Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Steps toward loss and restoration of Salvation
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 31 of 59 (271051)
12-20-2005 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Faith
12-20-2005 9:49 AM


Re: Adam's sin does not preclude his regeneration
Chapter and verse?? I bet the matter is not nearly as 'cut and dry' as you think it is.
And , of course, like I said, for the Jewish faith, what Jesus is alledged to have said is irrelavent.
And you do realise that no, he did not 'quote the accended Jesus'. He specifically was talking about the politics of Rome at that time. The book of revelation nearly did not make it into the canon.
This message has been edited by ramoss, 12-20-2005 09:58 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 9:49 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 10:04 AM ramoss has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 32 of 59 (271056)
12-20-2005 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by ramoss
12-20-2005 9:54 AM


Re: Adam's sin does not preclude his regeneration
Again, I don't see the relevance of what the Jewish faith has to say on any of this; The New Testament interprets the Old. You are right, however, that John isn't quoting the ascended Christ about the serpent, I looked it up. But he does quote him through the first chapters of Revelation. There are elements that refer to Rome at the time, certainly, what does that have to do with the topic?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ramoss, posted 12-20-2005 9:54 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by ramoss, posted 12-20-2005 10:09 AM Faith has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 33 of 59 (271058)
12-20-2005 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Faith
12-20-2005 10:04 AM


Re: Adam's sin does not preclude his regeneration
It basically is saying that you are incorrecty using the New Testament to distort the story of Genesis. It is because of the distortion that the readers of the New testament has given Genesis that many of the conflicts about 'salvation' is created. The story of Genesis has not message about 'salvation', because of the fact that the religion it originally came from does not have the concept of "salvation'.
This message has been edited by ramoss, 12-20-2005 10:10 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 10:04 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 10:24 AM ramoss has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 34 of 59 (271067)
12-20-2005 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by ramoss
12-20-2005 10:09 AM


New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology
It basically is saying that you are incorrecty using the New Testament to distort the story of Genesis. It is because of the distortion that the readers of the New testament has given Genesis that many of the conflicts about 'salvation' is created. The story of Genesis has not message about 'salvation', because of the fact that the religion it originally came from does not have the concept of "salvation'.
Well, you have every right to believe that, of course, but Christians are under no obligation to view it as you do. In fact you are asking us not to be Christians. The New Testament clearly presents itself as a commentary on the Old, it elucidates meanings that in some sense were hidden (though really just misinterpreted) and it reveals that Genesis certainly does foreshadow the coming of a Savior.
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-20-2005 10:25 AM
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-20-2005 11:43 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by ramoss, posted 12-20-2005 10:09 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by ramoss, posted 12-20-2005 3:26 PM Faith has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 35 of 59 (271147)
12-20-2005 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Faith
12-20-2005 10:24 AM


Re: New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology
NOpe, they are under no obligation to view it.However, it will be pointed out that the concepts are being read INTO genesis, rather than being taken FROM genesis.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 10:24 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 7:17 PM ramoss has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 36 of 59 (271192)
12-20-2005 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by ramoss
12-20-2005 3:26 PM


Re: New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology
NOpe, they are under no obligation to view it.However, it will be pointed out that the concepts are being read INTO genesis, rather than being taken FROM genesis.
It will be asserted no doubt, but it will be wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by ramoss, posted 12-20-2005 3:26 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by ramoss, posted 12-21-2005 12:36 PM Faith has replied

  
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1337 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 37 of 59 (271208)
12-20-2005 8:43 PM


Faith and ramoss
Faith and ramoss...interesting topic...but...uh...could you take it to a new thread please?
I agree it's kind of related to what iano and I are discussing -- but it kinda doesn't fit too. You both seem to be debating this topic from the perspective of arguing over whether something is jewish or christian -- and which is the right perspective.
The conversation between iano and I seems to be based on the assumption that the Christian faith at least is accurate within its own context -- and we're trying to refine some aspects of how the Holy Spirit works within this assumed context.
Just sayin'.
Edit: If you guys would like to debate the idea of the "dwelling" that purpledawn interjected, I'd be ok with that. I actually thought purpledawn's contribution from a Jewish perspective was really interesting. I never noticed that before.
This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 12-20-2005 08:49 PM

  
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1337 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 38 of 59 (271398)
12-21-2005 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by iano
12-20-2005 6:13 AM


Re: Spirit indwelling in Adam
iano writes:
I agree that God breathed something of himself into man which made him in his image and likeness but the biblical material available is too limited to tell us precisely what was involved.
So what other Spirit would God breath into Adam if not the Holy Spirit?
iano writes:
I would agree that it was Gods Spirit that entered man.
Is God's Spirit not the Holy Spirit?
iano writes:
The word 'indwelling' of the Spirit has it's in/outworkings fairly clearly described in the context of a person who has been justified by fait.
Was Adam not justified by faith in God the Messiah?
iano writes:
But what that has to do with "indwelling" of the Spirit as it pertained to Adam I don't know.
According to the Scriptures God breathed his Spirit into Adam fairly well the same way Christ breathed the Holy Spirit into his apostles.
Seems to be the same mechanics to me.
iano writes:
The use of the word indwelling is to my mind inappropriate as it is not described as having the characteristics and purposes associated with NT indwelling.
What differences have you noted between the working of God's Spirit in the Hebrew Scriptures when contrasted to the working of the Holy Spirit in the Christian Scriptures?
They seem to be producing the same effects to me -- although the outpouring of the Holy Spirit within the framework of Christ's salvatory action seems to be an outpouring without limit whereas the outpouring of God's Spirit prior to Christ's coming seems to have finite limits.
iano writes:
The person who receives the indwelling in the latter case is a completely different case from Adam. Their starting from 2 different vantage points: 1 is fallen the other at the time of receipt, wasn't.
So you're saying the difference between the two indwellings was that Adam was in a state of sin whereas Christ was in a state of perfection?
If I'm understanding you correctly, this is wrong. Adam was not fallen when he received God's Spirit. Adam was in a state of perfection, being without sin, when he received the Spirit of God -- just like Christ was when he received the Holy Spirit's permission from on high (in the form of a dove).
Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly. Could you explain this point further please?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by iano, posted 12-20-2005 6:13 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 12-21-2005 12:25 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 39 of 59 (271416)
12-21-2005 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
12-21-2005 12:01 PM


Re: Spirit indwelling in Adam
Is God's Spirit not the Holy Spirit?
Sorry, yes of course it was the Holy Spirit
Was Adam not justified by faith in God the Messiah?
I don't know. There doesn't appear to be anything written about Adam being justified by faith in God as far as I can tell. And in order to have faith in a saviour I suppose one would need to recognise their need of a savior. I don't see where Adam expressed this need in word or deed.
According to the Scriptures God breathed his Spirit into Adam fairly well the same way Christ breathed the Holy Spirit into his apostles.
It is not just what is applied but what it is applied to which forms the whole, I hold. A spanner applied to a crankshaft will turn the crankshaft. A spanner applied to a bolt with loosen a bolt. Same tool, same rotary action - different result. Sinless Adam/sinful man. The imparting of the Holy Spirit can't be shown to have equivilent purpose or result.
What differences have you noted between the working of God's Spirit in the Hebrew Scriptures when contrasted to the working of the Holy Spirit in the Christian Scriptures?
I would see the Holy Spirit operating in parallel ways in Old and New Testaments. But this discussion revolves around Holy Spirit at he pertained to a unique man, Adam and the rest of us. The discussion is a preliminary basis for a discussion on a person (like me for instance) losing the Holy Spirit/salvation (or so I gathered. The area of interest is drawing parallels between the Spirits indwelling in me (who holds that this cannot be lost) with the 'indwelling' in Adam - who presumably lost the Holy Spirit. I argue that there are no parallels to be drawn between the two indwellings.
So you're saying the difference between the two indwellings was that Adam was in a state of sin whereas Christ was in a state of perfection?
No. I was saying that the Spirit as it pertained to Adam was given to a man who knew no sin. The Spirit indwelling in me was given to a man who did know sin (in the pre-born again state) and who does know sin (in so far as it is applicable in the post born-again state). In other words the Spirit as I have it is not the same as the way Adam had it. If the way I have it is described as indwelling and that is different to that which Adam had then Adam, whatever way he had the spirit, didn't have it as indwelling in the same way I have. Adam losing (assuming you hold that he did) cannot thus be used to suppose that I could lose. They are different things: crankshaft/bolt
This message has been edited by iano, 21-Dec-2005 07:00 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-21-2005 12:01 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-21-2005 10:49 PM iano has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 40 of 59 (271424)
12-21-2005 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Faith
12-20-2005 7:17 PM


Re: New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology
Your opinion, corrupted by the concepts of Saint Augustine, no doubt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Faith, posted 12-20-2005 7:17 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Faith, posted 12-21-2005 3:24 PM ramoss has not replied
 Message 43 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-21-2005 11:16 PM ramoss has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 41 of 59 (271475)
12-21-2005 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by ramoss
12-21-2005 12:36 PM


Re: New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by ramoss, posted 12-21-2005 12:36 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1337 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 42 of 59 (271596)
12-21-2005 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by iano
12-21-2005 12:25 PM


Re: Spirit indwelling in Adam
iano writes:
Sorry, yes of course it was the Holy Spirit
Ok, so do you agree that references to God's Spirit in the Hebrew Scriptures is understood as references to the Holy Spirit within a Christian framework?
iano writes:
I don't know. There doesn't appear to be anything written about Adam being justified by faith in God as far as I can tell.
Exactly how precise of information are you looking for?
I ask this because there are many things not specifically said in the Scriptures -- certain conclusions are inferred based on the information available as the reader is enabled by the Holy Spirit to do comprehend it.
In the other thread, for example, where we were debating, you claimed that the Law was given specifically for the purpose to condemn. I countered your claim by pointing to three different passages from the Christian Scriptures which specifically stated that the purpose of the Law was to reveal Christ.
The Scriptures, in this previous case regarding our discussion of the purpose of the Law, do not explictly state what you've claimed. In fact, what you've claimed is a conclusion that you've inferred based on your reading of the Christian Scriptures. For the record, it remains quite possible that your inference is incorrect -- especially since I have pointed to three specific passages which explicitly claim that the purpose of the Law was to reveal Christ -- not condemn.
When you make the claim, "There doesn't appear to be anything written about Adam being justified by faith in God as far as I can tell", I'm left a little bit perplexed by how easilly you infer that the Law was given strictly for the purpose to condemn all the while having difficulty in inferring that Adam was justified by faith in God.
Let me put it another way: How else is someone saved if not by their faith in God?
This brings me back to another question: If, based on the Scriptures, you are still unsure about whether Adam was damned or not, then, based on the Scriptures, how can you be so sure about whether or not all born in Adam are by default damned?
I think this is a valid question which really needs to be addressed clearly from this point on.
iano writes:
And in order to have faith in a saviour I suppose one would need to recognise their need of a savior. I don't see where Adam expressed this need in word or deed.
For the record, many Christians do understand the following passage in Genesis as a promise from God that a Savior would come to redeem them from the serpent:
NIV writes:
And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.
This is often refered to as something like the protoevangelium, or first gosepl, according to many mainline Christians.
This is a Catholic link which explains it in greater detail, breaking it down verse by verse:
GENESIS 3:15
THE PROTOEVANGELIUM OR "FIRST GOSPEL"
Please note that even though you will probably not accept the conclusions noted in regards to Mary (like Catholics, Orthodox and High Anglicans do), the general consenus among many mainline Christian groups is that the information found in Genesis 3:15 is a prophecy pointing toward the coming of Christ.
As such, it seems entirely possible to infer that Adam placed his faith in God and was expecting some kind of Messiah.
And, for the record, later passages in the Genesis account do explicitly indicate that men were calling upon God for things in their life:
NIV writes:
Adam lay with his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth, saying, "God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him." Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh.
At that time men began to call on the name of the LORD.
It seems highly probable that Adam was within this group. I see no reason to conclude he wasn't, especially since St. Paul himself speaks of Adam in such wise:
Romans 5:12-14 writes:
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned - sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
iano writes:
It is not just what is applied but what it is applied to which forms the whole, I hold. A spanner applied to a crankshaft will turn the crankshaft. A spanner applied to a bolt with loosen a bolt. Same tool, same rotary action - different result. Sinless Adam/sinful man. The imparting of the Holy Spirit can't be shown to have equivilent purpose or result.
What exactly are you talking about here?
I'm not talking about sinless Adam/sinful man.
I'm talking about sinless Adam/sinless Jesus.
I thought I made it clear that we were starting with Adam, and comparing his indwelling of God's Spirit with Christ's indwelling of the Holy Spirit?
Maybe I wasn't clear on this part.
iano writes:
I would see the Holy Spirit operating in parallel ways in Old and New Testaments. But this discussion revolves around Holy Spirit at he pertained to a unique man, Adam and the rest of us.
*slaps forehead*
No. It doesn't.
We're first of all comparing Adam's indwelling to Christ's indwelling -- and we're trying to detemrmine if Adam had that Holy Spirit's indwelling or not.
I thought I'd made this clear.
iano writes:
The discussion is a preliminary basis for a discussion on a person (like me for instance) losing the Holy Spirit/salvation (or so I gathered. The area of interest is drawing parallels between the Spirits indwelling in me (who holds that this cannot be lost) with the 'indwelling' in Adam - who presumably lost the Holy Spirit. I argue that there are no parallels to be drawn between the two indwellings.
uh huh...
This discussion will come later.
We're staring with Adam...
iano writes:
No. I was saying that the Spirit as it pertained to Adam was given to a man who knew no sin. The Spirit indwelling in me was given to a man who did know sin (in the pre-born again state) and who does know sin (in so far as it is applicable in the post born-again state). In other words the Spirit as I have it is not the same as the way Adam had it. If the way I have it is described as indwelling and that is different to that which Adam had then Adam, whatever way he had the spirit, didn't have it as indwelling in the same way I have. Adam losing (assuming you hold that he did) cannot thus be used to suppose that I could lose. They are different things: crankshaft/bolt
What are you talking about? And what does this have to do with Adam and Christ? Do you agree that Adam had the Holy Spirit or not?
This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 12-21-2005 10:50 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 12-21-2005 12:25 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by iano, posted 12-22-2005 5:49 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

  
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1337 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 43 of 59 (271599)
12-21-2005 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by ramoss
12-21-2005 12:36 PM


Re: New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology
Don't convict Saint Augustine.
Wisdom 2:23-24 writes:
For God formed man to be imperishable;
the image of his own nature he made him.
But by the envy of the devil,
death entered the world,
and they who are in his possession experience it.
For the record, according to Daniel J. Harrington, a date in the first century B.C.E. seems most likely for the preiod in which it was written, though any time from the second century B.C.E. to the first century C.E. is possible.
Either way, this predates Saint Augustine's thoughts considerably. And it may even be possible that it predates Christianity as whole by almost 150 years.
Now would you kindly refer to Faith's message found in message 41.
Thank you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by ramoss, posted 12-21-2005 12:36 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by ramoss, posted 12-22-2005 3:41 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 44 of 59 (271623)
12-22-2005 5:49 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
12-21-2005 10:49 PM


Re: Spirit indwelling in Adam
Ok, so do you agree that references to God's Spirit in the Hebrew Scriptures is understood as references to the Holy Spirit within a Christian framework?
Amen.
I ask this because there are many things not specifically said in the Scriptures -- certain conclusions are inferred based on the information available as the reader is enabled by the Holy Spirit to do comprehend it.
I agree. Trintity is inferred. The doctrine of sanctification is largely inferred etc. I just don't infer that Adam was justified
In the other thread, for example, where we were debating, you claimed that the Law was given specifically for the purpose to condemn. I countered your claim by pointing to three different passages from the Christian Scriptures which specifically stated that the purpose of the Law was to reveal Christ.
The scriptures specifically state that if a person is justified they shall be saved from wrath. This doesn't mean people won't discuss long and hard about salvation by works/obedience. The law ends its central role when it has been used effectively to convict a person of sin either before they die (justification) or after they die (damnation). It is meant to show the person their need of salvation. The law by itself reveals nothing. It is a tool. It would be incorrect though understandable to say that the purpose of a spanner was to disassemble an engine (overall goal). It is more accurate however to say the purpose of a spanner is to apply torque to a bolt or nut. The law is a tool only. It has no life of its own. The purpose of it is only those things to which it can be applied. It would be better stated that the purpose of God is to use the law as a tool to reveal Christ.
That is how I infer the purpose of law. I don't think your view is wrong but just that mine is more precise. Us engineers have a thing about that. The mechanics of things. (That's one thing I love about the Bible. It's so mechanical, so precise at times)
I'm left a little bit perplexed by how easilly you infer that the Law was given strictly for the purpose to condemn all the while having difficulty in inferring that Adam was justified by faith in God
I trust the above comments clarify how I infer what I do. Neither of us are miles of the mark I just hold like I said a different slant on 'sole purpose'. When it comes to Adam it may well be that he was justified by faith. It's just that I can see nothing at all to indicate that he was. Inferance does need at least something to infer with. What do you suppose that to be?
Let me put it another way: How else is someone saved if not by their faith in God?
I'm tempted to say works - just for the fun of it Although I think I know what you mean it is not salvation by faith. It is justification by faith. Just a nit pick. Going with that terminology there is no way to be saved other than to be justified by faith.
This brings me back to another question: If, based on the Scriptures, you are still unsure about whether Adam was damned or not, then, based on the Scriptures, how can you be so sure about whether or not all born in Adam are by default damned?
What scripture is clear about is that Adam sinned. And unless he was justified he was damned. I infer this because if justification is required in order to be saved then lack of justification means a person will be damned. And we know that it wasn't justification that came to all men from Adam. It was sin. All men sin. Until they are justified on a road to damnation they must be. There is no other road to be on. Whether Adam was justified at some point doesn't really matter to anyone except him. A person who is justified doesn't interupt sin coming to all men through Adam.
For the record, many Christians do understand the following passage in Genesis as a promise from God that a Savior would come to redeem them from the serpent:
I wholeheartedly agree that the passage promises a saviour in our Lord Jesus Christ. I wouldn't be as quick to say redemption is from the serpent.
As such, it seems entirely possible to infer that Adam placed his faith in God and was expecting some kind of Messiah.
It is not at all possible to infer this. There is nothing about Adams reaction to indicate how he took this news. All the passage gives Adam (and us) is a promise. We know that "Abraham believed God ('s promise) and it was etc, etc" There is nothing with which to infer Adam did the same herre. To hold that is to hold that because I promise someone something means that they believe me and expect it to happen.
No information to make a inferance mean one cannot infer anything.
It seems highly probable that Adam was within this group. I see no reason to conclude he wasn't, especially since St. Paul himself speaks of Adam in such wise:
It is possible that he was in this group. There is nothing to give us any level of probablility. We simply do not know. We cannot infer But like I said above, it matters not whether Adam was justified at some point. We are told sin came to all men through him - not justification.
who was a type of the one who was to come.
I fail to see what evidence "a type" offers to infer that Adam was one of those in the group who called on the name of the Lord. Adam was a type Indeed. Adam was given dominion and lost it. Christ is given dominion and won't ever. Death through Adam, life through Christ etc. As far as type goes it is the opposites that are drawn out. Two sides of a coin.
Could you explain briefly why you think it makes any difference whether or not Adam was indeed justified
I thought I made it clear that we were starting with Adam, and comparing his indwelling of God's Spirit with Christ's indwelling of the Holy Spirit?
There are three available to us to discuss - I thought it was the Spirit as it pertained to Adam vs the Spirit as it pertains to us. Sorry that I misunderstood. I understand now. "Christs indwelling of the Holy Spirit" means the spirit as it pertained to Christ and thus we're going to track along Spirit pertaining to Adam vs Spirit pertaining to Christ. I'm not sure where your headed with it but I'm sure I'll find out
I'm talking about sinless Adam/sinless Jesus.
Reconfirming that I finally get you
What are you talking about? And what does this have to do with Adam and Christ? Do you agree that Adam had the Holy Spirit or not?
So as there isn't even the merest shadow of a doubt. Yes Adam had the Holy Spirit - as it pertained to him.
Spirit 'indwelling' in Adam vs Spirit indwelling in Christ
Forwaaaaaaaard
This message has been edited by iano, 22-Dec-2005 01:55 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-21-2005 10:49 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-24-2005 3:13 AM iano has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 45 of 59 (271769)
12-22-2005 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
12-21-2005 11:16 PM


Re: New Testament comments on the Old ARE Christian theology
Interesting..
I will note that 'The wisdom of SOlomon' was written in Greek, and is very hellenised, from what I read. There also is debate about when it was written
quote:
David A. deSilva writes: "There is wider debate concerning the date of Wisdom, which has been placed anywhere between 220 B.C.E. and 100 C.E. The terminus a quo is set by the author's use of the Greek translation of Isaiah, Job, and Proverbs, the first of which was probably available by 200 B.C.E. (Reider 1957: 14; Holmes 1913: 520). The terminus ad quem is set by the evident use of the work by several New Testament authors (Holmes 1913: 521; Reider 1957: 14).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-21-2005 11:16 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 12-22-2005 6:37 PM ramoss has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024