The Literal Fall of Man

[Speedwell]

Never

You decided that it must be literal. That is your interpretive decision.

 

[Open Heart]

But when did THIS PARTICULAR AUTHOR give you the rights to suggest when HE is and is not being literal?

When he wrote in a figurative genre.

 

[miknik5]

You decided that it must be literal. That is your interpretive decision.

Well I have no choice.

I do not confuse this world as the original home and yes, I have found THE WAY back

 

[Speedwell]

Well I have no choice.

I do not confuse this world as the original home and yes, I have found THE WAY back

What does that have to do with genre determination?

 

[miknik5]

When he wrote in a figurative genre.

What does that have to do with genre determination?

much. The whole plan of mankind's salvation was already laid out in Genesis

Every little hidden nuance spoke of CHRIST

From the literal 6 day creation account with the 7th day symbolizing the LORD's SABBATH rest to the one command to man do not..in the day you do (showing that GOD's GRACE was there from the beginning -HE not only knew our/mankind/Adam's fall, HE still, in HIS GRACE, created us/mankind/Adam

In the day you eat of it means HE knew that we would. That there indeed would be that day

 

[miknik5]

now as to the covering of skins, should we go on to these lower things which were simply to point us to HIS HIGHER and HIDDEN SPIRITUAL TRUTHS?

Every WORD of GOD was to point us to HIS SON.

 

[miknik5]

Man created on the 6th day must pass through the 7th day( the LORD's sabbath rest) in order to be made a new/8th day creation covered and marked in the RIGHT GARMENT

 

[joshua 1 9]

a reference to their eating dust all their days.

Actually worms eat dust or dirt. Snakes tend to be more carnivorous. Mark 9:44 "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, but couldn't God just send bad people to a Purgatory place instead.

We still have to deal with the lake of fire or the second death. The Bible uses the two words: "utterly destroy" quite a bit. Of course the word "destroy" is used even more. I am not aware of the word: "Purgatory" being used in the Bible. This is a word that comes out of Dante's book.

 

[CrystalDragon]

We still have to deal with the lake of fire or the second death. The Bible uses the two words: "utterly destroy" quite a bit. Of course the word "destroy" is used even more. I am not aware of the word: "Purgatory" being used in the Bible. This is a word that comes out of Dante's book.

I wasn't saying Purgatory was in the Bible, I'm saying a place like Purgatory would be more just and loving than eternal hell, which is evil.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I'm saying a place like Purgatory would be more just and loving than eternal hell, which is evil.

A loving God gives us choice. What we do with that choice is up to us. If we did not have a choice then we would not have freedom. The invitation is open for whosoever is willing. We can follow God, His will and His plan or we can choose not to follow God and live a life of rebellion. You would think that is freedom but we are only free when we choose to follow God's plan. We are in bondage to sin if we live a life of rebellion. Marriage is a good example. You can not force someone to remain in a marriage. If you could it would not be a marriage, they would be a slave. They can only be free if they are in the marriage because of their own free will, because they want to be married.

I do not believe in eternal hell. I am more of an annihilationist because many times the Bible talks about destruction. That is why I say your concepts come from Dante's books and not from the Bible. The Bible talks about how hell well be thrown into the lake of fire and this is the second death. Nothing will remain of those who rebel against God, it will be as if they never existed. They do not get away with anything because there will be 1000 years in hell before hell is destroyed in the lake of fire. So there will be a "punishment" for their sin and transgression. They are consequences for what we do. Christians deal with the consequences here and now in this life. The unsaved do not deal with the results of their sin until after this life is over and their sin and transgression have been completed. God is a Just God so they will receive Justice. There are laws in this universe and if you violate the law there will be consequences. This is why Jesus had to die for us. Because of God's love for us He gave His Only Begotten Son to pay the price for our sin so that we could inherit eternal life.

 

[SkyWriting]

Near the beginning at the time of the fall of man, there is speculation by some the account isn’t literal, but rather figurative. There are many points made for the figurative point of view, but at least two of them haven’t had any satisfactory responses that I’ve ever seen. Both of them pertain to the 2-fold curse placed upon the serpent.


Curse Part 1: “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.” Gen 3:14

This pertains directly to the animal nature of the serpent, a direct comparison to other animals, a change in their body, and a reference to their eating dust all their days.

If this passage were figurative, then it would not be observable now and we would not be told it extends into the new world. Isaiah 65:17 starts with the creation (not evolution) of new heavens and a new earth, and then continues on until the nature of the literal animals is given. Verse 25, “The wolf and the lamb shall graze together; the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's food.”

The animals are restored to their original state, but the curse on the serpent remains, literally. If the curse of the serpent was just a story, it would not still be observable and in literal effect in the new world.


Curse Part 2: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” Gen 3:15

Did the serpent actually talk? The second part of the serpent’s curse indicated there was a spiritual force behind the creature, causing it to speak to say what it did. But can supernatural beings cause animals to talk? It seems so. In Numbers 22, we see the mouth of the donkey of Balaam was opened by supernatural means and it spoke as well.

So, I see these as two big problems when people attempt to justify the fall of man as figurative when the curse is literal and not figurative, and the idea of animals talking is not absurd when supernatural forces are involved.

The Garden of Paradise is not the same place we currently live.
Adam was removed from that place.

 

[Ron Gurley]

OP: Q: " The "Literal" "Fall of Man" "

A: False doctrines: 1. "Fall of Man" and 2. "Original Sin"

True Doctrines:
1. God disciplined A&E for their disobedience by casting them from Eden and barring them from the "Tree of (eternal) Life".
2. The "first disobedience" of A&E is NOT passed genetically to Mankind. Infants are NOT tainted by sin and estranged from God.
3. God gave Man and angels the spiritual gift of "free will" to accept or reject Him, to choose within His Sovreign power. From this all have a "sin nature", the innate tendency of Man to turn from God and toward self.

RE: "Fall of Man":
"fall" FROM where TO where?

RE: 2. "Original Sin"
No. The first knowing and wilfull disobedience of a clear command of God.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

RE: "Fall of Man":
"fall" FROM where TO where?

From life to death

 

[mark kennedy]

Near the beginning at the time of the fall of man, there is speculation by some the account isn’t literal, but rather figurative. There are many points made for the figurative point of view, but at least two of them haven’t had any satisfactory responses that I’ve ever seen. Both of them pertain to the 2-fold curse placed upon the serpent.

There's nothing figurative about it, the curse is just a curse.

Curse Part 1: “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.” Gen 3:14

This pertains directly to the animal nature of the serpent, a direct comparison to other animals, a change in their body, and a reference to their eating dust all their days.

The Serpent isn't a snake, it has nothing to do with an animal, it's Satan. Serpent is a proper name.

If this passage were figurative,

Which it's not...

then it would not be observable now and we would not be told it extends into the new world. Isaiah 65:17 starts with the creation (not evolution) of new heavens and a new earth, and then continues on until the nature of the literal animals is given. Verse 25, “The wolf and the lamb shall graze together; the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's food.”

Irrelevant.

The animals are restored to their original state, but the curse on the serpent remains, literally. If the curse of the serpent was just a story, it would not still be observable and in literal effect in the new world.


Curse Part 2: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” Gen 3:15

It's not a just a story, it's an historical narrative.

Did the serpent actually talk?

And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. (Rev. 20:2)
​

That Serpent of old was not a snake, it was the Devil and Satan.

The second part of the serpent’s curse indicated there was a spiritual force behind the creature, causing it to speak to say what it did. But can supernatural beings cause animals to talk? It seems so. In Numbers 22, we see the mouth of the donkey of Balaam was opened by supernatural means and it spoke as well.

So, I see these as two big problems when people attempt to justify the fall of man as figurative when the curse is literal and not figurative, and the idea of animals talking is not absurd when supernatural forces are involved.

Your premise is confused and flawed. I don't know what went wrong here but the Serpent of old was and is Satan.

 

[Ron Gurley]

Response to post #111: "I do not believe in eternal hell."

You should. Jesus dwells on this ETERNAL spiritual realm than on the ETERNAL heavenly realms.

Matthew 10:28 (NASB)
Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul (Mankind);
but rather fear Him (God) who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.(Gehenna)

BUT the SPIRIT of Man is IMMORTAL.

Matthew 25
46 These (unbelieving goat Nations/ethnos) will go away into eternal punishment,(in the "lake of fire")
but the righteous (believing sheep Nations/ethnos) into eternal life.” (in the heavenly realms)

Matthew 23
38b...the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom (of God) ;
and the tares are the sons of the evil one...
40 So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at "the end of the age".(of Grace)
41 The Son of Man will send forth His angels,
and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness,
42 and will throw them into the furnace ("lake"?) of fire;
in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.
He who has ears,let him hear.

Revelation 20:15
And if anyone’s name was not found written in the (Lamb's) "book of life", (saved believers)
he was thrown into the "lake of fire".

Revelation 20:10...ETERNAL DOOM OF THE UNHOLY THREE
And the 1. devil (ANTI-GOD) who deceived them was thrown into the "lake of fire" and brimstone, where the 2.beast (ANTI-CHRIST) and the 3. false prophet (ANTI-SPIRIT) are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

 

[Ron Gurley]

Response to post #114:
RE: "Fall of Man":
Q: "fall" FROM where TO where?
A: From life to death

Wrong. The SPIRITS of A&E are immortal and returned to God who gave them. SEE: Eccl. 12
Only their Body/Soul combos were denied the "Tree of (eternal) Life".