When is it sin?

Reformationist said:

I agree.



Maybe it will become clearer with this follow up question:

When Adam first sinned in the Garden was it his act of actually eating of the fruit or was it his willful disobedience to God prior to actually eating of the fruit?

God bless

Click to expand...

IMO Adam's original sin had nothing to do with the fruit. It had to do with his failure as the spiritual leader. He stood by as Satan tempted Eve. He did not intervene, he did not do his part to protect the weaker vessel. In the book of Genesis we are told that after Eve bit the fruit she, "Turned to her husband who was with her". He was right there the whole time. Neglecting his duty as the leader, husband and protector was his sin. But, as the law given to him was do not eat the fruit, eating the fruit is his claim to fame. Am I making sense here?

To answer your question, don, sin begins in the heart. David's lust, Judas' greed, Jonah's disobedience, all started in the heart and mind. Sin committed before acted upon. Reason being, the heart is the man's character. If God allowed us to think whatever we wanted and sin was only action, not thought. How much more retched would this world be?

Interesting point Gabriel. I agree.

You could say that Adam committed two sins:

1) Failure to perform his duty as the spiritual leader in his household. (Sin of omission)

2) Willful disobedience of God's one law (at the time.)

What do you think?

Knight said:

Interesting point Gabriel. I agree.

You could say that Adam committed two sins:

1) Failure to perform his duty as the spiritual leader in his household. (Sin of omission)

2) Willful disobedience of God's one law (at the time.)

What do you think?

Click to expand...

If we examine ourselves completely, we will probably find that sins of omission are the most frequent sin.

But, as I, (and you) pointed out. Adam only had one law to follow at the time. Don't eat the fruit. His neglect is just a great example to all of us father's, husbands and mentors.

Sorry, Don. Didn't mean to high-jack your thread.

RO 7:7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not covet." 8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead. 9 Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. 12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

Click to expand...

God commanded they not eat the fruit, so sin sprang to life by this commandment of God. God (who is Jesus) knew that Adam was now condemend by the very commandment of the law, the begining of sin was at the very commandment to not eat the fruit. Paul then goes on to wrestle with the concept of sin and it's birthplace being the very law He loved.
read on:

RO 7:13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.
RO 7:14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 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 I know that nothing good lives 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 what I do is not the good I want to do; no, 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.
RO 7:21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23 but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

Click to expand...

This is the very key to bringing home who God has chosen, to understand what we are apart from the cross of Jesus. Sin is not only in our hearts, and our minds, it exists because God commands against our nature but to His Holy purpose and Nature. Apart from Christ we are condemned before any thought or desire of our hearts.
read on:

RO 8:1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4 in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

Click to expand...

Eldermike

Very good explanation eldermike.

Just a question at this point. The concensus seems to be that Adam sinned before the fall, IOW as soon as he thought of it. Do I detect a supralapsarian world view?
Adam was created without sin, and did not know the difference between good and evil until he ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
I agree that sin comes from the heart, but that is from fallen, sinful man, not unfallen innocent man. Can anyone comment? Does this make sense?

To say Adam was created without sin is correct but not very descriptive.
Adam was created without commandments, sin was not an issue until He was commanded. At the point He was commanded, sin entered the picture, though Adam had not yet fallen, he would fall that was assured. God said "when you eat", not "if you eat". God did not tempt Adam with the fruit what God actually did was set the stage for our salvation (Jesus on the cross) when He gave his first commandment.

We are always looking for a way to get sin into a box so we can measure it, control it or understand it. We use "Nature" as a descriptive word for why we can't defeat it.
Sin is the void between a Holy God and man, it's impossible to describe because we are not Holy. we cannot see into the void and have not even a clue as to how deep, how far it goes.

The work of the cross is the bridge over sin for those who are called.

Thank you for the explanation of your views, eldermike. They describe a supralapsarian world view, and also mirror my own. God created Adam with the purpose of having him fall so that He(God) may show forth His(God's) glory through His Son, Jesus Christ. We cannot overcome the sin nature in ourselves; we are completely dependant on the Grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Anyone who calls upon the name of the LORD will be saved, and we know that only the elect will.
The elect were forknown and predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus before the foundation of the world. We can trust totally in God's grace.
Do you agree with supralapsarianism or do you have reservations? Some people have told me that it is equivalent to "hypercalvinism", but I disagree. Hypercalvinism is more of a fatalistic approach to life. "It's all predestined, so why do anything?" line of thought. I view supralapsarianism as God knew what He was doing in every step of creation; even Einstein is reported to have said "God does not play dice with the universe."
We evangelize, teach and proclaim the Gospel because that is what God commands us to do, and it is a joy to serve Him. Thoughts? Disagreements?

I believe in freewill, but I believe that God also new what was going to happen. God knew what choice Adam would make, but that doesn't remove his freedom to choose.

eldermike said:

To say Adam was created without sin is correct but not very descriptive.
Adam was created without commandments, sin was not an issue until He was commanded. At the point He was commanded, sin entered the picture, though Adam had not yet fallen, he would fall that was assured. God said "when you eat", not "if you eat". God did not tempt Adam with the fruit what God actually did was set the stage for our salvation (Jesus on the cross) when He gave his first commandment.

We are always looking for a way to get sin into a box so we can measure it, control it or understand it. We use "Nature" as a descriptive word for why we can't defeat it.
Sin is the void between a Holy God and man, it's impossible to describe because we are not Holy. we cannot see into the void and have not even a clue as to how deep, how far it goes.

The work of the cross is the bridge over sin for those who are called.

Click to expand...

I disagree in my Bible it does not say "when you eat" it says
Gen 3:3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"

I dont believe that God would clue them into that action buy saying when you eat of it.

Yes, we have freewill, however it's not actually an asset, but a limitation of not knowing our future. Walking in God's will minute by minute is an impossibility because on our best day we are bumping into things (as if we didn't have spiritual sight) and then readjusting our paths, seeking the will of God as we go. If we knew the future we could walk straight into it. So, freewill is actually overrated as an attribute of man, it's a restriction given by God. I don't focus on freewill as a gift but look at it more like my kids did when they rode in the back seat on trips and continually ask "are we there yet"?. They had no choice on where when or how but could choose to sit quietly and read or hit each other on the head.

Boughtwithaprice, from your explanation I think we agree on many things.

Garbru:

I am sorry to say that you are mistaken. Gen 3 is Eve's distorted rendition of God's words. God's words are contained in Gen 2:17, and they do say, "...when you eat of it you will surely die."

respectfully,
JA

boughtwithaprice said:

Garbru:

I am sorry to say that you are mistaken. Gen 3 is Eve's distorted rendition of God's words. God's words are contained in Gen 2:17, and they do say, "...when you eat of it you will surely die."

respectfully,
JA

Click to expand...

Gen 2:17 but 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."


My version says "in that day that you eat" which does not give the same kind of encouragement to do so with the words "when you eat"



Anyway we all knew that it was inevitable that they would eventually eat from it...and surely God knows how things are going to happen.

As far as freewill I have to agree with some here that its not such a fantastic thing. I wish God would take my freewill away from me and just take over my life, that would be the best! Submitting to his word is really the only way we can know we are right with him. I wish God would speak to me and tell me what he wants me to do with my life or how I should handle things.....I have heard some people say they hear God speak to them but I never have even though I often try to pray and ask for him to speak to me. My life would be so much easier if he would speak to me. any thoughts on that(probably way off topic)

Hi Garbru:

So you agree that God knew that Adam and Eve would eat of the fruit before He created them? Then you are essentially ready to understand the reformed faith. Welcome.

My advice to you is get a copy of "Putting Amazing back into Grace" by Michael Horton. It explains the reformed faith to those of any church background.

The point at the end of the book may help with your other question. How can I get God to talk with me? Most people want God to communicate to them in a profoundly spiritual way, but that ususally doesn't happen unless you are Paul, the Apostle. God speaks to most people in what He has called them to do. Examine your life, find your talents, what are you good at? What do you like to do? God has given you gifts to aid you in your calling, and no job is too lowly. Whatever your profession, do it for the glory of God. Remember the widow with two pennies? She had nothing, but Jesus knew her because she gave all that she had for the glory of God. God will speak to your heart when you decide to follow Him with the talents that He has already given you.

peace Garbru

Eldermike:

excellent analogy of freewill

Reformationist said:

I understand what you're saying. I don't know that I agree but I certainly understand what you're saying.
God bless you my brother,
Don

Click to expand...

What do you disagree with? I'm not trying to go off on a rabbit trail, but I am curious.

The only law that was given to Adam and Eve was not to eat the fruit. The law made the act sin. I understand that, as Adam's role was not clearly defined, his neglect was not sin. However, notice that although Eve ate first and both were commanded not to eat, Adam is blamed for the sin of the world. If his role as leader does not come into play, why is Eve not blamed for the fall?

I am not debating, mearly discussing. Brainstorming, if you will, a thought that I have long had concerning this. The written word does not convey tone or attitude. I don't want you to mistake my post for the usual attempts at argument that you receive. It's more of something that makes you go hhmmm. Know what I mean?

Hi Reformationist:

My exception to your descrition of Adam's fall hinges on the words of God. Gold told him not to eat of the fruit; He did not say "Don't even think about it." It wasn't sin until Adam ate.
I have heard preachers give sermons on how Eve added to the words of God by saying not to touch it. I am wondering why you have to add to God's word by saying Adam's thoughts were sin BEFORE he ate. If they were, then he fell before he fell. The command was do not eat, not do not think. While this may be seen as hair slitting, but I believe its important. Adding to the words of God can lead to distortions of His true intent and the teaching for doctrine the commandments of men. I am not saying that this is what you are trying to do, but I am concerned about the path your line of reasoning is taking. The only sin that Adam could know was to eat or not to eat. If he had considered eating and then rejected the thought, then I do not believe he would have sinned. It is a moot point however because we all know that he did eat and therefore fell. We have no descrition of him thinking about eating and not falling, unless you can mean that he thought of it when God gave the command. When God first gave the command, Adam had to understand it in order to obey it. In order to understand it, he would have to have known what not to do. The Bible does not say that sin appeared at the moment the commandment was given to Adam, but it does say "I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died." Rom7:9 Paul does not use this description when talking about Adam. I believe that his point is that the Law reveals sin in fallen man and does not lead him to eternal life. In Genesis, God condemns Adam for listening to his wife and eating the fruit; it mentions nothing of his thoughts.

I am concerned about a couple of distortions that I have been thinking of. The first is that knowledge is "bad" and that all of our thoughts are sinfull. There seems to be an anti-intellectualism in the churches that I have attended. In its extreme form this anti-intellectualism leads to thinking that all thoughts are bad and no thought is good. This is best characterized by the disease cretinism. Cretinism means "christ-like". This disease was so named because the children with it were so mentally handicapped that they were believed incapable of a sinful thought, and therefore innocent and christ-like. I believe that these children should be pitied and shown compassion, not adored for the ultimate example of christianity. Take a look at the medical description of the disease and see what you think. Is this what we strive for in our christian walk?

cretinism , condition produced in infants and children due to lack of thyroid hormone. It usually results from a congenital defect (e.g., absence of the thyroid, presence of only a rudimentary gland, inability of the gland to produce thyroxine). However, it can develop later if there is a lack of iodine in the diet, or if the thyroid is diseased or surgically removed. Cretinism causes very serious retardation of physical and mental development; if the condition is left untreated, growth is stunted and the physical stature attained is that of a dwarf. In addition, the skin is thick, flabby, and waxy in color, the nose is flattened, the abdomen protrudes, and there is a general slowness of movement and speech. If discovered early enough and treated with thyroid extract and sufficient iodine intake throughout life, growth may become normal and mental facility greatly improved. If the condition commences after adulthood is reached it is called myxedema.

The other distortion comes from Christ's assessment of looking on a woman with lust is equivalent to actual adultery. I believe that what Christ meant was imangining adultery is the same as commiting the act. The modern equivalents are pornography, voyeurism, phone-sex, etc. The pharasaical interpretaion was that if you don't actually commint adultery, then you have not sinned. The previous activities would have been okay, but Jesus said, not so, if you imagine it, you have committed it in your heart, and therefore have sinned.
Some have interpreted Jesus word as any sexual thought is sin. I believe that if a sexual thought enters our mind, but we are able to dismiss it then it is not sin, but when we intend to imagine adultery for the sake of sexual gratification, then that is sin. Let me give you an example to illustrate my point. I work in a hospital, in the operating rooms and delivery rooms. I provide anesthesia for patients undergoing surgery and delivering babies. In the course of my job I see naked women, lots of naked women. I have probably seen more naked women than most people have seen clothed women in their lifetime. After a while, I have become desensitized to it, it is just my job. Two questions arise:

1) Can I sin while doing my job? The answer is yes. I am a man.
2) Do I sin of necessity while doing my job? Is my job sinful? I believe that the answer is no. I provide comfort and pain relief to my patients. I concentrate on the good that I am doing even though the occaisional sexual thought occurs.

A quote from you
"Again, I think that Adam knew the difference between what was obedient and what wasn't. But, I will say that I agree, and even further state, that after the Fall our thoughts are only and continuously evil."

I agree if we are speaking of natural or unregenerate men/women. The regenerate are capable of at least some righteous thoughts.

Another quote

" Then why is it sin when we think about sin? Was Jesus wrong? No, He wasn't.

Sorry, I don't know what you mean here."

I tried to explain better in this post, I hope it clears my position for you. God did not condemn Adam for thinking; He condemned him for listening and eating. Jesus condemns us for thinking in some circumstnaces, because we know better. We have the results of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and we have much more detailed commandments than Adam received. This was done so that sin may be utterly sinful, and we are completely dependant on the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, and not to attempt to reach righeousness by works of the Law by which no flesh shall be justified.

I have posted only so that you may understand my position better and not to say that mine is more right than yours. If you can show me where my reasoning is flawed, I would appreciate it. Lord willing we will learn from eachother and pursue the truth for the greater glory of God.

Take care and have a blessed day