Jesus Nature?

[LittleBear]

This is the intent of my heart to stay focused on the prize set before me.  That prize is the high calling of Jesus Christ.  I will not worry with the mark I missed yesterday.  I will press on not looking to the right or the left knowing that it is a daily fight and in the end it will be lonely, but the reward will be tremendous to those who perservere to the end.

Me too! Christ in You the hope of glory...that is the only way.

[Kat]

Hi sonofone,

Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit, that puts Him in a whole other catergory than we are in.  Whereas Adam, though not having a mother, was still created with the same nature as the rest of mankind.

Here are a couple of emails that I thought was was speaking to this same subject.
I got this out of some emails that were tacked on the end of the 'Trinity' article.

http://bible-truths.com/trinity.html --------------

Jesus Christ had a physical body and could be seen, whereas God does not have a physical body (God is SPIRIT) and God cannot be seen as He is INVISIBLE.
Jesus does not "consist" of the "substance" of God Who is invisible, but rather Jesus is the VISIBLE IMAGE of the INVISIBLE GOD. God does not bear this visible substance which can be seen, therefore He send His Son in a VISIBLE form that can be seen (and heard).  
If the Father were to take to Himself a Form or a Substance then what we would see is CHRIST. Christ IS the express image, form, (or substance if you insist) of God His Father. However, the difference is that when Christ takes on all of the Father's form, image, character, etc., etc., we can see and hear and touch Him with our hands, but we still cannot see, hear or touch our Heavenly Father with our physical hands. Jesus said that when we SEE Him we SEE the Father even though the Father is INVISIBLE! Granted, this is a little higher than theology 101.

http://bible-truths.com/email5.htm#Adam ---------------

[Ray Replies]

Dear Barb:

As with ALL major doctrines, the Christian Church has not a clue as to this subject of "original sin."

The doctrine taught is that Adam and Eve were PERFECT (after all, could God create something that was NOT perfect? Were they not created in God's OWN IMAGE)?

Well, they were "perfect" in the same way that Satan (a liar and a murderer from the very beginning) was perfect -- PERFECT FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH GOD CREATED THEM.

Adam and Eve ALREADY had lust and disobedience in their hearts BEFORE the serpent approached them. Eve LUSTED BEFORE she ever actually ate of the fruit. Small technicality for our Christian friends.

Now then let's read Rom. 5:12 together:  

"Wherefore, as by one man [Adam] sin entered into the world, and death by sin: and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."

Now then, WHERE does that verse say that Adam's "sin was passed on to all in the world?"  Was "sin" passed on? NO! "DEATH" was passed on.

Are we condemned because of "ADAM'S SIN?"   NO! "...for that ALL have sinned."  All have sinned their OWN individual sins, they are not condemned because of Adam's sin, but they did receive "death" from Adam in that "mortality" WAS passed on to the whole human race, because Adam did NOT partake of the "TREE OF LIFE," but rather sinned which brought the penalty God promised of "death."

A better translation helps our understanding:  

"Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, and thus death passed through into all mankind on which all sinned..." (Concordant Literal New Testament).

Rom. 5:19 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners..."

They were made sinners by VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT THEY RECEIVED ADAM'S MORTALITY [DEATH] NOT HIS SIN. We sin because we are mortal [dying]. We have NO SPIRITUAL STRENGTH to combat our carnal, sinning, DYING, FLESH. Hence all sin because THEY ARE MORTAL. Adam sinned because HE WAS MORTAL. "It is appointed unto ALL men once to die"

But there are TWO DEATHS -- spiritual and physical. Jesus Christ said: "Let the DEAD bury the DEAD."  Two kinds of "dead" in ONE VERSE. The SPIRITUALLY DEAD, who bury the PHYSICALLY DEAD!

Hope that helps your understanding a little better. One more point: Any human being from any generation in the history of the human race, if put in the garden under the same conditions as Adam, would have ALSO SINNED THE SAME WAY. Adam sinned not because he could have chosen NOT TO SIN, but because he was made too spiritually weak to avoid or conquer sin. God MADE Adam subject to VANITY and CORRUPTION (and "not willingly"). See Romans 8:18-23).

God be with you,

Ray

[sonofone]

I appreciate all the info and feedback you all are giving.Kat when reading Rays perspective on Adam that you provided,it raises one fundamental question.Is Ray saying that Adam was created just like us? That he was created with this unstoppable carnal nature that you and I have,which would have given him no chance at not sinning?

[Kat]

sonofone,  why do you think that Adam was not created just like us, and thus giving him no chance at not sinning? 

Rom 11:32  For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that He might have mercy upon all.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[sonofone]

Thanks for the question Kat. It has always been my understanding that Adam and Eve were created sinless. That is not the same as being perfect,just had not sinned therefore no sin nature. I have always believed that sin was introduced into the world by Adam's disobedience to God's command. I was under the impression that the carnal nature of man was activated once they ate of the fruit. I thought that's what God meant when he said that there eyes were opened.I thought it was this sin that separated them from God. Before this happened they were in fellowship with God,afterwards they were not.I could go on but I think you get where I am coming from.By the way am I to take by your question that Ray teaches the opposite?

[Kat]

Hi sonofone,

Maybe this part of Ray's article A of 'The Myth of Free-Will Exposed' will explain what Ray teaches concerning Adam and Eve eating of the forbidden fruit.

http://bible-truths.com/lake15.html ---------------------------------

IN THE BEGINNING/IN THE GARDEN

What was the first historically recorded choice of our first parents? We read of Mother Eve that:

"...she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat..." (Gen. 3:6).

But was this the first choice and the first sin attributed to our Mother Eve? No, it wasn't the first. It was not even the second, or the third choice.

It is generally taught that Adam and Eve were spiritually perfect immediately after their creation, seeing that it says,

"And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good..." (Gen. 1:31).

Never mind the fact that even poisonous snakes were also "very good." Of course everything God made was "good." It was, in fact, even "perfect"—perfect, that is, for the purpose for which it was created.

But did our first parents have perfect and good spiritual character of heart when God completed them? Absolutely not! Far from it! They were as carnal-minded as any two people who have ever lived.

The Scriptures show us that Eve committed every known category of sin there is, before she ever ate of the forbidden fruit. This one should knock your socks off. It knocked mine off when I first discovered it.
v
v
v
LOVE NOT THE WORLD—THREE CATEGORIES OF SIN

"Love NOT the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father IS NOT IN HIM. For [for means 'because'] ALL that is in the world,

1. the lust of the FLESH,

2. the lust of the EYES,

3. and the pride of LIFE,

is not of the Father, but is of the world.

And the world passes away, and the lust thereof: but he that does the will of God abides for ever" (I John 2:15-17).

Notice that "...ALL that is in the world..."—all the sins of the world, have their origin in one of these three categories of sin that proceeds "out of THE HEART." Not out of the "will" or out of the "mind," but "out of THE HEART." The "will" and the "mind" are subject to the "heart," and not the other way around. The heart is not subject to the will, neither is the heart subject to the mind, but rather both of these are subject to the birthplace of all human functions—the HEART!

Simply and unarguably, Jesus states as a fact, that all evil thoughts and sins proceed OUT OF THE HEART.

Now, with all that said, let's prove once and for all that Mother Eve and Adam were (1) NOT spiritually perfect in any way shape or form, BEFORE they actually ate of the forbidden fruit, and (2) neither did they sin and then partake of the forbidden fruit through the operation of something called "free will."

"And when the woman saw that the tree was GOOD FOR FOOD... Gen. 3:6:

"...lust of the FLESH..." (I John 2:15)
 
and that it was PLEASANT TO THE EYES... Gen. 3:6:

"...lust of the EYES..." (I John 2:15)

and a tree to be DESIRED TO MAKE ONE WISE Gen. 3:6:

"...the PRIDE OF LIFE" (I John 2;15)

Eve committed EVERY CATEGORY OF SIN THERE IS IN THE WORLD, before... BEFORE she actually ate of the forbidden fruit.

ALL of Eve's evil thoughts of pride, vanity, lust, greed, disobedience, and finally thievery proceeded NOT from Eve's supposed "free will," but rather from out of her HEART. And the only reason these sins could come out of her heart is because THEY WERE ALREADY IN THERE FROM THE BEGINNING. BEFORE Eve actually ate of the forbidden fruit, she committed every category of sin in the world. And need I remind us that we were also, ALL IN ADAM, before he ate of the tree (I Cor. 15:22). Will we deny our own eyes and the Scriptures we have just read?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[sonofone]

Hey Kat, thanks for the link I have read these before,but thanks just the same. This is the problem I have. I don't agree with Ray on this matter. I don't understand how Adam and Eve could have been spiritually and physically alive if they were created in sin. Sin brings death,spiritual and physical. If they were already sinful before they ate the fruit why were they not already spiritually disconnected from God?We are born spiritually dead and physically dying.This was not the case for them. At worst they were spiritually neutral,meaning they were capable of sinning but had not sinned or activated the law of sin.I mean no disrespect to anyone here I hope this does not cause any problems for me here.

[rocky]

I am not sure I fully understand why Adam was not deceived, and Eve was??

How come Adam, a man of flesh, wasn't deceived??  Didn't the serpent have power to deceive Adam if he was flesh??

There's something in there in the relationship to the church (Eve), pain with child birth (our spiritual birth), and judment upon Adam=death. 

Here's some scriptures i am pondering

Eve:

Rom 7:11 for sin taking occasion through the commandment deceived me, and through it killed me.

ignorant?? same as deceived??

Luk 23:34 Then Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do."[8] And they divided His garments and cast lots.

Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God.

1Co 14:38 But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant. [5]

Heb 5:2 He can have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness.

Eve was deceived, she was ignorant??


Adam:

2Co 2:11 lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.

Heb 10:26 For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,


??

any ideas??

[sonofone]

I'm sorry but you have to accept the scriptures for what they say,and I sympathize with you. Furthermore if there is no free will than this is the way God intended it to be. Eve deceived not Adam. Man over Woman it is the order of creation and the result of sin.

[rjsurfs]

The subject of this thread is interesting... and has been on my mind of late.  This thread has somewhat wound through several topics so forgive me if I too am off-topic.  I enjoyed Gregor's first reply as well as Kat's response regarding the Nashville convention.  I was blessed to be there for sure.

Regarding the nature of Jesus in regards to what Kat posted (a quote from Ray's Nashville visit):

And God said, I will DIE! 
But God can't die, He's eternal, He has immortality, deathlessness.  If you have immortality you can't die. 
So He made a Son.  He made Him great.  And to show us how great He was, He said, let Me show you what I can do when I make a Son.  Ok, Create the universe first, now become a man, and now die.

Now the Christian Church teaches that Christ is one person with two natures, one divine and one human.  They teach that these natures are not mixed together and not seperable....  And this is where heresy snowballs with the perversion of the character of God... one lie builds upon another.  Jesus died.  He was dead.  In Sheol... where there is no perception.

At their loss or inability, the Church does not believe or want to believe what Jesus saves us from much less what he actually did.  He died.  He was dead.  And dead means dead, not really alive somewhere else.  Dead.

[skydreamers]

Thanks for the question Kat. It has always been my understanding that Adam and Eve were created sinless. That is not the same as being perfect,just had not sinned therefore no sin nature. I have always believed that sin was introduced into the world by Adam's disobedience to God's command. I was under the impression that the carnal nature of man was activated once they ate of the fruit. I thought that's what God meant when he said that there eyes were opened.I thought it was this sin that separated them from God. Before this happened they were in fellowship with God,afterwards they were not.I could go on but I think you get where I am coming from.By the way am I to take by your question that Ray teaches the opposite?

Hi sonofone,

Here's something interesting to consider:

nakedness is said to represent "sin" or the "sinful nature":

Revelation 3:17-18
For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see.

But there is nothing that can separate us from the love of God including our nakedness:

Romans 8:35-39
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?....For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, NOR ANYTHING ELSE in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Just because Adam and Eve were "naked" (in the sinful nature=carnal) does not mean they were separated from God.

They were naked before and were not ashamed, they had not yet eaten of the tree so what could they have really known or understood....how could they have known they were naked...as opposed to what?  They were not ashamed because they were not aware of being naked or what that even meant ...they needed to eat of the tree to even begin to understand the "law of opposites or contrasts".

Once they ate, they became aware of their own condition...the same condition they had been in before.  When you are called by God to be a Christian the long road to understanding your true "condition" begins.  The secular world has no awareness of this, and even most if not all of the "called" even understand their true condition.  It is when God calls you out of the world and it's systems, including the religious systems, you begin to see the "beast" inside of you, that is, your true condition, the same one you had all along.  And then you truly see the need to be clothed by white garments (Jesus) to cover your nakedness (sin).  There are not too many that can see or accept that humanity is actually innately bad rather than good.

Adam and Eve became aware of their inherent carnality (hostility towards God) and this resulted in fear of God, thus they hid from Him.

Before eating the fruit:

Genesis 2:25
And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

After eating the fruit:

Genesis 3:9-11
But the LORD God called to the man and said to him, "Where are you?" And he said, "I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself."  He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?"

Romans 5:13
for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law

This is where I think Gregor might be right.  Adam and Eve were "in a sinful nature" before eating of the tree.  God's command to not eat was the first law, perhaps, or first introduction to the prinicipal of law, because without law there can be no transgression of the law

1 John 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Romans 5:20
And the Law came in that the transgression might increase....

(you cannot be saved until you are first lost...)

The carnal nature was always there....God provides a law:  "do not eat" and this brings the sinful nature to light....

Just as the 10 commandments could not be kept by a carnal people, neither could God's commandment to "not eat" be kept by Adam and Eve...

So it seems there is such a thing as being carnal...in a sinful nature...but not being aware...and as long as you are not aware/conscious of your nature it is not counted as sin.  How can you know something is "wrong" if you don't know "right" from "wrong".  Adam and Even were unaware and unknowledgable before they ate.  But once they became knowledgable of good and evil, they were left with no excuses.

James 4:17
So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

Now you could say, Adam knew that God had said "not to eat of the tree".  But how did he know that to "oppose" God was wrong....how did he really know or understand the goodness of God...as opposed to what?  How did he know it was wrong to disobey God?

All of this comes down to the way God is fashioning for himself a family that is in his image....time, experience and circumstance....summed up by living a life in the flesh which is in direct opposition to God.  In this way we learn about evil and learn to hate it, and learn about goodness and learn to love it....

That's how I see it anyways.  There is no learning without contrasts, struggles and adversities.  And where there is no learning, there simply is not growth.

Peace to you,
Diana

[dawnnnny]

Wow Diana, awesome response. 
Its interesting that I know all these scriptures, yet when they are combined to "teach" a concept, they become so much clearer.
I could feel God's spirit all over it. 
Thank you for sharing!

[indianabob]

Well said Diana,

Thank you for your thoughts and expressions of love.

indianabob

[Gregor]

I don't understand how Adam and Eve could have been spiritually and physically alive if they were created in sin. Sin brings death,spiritual and physical. If they were already sinful before they ate the fruit why were they not already spiritually disconnected from God?We are born spiritually dead and physically dying.

Greetings sonofone,

I'm not sure if you've had any resolve in understanding on this yet, but here are a few more scriptures (with my thoughts) to consider in this dichotomy: NJKV

Ecc. 12:7 Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit (living, not dead) will return to God who gave it.

Job 34:13-15 Who gave Him charge over the earth? Or who appointed Him over the whole world? If He should set His heart on it, if He should gather to Himself His Spirit and His breath, All flesh would perish together, and man would return to dust.

Acts 14: 15-17 and saying, "Men (idol worshippers), why are you doing these things? We (Paul and Barnabas) also are men with the same nature (sinful, carnal, flesh) as you, and preach to you that you should turn from these vain things (idols) to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them, who in bygone generations (all generations prior to the manifestation of Jesus) allowed all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good, gave us rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness."

James 1:14,15,26 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death. Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren (reference to Eve, wife of Adam, type - relationship between church/bride and Christ, made possible by the Spirit through Faith). vs.26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead.

Gal.4:19 My little children (immature/not full-grown in understanding), for whom I (Paul/male) labor in birth (female - Eve) again until Christ (anointing, author/finisher of faith) is formed (Spirit) in you,

What justification is there for dust living, apart from the Spirit of the living God? See Rom.3:21-26. Not sure where all this is leading, but hope it sheds some light. Let me know if it helps any.
Your brother in Christ,
G.

[sonofone]

I am always thankful just to hear you guys respond to my post. I know I say it a lot,but I appreciate your feedback. As a side note I have always learned in a somewhat confrontational style. That is to say I speak what I believe and hold it against reasonable debate.That's how I landed here. God opened up my understanding on the issues of tithes over ten years ago. I was at the time the only one I knew of that thought this way,so you can imagine that stumbling upon Ray's site brought great joy.Brothers,and sisters I hesitate quite often to post my thoughts,because the last thing I want to do is cause confusion,or discord.I don't stand in opposition for arguments sake.This is what I firmly believe.I am not one who is a Wolfe who has sneaked in on you unaware,to undermine all that you believe and hold true.I do read Ray's teachings and I don't consider myself to be in opposition to what he says. There are some things that I have read that present questions in my head,this just happens to be one of them.I say this not because anyone has given me a hard time,I just want as many of you who happen to read my post to know what my heart and intent is. Now as for the most recent response to my post,this is where questions yet remain after I consider what was said.Nakedness to represent sin.Adam and Eve were in a sinful nature before eating of the tree.To the first point the argument is compelling, in fact it is not even debateable,Adam was naked, but he was not ashamed.He was as God had made him or created him,innocent. He had not as yet sinned or transgressed, therefore he required no covering,he was covered by God, he enjoyed perfect fellowship with God in the garden,he was spiritually alive.The other important piece of this puzzle as it relates to this nakedness,is the tree of Life that Adam could have ate from as well,the choice was his to make,it was there in the middle of the garden,along with the tree of good and evil.As I mentioned in an earlier post,we are not given any information about this tree,as we are about the other tree. There is only given the command to eat of any tree in the garden but this particular one.The command also came with the punishment,you shall surely die. Loss of innocence,loss of life IE death both naturally and spiritually. Which is the disconnect,separation from God alienated from God. This was a result of disobedience,not the fruit. The fruit gave them a knowledge of good and evil,but notice it was the serpent that gave them this bit of information not God. Of course he distorted it and caused Eve to be deceived thinking that God was witholding valuable information from her.This is what caused her to transgress. This has also been an interesting point for me, sorry to go down a side street here,did the serpent lie,or tell the truth here. vs 4-5 You shall not surely die. God knows that when you eat your eyes will be opened. you will be as God knowing both good an evil?The devil is always in the details. This was the wrong way to be like God.The correct way was the tree of life. Adam knew this, that is why he was not deceived. He knew that this tree did not represent Gods best.We now know what the tree of life represents,but did Adam?Yes I believe he did.So nakedness according to my understanding in the case of Adam prior to the fall was not sin or sinful nature,to say so is to openly say that God created sinful creatures when we know that God can have no dealings with sin thus the death and separation from God once they did sin. In sinning they required a covering not naturally but spiritually being physically naked was no sin,but being spiritually stained was,that is what required covering. So your point is valid I just feel it is misapplied.The scripture that says sin was in the world before the law is also misapplied because it refers to the law of moses which did not exist from the time of Adam to Moses.The point that Paul was making was, from the point that Adam sinned until the law was given sin reigned and existed.The absence of law did not mean that they were not sinners or sinning.I think it is easy to mix things up and confuse issues and cause a great deal of error when scriptures are misapplied.Romans 5 vs 14 Wherefore,as by one man sin entered  into the world,and by sin,and so death passed upon all men,for all have sinned.For until the law sin was in the world;but sin is not imputed when there is no law.Nevertheless,death reigned from Adam to Moses,even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression,who is the figure of him that was to come. If you read one verse without the other, context is lost ,and scripture misapplied. The whole point that Paul was raising is clear. First that sin came into the world not by Adam being created but by his transgression,vs 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.So sin came by disobedience not creation.As I mentioned in an earlier post, unlike Adam we are born and shaped in iniquity,born spiritually dead and physically dying,this was not the case for Adam. I do not hold that Adam was created or made perfect,just sinless,which we can not claim. without any law we sin, children sin adults sin.To say that Adam was born in sin would have meant that he would have been like us sinning unconsciously until the law or mirror showed him what he was doing.Secondly death reigned from this point forward because sin continued in the world even though there was no law, or law of moses the proof of this vs 14 death reigned from Adam to Moses which is the penalty of sin. I hope this makes sense. Because you can't have it both ways.Adam could not have been borne in sin and not have been spiritually and physically dead. The law or command did not activate this nature or even reveal a sin nature the law along with its penalty,and subsequent transgression, brought on this sin nature. That was the promise from God if you do,you shall. Cause and effect.You eat you die. Theres more I want to say but I have to go to a doctors appointment. Post back I will have more time to clear things up if need be when I get back. Thanks again everyone.

[Kat]

Hi sonofone,

I picked out this part of your post to reply to.

vs 4-5 You shall not surely die. God knows that when you eat your eyes will be opened. you will be as God knowing both good an evil?The devil is always in the details. This was the wrong way to be like God.The correct way was the tree of life. Adam knew this, that is why he was not deceived. He knew that this tree did not represent Gods best.We now know what the tree of life represents,but did Adam?Yes I believe he did.So nakedness according to my understanding in the case of Adam prior to the fall was not sin or sinful nature,to say so is to openly say that God created sinful creatures when we know that God can have no dealings with sin thus the death and separation from God once they did sin.

This last part that says, God can have no dealings with sin.
We know that Jesus Christ is the God of the OT and He dealt with sinning Israel a great deal.  Even if you say not directly, but through Moses, Moses was a sinner.  And He came and lived on earth, where everybody was sinners.  I'm just not sure what you mean by that statement.  Also He will certainly deal with sinners when He judges the world.

2Tim 4:1  Therefore I solemnly witness before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is going to judge the living and the dead according to His appearance and His kingdom,

You say, We now know what the tree of life represents,but did Adam?Yes I believe he did.  How could Adam have understood this?  No one in the OT understood who Jesus Christ was, they thought the Messiah was coming to rule the world, not to die on a cross. Adam could not have understood that the God that he spoke with, was someday going to be born a man and live on earth. The tree of life was not offered to Adam or anybody in the OT.  It was only after Christ's resurrection that the Holy Spirit was offered.

John 16:7  But I tell you the truth, it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you. But if I depart, I will send Him to you.

Adam was like all other humans that are born with only a mind that understands fleshly matters, he never had the Holy Spirit. 
When he ate the fruit, that was when he began to understand the difference between right and wrong, just like every child reaches a point where they too began to realize some things that they do are bad. 
If Adam had lived alone for some time before God created Eve, we know Adam didn't eat of the tree while he was alone. So it was not until they were together that they came to the tree, so that they could have there eyes opened to understand right and wrong at the same time. They were beginning the experience together.  They may have started out differently being created instead of born, but I think it is the same thing we all go through, learning from experience about good and evil.

Just my thoughts on this.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[sonofone]

Thanks for your reply Kat, I anticipated this response from you so I am ready to give an answer. On the first point.God having no dealing with sin. I'm sorry but sometimes I assume that certain truths are universal to believers in God. I assumed that we all knew that sin separated us from God and that is why we needed a Savior I would recommend reading the book of Hebrews for anyone still confused or uncertain about this.I can not give you every chapter and verse as it would take all day for me to type it. Hebrews 10 vs 3-7vs 16-18, But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. For it is possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. Wherefore,when he cometh into the world, he saith,sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me.In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I,Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will O God.This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days,saith the lord: I will put my laws into their hearts,and in their minds will I write them,and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is,their is no more offering for sin.It was sin that separated us from God Romans 5vs 10 For if,when we were enemies,we were reconciled to God by the death of his son, much more, being reconciled,we shall be saved by his life,and not only so,but we also joy in God through our lord Jesus Christ,by whom we have now received the reconciliation.Colossians 1 vs 21 And you that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works,yet now hath he reconciled. It was Jesus who reconnected us back to the father. You can not be reconciled if you were never connected,you can not be alienated or estranged if you had not broken fellowship.God our Father has no dealing with sin. Gen 1 vs 29 says And God said, let us make man in our image after our likeness. That certainly included Jesus,but it did not exclude God our father who has nothing to do with sin.Gen 2 vs 7 And the lord God formed man of the dust of the ground,and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;and man became a living soul. I don't see anywhere in here that God breathed sin into the nostrils of man. Man sinned not god if God did this than he should be the one repenting not us.On the point of Adam knowing about the tree of life,conjecture; I said I believe he did. You say God did not offer him the tree of life? I think you made a mistake in typing this. Gen 2 vs 9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden,and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. vs 16 And the Lord God commanded the man saying,of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat;But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,thou shalt not eat of it,for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.vs 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 IT ALSO OF THE TREE OF LIFE,AND EAT AND LIVE FOREVER.
Now on another note I saw something I had not considered before today. God offered them both trees. The tree of life is the one that interest me the most, because Adam was not dead spiritually nor was he dying physically at the point that God offered him the tree of life? Why did he offer him life when he already had life? If he was already sinful as you suppose,he would have life in a sinful state VS 22 blows this theory out of the water that is the whole reason why God put an Angel with a flaming sword to guard the tree. By the self same same token if he was already perfect as the church claims he was he would not have needed the tree of life. So why did God offer them the tree when he did?

[Kat]

Hi sonofone,

This is getting confusing to me and beyond my ability to discuss.  I think it would be good to email Ray concerning this matter 

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[skydreamers]

Hi sonofone,

I appreciate your comments!  We certainly are all in a process of learning, and to me looking at things from all angles helps us continue to seek after truth.  I do not see you as a "wolf" at all, just someone desiring to understand as I am too, and if we are in disagreement on some points, well that creates challenge for all of us and in the challenge we learn all the more. 

Now as for the most recent response to my post,this is where questions yet remain after I consider what was said.Nakedness to represent sin.Adam and Eve were in a sinful nature before eating of the tree.To the first point the argument is compelling, in fact it is not even debateable,Adam was naked, but he was not ashamed.He was as God had made him or created him,innocent. He had not as yet sinned or transgressed, therefore he required no covering,he was covered by God, he enjoyed perfect fellowship with God in the garden,he was spiritually alive 

Here are just some thoughts while reading through your post.  (Not to say I think that I am right about everything...I struggle to understand things too.) 

I agree that Adam was innocent, even naïve, in that he didn't yet "know" anything.  I think however, that he was also spiritually weak and adversity was yet required in his life in order to spiritually strengthen him.  I think it is a principal that is reflected in everything around us:  we cannot get stronger without opposing forces.  We are called to be "overcomers", and how would this be possible if there was nothing to overcome.  Even our Saviour was made perfect through suffering while he was living life in the flesh.  If He clearly had to go that route, showing us by example, saying that He was "the way, the truth, and the life" than it seems logically this too must be how any of us can become "perfect"...how could it have been any different for Adam?  So I'm not sure if we agree or disagree on this point, but I see that there could have been NO OTHER WAY but for Adam to eat of that tree if he was ever to be "perfected" and come into being in the "image of God".  So it seems to me that it was God's ultimate intention for him to eat of that tree in order that the "process" of perfection could begin.  It is my perspective that Adam and Eve were created with a carnal nature, and this would ensure that they would eat of the tree of knowledge, since we have scripture to show the natural built "lusts of the flesh" which Eve committed before she actually performed the act.  The pull to sin was already existent IN HER even if she had yet not actively transgressed.

The other important piece of this puzzle as it relates to this nakedness,is the tree of Life that Adam could have ate from as well,the choice was his to make,it was there in the middle of the garden,along with the tree of good and evil.As I mentioned in an earlier post,we are not given any information about this tree,as we are about the other tree. There is only given the command to eat of any tree in the garden but this particular one.

It's true that we are not given any information on the tree of life in the Genesis account, so we cannot  know if they ate of it or they did not.  It seems that it was made available to them.  But here's the thing which Ray points out:  the tree of K of G/E was definitely desirable to Eve.  And it has been said that the tree of life represents Jesus (I think most would agree).  And if we can look elsewhere in scripture for the description of this tree I think it's possible to see a connection with this verse regarding Jesus being like a "tree" that  was NOT DESIRABLE:

Isaiah 53:2
For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.

Jesus who is the tree of life had no beauty that we through our carnal nature should desire him.

So here's the scenario as I see it.  Tree of Life was perhaps "pleasant to the sight and good for food" spiritually speaking.  But since Adam and Eve were spiritually "weak" they were not pulled to that tree.  Their carnal natures were yet stronger and so the tree that was desirable, and thus the one they could not resist, was the one that spoke to the carnal lusts within them:

Genesis 3:6
So 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 its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.

Notice the Tree of K of G/E is given a distinction here it seems from any other tree in the garden:  "the tree was to be desired TO MAKE ONE WISE"  What motivated her to be drawn to the tree is that insidious voice of the serpent  through what I believe to be actually her own carnal mind.  That's where Satan gets his power.  The beast is rearing it's ugly head and already taking its seat on the throne:  Because as you pointed out the snake told her that eating of it would open her eyes and she would be like God....this is "the pride of life"...which I believe comes from within us, and so we begin the process of God breaking down that pride by giving us an experience of evil to humble us.

What I see happening in the garden is what I think NEEDS to happen for every individual.  Adam and Eve were not ashamed not because they had no reason to be ashamed but because they didn't know any better.  But when temptation was put before them their prideful nature came to light....and so they needed to be covered, they needed to be humbled.

The command also came with the punishment,you shall surely die. Loss of innocence,loss of life IE death both naturally and spiritually.

Something Ray has also pointed out is the verse 

Genesis 2:17
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die

actually reads like this in an interlinear:

"that   in-day-of   to-eat-you  from-him  to-die (muth)  you-shall-die(thmuth)"

So I think this verse holds a big clue to their condition, in that, they were already dying.  Man is made of dust and dust returns to dust.  It doesn't seem according to other scriptures that the physical body God created for humanity to live in, was ever meant to exist forever.  First the physical then the spiritual.  The physical (and that's everything) is fading away and will make way for the new spiritual existence.  The first Adam (earthy fleshly and thus carnal man) must decrease while the second Adam (Jesus) must increase, until death (sin) is swallowed up by life (Jesus). 

It is my view that they (Adam and Eve) were already dying the physical death, same as we all are  the second we are born...it's only inevitable for all of us that we shall meet the physical death...

So "dying" (they were already marching to death) "you shall surely die" (the spiritual death...being dead in sin began at the tree, when we come to see our need for the tree of life, that we must die to the old man of sin and live as the new creation in Christ).

But there is no access to the tree of life without going through the flaming sword...the spirit of the Word of truth that burns out the hay and the stubble from within us.

Genesis 3:24
He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.

So nakedness according to my understanding in the case of Adam prior to the fall was not sin or sinful nature,to say so is to openly say that God created sinful creatures when we know that God can have no dealings with sin thus the death and separation from God once they did sin.

However we look at this: whether we were in a sinful nature, or in a carnal nature prone to sin, or spiritually weak being pulled by the "earthy" flesh....the result is all the same...we will sin when faced with something we are not yet strong enough to overcome.  God made man as a marred vessel (physical) and will remake mankind into another vessel (spiritual).  The physical is temporary and was always meant to be temporary.  It is God the Potter who made humanity into a marred vessel to begin with....

Jeremiah 18:4-6
And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make...says the LORD. Look, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand
 
If we insist that Adam could have chosen otherwise, than we have to say that God meant for Adam and Eve and all the generations to be forever prancing naked around the garden of Eden eating from the tree of life like gleeful naïve little children who haven't a clue about anything!  But I believe that God created a "marred vessel" with the intention of reworking it into "another vessel".   

I believe God, who has a full understanding of everything He is not, that is, everything that is opposite to Himself, would want his created beings to have this same knowledge, so that we will be like Him.  God IS CREATING man in His image, He isn't done yet, nor was He done in the garden of Eden.  I think Ray has said somewhere, God isn't working at getting us back to the same state humanity was in, in the garden, God doesn't work backwards, God always moves forward in progression...and what once had glory is surpassed by a greater glory that He has planned for our future.

2 Corinthians 3:10-11
Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it.  For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

I do not hold that Adam was created or made perfect,just sinless,which we can not claim.

I see Adam and Eve (and all of humanity) being created as "carnal" (having the nature of flesh, i.e. under the control of the animal appetites, governed by mere human nature not by the Spirit of God)  which ultimately will lead to "transgressions"  (violations of the law) and "sins" (missing the mark).  Also we are "earthy" (of the dust, dirty).  Both descriptive conditions lead to death.  Being carnal leads to being spiritually dead in your sins.  Being earthy leads to being physically dead, as dust is destined to return to dust.

John 12:24
Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.

We must die, it is part of the process to becoming like God.  Therefore, if we must die, than eating of the tree of knowledge is mandatory.

That's my perspective at this point, but I always pray that God will correct false understandings and deepen any truths He may have given us.  The journey continues!

Peace,
Diana

[sonofone]

Hey Diana,thanks for the post. I think you have made some valid points and I am sorry that I don't know how to paste your responses to speak to them point by point. The only thing I want to cover right now is the importance of understanding the nature of Adam and what happened in the garden. If he was as I hold not born in sin as we are, and the carnal nature not in tact then he had a chance to do right.If he was born in sin or carnal as I suppose you and others here believe than sin lies with God not man because would have created them this way.It would have been the only choice they could have made. If this is true ,than for me God is a mad man,and I would gladly walk away with whatever life I have left and live to my fullest satisfaction because my very existence would be in the hands of a mad man.I don't believe this to be the case, I believe God to be just and righteous. Having said that I don't hold that God wanted a different outcome,after all he is God he could have made man in his image without having to go through any of this. So I don't believe that God resorted to plan B,or C -Z. I just believe that God allowed man or Adam to chose for himself and in doing so he was justified to set the penalty,because he could have chose better.Adam ate to follow his wife not because his carnal nature took over. We don't read that Adam was drawn away of his own lust.We only read that he listened to the voice of his wife,and that he was not deceived. Eve was deceived not Adam,he knew better he was not naive,he knew better.That matters to me because it means that he is accountable for his action,and it further means that I am accountable for my action. That is why I repented and repent that is why I got saved. If you tell me that I did not sin I was just born or created a sinner,than I have no reason to be sorry. I came to God because I wanted to avoid his wrath,I stayed because I found out he loved me,and in him loving me I found out that I love him too.We love him because he first loved us. The bible also says draw nigh to God and he will draw nigh unto you. I view this as a partnership, that is afterall what a covenant is. It is an agreement between two or more parties. Both sides make agreements and promises. I can not believe it the way you guys do. I believe God is just and righteous.I have heard nothing in any of your post to convince me otherwise,but I am open to hear your thoughts. Thanks again.