Which act was greater? - Adam or Christ?

[St. SteVen]

A question for you... did God perform the first sacrifice providing skins for Adam and Eve?

Some claim that. But why would God sacrifice to himself? To atone for what?

In a similar vein, what was the problem with Cain's sacrifice?

/

 

[Aunty Jane]

A question for you... did God perform the first sacrifice providing skins for Adam and Eve?

Since you asked…..there is no scripture that says God sacrificed any animals to provide clothing for Adam and his wife. He is the Creator, and just as angels materialized, and appeared to God’s earthly servants fully clothed, so God could have simply produced the clothing he provided for them, as life outside the garden was going to be tough going….”thorns and thistles” would grow….things that could tear the flesh, and the ground was cursed, so the long garments of skin would have provided some protection, as well as modesty.

Farming the land for food was something they had never had to do before. They only had to walk in the garden and fresh fruit of many varieties was freely available to them……they soon became aware of how much they had sacrificed themselves, for no gain at all.

If there are no specifics, then we cannot make categorical statements about anything, but we can speculate. However, a speculation is not a fact if the Bible does not confirm it.

The first sacrifice recorded in the Bible was from Cain and Abel…..it was also the catalyst for the first murder.

 

[St. SteVen]

The first sacrifice recorded in the Bible was from Cain and Abel…..it was also the catalyst for the first murder.

Not sure sheep are on the cattle list. - LOL

/

 

[Cyd]

Some claim that. But why would God sacrifice to himself? To atone for what?

In a similar vein, what was the problem with Cain's sacrifice?

/

I think Cain's was not accepted because it was not "first fruits" my opinion

 

[Cyd]

The first sacrifice recorded in the Bible was from Cain and Abel…..it was also the catalyst for the first murder.

Actually the first time sacrifice is used is not till Jacob in Ge 31:54

 

[St. SteVen]

I think Cain's was not accepted because it was not "first fruits" my opinion

Very good, I agree.
Most claim it was because it was not blood.
But Cain was not a keeper of sheep. Nor his brother, as he claimed. - LOL

/

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Christ had the greater act.

However, not like in Adam all die. To be made alive in Christ one must receive his gift. God will not force his salvation on anyone

My own personal belief just by life and my own experiences. It’s like asking which is greater love or wrath? Which is greater to being high on pride or humble? How many would be honest that to be humble or weak or vulnerable will make you doormats? Because that is what this world teaches. There is something about this world that convinces you to be vulnerable is weak. That it’s better to be hard and resilient and to tuck away any failure or shame or need. That one thing stands out. That one thing that is taught; to “be resilient” is better. Even in marriage “authority” and “power” is better than being the submissive. (Meaning this is the teaching). Is that a lie? Consider the power struggle.

I think of Paul who said “when the time came God separated me from my mothers womb” and that is when the gospel of grace come to Paul to then take to others. So to me…it is always God who decides when and where and how there is fruit, since He is the One who gives the increase. No other but God gives the increase. Never is it…mans choice to receive increase, but “the when” there is increase is always God’s. But to me while He gives the increase and decides when the time has come, He also leads in a way that isn’t forcing anyone but “guidance”…so I do get this “God will not force anyone”. however I do also consider God knows perfectly “when the time has come” to separate (as Paul said) one and leads His children to bear fruit. The word says “the woman will be saved by the fruit” in the mother which is above gives(gave) Birth to Christ, that seed which remains and bears fruit. God has to decide when that fruit increases? Yes, there is planting. Still—God gives fruit. No?

So for me I wish I could ask Paul how much he had to do with choosing and accepting…and how much it was by the grace of God that he became Paul and not Saul. I wish I could ask Paul what his part was. I think he would say that he persecuted the body of Christ, that was Saul’s part. But at the same time to ask Paul how invasive or “grab you by the neck” the gospel was when Paul received the Revelation of Jesus Christ…I do think Paul would say “it was unexpectedly gentle and peaceful and forgiving and merciful.”
Yet if I asked then, “so you made the choice to accept the gift?” I still think Paul would shake his head and say “no He chose me. By mercy and the Grace of God, Jesus Christ revealed Himself to me so that I could take that same mercy and grace of His and show it towards others. really…I had no choice in the matter but to follow since He showed me what I did to my brother Stephen and how I had harmed the body of Christ. There really was no choice for when the Revelation of Christ come, sin slayed me and I was brought to my knees … it being “no longer I Live, but it is Christ who Lives in me.” Yet this world teaches to be anything like Christ will get you killed or make you unsuccessful so I don’t see how anyone at all would choose to “accept” the gift which is said to be no gift at all, to be endowed with “His qualities”. It really isn’t taught. More so “authority” is taught. Not submission because submissive is “weak” and “lowly”…better is to be endowed with “power” and “authority”. I truly don’t see how any convinces themselves they would willingly choose “submission” over “authority” unless God first gives the power to accept the gift of humility. I truly don’t see where not one person can boast that they “accepted it” willingly first, without first God giving the the strength “to accept it”.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

My own personal belief just by life and my own experiences. It’s like asking which is greater love or wrath? Which is greater to being high on pride or humble? How many would be honest that to be humble or weak or vulnerable will make you doormats? Because that is what this world teaches. There is something about this world that convinces you to be vulnerable is weak. That it’s better to be hard and resilient and to tuck away any failure or shame or need. That one thing stands out. That one thing that is taught; to “be resilient” is better. Even in marriage “authority” and “power” is better than being the submissive. (Meaning this is the teaching). Is that a lie? Consider the power struggle.

I think of Paul who said “when the time came God separated me from my mothers womb” and that is when the gospel of grace come to Paul to then take to others. So to me…it is always God who decides when and where and how there is fruit, since He is the One who gives the increase. No other but God gives the increase. Never is it…mans choice to receive increase, but “the when” there is increase is always God’s. But to me while He gives the increase and decides when the time has come, He also leads in a way that isn’t forcing anyone but “guidance”…so I do get this “God will not force anyone”. however I do also consider God knows perfectly “when the time has come” to separate (as Paul said) one and leads His children to bear fruit. The word says “the woman will be saved by the fruit” in the mother which is above gives(gave) Birth to Christ, that seed which remains and bears fruit. God has to decide when that fruit increases? Yes, there is planting. Still—God gives fruit. No?

So for me I wish I could ask Paul how much he had to do with choosing and accepting…and how much it was by the grace of God that he became Paul and not Saul. I wish I could ask Paul what his part was. I think he would say that he persecuted the body of Christ, that was Saul’s part. But at the same time to ask Paul how invasive or “grab you by the neck” the gospel was when Paul received the Revelation of Jesus Christ…I do think Paul would say “it was unexpectedly gentle and peaceful and forgiving and merciful.”
Yet if I asked then, “so you made the choice to accept the gift?” I still think Paul would shake his head and say “no He chose me. By mercy and the Grace of God, Jesus Christ revealed Himself to me so that I could take that same mercy and grace of His and show it towards others. really…I had no choice in the matter but to follow since He showed me what I did to my brother Stephen and how I had harmed the body of Christ. There really was no choice for when the Revelation of Christ come, sin slayed me and I was brought to my knees … it being “no longer I Live, but it is Christ who Lives in me.” Yet this world teaches to be anything like Christ will get you killed or make you unsuccessful so I don’t see how anyone at all would choose to “accept” the gift which is said to be no gift at all, to be endowed with “His qualities”. It really isn’t taught. More so “authority” is taught. Not submission because submissive is “weak” and “lowly”…better is to be endowed with “power” and “authority”. I truly don’t see how any convinces themselves they would willingly choose “submission” over “authority” unless God first gives the power to accept the gift of humility. I truly don’t see where not one person can boast that they “accepted it” willingly first, without first God giving the the strength “to accept it”.

If a man straightway brought plenty bread enough to feed an entire stadium of starving people. In defense of the man’s character is it necessary for me to prove the man’s character by asserting “Yes, this man brought enough to feed all but he won’t force anyone to willingly break the bread and put it in their mouth and chew”. It seems like the whole stadium would be filled with a thanksgiving and standing ovation that this man brought enough for All. That that alone would speak of His character and not how many “willingly” broke the bread and put it in their mouth. The only reason I can see for why take the focus of the character of the man who brought enough for all and to put it on picking through the baskets given out to see who willingly took of the basket what was provided by the man who distributed the food….the only reason would be to take the focus off of His character and put it on those “good eaters” who willingly “didn’t waste it”. See, it becomes more about what’s in the baskets or left overs then about the character of the One who brought enough for all. We say it’s defending God’s character in “yeah He offered to all, but He doesn’t force any.” “Yes “all” BUT They have to be willing.” Yet still the man brought enough for the whole is His character not those who sort through to speak of those who wasted any of the food nor whether the man made people to eat, or any of that is our squabbles over the baskets instead of the Giver of the baskets where their is no denying The character of He gave the free gift to ALL. Because if He would have only brought a free gift for some …think of the man bringing bread to a stadium then we would say …”who…what man comes to a full house of starving people and doesn’t bring enough for all. Now those in the stadium and fighting over the baskets of food given out freely as a gift. There’s an uproar in the stadium, fist fights, stealing and wrestling of people fighting with one another because of the limited supply.” Then that becomes the character of the man ..well hell, he didn’t plan ahead and bring enough food for everyone. Hey, I know what we will do! Let’s stand in the aisles of the stadium and shout out “if you are going to waste the food and not eat it get on this side! If your willing to eat the bread this man brought…get on this side! Because there is not enough for all of you!”

 

[Eternally Grateful]

My own personal belief just by life and my own experiences. It’s like asking which is greater love or wrath? Which is greater to being high on pride or humble? How many would be honest that to be humble or weak or vulnerable will make you doormats? Because that is what this world teaches. There is something about this world that convinces you to be vulnerable is weak. That it’s better to be hard and resilient and to tuck away any failure or shame or need. That one thing stands out. That one thing that is taught; to “be resilient” is better. Even in marriage “authority” and “power” is better than being the submissive. (Meaning this is the teaching). Is that a lie? Consider the power struggle.

I think of Paul who said “when the time came God separated me from my mothers womb” and that is when the gospel of grace come to Paul to then take to others. So to me…it is always God who decides when and where and how there is fruit, since He is the One who gives the increase. No other but God gives the increase. Never is it…mans choice to receive increase, but “the when” there is increase is always God’s. But to me while He gives the increase and decides when the time has come, He also leads in a way that isn’t forcing anyone but “guidance”…so I do get this “God will not force anyone”. however I do also consider God knows perfectly “when the time has come” to separate (as Paul said) one and leads His children to bear fruit. The word says “the woman will be saved by the fruit” in the mother which is above gives(gave) Birth to Christ, that seed which remains and bears fruit. God has to decide when that fruit increases? Yes, there is planting. Still—God gives fruit. No?

So for me I wish I could ask Paul how much he had to do with choosing and accepting…and how much it was by the grace of God that he became Paul and not Saul. I wish I could ask Paul what his part was. I think he would say that he persecuted the body of Christ, that was Saul’s part. But at the same time to ask Paul how invasive or “grab you by the neck” the gospel was when Paul received the Revelation of Jesus Christ…I do think Paul would say “it was unexpectedly gentle and peaceful and forgiving and merciful.”
Yet if I asked then, “so you made the choice to accept the gift?” I still think Paul would shake his head and say “no He chose me. By mercy and the Grace of God, Jesus Christ revealed Himself to me so that I could take that same mercy and grace of His and show it towards others. really…I had no choice in the matter but to follow since He showed me what I did to my brother Stephen and how I had harmed the body of Christ. There really was no choice for when the Revelation of Christ come, sin slayed me and I was brought to my knees … it being “no longer I Live, but it is Christ who Lives in me.” Yet this world teaches to be anything like Christ will get you killed or make you unsuccessful so I don’t see how anyone at all would choose to “accept” the gift which is said to be no gift at all, to be endowed with “His qualities”. It really isn’t taught. More so “authority” is taught. Not submission because submissive is “weak” and “lowly”…better is to be endowed with “power” and “authority”. I truly don’t see how any convinces themselves they would willingly choose “submission” over “authority” unless God first gives the power to accept the gift of humility. I truly don’t see where not one person can boast that they “accepted it” willingly first, without first God giving the the strength “to accept it”.

I think sometimes we read to much into things, and it then becomes confusing. not only to us but others.

I think one of the best examples we have is by Jesus in John 3. when he mentio0ns Moses lifting a serpent. If we go back to the actual scene in Numbers 21. we see a great example of how one is saved.

Num 21: 8 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and it shall be that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, shall live.” 9 So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it on a pole; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.


if we dig deep we see this

1. Whoever was bit had a death sentence. They could not save themselves. they were without hope.
2. Jesus gave them hope. The hope was the serpent on the pole.
3. Those who looked lived.
4. Those who did not died.

so why did people not look?

1. They did not believe
2. They did not think they were actually going to die
3. They thought they could save themselves

Why did the people look?

1. They understood they were dead. without hope
2. They understood they could not save themselves
3. They trusted that God would save them if they believed. (had faith)

Jesus said that just as the serpent was risen, He to would be lifted up. that whoever believes will not die. and receive eternal life.

why would we look up? We believe, because we have admitted that they are dead, and are without hope.

why do they not look. They do not believe they need saved, they think they can save themselves. they do not believe in God.


the decision to believe or not believe is ours. Its not Gods..

 

[VictoryinJesus]

the decision to believe or not believe is ours. Its not Gods..

Ok.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

the decision to believe or not believe is ours. Its not Gods..

Ezekiel 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby you have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

…make you a new heart and a new spirit… it’s like that joke where man claims he can make his own man. Apart from God. And he starts with dirt or dust…and God says “whoa wait a minute, go get your own dirt.”

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Ezekiel 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby you have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

…make you a new heart and a new spirit… it’s like that joke where man claims he can make his own man. Apart from God. And he starts with dirt or dust…and God says “whoa wait a minute, go get your own dirt.”

so are you saying the people in Israel did not chose to look to the serpent. And did not chose to not look up?

Why would Jesus tell us if we want to be born again we had to look to him risen on the cross in faith to be born again

 

[VictoryinJesus]

so are you saying the people in Israel did not chose to look to the serpent. And did not chose to not look up?

It’s similar to the look up for your redemption draws near in the New Testament. This is only my opinion but I’ve read that passage for a long time hearing it as those whose heart are failing them are about to get a whooping. The waves and seas roaring, and men’s hearts failing them for looking after those things coming upon the earth …but now I see Him coming or walking upon the sea coming to Peter who is sinking to drowning. I no longer think “those hearts failing them out of fear of looking upon those things which are coming upon the earth” is condemnation but His “see, Look up! I am coming to save you whose hearts are failing out of fear from those things coming upon the earth”. Big difference between where I thought they were the evil ones whose hearts were failing looking after those things coming upon the earth ..and seeing His coming appearance is to not destroy them but instead “look up, your redemption draws near” …I don’t know much about the serpent raised up in the wilderness but I do think it has to tell of Christ but if it’s a “me” against “you” result in who chooses …I think I’ve missed the point “their hearts failing them out of fear of those things coming upon the earth” point being….”they are failing” and not some notable stock of “we got it right!”

Why would Jesus tell us if we want to be born again we had to look to him risen on the cross in faith to be born again

The circumcision of Christ ….it’s a cut made without hands. No where do I read man willingly chooses to circumcise himself. We might say Jesus was willing but to me it wasn’t the flesh but the Spirit within Him given of God that was or is willing. From the start it is God’s doing in giving His Spirit.

To me there is something in “made without hands”. It’s like in the OT being told “go make you a new heart, and a new spirit” YET “God will remove the heart of stone and give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you”. It’s an age old debate of man retains his decision and is better than another in his willingness to have chosen Him first.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It’s similar to the look up for your redemption draws near in the New Testament. This is only my opinion but I’ve read that passage for a long time hearing it as those whose heart are failing them are about to get a whooping. The waves and seas roaring, and men’s hearts failing them for looking after those things coming upon the earth …but now I see Him coming or walking upon the sea coming to Peter who is sinking to drowning. I no longer think “those hearts failing them out of fear of looking upon those things which are coming upon the earth” is condemnation but His “see, Look up! I am coming to save you whose hearts are failing out of fear from those things coming upon the earth”. Big difference between where I thought they were the evil ones whose hearts were failing looking after those things coming upon the earth ..and seeing His coming appearance is to not destroy them but instead “look up, your redemption draws near” …I don’t know much about the serpent raised up in the wilderness but I do think it has to tell of Christ but if it’s a “me” against “you” result in who chooses …I think I’ve missed the point “their hearts failing them out of fear of those things coming upon the earth” point being….”they are failing” and not some notable stock of “we got it right!”

I think is was shown in the text.

They were dead. nothing could save them

if they chose to look, they lived, if they did not. they died.

It is not a me against you, it is a status. Do we acknowledge we are dead. or do we ignore it and keep living as we please.. and deny God.

The circumcision of Christ ….it’s a cut made without hands. No where do I read man willingly chooses to circumcise himself. We might say Jesus was willing but to me it wasn’t the flesh but the Spirit within Him given of God that was or is willing. From the start it is God’s doing in giving His Spirit.

To me there is something in “made without hands”. It’s like in the OT being told “go make you a new heart, and a new spirit” YET “God will remove the heart of stone and give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you”. It’s an age old debate of man retains his decision and is better than another in his willingness to have chosen Him first.

Did the people chose to look up or not?

You have to allow God to circumcise you. He is not just going to do it.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I think sometimes we read to much into things, and it then becomes confusing. not only to us but others.

You are right saying we sometimes read to much into things, and it becomes confusing. Not only to us but to others.

I was reading a yahoo post about the tsunami warning in the Philippines from the earthquake. In the comments someone asked “why doesn’t the Bible mention tsunami’s?”

Someone responded just a verse to let them know the Bible does speak of tsunami’s. Psalm 89:9 Psalm 107:25 For he commands, and raises the stormy wind, which “lifts up the waves” thereof.

To which they questioned “ok, do winds drive tsunami’s then?”

I wanted so bad to respond that “every wind of doctrine” does, drowning men in perdition. Waves pushed about upon the sea, tossed to and fro driven by the wind of every doctrine. But see, I would be blamed as reading too much into things, where it becomes confusing. Not only to us but to others too. But even so, what I think makes it confusing is saying that verse is God talking about His lifting up Tsunami’s.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You are right saying we sometimes read to much into things, and it becomes confusing. Not only to us but to others.

I was reading a yahoo post about the tsunami warning in the Philippines from the earthquake. In the comments someone asked “why doesn’t the Bible mention tsunami’s?”

Someone responded just a verse to let them know the Bible does speak of tsunami’s. Psalm 89:9 Psalm 107:25 For he commands, and raises the stormy wind, which “lifts up the waves” thereof.

To which they questioned “ok, do winds drive tsunami’s then?”

I wanted so bad to respond that “every wind of doctrine” does, drowning men in perdition. Waves pushed about upon the sea, tossed to and fro driven by the wind of every doctrine. But see, I would be blamed as reading too much into things, where it becomes confusing. Not only to us but to others too. But even so, what I think makes it confusing is saying that verse is God talking about His lifting up Tsunami’s.

I would not have read that as a tsunami either.. They are not caused by winds..

 

[VictoryinJesus]

You have to allow God to circumcise you. He is not just going to do it.

The stone has been rolled away from the mouth of the tomb but man has to walk out of that open tomb. Why do some not come forth out of the tomb? More familiar with captivity instead of freedom? I ask myself this every day. Regardless, man didn’t roll the stone away of man’s own free will. Instead it was too heavy for man to roll away. That is just my opinion. I get you see it differently.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The stone has been rolled away from the mouth of the tomb but man has to walk out of that open tomb. Why do some not come forth out of the tomb? More familiar with captivity instead of freedom? I ask myself this every day. Regardless, man didn’t roll the stone away of man’s own free will. Instead it was too heavy for man to roll away. That is just my opinion. I get you see it differently.

Jesus answered the question.

John 3: 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

To answer your question. God rolled away the rock (the cross)

we have to chose to walk out or stay in darkness.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Jesus answered the question.

John 3: 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

To answer your question. God rolled away the rock (the cross)

we have to chose to walk out or stay in darkness.

You said: “We have to choose to walk out or stay in darkness.” It doesn’t matter how long we go back and forth …to me it’s similar to the question is the glass have empty or half full. I don’t see how a blind man can choose the circumcision of Christ to remove his blindness, saying to Christ “I allow you to circumcise my eyesight ” …because he (realistically Imo)doesn’t know he is in blindness until God allows him to see he is blind. …until he “sees” he is blind. a point where he is able or “granted” to “see” he is blind. I think of the verses concerning the vail which remains still, however when they turn to God “the vail” is removed. I do see your point in “when they turn” but still to me God gets them to the turning knowing best “the how” and “when”. Like the glass half full or half empty…I get you say the opposite that no we have to first choose to allow it…but something about “we have to first allow it” sounds like “all power and authority” is given to man to be the dictator of “a man or woman must first allow it” …”he must first allow Christ to draw him out of the darkness” or “I decide when to allow God to remove the vail in Christ” …sounds like man retaining all power and authority he has to allow God first. I see the opposite in God has the power and authority for example “He has granted” John 6:65 And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."

Luke 8:10 And He said, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest they are told in parables, so that while seeing they may not see, and while hearing they may not understand.


Although there is all the verses where “Pilate” granted them to come remove the body of Jesus. …so maybe man is the one who first grants God the power and authority… (imo) man thinks so not realizing without God first giving the body of Jesus for Pilate to “grant the removal of” man would not have anything “to grant” or be “willing” of, except of first God gave His Son…see, now this debate of man’s first must be willing is pointless because First God has to provide what man says man has to be willing to receive. If God didn’t move first, there wouldn’t be anything to discuss man having to be “willing of” …if there was no circumcision of Christ made without hands …man’s “willingness” would be pointless and dead.

 

[St. SteVen]

Excerpt from the OP. (and added illustration)

Did the results of the Fall of humankind supersede the results of the Atonement?
Was the act of the one man (Christ) insufficient to cover the act of the other man? (Adam)
Which act was greater? - Adam or Christ?

Which of these illustrates which act was greater?
Adam = Christ (equal to)
Adam > Christ (more than)
Adam < Christ (less than)

Helpful video in post #1.

]