The scandal of the evangelical heart and mind

[Deborah13]

We can verify after the fact with 2 Peter but it appears Paul has added to OT account. I notice no one is refuting the claim that its not in genesis.

Genesis 8:21
"... and the Lord said to Himself, “..., for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth;..."

I don't see that Paul was adding anything to the OT but rather he was explaining the reason the man was evil from his youth. The OT is a partial revealing of the Truth, with many types and shadows of what was reveal in the NT. When John the Baptist proclaimed the coming of the Messiah this Truth had been revealed by the prophets in the OT. If you really want to have an interesting study compare the types and shadows in the OT to the revelations in the NT.

 

[Grazer]

Genesis 8:21
"... and the Lord said to Himself, “..., for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth;..."

I don't see that Paul was adding anything to the OT but rather he was explaining the reason the man was evil from his youth. The OT is a partial revealing of the Truth, with many types and shadows of what was reveal in the NT. When John the Baptist proclaimed the coming of the Messiah this Truth had been revealed by the prophets in the OT. If you really want to have an interesting study compare the types and shadows in the OT to the revelations in the NT.

Mmm, bit of a stretch since again, many look to clarify in a similar manner to Paul yet get shot down because they're explanation is not in scripture. Well neither was Pauls.

Think this is going to be a subject I put on hold until I've read up on it more along with whether the holy spirit has stopped working since the bible was brought together.

 

[Deborah13]

Mmm, bit of a stretch since again, many look to clarify in a similar manner to Paul yet get shot down because they're explanation is not in scripture. Well neither was Pauls.

Think this is going to be a subject I put on hold until I've read up on it more along with whether the holy spirit has stopped working since the bible was brought together.

Now you have proposed something very different. I do not believe that the Holy Spirit does not give revelation today. I believe the scripture that says in the end times there will be visions and dreams. I also believe that the end times began immediately after Jesus death on the cross. I may be wrong about this and there are those on this forum who know better than I about when the end times did or will commence.
But I KNOW for a Fact that the Holy Spirit is still very active in revelation given in dreams. But I am sure there are naysayers who will say that the dreams were not from God and that the were produced by satan even though both were very scriptural and of a nature of revealing undebated Truth in all regular Christian doctrine.

 

[Grazer]

Now you have proposed something very different. I do not believe that the Holy Spirit does not give revelation today. I believe the scripture that says in the end times there will be visions and dreams. I also believe that the end times began immediately after Jesus death on the cross. I may be wrong about this and there are those on this forum who know better than I about when the end times did or will commence.
But I KNOW for a Fact that the Holy Spirit is still very active in revelation given in dreams. But I am sure there are naysayers who will say that the dreams were not from God and that the were produced by satan even though both were very scriptural and of a nature of revealing undebated Truth in all regular Christian doctrine.

Yeah as I said though, I don't see any scriptiual support for Pauls revelation that all of humanity will suffer the consequences of Adam and eves actions but you've given me somethings to ponder

 

[Agape]

You're answering my question with another one but that's okay, will try to answer yours.

There is nothing in genesis that says the entire human population for all time will suffer the consequences of what Adam and eve

Depends how we read Genesis 3.

Genesis 3:11 And He said, “Who told you that you were naked?
Question: Is this still happening? Do we notice it when we are naked?

Genesis 3: 16 “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children;"
Question: do you know a woman who can "naturally" give birth without pain?

Genesis 3:16 Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.â€
Let us set aside doctrine and work on nature only.
Question: does a woman have naturally more muscle mass than a man her age?

Genesis 3: 19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken; For dust you are, And to dust you shall return.â€
Question 3a: do we still need to work to eat bread?
Question 3b: do humans die?

Based on your answers to the above question, do humans suffer from the consequences of Adam's sin?

We can verify after the fact with 2 Peter but it appears Paul has added to OT account. I notice no one is refuting the claim that its not in genesis.

Those who claimed that Paul "added to the OT" must prove that we don't die, don't need to work to eat, that females are physically as strong as men, that men can get pregnant, women can give birth without pain, and that we don't need to wear clothes.

 

[Grazer]

I have to prove no such thing, that's absurd. The passages you've put relate to Adam and Eve alone, it makes no mention about the rest of humanity throughout history. Further on with the story of Cain, its very clear Cain has a choice and God is saying he can make that choice. It says nothing about him not being able to make that choice because of what his father did. What Paul is suggesting simply isn't there in the text until he brings it in. He's going beyond what the text says, especially if he believes Adam to be an historical person.

 

[Agape]

I have to prove no such thing, that's absurd. The passages you've put relate to Adam and Eve alone, it makes no mention about the rest of humanity throughout history.

I beg your pardon! Humans still suffer from the consequences of Adam's sin shown in Genesis 3 and you call that absurd.

Further on with the story of Cain, its very clear Cain has a choice and God is saying he can make that choice. It says nothing about him not being able to make that choice because of what his father did. What Paul is suggesting simply isn't there in the text until he brings it in. He's going beyond what the text says.

scripture please.

 

[Grazer]

I beg your pardon! Humans still suffer from the consequences of Adam's sin shown in Genesis 3 and you call that absurd.

No, I called your statement that I have to prove what you say I have to absurd. I see Genesis as an explanation based on the culture of why we are seperated from God. I don't need what Paul says to understand that something is not right with this world.

scripture please.

Genesis 4:7 NIV

If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it."

 

[Agape]

Further on with the story of Cain, its very clear Cain has a choice and God is saying he can make that choice. It says nothing about him not being able to make that choice because of what his father did.

If you quoted Paul's actual words, that would help us compare what he states with what you claim is not in Genesis.

 

[Deborah13]

I have to prove no such thing, that's absurd. The passages you've put relate to Adam and Eve alone, it makes no mention about the rest of humanity throughout history. Further on with the story of Cain, its very clear Cain has a choice and God is saying he can make that choice. It says nothing about him not being able to make that choice because of what his father did. What Paul is suggesting simply isn't there in the text until he brings it in. He's going beyond what the text says, especially if he believes Adam to be an historical person.

I'm a little confused by your Cain statement. Cain had a choice as did Abel. Because they were born with the a nature that if just let go will naturally fullfil it's own desires first does not mean that there is not the ability to choose. Simple example, two small children both want the same toy, before they are taught to share or (Susie had it first) their first desire is to please themselves, we are all born self-centered. But as the child matures they can make the choices to do what is not just for self. Abel chose to served God. Cain did not, Cain was self-serving and then stiff necked when the Lord tried to talk to him about it.

 

[P31Woman]

But as I'm trying to point out, what makes Paul more God inspired than anyone else?

Again, Paul was not inspired. It's the words of scripture that are inspired. BTW, all words of scripture are "equal" in their inspiration. The OT is not "more" inspired than the NT.

Why do you keep repeating that same false claim that Paul (human) was inspired?

2 Tim. 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Peter says in 2 Pet. 1:21, "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Also Paul claims it was Jesus Christ who taugh him not the Holy Spirit. That is why Paul is called an Apostle of Jesus Christ.

 

[Grazer]

Again Paul was not inspired. It's the words of scripture that are inspired.

Why do you keep repeating that same false claim?

Because I don't think it's false in that I don't see a difference?

 

[Grazer]

I'm a little confused by your Cain statement. Cain had a choice as did Abel. Because they were born with the a nature that if just let go will naturally fullfil it's own desires first does not mean that there is not the ability to choose. Simple example, two small children both want the same toy, before they are taught to share or (Susie had it first) their first desire is to please themselves, we are all born self-centered. But as the child matures they can make the choices to do what is not just for self. Abel chose to served God. Cain did not, Cain was self-serving and then stiff necked when the Lord tried to talk to him about it.

Exactly, I agree. My point is (and the question I guess I'm asking) is did we have that before Adam and Eve disobeyed God? The passage from Genesis I quoted suggests we did and that Adams actions had no bearing on how Cain decided. If Paul is right and through Adam sin entered this world and now we're incapable of choosing right, I would expect to see something in Genesis to that effect and I just don't.

I think I'm going to bow out of this one for a bit, I've got a lot to think about on this one and I need to focus on some other projects as well

I'll be back though

 

[P31Woman]

Because I don't think it's false in that I don't see a difference?

Inspired means God Breathed.

Scripture teaches us it's the WORDS of SCRIPTURE not human beings that are God Breathed.

If you want to discuss "inspiration" you MUST talk about the words of scripture.

 

[Sinthesis]

In the context of original sin, I'm asking where Paul got it from, at the time he only had the OT, there's no need to reference NT as scripture in the context of that discussion. I don't believe the holy spirit has stopped working and I don't believe its merely a case of being sinful that leads people taking different interpretations. If Paul got it from the holy spirit then great, but at least acknowledge that he didn't get it from scripture and with that in mind, why do you insist everything is supported with scripture?

Paul got it from scripture. The consequences of original sin are that mankind took it upon himself to determine what is right or wrong instead of accepting Gods judgement, and for this he is expelled from the garden and kept from the tree of life. If you can cross back into eden to eat from the tree of life via your own effort, then congratulations, you are not stained by original sin.

Gen 3:22 ¶ And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 - Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24 - So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.​

 

[Grazer]

If Paul got it from those passages, he's interpreted them. Why is that any different to what anyone else does?

 

[P31Woman]

If Paul got it from those passages, he's interpreted them. Why is that any different to what anyone else does?

The Bible is not written by Paul....it's written by God......from Genesis to Revelation...... God breathed scripture.

2 Timothy 3:16a

All scripture is God Breathed....

2 Peter 1

20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

 

[reba]

2.5: Respect each others' opinions. Address issues, not persons or personalities. Give other members the respect you would want them to give yourself.


We consider Paul's writings to be part of the inspired Word of God. This is a Christian forum and any posting(s) that is intended to purposely distort Paul's writings will not be tolerated.



A friendly reminder

 

[P31Woman]

F.F. Bruce on the New Testament Canon


“One thing must be emphatically stated. The New Testament books did not become authoritative for the Church because they were formally included in a canonical list; on the contrary, the Church included them in her canon because she already regarded them as divinely inspired, recognizing their innate worth and generally apostolic authority, direct or indirect.”

- F.F. Bruce (The New Testament Documents

, p. 22)


PART OF A BOOK REVIEW;
The Canon of Scripture by F.F. Bruce

How did the Christian Bible come to be? How did each of the sixty-six books it contains come to be included as scripture? Who made these decisions and when? The Canon of Scripture by F. F. Bruce seeks to answer these questions in a complete treatise on the subject. Bruce explores the history behind the formation of the Bible and unfolds a very complex, lengthy process: the formation of the canon of scripture. This review will not cover all the ground the author does, but instead will briefly summarize the overall process.
---------------

Not only does Bruce thoroughly detail the process of acceptance of the New Testament writings, he also shows how conflicts and tensions within the early church seemed to force a canon of scripture to be formed. Heretical teachings and Gnostic writings started to abound. The church was under persecution. How was a Christian to know what writings were authoritative? It was pressures such as these that caused the formation of a definitive list to be recognized and affirmed.

The criteria of canonicity, as summarized by Bruce, were apostolic authority, antiquity (early writing), orthodoxy, wide acceptance, traditional use and inspiration. However, these are factors that are shown to be the case after the fact; they were not rules to be followed at the time. Rather, these factors all played a role in the acknowledgement of New Testament scripture.​

http://www.apologetics315.com/search/label/F.F.Bruce

___________________

 

[Deborah13]

Exactly, I agree. My point is (and the question I guess I'm asking) is did we have that before Adam and Eve disobeyed God? The passage from Genesis I quoted suggests we did and that Adams actions had no bearing on how Cain decided. If Paul is right and through Adam sin entered this world and now we're incapable of choosing right, I would expect to see something in Genesis to that effect and I just don't.

I think I'm going to bow out of this one for a bit, I've got a lot to think about on this one and I need to focus on some other projects as well

I'll be back though

Ah ha, now I see where you're going, I think anyway.
I don't know exactly what verses you are refering to in Genesis 1 and don't want to assume so I will have to wing it here and just give my thoughts.
1. Adam and Eve had free will, one of the attributes of being made in God's image
2. Free will is not sin or evil
3. When they exercised their free will in disobediance to what God had commanded and ate of the tree "knowledge of good and evil/sin" entered their minds not free will.
4. They passed on this same mind (nature) if you will to their children and .....that old man, the self-serving nature of man

When Paul talks about man not being able to do any good in the flesh he is talking about God's righteous ways. In other words people may do some very good things in the world, feeding the poor, etc. but they are of no value to them or God in the kingdom of God. Why? Because they did them to please themselves not to glorify God or to represent Him in the world. Their motives are of the flesh, not of the Spirit.
Say you get your girlfriend a beautiful bouquet of flowers in order to get her to agree to go to say a sporting event with you. Manipulation, self-centered. If you do it just because you want her to feel special and loved, expecting nothing in return your motive is pure.
Paul is always teaching about walking in the spirit not in the flesh because the flesh is self-serving. Now I would say that Paul was as close to having his fleshy soul renewed by the Holy Spirit as anyone alive but he wanted to show that all have a fleshy soul that needs to be sancitfied. He was very careful not to appear as a Pharisee that thought he was better than anyone else.