a lot of sins are defined as such not because we've done some heinous act against God each time, but in some cases a sin is defined as such to protect us from harming ourselves or others, and in some other cases, a sin is defined to show us where a slippery slope lies that leads to more serious sin. A lustful or covetous thought is sin because they lead to fornication, adultery, rape, theft, or murder. Those sins in the mind are the start of a slippery slope. That's what I got from the sermon on the mount, not that a higher standard was being raised but #1. That it was impossible for men to live 100% according to the law, and #2. There were slippery slopes that started in the mind. A lustful thought, fornication, and adultery all warrant punishment, but both Jesus and the Mosaic law teach varying degrees of punishment for different sins, so I think the thought would earn less punishment than fornication, which in the OT the punishment for fornication when there was no betrothal was just the man had to marry the woman. Adultery resulted in death for both participants on the other hand. Homosexual acts also resulted in death by stoning.
So.. I wouldn't equate lust with fornication, or adultery, but adultery and homosexual acts seem to be the same degree of seriousness. Not sure where inappropriate contentography would be placed.

Anyway we're getting a bit off track although it is a tangent that my dislike of homosexuality and transgenderism makes the theological knot harder to work out
I'm not QUITE at the point of needing to say "no homo" after saying I love Jesus but I suppose I might not be far off.

Dorothy Mae · May 3, 2020

Jamdoc said:
Maybe you guys can help.
As we know, Male and female He created them (Genesis 1:27)
and He created marriage (Genesis 2:24), and Marriage, romantic love, is supposed to be an image of how Christ loves His "bride" (Ephesians 5 and Hosea 2 go into this analogy, Ephesians more or less saying it's a great mystery).

HEre is where you made your mistake. The image of a marriage is not romantic between Christ and the church. It is the closest idea that resembles the committment between Christ and the church. It is not physical. It is not romantic. It does not bear children. It is only a picture of that kind of love and committment.

It's the relationship we'll have forever, since there won't be marriage between men and women in eternity, only the marriage between Christ and His church.

That was only a picture. Like all such devises, it has its limits and you cannot apply the duties in a marriage on earth to Christ and the church. Husbands, after all, are not dying for their wives and their wives don't want them to do so.....well, most of them anyway.

Consolation · May 3, 2020

"Husbands, after all, are not dying for their wives and their wives don't want them to do so.....well, most of them anyway."

Thx for the laugh, Dorothy Mae. We need humour to keep us sane in these difficult times!

God’s Blessings to You,

Consolation
"There is but one good; that is God.
Everything else is good when it looks to Him and bad when it turns from Him."
-- C.S. Lewis

Josheb · May 3, 2020

Good Morning Jam,

Jamdoc said:
Well the way I was thinking of it marriage was a union in love. The way God originally intended it, before legalism before inheritance and all that became necessary because Adam and Eve were not meant to die, but they were created as separate beings that complemented each other and were intended to unify with each other, which is fellowship, companionship, and yes, sex and procreation, "become one flesh". That is God's original creation of marriage.

I think there are some minor but very important errors in there.

Adam and Eve were are always going to die physically. They may not have been purposed to die transgressionally (in si), but they were made mortal. We know this because immortal creatures do not need a tree of life. We know this because the command, "Do not eat... our you will die," would be absolutely meaningless if they could die. Most importantly we know this because Jesus is the only way to God (Jn. 14:6) AND Jesus is the resurrection and life AND he was foreknown before the world was created as the perfect, blemish-free sacrifice (1 Pet. 1:19-20). We know this because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 15:35-54, vs. 50). We know this because reason tells us the laws of physics would have to be suspended: What would happen if one of Adam's and Eve's great-great grand-kids grew up and slipped off a cliff and plummeted 3-400 feet to the sudden stop below? Would that not cause death? Or would that suddenly compacted person still live? If so would he then be able to get back up and proceed through life with all his/her bones pulverized by that sudden impact with the very solid earth?

Adam and Eve were always going to have to die physically, otherwise there would be know reason for Jesus to come and live, die, and resurrect. The belief in no physical death negates the need for Jesus and that's simply not correct. If Jesus doesn't come then that also compromises God's omnisicence because He couldn't have foreknown something that never happens.

Now fact that into what has previously been believed about marriage because if Jesus' comments about men and women not being given in marriage in heaven is true then it was true prior to Genesis 1:28; it was true prior to Genesis 1:1 when God made the heavens and the earth.

All that is point 1. Point to is to not be so quick to discard the socio-economic-political aspects of marriage because the very first command ever given to humanity was to be fruit, multiply, and subdue the earth. The second command, not the first, was "Don't eat..., or you'll die." The second command was: Obey Me or die. This is what Paul later calls the "law of sin and death." We were purposed to cover the entire earth, ruling over it as God originally made it: good, unashamed, sinless, and in a right relationship with its Creator. All that changed at Genesis 3:7. All that was the context in which the first marriage was instituted.

Jamdoc said:
So to be married to Christ is to love Him and be in a union with Him. I am just wondering to what degree that union goes.

I can say without reservation the strongest marriages between a man and a woman don't occur in a vacuum of just two people; two people who in many ways are alien species to one another

. A thriving married couple is in-relationship with other married couples. In a thriving marriage a wife is connected to other women, other wives, and most importantly to a same-sex confidante. The same is true of men. We need a same-sex confidante, someone who loves us enough to speak truth to us in confidence and send us back to our wives. Men need men.

Stop thinking in binary.
.

Jamdoc said:
To be honest, I've also meditated on the entire "body of Christ" analogy and have thought about where that line leads when you take it to its most literal interpretation, and it's kind of terrifying, rather than being an individual you are just like a cell in a greater body.

Your name is written in the Lamb's book of Life.

Christianity is not Buddhism where the self is deemed the source of all suffering and the objective is entirely rid yourself of your self. In the Bible we are told it is God Who knit us together in the womb. God has seen fit to make every single one of the seven billion people on the planet unique individuals. He could have made us look and fell and act alike, like action figures or a bag full of little green Army men (and women). He did not do that. God likes diversity. The Bible does tell us to crucify the self but the second greatest command is to love our neighbors as we do ourselves. How can that be done if there is no self? Selfishness and selfish self-love is decried but one of the fruit of the Spirit is self-control.

You and I and coffee4u and paidiske and every other poster in this thread has a name written in the lamb's book of life... for all eternity! You get to keep you name on the other side of the grave. You get to keep your uniqueness in the body of Christ. I do not know how that wokrs, but that is what the Bible teaches. We can liken it to the Trinity in which three Persons, each with their own cognitive, affective, volitional, behavioral, and relationship attributes is wholly integrated and united as one God. Those Guys' Spirit is in us.

It is a mystery.

We will, apparently, fathom it on the other side of resurrection.

Jamdoc said:
We are in a way like that, all pieces of a whole, and yet we're also all individuals. To lose individuality entirely is a fear of mine.

Perfect love casts out fear. God not only made you uniquely, but according to Ephesians 2:10 He made you specifically for works He has already planned in advance for you to perform... and I see nothing in that passage saying those works are limited to this side of the grave. I expect we'll be doing God's work for all eternity; you doing what He has planned for you and me doing what He has planned for me, each in our divinely-created unique ways.

God's big enough to do that, yes?

Jamdoc said:
Which is like in another post why I meditate on how a sinless world might be achieved and one of the ways its possible and a way I fear is the loss of free will.

Hmmm... more errors, but I hesitate to open these up because it will digress further from the op. I will say this: While it is true the scriptures do use the phrase "free will," it does so in a manner whereby the phrase cannot be construed to mean we are autonomous. We are not autonomous. We have our very being in God and no amount of human will can ever usurp the will of the Creator. The creature cannot over-power the Creator. The finite cannot overcome the Infinite. This is the first and most immovable limit to the human will.

You are not free.

Your will is not free. Having sinned your will is even further compromised and soteriogically speaking every soteriological model but the Pelagian has understood, agreed with, and asserted what we now call "total depravity." You are not free. Then there are the limitations of time and space. You cannot know all the possible influences that are brought to bear on any given moment of choice. Nor can you know and understand who those influences affect your moment of choice. You cannot know all the possible options available to you, nor can you know all the ossible consequences of each and every possible alternative you do not known.

You are not free.

What you do have is an ability to make choices within a plethora of pretty significant limitations. The Bible repeatedly frames the human existence in simple dichotomies: life and death, obedience or lawlessness, faithfulness, or faithlessness, slave of sin or slave of righteousness. I've been telling you not to think in binary ways concerning marriage. I have been telling you to avoid false dichotomies. Now I tell you to pay attention to the true dichotomies; the ones asserted by God in His scriptures.

The world God created was full of unrealized dialectics, such as the possibility of sin. It was not created with that option already-existent. In other words, the world God created for us was dialectic, but it was not then at that time dichotomous when it comes to sin.

And these realized and yet to be realized potentialities ALL occur within the context of 1 Peter 1:19-20.

coffee4u · May 3, 2020

Josheb said:
Good Morning Jam,

I think there are some minor but very important errors in there.

Adam and Eve were are always going to die physically.

There was no death before sin, this includes cells.

Jamdoc · May 3, 2020

coffee4u said:
There was no death before sin, this includes cells.

Not explicitly in the bible and makes no sense. if bacteria and insects reproduced but never died they'd completely overrun the planet. We know they were told to reproduce and they do so rapidly and in huge numbers to overcome how quickly they die.
He does kind of have a point in that Adam and Eve needed to eat, if there was absolutely no way they could starve to death then they wouldn't need food.
The fruit from the tree of life sustained them, they didn't die because they ate from that tree, when they were cut off from eating from that tree and expelled from the garden, they would eventually physically die, after eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and spiritually dying. In Genesis 3:22 God mentions that if they continued to eat from the tree of life, they would live forever.
So the question becomes, would that be possible, to be spiritually dead from sin, but sustained physically by the tree of life indefinitely? It seems the case. It seems that if God had not expelled them from the Garden for their sin, they could have physically lived as sinners indefinitely just growing in wickedness over the millennia.
But that is another tangent, though an interesting theological question.

Tolworth John · May 4, 2020

Jamdoc said:
Well I haven't been able to go to church lately because of all that's going on, and to be frank, something like this that I'm stuck on that borders on what is always kind of a taboo subject for Christians, some Christians see sex as this borderline sin act even within marriage.. and I'm new to the church so I just haven't really had the opportunity for it yet.

Sex between married couples is not a sin, nor is it a borderline sin. Pl
May I suggest that if someone says or implies this to you , that you ask, what evidence they have for this view.
There are no verses in the Bible that say that sex between husband and wife is sinful.

coffee4u · May 4, 2020

Jamdoc said:
Not explicitly in the bible and makes no sense. if bacteria and insects reproduced but never died they'd completely overrun the planet. We know they were told to reproduce and they do so rapidly and in huge numbers to overcome how quickly they die.
He does kind of have a point in that Adam and Eve needed to eat, if there was absolutely no way they could starve to death then they wouldn't need food.
The fruit from the tree of life sustained them, they didn't die because they ate from that tree, when they were cut off from eating from that tree and expelled from the garden, they would eventually physically die, after eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and spiritually dying. In Genesis 3:22 God mentions that if they continued to eat from the tree of life, they would live forever.
So the question becomes, would that be possible, to be spiritually dead from sin, but sustained physically by the tree of life indefinitely? It seems the case. It seems that if God had not expelled them from the Garden for their sin, they could have physically lived as sinners indefinitely just growing in wickedness over the millennia.
But that is another tangent, though an interesting theological question.

They didn't have a chance to, God knew Adam was going to sin and not live forever before he even made the world.
Also, you are including things that 'don't die in the Biblical sense'. Death is referring to Nephesh. The word refers to sentience that humans and animals have that God gave them when they became living souls. Plants and bacteria don't have that. Not at all sure about insects, but possibly not. If insects don't have Nephesh than they don't 'die Biblically' even now.

Marumorose · May 4, 2020

Jamdoc said:
Maybe you guys can help.
As we know, Male and female He created them (Genesis 1:27)
and He created marriage (Genesis 2:24), and Marriage, romantic love, is supposed to be an image of how Christ loves His "bride" (Ephesians 5 and Hosea 2 go into this analogy, Ephesians more or less saying it's a great mystery). It's the relationship we'll have forever, since there won't be marriage between men and women in eternity, only the marriage between Christ and His church.
For male Christians then, it's a male+male marriage relationship, which romantic love and even sex are to be an image of.
Yet that kind of relationship between 2 males is an abomination in the bible all over the place.
So how does this pan out? How is a romantic relationship between a man and a woman, how is sex, between a man and a woman, supposed to be an indicator and image of a relationship between what is ultimately 2 males?
I just get stuck on this hangup all the time.
I just imagine it's so much easier to deal with this relationship issue if you're a woman where you just know, Christ is your eternal husband and the perfect man, so there's no emasculating feelings or feeling of rejection because it's same sex.

If i understand correctly in the Book of The Gospel of Thomas Jesus Christ said when you have a female body, you have a male spirit and when you have a man body you have a female spirit. That makes you complete or whole as a human being. Two males cannot be complete because both their spirits are female.
Book of gospels of Thomas says " Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

Understand that Jesus Christ is not male but he is both male and female because he was never separated like man was. And the Love of Jesus Christ is different from the love between a man and woman

Matthew 19:4-6 says "Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female', and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
Male and female were joined together but the Lord separated them to give Adam a helper

Sex was created for married couples to connect to one another and also for reproduction
1 Corinthians 7:3-5 says "The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control"
Jeremiah 29:6 says "Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease"

Remember that the bible is written in hidden messages/codes. Do not take everything literally
May God Bless you

pescador · May 4, 2020

Marumorose said:
If i understand correctly in the Book of The Gospel of Thomas Jesus Christ said when you have a female body, you have a male spirit and when you have a man body you have a female spirit. That makes you complete or whole as a human being. Two males cannot be complete because both their spirits are female.
Book of gospels of Thomas says " Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

Understand that Jesus Christ is not male but he is both male and female because he was never separated like man was. And the Love of Jesus Christ is different from the love between a man and woman

Matthew 19:4-6 says "Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female', and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
Male and female were joined together but the Lord separated them to give Adam a helper

Sex was created for married couples to connect to one another and also for reproduction
1 Corinthians 7:3-5 says "The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control"
Jeremiah 29:6 says "Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease"

Remember that the bible is written in hidden messages/codes. Do not take everything literally
May God Bless you

This is, as usual, ridiculous. The Bible (capitalized) is not written in hidden messages/codes; that's just a rationale to convince others that only certain people have a real understanding, yourself included of course.

There is a good reason that The Gospel of Thomas is not included in the canon of Scripture. It's full of distortions and untruths. This is a prime example, "" Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven." So, according to this, Mary, the mother of the Lord, should have her gender altered; that is the epitome of heresy. Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit "In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear!" I believe the Holy Bible, not some heretical nonsense.

Why do you continually make yourself out to be some priestess who knows "the truth" even though it conflicts with the Bible and long-established church doctrine?

Josheb · May 4, 2020

As I said, this will take us far afield of the op. Your own op and you're choosing to digress rather than stay with your original point of stuckness.

Okay.

coffee4u said:
There was no death before sin, this includes cells.

You're proof-texting. Bad practice.

And you are ignoring what I have posted because what I have already posted already addresses this dissent. There was physical death, but not "dead in sin," or "dead in transgression." I repeat: we know Adam and Eve were mortal because...

list]Immortal people can't die and God told them they'd die if they disobeyed Him.
Immortal people don't need a Tree of Life by which they can live forever.
The body is sown mortal.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
Animals would also be immortal.
The normal laws of physics would have to be suspended.
Jesus was destined to die before the world was created.[/list]

Now you can choose to hold on to your position in resistance to these scriptural and logical truths, but you cannot pretend citing one single verse instantly erases all others.

Humans were always intended to die physically. There is no resurrection without first dying physically. Jesus is the resurrection. Put the two together: there is no Jesus without physical death.

Jesus was foreknown as the perfect blemish-free sacrifice before the world was made (1 Pet. 1:19-20). In other words, before a single atom was spoken into existence, before a single human was ever made, before a single human ever drew his/her first breath, before a single sin had ever been committed it was decided Jesus would enter the earthly realm, live, die, and resurrect AND the purpose of that decision was to bring humanity to God.

As far as we can tell there is no option for angels to receive forgiveness, redemption, and salvation for their disobedience (Jude 1:6). Salvation is the privilege of humans alone. This privilege was decided upon prior to the world being created. It is part of the original plan - the plan that existed before any of us were made.

If a person physically dies in a right relationship with God then He inherits the kingdom. The problem is all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) and none are righteous (Rom. 3:10 and a host of others). Everyone sins so all will physically die also dead in sin. I believe you called it "spiritual death" earlier. I prefer the term "transgressional death" or "dead in sin" because nowhere does the Bible use the phrase "spiritual death," but it does speak explicitly about "dead in transgression" or "dead in sin." As a consequence no one will die in a right relationship with God unless found in Christ.

No human in Eden prior to Genesis 3:7 was dead in sin. No human in Eden prior to Genesis 4:8 had died physically.

If we die physically spiritually alive we resurrect with an immortal body
If we die physically having also died in transgression we reap destruction.
If we die physically having also died in sin AND having also died in Christ we resurrect with an immortal body.

Everyone dies.

Scripture uses the words "dead" and "death" quite diversely, as I have just shown. Dying physically is nto the same as dying in sin and neither are the same as being dead in Christ. After Genesis 3:7 both Adam and Eve were dead in sin but neither was physically dead. People walk around every day all dead pumping blood and breathing air thinking they are alive but they are not; they are dead in sin. They are, for all intents and purpose, nothing more than animated corpses plodding through what they vainly imagine if life on their way to utter destruction.

Conversely, those who have a right relationship with God that is possible only through His resurrected son, Jesus His anointed one, will suffer being both dead in sin and physical death but because of the grace and faith in Christ extended to us by God we can and will die physically dead and dead in sin and still resurrect because we are also dead in Christ.

To be dead in Christ is to be made alive in Christ!

Te be dead in sin is dead death. To be dead to sin is to no longer be dead in sin.

So, again I point out to you the fact the word "death" is used quite diversely in scripture and you cannot treat it all alike or think there is a single simple dichotomy.

Now, let's look at this verse you've cited; John 3:16. Had you read on you would have noted John also stated the following:

John 3:18 NIV
"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

So we must ask ourselves, "Did Adam believe in Jesus?" because if the answer is "No, Adam did not believe in Jesus," then Adam was already living in a state of condemnation.

Fries the head, doesn't it.

You see, being good isn't enough. The righteous live by faith. Anything not done in faith is sin (Rom. 14:23; sin is not simply a matter of law-breaking). Jesus was there in Eden. Jesus is the Tree of Life (Rev. 22). God told Adam and Eve they could eat of any tree in the Garden except one; that means they could have eaten from the Tree of Life at any time. Do you read any record of them having done so? Genesis 3:22 would seem to indicate they had not. In other words, faith-wise Adam and Eve placed their faith in the tree of the knowledge of good and evil instead of the tree of life.

It is out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks... and the body acts. Adam disobeyed God in heart first. Before he disobeyed in action. Adam disobeyed the first command (subdue and rule) before he broke the second command (do not eat). Adam and Eve had been given authority over all of the creatures in Eden and that means they had authority over the serpent. They broke the first rule before they broke the second.

Adam stood condemned because he had not believed in the name of God's one and only son and that is what caused him to eat the forbidden kiwi.

So what you've done by appealing to John 3:16 has no bearing on the matter of physical death. Adam and Eve always needed to eat from the tree of life and until they did they would die. The problem is this

The Tree of Life is the resurrection!

Go study the phrase "tree of life" and see that it points to Christ.

Genesis 3:7-9, 15-20
"7Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. 8The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. 9Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... 15Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.'"

Adam did not die the day he ate from the forbidden tree. He lived on for many centuries. He live on physically dead in sin with no recourse because he'd been banned from Eden where the tree of life lived.

1 Peter 1:20
"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you"

Foreknown before the world was made.
Revealed in those last times.

Adam was mortal and he was always going to die physically.

One last thought for you to contemplate: if the only reason Jesus came is to address the occurrence of sin then God's entire plan for humanity is dependent upon the existence of sin. That position necessarily makes God dependent upon sin; the Law Maker dependent upon law-breaking for His purpose in creation to be realized.

I trust you see the problem with that position.

Jamdoc · May 4, 2020

Tolworth John said:
Sex between married couples is not a sin, nor is it a borderline sin. Pl
May I suggest that if someone says or implies this to you , that you ask, what evidence they have for this view.
There are no verses in the Bible that say that sex between husband and wife is sinful.

I know this, but there's a staggering number of Christians who believe it is, they have a translation o the bible that changes Hebrews 13:4 that instead of saying the marriage bed IS undefiled, their translation reads "let the marriage bed be undefiled" which to them means oh we should only have sex for the holy purpose of procreation, any other reason to have it is sin, or something along those lines. It can be a testy subject to bring up with people who have those beliefs.
My grandparents were Catholic so they were like that.

Jamdoc · May 4, 2020

Marumorose said:
If i understand correctly in the Book of The Gospel of Thomas Jesus Christ said when you have a female body, you have a male spirit and when you have a man body you have a female spirit. That makes you complete or whole as a human being. Two males cannot be complete because both their spirits are female.
Book of gospels of Thomas says " Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

Understand that Jesus Christ is not male but he is both male and female because he was never separated like man was. And the Love of Jesus Christ is different from the love between a man and woman

Matthew 19:4-6 says "Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female', and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
Male and female were joined together but the Lord separated them to give Adam a helper

Sex was created for married couples to connect to one another and also for reproduction
1 Corinthians 7:3-5 says "The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control"
Jeremiah 29:6 says "Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease"

Remember that the bible is written in hidden messages/codes. Do not take everything literally
May God Bless you

Thomas is also not in the bible so I'd take everything in it with a grain of salt

Jamdoc · May 4, 2020

Josheb said:
As I said, this will take us far afield of the op. Your own op and you're choosing to digress rather than stay with your original point of stuckness.

Okay.
You're proof-texting. Bad practice.

And you are ignoring what I have posted because what I have already posted already addresses this dissent. There was physical death, but not "dead in sin," or "dead in transgression." I repeat: we know Adam and Eve were mortal because...

list]Immortal people can't die and God told them they'd die if they disobeyed Him.
Immortal people don't need a Tree of Life by which they can live forever.
The body is sown mortal.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
Animals would also be immortal.
The normal laws of physics would have to be suspended.
Jesus was destined to die before the world was created.[/list]

Now you can choose to hold on to your position in resistance to these scriptural and logical truths, but you cannot pretend citing one single verse instantly erases all others.

Humans were always intended to die physically. There is no resurrection without first dying physically. Jesus is the resurrection. Put the two together: there is no Jesus without physical death.

Jesus was foreknown as the perfect blemish-free sacrifice before the world was made (1 Pet. 1:19-20). In other words, before a single atom was spoken into existence, before a single human was ever made, before a single human ever drew his/her first breath, before a single sin had ever been committed it was decided Jesus would enter the earthly realm, live, die, and resurrect AND the purpose of that decision was to bring humanity to God.

As far as we can tell there is no option for angels to receive forgiveness, redemption, and salvation for their disobedience (Jude 1:6). Salvation is the privilege of humans alone. This privilege was decided upon prior to the world being created. It is part of the original plan - the plan that existed before any of us were made.

If a person physically dies in a right relationship with God then He inherits the kingdom. The problem is all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) and none are righteous (Rom. 3:10 and a host of others). Everyone sins so all will physically die also dead in sin. I believe you called it "spiritual death" earlier. I prefer the term "transgressional death" or "dead in sin" because nowhere does the Bible use the phrase "spiritual death," but it does speak explicitly about "dead in transgression" or "dead in sin." As a consequence no one will die in a right relationship with God unless found in Christ.

No human in Eden prior to Genesis 3:7 was dead in sin. No human in Eden prior to Genesis 4:8 had died physically.

If we die physically spiritually alive we resurrect with an immortal body
If we die physically having also died in transgression we reap destruction.
If we die physically having also died in sin AND having also died in Christ we resurrect with an immortal body.

Everyone dies.

Scripture uses the words "dead" and "death" quite diversely, as I have just shown. Dying physically is nto the same as dying in sin and neither are the same as being dead in Christ. After Genesis 3:7 both Adam and Eve were dead in sin but neither was physically dead. People walk around every day all dead pumping blood and breathing air thinking they are alive but they are not; they are dead in sin. They are, for all intents and purpose, nothing more than animated corpses plodding through what they vainly imagine if life on their way to utter destruction.

Conversely, those who have a right relationship with God that is possible only through His resurrected son, Jesus His anointed one, will suffer being both dead in sin and physical death but because of the grace and faith in Christ extended to us by God we can and will die physically dead and dead in sin and still resurrect because we are also dead in Christ.

To be dead in Christ is to be made alive in Christ!

Te be dead in sin is dead death. To be dead to sin is to no longer be dead in sin.

So, again I point out to you the fact the word "death" is used quite diversely in scripture and you cannot treat it all alike or think there is a single simple dichotomy.

Now, let's look at this verse you've cited; John 3:16. Had you read on you would have noted John also stated the following:

John 3:18 NIV
"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

So we must ask ourselves, "Did Adam believe in Jesus?" because if the answer is "No, Adam did not believe in Jesus," then Adam was already living in a state of condemnation.

Fries the head, doesn't it.

You see, being good isn't enough. The righteous live by faith. Anything not done in faith is sin (Rom. 14:23; sin is not simply a matter of law-breaking). Jesus was there in Eden. Jesus is the Tree of Life (Rev. 22). God told Adam and Eve they could eat of any tree in the Garden except one; that means they could have eaten from the Tree of Life at any time. Do you read any record of them having done so? Genesis 3:22 would seem to indicate they had not. In other words, faith-wise Adam and Eve placed their faith in the tree of the knowledge of good and evil instead of the tree of life.

It is out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks... and the body acts. Adam disobeyed God in heart first. Before he disobeyed in action. Adam disobeyed the first command (subdue and rule) before he broke the second command (do not eat). Adam and Eve had been given authority over all of the creatures in Eden and that means they had authority over the serpent. They broke the first rule before they broke the second.

Adam stood condemned because he had not believed in the name of God's one and only son and that is what caused him to eat the forbidden kiwi.

So what you've done by appealing to John 3:16 has no bearing on the matter of physical death. Adam and Eve always needed to eat from the tree of life and until they did they would die. The problem is this

The Tree of Life is the resurrection!

Go study the phrase "tree of life" and see that it points to Christ.

Genesis 3:7-9, 15-20
"7Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. 8The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. 9Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... 15Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.'"

Adam did not die the day he ate from the forbidden tree. He lived on for many centuries. He live on physically dead in sin with no recourse because he'd been banned from Eden where the tree of life lived.

1 Peter 1:20
"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you"

Foreknown before the world was made.
Revealed in those last times.

Adam was mortal and he was always going to die physically.

One last thought for you to contemplate: if the only reason Jesus came is to address the occurrence of sin then God's entire plan for humanity is dependent upon the existence of sin. That position necessarily makes God dependent upon sin; the Law Maker dependent upon law-breaking for His purpose in creation to be realized.

I trust you see the problem with that position.

Any theological knot is tied with many threads, all pertaining to God, so it does not bother me that we go on tangents that are also theological questions. To meditate on the mysteries of God is a good thing ultimately.

I think on my original issue of being stuck, I have some new things to think about, you have brought up one of them, in the means of seeing marriage as a binary relationship when it never was. Thank you for that, though it leaves me still needing to think about how marriage is, being single with no experience, I can only observe others, and have an academic understanding.
Another thing brought up is my own dislike of homosexuality and transgenderism and fear of loss of identity distort perceptions of a relationship with God because of the given gender being "Him/He".
Interpreting things literally is another thing
and finally, my own desire for love, affection, and relationship while being lonely and feeling in a place in life where I will never have love and affection and relationship make me wonder how God is to fulfill those needs when He promises that marriage is not a possibility in the resurrection.
I dislike the concept of God just making those needs not exist because it sounds robotic. It makes it sound like God is some cheapskate looking for loopholes in how He can fulfill a promise to fulfill every desire of the heart and not withholding any good thing, while also promising that some good things will not be available. Like the standard Christian answer is to make God look like he painted Himself into a corner so he just paints a door on the wall and leaves through it. I don't like that because it cheapens the image of God and limits Him in what He is capable of doing, and strips away unique identity from all Christians by rewriting their only sole desire to be looking at God's face for all eternity. That also makes eternity sound very boring, to be doing only 1 single thing, looking at one single thing. That all feels so wrong that I feel the Holy Spirit almost insulted that anyone would even think that God just wants you to stare at His face forever.
That He'd create this vast new perfect universe, that all He'd want His redeemed to do is stare at Him, that the rest of His new creation was all in vain because all He really needed to do was just make a blank white space with Him in the middle and all the redeemed arrayed around Him to stare at His face. He creates all things new for His glory, and His pleasure, and also our pleasure, because He is most glorified when we are most happy with what He has given us and we are most thankful to Him.

In fact that's the strongest feeling and impression I get when I have that thought, reflecting in the most standard answer that Christians give in regards to heaven that all we will want to do is see His face.
INSULTED
even OFFENDED
it feels like being convicted of a sin when I have that thought.
but that's the answer I get most often.

Jamdoc · May 4, 2020

Josheb said:
As I said, this will take us far afield of the op. Your own op and you're choosing to digress rather than stay with your original point of stuckness.

Okay.
You're proof-texting. Bad practice.

And you are ignoring what I have posted because what I have already posted already addresses this dissent. There was physical death, but not "dead in sin," or "dead in transgression." I repeat: we know Adam and Eve were mortal because...

list]Immortal people can't die and God told them they'd die if they disobeyed Him.
Immortal people don't need a Tree of Life by which they can live forever.
The body is sown mortal.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
Animals would also be immortal.
The normal laws of physics would have to be suspended.
Jesus was destined to die before the world was created.[/list]

Now you can choose to hold on to your position in resistance to these scriptural and logical truths, but you cannot pretend citing one single verse instantly erases all others.

Humans were always intended to die physically. There is no resurrection without first dying physically. Jesus is the resurrection. Put the two together: there is no Jesus without physical death.

Jesus was foreknown as the perfect blemish-free sacrifice before the world was made (1 Pet. 1:19-20). In other words, before a single atom was spoken into existence, before a single human was ever made, before a single human ever drew his/her first breath, before a single sin had ever been committed it was decided Jesus would enter the earthly realm, live, die, and resurrect AND the purpose of that decision was to bring humanity to God.

As far as we can tell there is no option for angels to receive forgiveness, redemption, and salvation for their disobedience (Jude 1:6). Salvation is the privilege of humans alone. This privilege was decided upon prior to the world being created. It is part of the original plan - the plan that existed before any of us were made.

If a person physically dies in a right relationship with God then He inherits the kingdom. The problem is all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) and none are righteous (Rom. 3:10 and a host of others). Everyone sins so all will physically die also dead in sin. I believe you called it "spiritual death" earlier. I prefer the term "transgressional death" or "dead in sin" because nowhere does the Bible use the phrase "spiritual death," but it does speak explicitly about "dead in transgression" or "dead in sin." As a consequence no one will die in a right relationship with God unless found in Christ.

No human in Eden prior to Genesis 3:7 was dead in sin. No human in Eden prior to Genesis 4:8 had died physically.

If we die physically spiritually alive we resurrect with an immortal body
If we die physically having also died in transgression we reap destruction.
If we die physically having also died in sin AND having also died in Christ we resurrect with an immortal body.

Everyone dies.

Scripture uses the words "dead" and "death" quite diversely, as I have just shown. Dying physically is nto the same as dying in sin and neither are the same as being dead in Christ. After Genesis 3:7 both Adam and Eve were dead in sin but neither was physically dead. People walk around every day all dead pumping blood and breathing air thinking they are alive but they are not; they are dead in sin. They are, for all intents and purpose, nothing more than animated corpses plodding through what they vainly imagine if life on their way to utter destruction.

Conversely, those who have a right relationship with God that is possible only through His resurrected son, Jesus His anointed one, will suffer being both dead in sin and physical death but because of the grace and faith in Christ extended to us by God we can and will die physically dead and dead in sin and still resurrect because we are also dead in Christ.

To be dead in Christ is to be made alive in Christ!

Te be dead in sin is dead death. To be dead to sin is to no longer be dead in sin.

So, again I point out to you the fact the word "death" is used quite diversely in scripture and you cannot treat it all alike or think there is a single simple dichotomy.

Now, let's look at this verse you've cited; John 3:16. Had you read on you would have noted John also stated the following:

John 3:18 NIV
"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

So we must ask ourselves, "Did Adam believe in Jesus?" because if the answer is "No, Adam did not believe in Jesus," then Adam was already living in a state of condemnation.

Fries the head, doesn't it.

You see, being good isn't enough. The righteous live by faith. Anything not done in faith is sin (Rom. 14:23; sin is not simply a matter of law-breaking). Jesus was there in Eden. Jesus is the Tree of Life (Rev. 22). God told Adam and Eve they could eat of any tree in the Garden except one; that means they could have eaten from the Tree of Life at any time. Do you read any record of them having done so? Genesis 3:22 would seem to indicate they had not. In other words, faith-wise Adam and Eve placed their faith in the tree of the knowledge of good and evil instead of the tree of life.

It is out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks... and the body acts. Adam disobeyed God in heart first. Before he disobeyed in action. Adam disobeyed the first command (subdue and rule) before he broke the second command (do not eat). Adam and Eve had been given authority over all of the creatures in Eden and that means they had authority over the serpent. They broke the first rule before they broke the second.

Adam stood condemned because he had not believed in the name of God's one and only son and that is what caused him to eat the forbidden kiwi.

So what you've done by appealing to John 3:16 has no bearing on the matter of physical death. Adam and Eve always needed to eat from the tree of life and until they did they would die. The problem is this

The Tree of Life is the resurrection!

Go study the phrase "tree of life" and see that it points to Christ.

Genesis 3:7-9, 15-20
"7Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. 8The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. 9Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... 15Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.'"

Adam did not die the day he ate from the forbidden tree. He lived on for many centuries. He live on physically dead in sin with no recourse because he'd been banned from Eden where the tree of life lived.

1 Peter 1:20
"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you"

Foreknown before the world was made.
Revealed in those last times.

Adam was mortal and he was always going to die physically.

One last thought for you to contemplate: if the only reason Jesus came is to address the occurrence of sin then God's entire plan for humanity is dependent upon the existence of sin. That position necessarily makes God dependent upon sin; the Law Maker dependent upon law-breaking for His purpose in creation to be realized.

I trust you see the problem with that position.

One small thing. I don't think that Adam was always going to die physically necessarily, He was potentially mortal, but as long as he ate from the tree of life, he would live indefinitely. Only when he was cut off from the tree did he start aging and die.

Consolation · May 5, 2020

Hi Jamdoc,

"One small thing. I don't think that Adam was always going to die physically necessarily, He was potentially mortal, but as long as he ate from the tree of life, he would live indefinitely. Only when he was cut off from the tree did he start aging and die."

Well said. That is my understanding also. Hope your day is a good one.

Jamdoc · May 5, 2020

Consolation said:
Hi Jamdoc,

"One small thing. I don't think that Adam was always going to die physically necessarily, He was potentially mortal, but as long as he ate from the tree of life, he would live indefinitely. Only when he was cut off from the tree did he start aging and die."

Well said. That is my understanding also. Hope your day is a good one.

Yeah, Genesis 3 doesn't cover the biology of Adam's body so much, but it does have God say that if Adam continued to eat from the tree of life he'd live forever.

Consolation · May 5, 2020

Hi Jamdoc,

Re your comment on offence etc. I recommend you take anything said on an open Forum with a grain of salt.

It is Scripture that is our guide not fallible, fallen human beings:
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11 (King James Version)

And truth must be spoken in love to be godly:
"For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God."
James 1:20 (King James Version)

“Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ.”
Ephesians 4:15 (New International Version)

Remember:
“How good and pleasant it is
when God’s people live together in unity!
It is like precious oil poured on the head,
running down on the beard,
running down on Aaron’s beard,
down on the collar of his robe.

It is as if the dew of Hermon
were falling on Mount Zion.
For there the Lord bestows his blessing,
even life forevermore.”
Psalm 133 (New International Version)

Blessings To You…..Consolation
“The sun looks down on nothing half so good as a household laughing together over a meal.”
— C.S. Lewis “The Weight of Glory” (1949)

Theologically stuck on something

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Christian

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Wise old man

Christian

Watching and Praying Always

Watching and Praying Always

Watching and Praying Always

Watching and Praying Always

Active Member

Watching and Praying Always

Active Member

Similar threads