Charles Spurgeon's Sanity Litmus Test (are you insane?)

[Stranger]

A baby is not at the age of accountability.i



I said before these last posts that you hold a valid POV and I wasn't willing to debate it in any way.

Adam's sin has been passed on to all mankind.
We suffer from this by being born with the sin nature.
Thus we suffer from the sin of Adam, and it has been passed but we are not responsible for it personally. Although we all pay for it since Adam was the "head" of man and represented man and thus all mankind is held responsible for his sin, but we did NOT cause the first sin.

"original sin is the corruption of the nature of every man. Whereby man is in his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth contrary to the spirit."
John Wesley, Works volume V

"Confess this need to God [for the spirit filled life]. You are not responsible for having inherited this plague of moral infection [O.S.]
but you are responsible to avail yourself of God's cleansing cure."
Dynamics of Discipling
Original Sin is the Basis for Moral Conflict from Within
page 121

I know a baby is of not of the so-called age of accountability. So what? Did you read what I said?

Well, you define what all believe original sin to be. Whether we caused it is immaterial. We are guilty of it. By imputation. For some reason you don't want to say that. We are guilty of Adams sin by imputation.

Stranger

 

[Richard_oti]

<snip>
I learned that if Adam had scolded her and had not eaten, the fall never would have occurred because of Eve not knowing about the covenant.

Yet, how did Eve reply to the serpent? (cf Gen 3:2-3)

<snip>

Adam made the mistake of eating when Eve offered the fruit to him.

Adam was there with her.

 

[Helen]

This is the post I was speaking about.

No. I didn't mean it in a sad way.
I've known Jesus over 40 years now.
He came to me one day in my Whitstone NY home.
In my kitchen. I was washing dishes at the time.
Have never used a dishwasher since then, even though one of my homes had two.

What I meant is that I won't be learning anything new from now on.
Unless it's some small thought that never came to mind before.
My doctrinal beliefs are set...The house is built on the foundation of Jesus.

God is done with me. Not in a bad way. In a good way.
I've learned in whom I trust.
I've accepted what needs to be accepted.
I no longer question my last question to which there is no answer.

That's all I meant.
But pray for me anyway.
I need it.

This is the part which stood out...your whole post is quoted above.

QUOTE:-
"What I meant is that I won't be learning anything new from now on.
Unless it's some small thought that never came to mind before.
My doctrinal beliefs are set...The house is built on the foundation of Jesus. "

End quote...

 

[GodsGrace]

I know a baby is of not of the so-called age of accountability. So what? Did you read what I said?

Well, you define what all believe original sin to be. Whether we caused it is immaterial. We are guilty of it. By imputation. For some reason you don't want to say that. We are guilty of Adams sin by imputation.

Stranger

It's OK to understand what you say the way you say it.
I can't say anything else.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yet, how did Eve reply to the serpent? (cf Gen 3:2-3)

Adam was there with her.

Genesis 3:2-3
She didn't know the consequences of eating from the tree.
If she had, she probably would not have eaten of the fruit.
Adam is the one who should have understood the consequences, and he went ahead and ate anyway.

She believed the serpent in 3:4-5
She believed the serpent more than God.

Adam, OTOH, believed God, but he let his wife tempt him and he gave in to it. Eve is less responsible than Adam. The serpent was wise and spoke to Eve because he knew he could convince her. Maybe if it had gone to Adam first, Adam could have resisted. (we'll never know).

 

[Stranger]

It's OK to understand what you say the way you say it.
I can't say anything else.

You could say we are guilty of Adams sin by imputation.

Stranger

 

[Richard_oti]

Genesis 3:2-3
She didn't know the consequences of eating from the tree.
If she had, she probably would not have eaten of the fruit.

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which YHVH God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden?

Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat: 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

Adam is the one who should have understood the consequences, and he went ahead and ate anyway.

She believed the serpent in 3:4-5
She believed the serpent more than God.

Adam, OTOH, believed God, but he let his wife tempt him and he gave in to it. Eve is less responsible than Adam. The serpent was wise and spoke to Eve because he knew he could convince her. Maybe if it had gone to Adam first, Adam could have resisted. (we'll never know).

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

 

[GodsGrace]

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which YHVH God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden?

Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat: 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.




Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

The serpent was assuring her she would not die, and in fact the didn't in a way that was visible to them.
Their spiritual death was not immediately visible till Adam also ate.
Physical death took a long time.

Adam was with her and did not stop her...this is the problem.

The most important fact here is that the covenant was made with Adam.
I thought this was common knowledge.

What say you??

 

[Richard_oti]

The serpent was assuring her she would not die, and in fact the didn't in a way that was visible to them.
Their spiritual death was not immediately visible till Adam also ate.
Physical death took a long time.

Adam was with her and did not stop her...this is the problem.

Indeed, for one who was right there.

However, she knew, as is evident in her reply to the serpent.

The most important fact here is that the covenant was made with Adam.
I thought this was common knowledge.

What say you??

The 10 were given to Israel through Moses. Like Eve, they were not given directly to you.

What happens should you choose to disregard the 10?


I don't pay much attention to the way people try to slice and dice things to relieve themselves of it.

 

[GodsGrace]

Indeed, for one who was right there.

However, she knew, as is evident in her reply to the serpent.




The 10 were given to Israel through Moses. Like Eve, they were not given directly to you.

What happens should you choose to disregard the 10?


I don't pay much attention to the way people try to slice and dice things to relieve themselves of it.

??
How does this relieve anyone of anything??
God asked Adam,
Adam referred Him to Eve,
Eve referred to the serpent.
The blame was passed down, just as we do.
But one was responsible.
Adam.

Take it or leave it.

 

[GodsGrace]

Indeed, for one who was right there.

However, she knew, as is evident in her reply to the serpent.




The 10 were given to Israel through Moses. Like Eve, they were not given directly to you.

What happens should you choose to disregard the 10?


I don't pay much attention to the way people try to slice and dice things to relieve themselves of it.

Oh. I see.
God gave the commandments to Moses, but for Everyone.
The commandments were specifically for the people,,,they even said they would obey them.

There was no one else around for the Edenic cov.
It was only between God and Adam.

 

[bbyrd009]

Adam, OTOH, believed God, but he let his wife tempt him and he gave in to it. Eve is less responsible than Adam. The serpent was wise and spoke to Eve because he knew he could convince her. Maybe if it had gone to Adam first, Adam could have resisted. (we'll never know).

a statement is said to be made there about how satan attacks a single person, through their "female" side, or their emotions iow i guess

 

[DPMartin]

You mean if I'm intelligent and rich I can't go to heaven!!

My brother is an intellectual, he's saved.
I know what you mean, it's the spirit that counts.
But it's OK to be intelligent too.

Rich persons have a difficult time getting to heaven, not because they're rich, but because they have no need to stop and think where their goods come from, who to thank. They have no need to think about God.

This is why God is many times found when we hit bottom. It makes us stop and reflect on exactly what life is all about.

what did Jesus say about the rich going to heaven? and wasn't that because they value their possession much more then heaven? the intellectuals do the same they value their own knowledge much more then the Knowledge of God. if you spend any amount of time on philosophy web sites you'd see this and much of the collage educators in the US berate Christianity and Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ openly in the classes according to students.

 

[GodsGrace]

what did Jesus say about the rich going to heaven? and wasn't that because they value their possession much more then heaven? the intellectuals do the same they value their own knowledge much more then the Knowledge of God. if you spend any amount of time on philosophy web sites you'd see this and much of the collage educators in the US berate Christianity and Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ openly in the classes according to students.

I believe I said the above.
I agree about what professors do these days, they tell students WHAT to think, not HOW to think. And the kids listen...

But there are also philosophers who are Christian.
And rich persons who are Christian.
Maybe if money doesn't keep us from God, something else might.
I do agree though, that it's easier to find God when one has little and can think more about the realities of life and God.
(I think I said this)

So because it is more difficult for a rich man to go to heaven, does not mean that he cannot. With God everything is possible.

 

[Richard_oti]

??
How does this relieve anyone of anything??
God asked Adam,
Adam referred Him to Eve,
Eve referred to the serpent.
The blame was passed down, just as we do.
But one was responsible.
Adam.

Take it or leave it.

IOW: "I am right" so shut up! <chuckle>

Eve's reply reveals that she knew full well. If only one was responsible, why was Eve also removed from the garden, given a couple added things, and also consigned to return to dust?

Without "law", can her "sin" be imputed? (cf Rom 5:13).

 

[Richard_oti]

Oh. I see.
God gave the commandments to Moses, but for Everyone.
The commandments were specifically for the people,,,they even said they would obey them.

There was no one else around for the Edenic cov.
It was only between God and Adam.

They were given to "Israel". Yes, those of "Israel" agreed to them. The Mosaic Covenant was between YHVH and Israel, and all those who chose to bind / join themselves to YHVH.

You were not around, you have not chosen to join yourself to the Mosaic Covenant. So how can you only accept a only a small part of the Mosaic Covenant, of which, is really only 9. As it states in Hebrews: "As God did from His".

Unless of course, perhaps in your opinion "Eve" was an "unbeliever". Had Adam and Eve had children while still in the garden, would the "do not touch / do not eat" have applied to them?

To attempt to slice and dice this is absurd from my perspective when Eve's reply demonstrates that she knew full well. And yes, Adam was right there with her and did nothing.

Yeah, I'm playing the devil's advocate a little.

 

[GodsGrace]

IOW: "I am right" so shut up! <chuckle>

Eve's reply reveals that she knew full well. If only one was responsible, why was Eve also removed from the garden, given a couple added things, and also consigned to return to dust?

Without "law", can her "sin" be imputed? (cf Rom 5:13).

No. Take it or leave it means I don't think we should argue this forever.
It has nothing to do with salvation or the nature of God and that's what I'm willing to debate.

Eve was removed from the Garden because by then sin had entered into the world and God cannot stand sin so they both had to leave the Garden so that they could not eat of the Tree of Life and never die and live forever in a sinful state.

I'm sure you know about the Covenants. Some are unconditional.
The Edenic Covenant was condition. On their obedience to what God had commanded --- do not eat of the one tree. They disobeyed.
Covenants with conditions have blessings and curses.

Because of Adam's sin we are all destined to die. By the first sin death entered and now affects everything, including nature. For humans it's both spiritual and physical, and moral.

According to the N.T. sin cannot be imputed without law.
Romans 5:13

What we keep skirting around is if we are STILL imputed sin after the Mosaic Covenant. I've been saying that we are not. Adam's sin cannot be imputed to us since we are not personally responsible for it.
Romans 4:8
However, this is a view that can be held legitimately. That belief is that since Jesus' righteousness is imputed to us then Adam's sin can also be imputed - in fact they balance each other out.

This is not my view, by that I mean what I was taught, and with which I agree. God does not hold us PERSONALLY responsible for Adam's sin, although the effects are passed on to us. His sin is propogated to us, not imputed.

If we were held personally responsible for such a serious sin, any baby dying would have to go to hell.

Would you care to explain how my last sentence would not be true of you were correct??

I think you're just giving me a difficult time!

But I really cannot explain it better than this...

 

[GodsGrace]

They were given to "Israel". Yes, those of "Israel" agreed to them. The Mosaic Covenant was between YHVH and Israel, and all those who chose to bind / join themselves to YHVH.

You were not around, you have not chosen to join yourself to the Mosaic Covenant. So how can you only accept a only a small part of the Mosaic Covenant, of which, is really only 9. As it states in Hebrews: "As God did from His".

Unless of course, perhaps in your opinion "Eve" was an "unbeliever". Had Adam and Eve had children while still in the garden, would the "do not touch / do not eat" have applied to them?

To attempt to slice and dice this is absurd from my perspective when Eve's reply demonstrates that she knew full well. And yes, Adam was right there with her and did nothing.

Yeah, I'm playing the devil's advocate a little.

Paragraph 2.
I can only accept part of the OC, of which we really only keep 9, because Jesus abolished the ceremonial and civil law.
It was decided between Paul and Peter that Christians did not have to become Jewish FIRST before becoming Christian. I mean gentiles of course. And that Christians did not have to be circumcised.
Jesus never spoke of circumcision in an important way or it would have been made part of the gospel.
John 7:21-23 would have been His opportunity to say that it was necessary.

Acts 15:1
Acts 15:5
Acts 15:9-10

Gentiles and new Christians were also allowed to eat all animals.
This is the ceremonial law which was abolished. Also animal sacrifices.

As far as the Sabbath.
It's stated in the N.T. that the first day of the week was kept for celebrating the breaking of bread, or communion.
Acts 20:7

Also, Jesus has become our day of rest.
However, this is not a command. Paul taught that we can worship when we feel it is right and not to hold anyone back.

It does seem to me that the day of resting has been changed.


P.S. as far as Eve standing right there with God...
I could be standing right near someone who steals something.
That does not make ME responsible for that sin.

 

[Stranger]

Genesis 3:2-3
She didn't know the consequences of eating from the tree.
If she had, she probably would not have eaten of the fruit.
Adam is the one who should have understood the consequences, and he went ahead and ate anyway.

She believed the serpent in 3:4-5
She believed the serpent more than God.

Adam, OTOH, believed God, but he let his wife tempt him and he gave in to it. Eve is less responsible than Adam. The serpent was wise and spoke to Eve because he knew he could convince her. Maybe if it had gone to Adam first, Adam could have resisted. (we'll never know).

Eve did know the consequences as well as Adam. Eve was deceived, as the woman is the weaker vessel. Adam was not. Eve was just as responsible, but Adam was the head of the human race.

Adam did not succumb to the temptation as Eve did, and ate for different reason. He ate knowing exactly what would happen.

Stranger

 

[GodsGrace]

Eve did know the consequences as well as Adam. Eve was deceived, as the woman is the weaker vessel. Adam was not. Eve was just as responsible, but Adam was the head of the human race.

Adam did not succumb to the temptation as Eve did, and ate for different reason. He ate knowing exactly what would happen.

Stranger

I agree with your last sentence.
Eve knew but I don't know if she knew the consequences as Adam did.

If Eve was just as responsible, could you explain to me...
Genesis 3:6-7

Why weren't their eyes opened after Eve ate?

And what was the reason Adam ate?

P.S. The woman is the weaker vessel?
Have YOU ever had a baby?
LOL