Eve's Posterity
- Thread starter Webers.Home
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
for the record, i believe you are quite wrong about 'everybody sinned' in Adam.
God says sin entered through one man. that in Adam all die.
((re: Romans 5:12, 1 Cor. 15:22))
it does not say all sinned in Adam, and it does not say through Adam all sinned.
as far as i am aware. by all means remind me of the passage that says this; i can be convinced, if it is true, but i will make you work hard to do so.
do you know what the term 'mortagenic factor' means?
God says sin entered through one man. that in Adam all die.
((re: Romans 5:12, 1 Cor. 15:22))
it does not say all sinned in Adam, and it does not say through Adam all sinned.
as far as i am aware. by all means remind me of the passage that says this; i can be convinced, if it is true, but i will make you work hard to do so.
do you know what the term 'mortagenic factor' means?
amen
these things contradict your position - i am glad i don't have to remind you of them
John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented.
(Matthew 3:14-15)
(Matthew 3:14-15)
notice that Christ does not say, "I sinned in Adam and must be absolved" 
Joseph is Y-shua's stepfather. The blood line for us Jews is the Mother. Even if I played along and Miriam was a surrogate (makes no sense whatsoever) she is still the natural mother.
I would just tell these christians you have encountered they are stupid and need to defend themselves!!!!....
Mat.1 is the genealogy of King David Miriam/ Mary is of the line of King David thru Nathan (Luke 3:31).
Adam is not Christ's father.
virgin birth, ya know.
and Adam didn't 'slip' -- he was not deceived.
Adam sinned willfully with full understanding of what he was doing. any other interpretation contradicts 1 Timothy 2:14
.
Unless someone can prove-- beyond any shadow of sensible doubt --that
Jesus' mom was not biologically related to Eve, then we have to accept that
Adam was the first in Christ's long line of biological fathers.
The reason being that Eve was made of Adam; ergo: all women descending
from Eve are made of Adam; thus children born of women are made of Eve
and thence of Adam.
As a result: the only way to cut Jesus out of Adam's genealogy is to cut Mary
out of Eve's genealogy, and I've yet to encounter anyone either online or in
church able to do that.
It's a common Christian mantra that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully
Man. But in order for that mantra to ring true, it's necessary for Jesus Christ
to be fully related to Adam and Eve because according to Gen 5:1-2, they
are the Man.
● Rev 22:16 . . I am the offspring of David
Well; unless someone can prove-- beyond a shadow of sensible doubt --that
David was not biologically related to Eve, then we're right back to Adam
again because Eve was made of Adam; thus David was made of Adam.
The Bible has gone to a lot of trouble from the very beginning to tie Jesus
Christ to Adam, and it is just amazing the number of people, Christians
among them, who've gone to extreme lengths trying to circumvent the
biblical records.
_
Unless someone can prove-- beyond any shadow of sensible doubt --that
Jesus' mom was not biologically related to Eve, then we have to accept that
Adam was the first in Christ's long line of biological fathers.
The reason being that Eve was made of Adam; ergo: all women descending
from Eve are made of Adam; thus children born of women are made of Eve
and thence of Adam.
As a result: the only way to cut Jesus out of Adam's genealogy is to cut Mary
out of Eve's genealogy, and I've yet to encounter anyone either online or in
church able to do that.
It's a common Christian mantra that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully
Man. But in order for that mantra to ring true, it's necessary for Jesus Christ
to be fully related to Adam and Eve because according to Gen 5:1-2, they
are the Man.
● Rev 22:16 . . I am the offspring of David
Well; unless someone can prove-- beyond a shadow of sensible doubt --that
David was not biologically related to Eve, then we're right back to Adam
again because Eve was made of Adam; thus David was made of Adam.
The Bible has gone to a lot of trouble from the very beginning to tie Jesus
Christ to Adam, and it is just amazing the number of people, Christians
among them, who've gone to extreme lengths trying to circumvent the
biblical records.
_
you're talking about a mother as though she is a father; a non-sequitur.
"seed of the woman" not 'seed of the man'
Adam's body, not Adam's soul. Adam's body is dust - and so Eve's, and all humankind. dust is not soul and dust is not spirit. Adam did not become a living soul until God breathed in him the breath of life. it's His breath that creates soul; it is not an emergent property of dust in some 'correct form.' to suggest that He never breathed life into any other dust but Adam-dust is to be forced into the position that all creatures are Adam's progeny, because ((e.g. Genesis 7:22)) He speaks of all living souls this way, having the breath of life in them. which is of course nonsense, because ((e.g. Genesis 1:22)) the other living souls were created before He breathed life into the Adam-dust and Adam became a living soul.
L
LPT
Guest
I like your explaination Sir and I concur, thinkin on if Adam had not sinned, will then the lower rib does grow back thus walla another companion lol...
another problem with Mssr. Weber's 'all-soul' doctrine is that if there is only one human 'soul' then there is either universal damnation or universal salvation, there being only one soul for God to redeem or to judge in that case.
which do you ascribe to, sir?
universal salvation or universal damnation?
having declared Christ culpable of sin, making salvation impossible, do you stand consistent in this, declaring no man saved because one soul -- the only soul, you say -- rejects life and dies in sin?
or do you declare heresy in the opposite sense, all saved, regardless of belief, because one soul -- the only soul, you say -- believes that Jesus IS?
which do you ascribe to, sir?
universal salvation or universal damnation?
having declared Christ culpable of sin, making salvation impossible, do you stand consistent in this, declaring no man saved because one soul -- the only soul, you say -- rejects life and dies in sin?
or do you declare heresy in the opposite sense, all saved, regardless of belief, because one soul -- the only soul, you say -- believes that Jesus IS?
L
LPT
Guest
but he -- "the first Adam" -- loved her, and gave himself
Indeed probably his loins were speaking to him rather than what God had told him to do
L
LPT
Guest
Excellent point of view and I concur it turned into the blame game, in gen 3:12 kinda seems like Adam was saying well God you gave the woman to me it's not my fault.
Gen 3:12
And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
the Biblical record is the things i've been quoting.
it does not say there is one 'all-soul' and it does not say Jesus was culpable of sin and it does not say He is the son of Adam but the Son of God.
L
LPT
Guest
It's suitable for me to correct myself in my statement here, surely it wasn't about loins but about his heart as posthuman had said in that Adam loved Eve and obeyed her instead of God, for the bible says we should place God above all.
There is a key to a complete understanding in realizing that, although the English translations may refer to him as such in any case, Adam is not referred to as man (ish) until God created woman (isha), and gave her to the man (ha'adam). According to the Hebrew understanding, this, shall we say, shows a separation of the men from the boys, and so a better understanding of the separation of sons from their fathers and their mothers in becoming men (and cleaving to their wives) would also follow.
Progeny are 'issues', according to old English, begotten of men and born of women, but Eve was not Adam's issue, she was [built; constructed; fashioned] take out of man. Although there is (typically) no progeny without woman's seed, sin enters through man's seed. So then, from what man's seed had Jesus was Jesus issue, considering God Himself claim Him His only begotten Son?
Progeny are 'issues', according to old English, begotten of men and born of women, but Eve was not Adam's issue, she was [built; constructed; fashioned] take out of man. Although there is (typically) no progeny without woman's seed, sin enters through man's seed. So then, from what man's seed had Jesus was Jesus issue, considering God Himself claim Him His only begotten Son?