Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Wow, I didn't expect that response. I'm astonished that anyone, much less an entire religion, could read Romans 5 and conclude that Adam didn't sin.You are correct.. It is only "your opinion" (imo) That Romans 5 says Adam sinned in the Garden.
As we can see here on this thread, many others have differing opinions.
What is Mormon doctrine is that Innocents are not held accountable for the transgression of an Innocent.
12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—
13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.
16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification.
17 For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for fall men.
19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.
20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Hello. In general, the works considered for inclusion in the NT canon were those written by 1st-century apostles (Matthew, John, Paul, etc.) or their traveling companions (Mark, Luke, etc.).Then we must question why the Church rejected so much of this scripture; and why it does so to this day.
I was a Christian for just over sixty years. In all this time I never heard any priest or minister preach a sermon based on the Gospels of Mary, Thomas; Philip; or Judas; nor on the Gospel of Truth. Nor did I come across any pastoral letter based on the same.
How would you explain this neglect of scripture?
im asking this question because there are many who believe that Adam is a dirty dog. Here is my reasoning to why they are not and were following the plan of God. Adam and Eve were placed in the garden of Eden. They were innocent of knowledge of good and evil. Satan was allowed to tempt them and Eve partook of the fruit and gave it to Adam. I believe that Adam and Eve disobeyed Gods law to not eat the fruit. God had told them not to eat of the fruit or they would die. Since there had not yet had death enter into the garden did they understand what the consequences of their choice? Since they did not know good and evil, could Adam and Eve understood what the law was and the consequences? They did disobey and as a result death came into the world. Sin also came into the world because of imperfection. I believe that to justice it does not matter if someone disobeys having full knowledge and understanding of the law broken or if someone is innocent of the law. It is still disobedience and there are consequences that must come as a result. The punishment is the same. Logic dictates that this was Gods plan all along because why would he allow satan to tempt them? Why would God place the tree of knowledge of good and evil for them to be tempted. I believe that God wanted Adam to eat the fruit so mortality would come to this earth as well so we could know good from evil. To experience the opposites of life so we could continue to progress. So to me Adam and Eve did not sin. They did transgress Gods law which had the same punishment.
Indeed they can. The tradition of the Holy Roman Empire was for the heir to the throne to be crowned King before his father died, effectively creating two Kings to one crown.
This caused all sorts of trouble, for obvious reasons.
Two shillings and six pence was called "half a Crown"
But here it is not about divided Crowns,
Two or more cannot wear the same Crown.
Nice try CA, but no cigar.
In that case, I would say that Saul had already been fired by the King of the King. Not really two rulers at the same time.Funnily enough, the same pertained in Israel. David was anointed King while Saul was still on the throne. Two crowns; one kingdom.
In that case, I would say that Saul had already been fired by the King of the King. Not really two rulers at the same time.
Or, the gift of grace makes atonement irrelevant.Isaiah 1:
11 What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices?
says the Lord;
I have had enough of burnt-offerings of rams
and the fat of fed beasts;
I do not delight in the blood of bulls,
or of lambs, or of goats.
16 Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean;
remove the evil of your doings
from before my eyes;
cease to do evil,
17 learn to do good;
seek justice,
rescue the oppressed,
defend the orphan,
plead for the widow.
18 Come now, let us argue it out,
says the Lord:
though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be like snow;
though they are red like crimson,
they shall become like wool.
Psalm 51:
15 O Lord, open my lips,
and my mouth will declare your praise.
16 For you have no delight in sacrifice;
if I were to give a burnt-offering, you would not be pleased.
17 The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.
It's possible you might be a bit mistaken about all this blood atonement in the Tanach. Seems like it's quite possible to atone without a single drop of blood. (There are plenty more quotes that show this)
im asking this question because there are many who believe that Adam is a dirty dog. Here is my reasoning to why they are not and were following the plan of God. Adam and Eve were placed in the garden of Eden. They were innocent of knowledge of good and evil. Satan was allowed to tempt them and Eve partook of the fruit and gave it to Adam. I believe that Adam and Eve disobeyed Gods law to not eat the fruit. God had told them not to eat of the fruit or they would die. Since there had not yet had death enter into the garden did they understand what the consequences of their choice? Since they did not know good and evil, could Adam and Eve understood what the law was and the consequences? They did disobey and as a result death came into the world. Sin also came into the world because of imperfection. I believe that to justice it does not matter if someone disobeys having full knowledge and understanding of the law broken or if someone is innocent of the law. It is still disobedience and there are consequences that must come as a result. The punishment is the same. Logic dictates that this was Gods plan all along because why would he allow satan to tempt them? Why would God place the tree of knowledge of good and evil for them to be tempted. I believe that God wanted Adam to eat the fruit so mortality would come to this earth as well so we could know good from evil. To experience the opposites of life so we could continue to progress. So to me Adam and Eve did not sin. They did transgress Gods law which had the same punishment.
Or, the gift of grace makes atonement irrelevant.
I do not accept the original sin idea either:
Would Adam and Eve have been the best all human (not divine) beings, which could be cratered?
Would there genes have been as good as genes could be made since no mutations would have occurred in them?
Adam at least is described as being “very good” by God’s standard, so would that be as good as a being could be created?
Who raised (or programmed) Adam and Eve to adulthood?
Who taught Adam and Eve the meaning of all the words God would use (including the word “die”)?
If Adam and Eve were not the best human representatives than the fact that better humans were not given the opportunity to live in the Garden is unfair.
Just because Adam and Eve did not know “good and evil” (which is something they did not need to know at the time) does not mean they did not know: “right and wrong”. I may be wrong to play next to a cliff but is it evil?
There is a ton of stuff Adam and Eve and all of us learn from their Garden experience and some needed to be learned through experience early on. People even today will at some point in their life ask: “How could a Loving God allow this____ tragedy to happen”? What they are really asking for is: “why are we not all in a Garden type situation no: tragedies, hardship, illness or death.
The problem is as Adam and Eve have shown us is: the Garden is a lousy place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective.
im asking this question because there are many who believe that Adam is a dirty dog. Here is my reasoning to why they are not and were following the plan of God. Adam and Eve were placed in the garden of Eden. They were innocent of knowledge of good and evil. Satan was allowed to tempt them and Eve partook of the fruit and gave it to Adam. I believe that Adam and Eve disobeyed Gods law to not eat the fruit. God had told them not to eat of the fruit or they would die. Since there had not yet had death enter into the garden did they understand what the consequences of their choice? Since they did not know good and evil, could Adam and Eve understood what the law was and the consequences? ...
I didn't actually say toddlers are culpable. I said sin is sin whether the one sinning knows it or not. You have a very different definition of sin than I am accustomed to. Do you know of an article etc resource where I can learn more about your perspective of it? Thank you.No, if a person who understood right and wrong were to steal it would be a sin. With a toddler it is simply testing boundaries; sharing; playing; all sorts of options. But it can never be sin. Sin has to include a deliberate intention to do wrong, while knowing for certain that right would mean doing something different. Sin is choice.
You seem happy to admit that babies are not culpable; what makes you think that toddlers are? The age of moral responsibility is rather higher than 2 or 3.
Agree with the toddler premise. As for the requirement for a deliberate action to qualify as sin, that's not entirely accurate according to the Bible. There is a category of sin called unintentional sins like breaking a commandment due to carelessness, forgetfulness or ignorance.No, if a person who understood right and wrong were to steal it would be a sin. With a toddler it is simply testing boundaries; sharing; playing; all sorts of options. But it can never be sin. Sin has to include a deliberate intention to do wrong, while knowing for certain that right would mean doing something different. Sin is choice.
You seem happy to admit that babies are not culpable; what makes you think that toddlers are? The age of moral responsibility is rather higher than 2 or 3.
No, we are not simply spirit. We are flesh and spirit, the same as the Lord.
The Lord ascended in his body, not just in spirit.
What I see missing from the list is any indication of the things that only one person can ever have happen while they are King of Israel:
World Peace
Universal Knowledge of HaShem
The Temple built as laid out in Ezekiel
The return of the Exiles to Israel and all Jews living in Israel
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?