What if Adam had not sinned ?

[glorydaz]

I know that, we were talking about Adam being made innocent but he was made sinful in the beginning !



When Adam was created, he was a sinner in need of Christ and His Righteousness !

After he sinned it was later revealed to him that the saviour woulf come from his seed according to the flesh..Gen 3:15

Adam was NOT a sinner when he was created. He was NOT MADE sinful in the beginning.

God said this after the creation of man....IT WAS VERY GOOD.
God would not EVER call sin "good"

Gen. 1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."

 

[savedbygrace57]

glory

Adam was NOT a sinner when he was created.

Not a practising one at that time, but he was a sinner, that is why he sinned !

 

[francisdesales]

I guess we have a disconnect here. What is it you define sinful as? I regard sin as a seperation from God as in a direction or path away from the True Character of God. All was built upon faith. Therefore Adam being made sinful does not compute.

Agree. It is obvious that God and Adam had a relationship in the Garden before the Fall. Adam was created in supernatural grace, a loving relationship with God. There would be no need for a Savior without sin. However, God's intent was to bring about a greater "Adam" in Jesus Christ. Thus, the question, really, is not worth arguing over. This was all part of God's plan to bring about a greater good as a result of sin.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

glory



Not a practising one at that time, but he was a sinner, that is why he sinned !

No, he wasn't a sinner until he sinned...

 

[jasoncran]

if thou beatest thine head agaisnt thee wall of calvin thou willest get a shiner! not to mention a headachest.

 

[savedbygrace57]

No, he wasn't a sinner until he sinned...

No that is when he was declared to be a sinner ! Rom 5:19

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,


That word made is the greek word
kathistēmi and means:

to set, place, put

a) to set one over a thing (in charge of it)
b) to appoint one to administer an office
c) to set down as, constitute, to declare, show to be
d) to constitute, to render, make, cause to be
e) to conduct or bring to a certain place
f) to show or exhibit one's self
1) come forward as

by his disobdience he showed or exhibit himself to be a sinner, he and all whom he represented ! He just now became a practising sinner. He just then came forward as a sinner..

 

[glorydaz]

No that is when he was declared to be a sinner ! Rom 5:19

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,


That word made is the greek word
kathistēmi and means:

to set, place, put

a) to set one over a thing (in charge of it)
b) to appoint one to administer an office
c) to set down as, constitute, to declare, show to be
d) to constitute, to render, make, cause to be
e) to conduct or bring to a certain place
f) to show or exhibit one's self
1) come forward as

by his disobdience he showed or exhibit himself to be a sinner, he and all whom he represented ! He just now became a practising sinner. He just then came forward as a sinner..

Simply untrue.

Ez. 18:20 - "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

God looked at man and the rest of creation, and said, "It is Good."

Not much to add to the SbyG, for you know we shouldn't add to the Word of God.

 

[francisdesales]

No that is when he was declared to be a sinner ! Rom 5:19

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,

That does NOT say Adam was created a sinner... 2

We were made "sinners" because of Adam's sin. Not because HE was a created a sinner. Simply put, if Adam was made in sin, then Jesus Christ, to be FULLY man, must have also been a sinner...

Think about it:

Jesus took on flesh and the form that Adam possessed before the Fall. This must not have been "a sinner". And by grammar, it becomes obvious that a person only becomes a "sinner" once they actually sin!

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

if thou beatest thine head agaisnt thee wall of calvin thou willest get a shiner! not to mention a headachest.

Me thinketh you are correcteth.

 

[childeye]

No that is when he was declared to be a sinner ! Rom 5:19

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,


That word made is the greek word
kathistēmi and means:

to set, place, put

a) to set one over a thing (in charge of it)
b) to appoint one to administer an office
c) to set down as, constitute, to declare, show to be
d) to constitute, to render, make, cause to be
e) to conduct or bring to a certain place
f) to show or exhibit one's self
1) come forward as

by his disobdience he showed or exhibit himself to be a sinner, he and all whom he represented ! He just now became a practising sinner. He just then came forward as a sinner..

He exhibited that he was malleable. He listened to the woman.

 

[ivdavid]

I haven't gone through the entire thread...just the last few posts...and this is what I've gathered.

On one side, there are people who believe that men sin because they are sinners - ie one commits sin because that's what his own nature, which is sinful, is capable of. I believe this myself.

On the other side are the people who believe men are sinners because they sin - ie the state of one's nature depends on and is affected by his (free) choices to commit or not commit sins.


What's at stake for both sides are probably these -

The former group wishes to stress upon the power of sin in the flesh to enslave all mankind - and accordingly the glory of God in overcoming such power of sin out of His own grace and not based on what man in the flesh does/doesn't do. The flesh must not receive any glory whatsoever of having done any part of anything good - for it amounts to denying God's glory in such good works to the extent of attributing that much, however small it may be, to the flesh. (Here, flesh and "self" are synonymous.)

The latter group sees the former beliefs to imply that every man's destiny is predetermined and that man himself cannot alter his path to salvation/condemnation - and consequently, God happens to be the sole determiner of who will be saved and who won't, dependent on His will alone - which again implies that God wills some and not all to be saved, that He loves some differently from others - which seems to deny the "impartial" attribute of God.

Accordingly, whether one's nature is inherently sinful or not, does make a difference. I see that the last few posts here specifically enquire upon when man's nature became inherently sinful, if indeed it is so. That man was created with a sinful nature has been proposed - and has drawn criticism from both groups. I think the reasoning behind such a proposal (from a proponent of Group 1 beliefs) is that man must already be corrupted and must already have a sinful nature to then commit the first sin. But this implies that God created something "not good" and this is vouched as proof of Group 2 beliefs and the denial of Group1 beliefs.

I personally agree with the view here that man's nature was created corruptible but not corrupt itself. Man was not created sinful. "Sin" entered the world and corrupted man's nature to be sinful and led him to commit the first sin - this seems to keep the Group1 beliefs intact. To see only God and man in the picture and not the effects of the works of the devil is to miss a crucial part of the picture. This is the strong one who takes man as his goods - requiring a stronger One than he to bind him and to redeem man.

 

[savedbygrace57]

iv

But this implies that God created something "not good"

But that's all it does is imply it. The fact is however Adam was Created good, very good, for God's redemptive purpose to bring Glory to Himself through the redemptive work of Christ. Redemption from Sin, So yes, God created Adam very Good and a sinner !

I personally agree with the view here that man's nature was created corruptible but not corrupt itself. Man was not created sinful.

I see your point there and it is more advanced than most, but if it was created corruptible, then it was sinful. God's Ideal is incorruptible !

"Sin" entered the world and corrupted man's nature to be sinful and led him to commit the first sin

Adam sinned because his nature was sinful, and temptation from satan manifested it. When Christ was tempted by satan, He showed that He was incorruptible and not sinful !

 

[savedbygrace57]

glory

Simply untrue.

You can deny it all you like, I stand firm with scripture..

 

[ivdavid]

if it was created corruptible, then it was sinful.

I think here lies the difference. Something corruptible does not itself imply it is sinful.
1) Something corruptible implies it can be corrupted.
3) Something corrupted implies it is sinful.
4) Something sinful commits sin.

There must be a step 2) between the above premises 1) and 3) -
2) The corruptible ie what can be corrupted, must be corrupted.

Similarly, I believe
1) God created a corruptible nature in man.
2) "Sin" corrupts this nature of man.
3) Man's nature is corrupted, hence sinful.
4) Something sinful commits sin.

Adam sinned because his nature was sinful, and temptation from satan manifested it.

I do not limit satan's role to merely tempt - he actively corrupts in the flesh through deception. And God actively restores and establishes truth in the spirit.

You say that "Adam sinned because his nature was sinful" - and I agree with that. But why aren't you considering the fact that the deceptive work of the devil was not merely a temptation - it was the very thing that made man's nature sinful.

1) God created a corruptible nature in man.
2) "Sin", a deceptive work of the devil, corrupts man's nature to be sinful.
3) Man's corrupted and sinful nature is tempted by the lust of the flesh, lust of the eye and pride of life from within ie by the sinful "self", and from without ie by the devil and the world that passeth away - to which temptation it always succumbs.
4) Hence man's sinful nature always commits sin.

When Christ was tempted by satan, He showed that He was incorruptible and not sinful !

That's true. But what I've stated as my position is just as true even here. Since Jesus is incorruptible, He was never corrupted. Since He was never corrupted, He was never sinful. The link is between "corrupted" and "sinful" - not "corruptible" and "sinful".

Which of the premises stated here would you disagree with?

 

[francisdesales]

iv

But that's all it does is imply it. The fact is however Adam was Created good, very good, for God's redemptive purpose to bring Glory to Himself through the redemptive work of Christ. Redemption from Sin, So yes, God created Adam very Good and a sinner !

Double talk...

God didn't create a sinner. If so, then Jesus was a sinner by association of merely being man. If Adam was created in sin, then Jesus took up that form and the letter of Hebrews is incorrect about Jesus and sin.

I see your point there and it is more advanced than most, but if it was created corruptible, then it was sinful. God's Ideal is incorruptible !

Man was not created corruptible. It was only AFTER sin that God said Adam would die...

Adam sinned because his nature was sinful,

Where does Scriptures state that Adam was created with a sinful nature? Where does the Bible state that human nature is sinful before the Fall? Again, this theology ignores the fact that Christ became man. ENTIRELY. Not just in the fashion of the Docetist. He took on OUR nature. Thus, you are stating that Christ was born in sin...

Regards

 

[mondar]

if thou beatest thine head agaisnt thee wall of calvin thou willest get a shiner! not to mention a headachest.

Jason, that was not a good thing to say. Anyway, SBG does not represent Calvinism on this issue.

 

[ivdavid]

Man was not created corruptible. It was only AFTER sin that God said Adam would die...

Here, corruptible is being used to mean,"that which can be corrupted; susceptible to corruption" - not "perishable" as the Bible uses it.

 

[mondar]

I am going to throw my 2cents in. I would agree that Adams nature was corruptible. I would also agree that man became a sinner by nature at Adams fall. Mankind became children of wrath by nature (Eph 2:3) and spiritually dead (Eph 2:1) at the fall.

On the other hand, in the sovereignty of God, Adam was going to fall. God had a purpose for Adams fall, and that was for his glory. The issue of all creation is the glory of God. God's glory is manifest by mankind and the angelic realm seeing all the attributes of God. So then, the love of God must be manifest, and the justice of God must be manifest. I guess the justice of God could be manifest because of the rebellion of Satan and many angels, but God chose also to manifest his justice in the judgment of sinners in the realm of mankind. For God to manifest his wrath against sin, sin has to exist. So then, in the sovereignty of God, Adam had to fall so that God can manifest his wrath, judgment, and justice. God also manifest his love in redeeming a people for himself.


I would not agree that God created Adam with a sinful nature, but I would also agree Adam was not created with a holy nature, or a righteous nature. Of course no one here is saying that. The term innocence is the common term to discribe Adams nature, and I think that term works. Adam was not holy or righteous, he was not by nature a sinner, but he was unconfirmed in either righteousness or evil. He did not have a knowledge of good or evil when created. His nature was changed when he received this knowledge of good and evil from a perspective of rebellion against God. From that moment, spiritual death occurred. This takes us back to the statements of Ephesians 2 and Romans 5. In Adam all died. Mankind died spiritually not at creation, but at Adams sin. It was at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that we all became rebels against God.

So then, to answer the question in the OP, if Adam had not sinned, then God would not receive the glory of manifesting his love toward rebels, and manifesting his wrath and justice toward sinners.

I am saying that while Adam was not created with a sin nature, in the providence and sovereignty of God, God intended for the fall to happen all along. The fall was not some accident where God said "oops, I did not mean for that to happen, now for plan B."
---Now for a little fun--- Satan had been cast out of heaven during his rebellion. Can someone remind me where God cast Satan? Was it to the pit, or was it the planet kolub? How did that nasty little serpent get in the garden anyway?

If Adam was created morally neutral or innocent, was it God that tipped the scales toward rebellion? As God did this, he did not in any way participate in Adams temptation or rebellion. But neither was God caught off guard. He knew what would happen, and he wanted it to happen so that he could manifest his glory by judging rebels and sinners, and also to manifest his love in saving other rebels and sinners.

 

[francisdesales]

I am going to throw my 2cents in. I would agree that Adams nature was corruptible. I would also agree that man became a sinner by nature at Adams fall. Mankind became children of wrath by nature (Eph 2:3) and spiritually dead (Eph 2:1) at the fall.

On the other hand, in the sovereignty of God, Adam was going to fall. God had a purpose for Adams fall, and that was for his glory. The issue of all creation is the glory of God. God's glory is manifest by mankind and the angelic realm seeing all the attributes of God. So then, the love of God must be manifest, and the justice of God must be manifest. I guess the justice of God could be manifest because of the rebellion of Satan and many angels, but God chose also to manifest his justice in the judgment of sinners in the realm of mankind. For God to manifest his wrath against sin, sin has to exist. So then, in the sovereignty of God, Adam had to fall so that God can manifest his wrath, judgment, and justice. God also manifest his love in redeeming a people for himself.


I would not agree that God created Adam with a sinful nature, but I would also agree Adam was not created with a holy nature, or a righteous nature. Of course no one here is saying that. The term innocence is the common term to discribe Adams nature, and I think that term works. Adam was not holy or righteous, he was not by nature a sinner, but he was unconfirmed in either righteousness or evil. He did not have a knowledge of good or evil when created. His nature was changed when he received this knowledge of good and evil from a perspective of rebellion against God. From that moment, spiritual death occurred. This takes us back to the statements of Ephesians 2 and Romans 5. In Adam all died. Mankind died spiritually not at creation, but at Adams sin. It was at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that we all became rebels against God.

So then, to answer the question in the OP, if Adam had not sinned, then God would not receive the glory of manifesting his love toward rebels, and manifesting his wrath and justice toward sinners.

I am saying that while Adam was not created with a sin nature, in the providence and sovereignty of God, God intended for the fall to happen all along. The fall was not some accident where God said "oops, I did not mean for that to happen, now for plan B."
---Now for a little fun--- Satan had been cast out of heaven during his rebellion. Can someone remind me where God cast Satan? Was it to the pit, or was it the planet kolub? How did that nasty little serpent get in the garden anyway?

If Adam was created morally neutral or innocent, was it God that tipped the scales toward rebellion? As God did this, he did not in any way participate in Adams temptation or rebellion. But neither was God caught off guard. He knew what would happen, and he wanted it to happen so that he could manifest his glory by judging rebels and sinners, and also to manifest his love in saving other rebels and sinners.

I agree with much of what you said - esp. about the "oops" part... I think we would say that Adam was created with the ability to control his fleshy passions, something we don't seem to be able to do. Perhaps one would call this "innocence", but if you define sin as a separation between God and man and holiness is maintaining that relationship, I would say there was some original holiness lost at the fall that we call "original sin", and without which attaining this original holiness (through Christ), we cannot enter a relationship with God.

God seems to work great things through human sin. Look to the cross.

Regards

 

[childeye]

Around God's riddle men do fiddle,
But if they seek gain so as to be vain,
instead of more higher they become little.