Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

He ought to be...he just had his weekly bath.

I am currently looking for a face for my latest panel... I tried many since starting it, and hair/eye combinations
to go with it, before thinking I need something fresh. So I am on a site where illustrations of women's faces
alone offers up 682 pages, with maybe sixty images per page... and from there, found two different artists
whose work I like, each having over 50 pages of images, sixty per page. I may be busy for a while .

But I will check back periodically to make sure you are keeping your nose clean... .

Let's look at how the discussion ran to this point.

Cameron143 said:
What actually occurred in Adam and Eve when they sinned? Why did they only hide from God and cover themselves after sin and not before? God certainly hadn't changed. What changed in man?

Cameron143 said:
I asked you a question. You don't answer my question which was designed to answer your return questions. So if you will, please answer my question and we can begin to answer your questions.
What actually occurred in Adam and Eve when they sinned? Why did they only hide from God and cover themselves after sin and not before? God certainly hadn't changed. What changed in man?

PaulThomson said:
Adam and Eve experienced guilt and shame and so came a sense of distance between them and the holy One.

Magenta said:
Where does it say Adam and Eve felt guilt?

PaulThomson said:
Before they sinned they were naked and not ashamed. After sinning they covered their nakedness
and blamed others. What do you think that means. They developed a fashion sense?

Magenta said:
So no text saying Adam and Eve felt guilt. Thanks.

And I know how very much you hate to admit that you do that...

PaulThomson said:
Did Jesus not bear our guilt and our shame on the cross? Why would he do that if we do not experience guilt and shame from our sin?

Prov. 11:2 When pride comes, then comes shame; but with the lowly is wisdom.

Prov. 13:18 Poverty and shame shall be to him that refuses instruction, but he that regards reproof shall be honoured.

Rom. 5:16 for the judgment was by one (Adam) to condemnation...

Magenta said:
Does not answer my question. Where does the text say Adam and Eve felt guilt?

Or, instead of deflecting, you could just admit the text does not say that they did.

Of course that would also show another instance where you go beyond what the text says.

Magenta said:
I don't understand why people cannot admit when the text does not explicitly say something.

Especially after that same person has wished others would stick to what Scripture explicitly states.

But that is an issue also, isn't it? People don't want to see their hypocrisy. Jesus addressed that also.

PaulThomson said:
I gave three verses. I have yet to see you explain how Adam and Eve are excluded from being subject to what those verses say. You seem to think Genesis 3 must say the specific words "Adam and Eve felt guilt and shame after eating the fruit" for the Bible to be saying "Adam and Eve felt guilt and shame after eating the fruit."

Prov. 11:2 When pride comes, then comes shame; but with the lowly is wisdom.

Prov. 13:18 Poverty and shame shall be to him that refuses instruction, but he that regards reproof shall be honoured.

Rom. 5:16 for the judgment was by one (Adam) to condemnation.

You seem to be hiding behind ad hominem to avoid responding to the biblical texts.

Yes. The text of Gen. 3 does not specifically say that Adam and Eve felt guilt and shame. My assertion of guilt and shame was in response to Cameron's question, "What actually occurred in Adam and Eve when they sinned? Why did they only hide from God and cover themselves after sin and not before? God certainly hadn't changed. What changed in man?"

If a direct answer to that specific question is in the text of Gen. 3, no one has pointed to it yet. When we exegete a text, we START with what the text actually says. I have never said that we should only infer from a verse what the verse itself actually says.

We THEN ask questions related to the text, such as Cameron's question. If the answer is not directly stated in the text itself, we look at the immediate context of the chapter, book, and Bible to see if there is something elsewhere that sheds light on the question re the text being studied. Do you have an answer to Cameron's question that you can lift directly from Genesis chapter 3? If not, is there some scripture that seem to mesh with Gen. 3 that would suggest an answer Cameron's question?

I cited three verses elsewhere that seem to apply to the evidence of Adam's and Eve's behaviour described in Gen. 3. Rather than agree or disagree with my application of those texts to Gen. 3 in order to better understand what the Bible is saying, you chose to ignore them and focus on trying to discredit the person citing them, in the hope that other posters would dismiss my verses because I'm a hypocrite and so whatever I say in this forum need not be taken seriously. That is ad hominem argument, and is a logical fallacy. It is a rhetorical device people use to persuade poor critical thinkers towards accepting one's own view. It is not a tactic people who want to arrive at the truth of a matter use. A seeker of truth might address the verses as they relate to Gen. 3 as well as attempt to prove their interlocutors hypocrisy with evidence, but they would not ONLY seek to prove their opponent's hypocrisy while avoiding addressing the evidence put forward.

Does their being naked and NOT ASHAMED, but then noticing their nakedness and covering it over, indicate to you any specific change in Adam's and Eve's opinion of themselves? If so, what changed?

Does Adam and Eve blaming others others indicate to you that they felt guilt? If not, to what do you attribute that behaviour by them after they had sinned?

Does Proverbs link rejecting instruction with shame? Does proverbs link rejecting insr=truction with pride? Does Proverbs link pride with shame? If so, do you yhink this has any bearing on events in Gen. 3

If Adam's transgression led to his condemnation according to Rom. 5, and God condemns and sentences the guilty, and Adam and Eve hid from God and then blamed others for their sin, do you see any possibility that Adam and Eve did not at all feel guilty?

Now we will see if you are you interested in discovering God's truth, or merely in defending your present thologicl opinions come hell or high water.

I appreciate you checking up on me but don't worry. My kids are getting me a nose spa for Father's Day. And to think, one used to be able to keep their noses clean for free by just bobbing for apples.

What does that mean, studier?

You might want to consider my picture! It's a breath of fresh air!

Your statement I quoted: if you keep running when your presuppositions get pinned to the wall

Greek first class conditional "if" = assumed true (round-about way of saying I agree with you).

Thank you! I will contemplate how I might actually be able to do that...

Though I must tell you, I have designed very few panels since late last year...
my start folder shows six not counting Christmas and New Years .

Aside from the possibility of using your lovely visage in a panel, is there a verse you might like to see?

I'd like to see that. Do you have a link?

Not picking on you just using your scripture reference for something I think is being missed in many minds.

Your verse indicates man is talking back to God. We know a sinner does not talk to God. So this is the ""saved man"" in this reference. It brings me to the example we read in Job. They are all good with God but God keeps reprimanding when they question God or insinuate to God.

The reason I bring this up because the Reformed will claim the Fallen Man cannot understand the Spiritual things but will then use this verse. But in reality, only the Saved Man can have this type of discussion with God.

Just shows the holes within their doctrine as there are so many including this one.

Also shows how hypocritical they are to use false meaning but condemning others for not adhering to what is obvious.

Southern Inbred doctrinal practice to the letter.

Your post contains the most inspiring, hopeful, wonderful, beautiful message about God to tell others.

This is incorrect. Paul is simply anticipating objections that will arise with some because of the argument he is making. And where does it say only saved people talk to God? And the people who would be objecting would be wrong. Wouldn't this make it more likely that those objecting would be unsaved?
BTW...I noticed in another thread you didn't drink because you thought it unbefitting one in your office. I wonder why you don't have such an exacting standards when it comes to describing people.

I know the Devil when I meet him. But even you, who is unlike the others in many respects, are still like the others who have hammered me about Fallen man being crippled to the Spiritual things. In this thread alone and on several others you claim Fallen Man is unable to accept God but now you suddenly by decisively using deceit claim that Fallen man, who is unable to seek God because of his condition, is still able to question God to the content Paul is discussing.
You are all over the place.

I prayed to God for years before I became a Christian.

Paul addressed the people at Mars Hill because they worshiped an unknown God...

"Therefore what you worship as something unknown, I now proclaim to you."

The man is also criticising an exhaustive divine pre-determinist who is denying that God's will can be resisted, after Paul has just cited both the Edomites and Pharaoh who were punished for resisting God's will.

They exhibited shame because they covered what they were previously not ashamed of. They exhibited guilt because they hid from God, not something those believing they are innocent do. What do you attribute those two behaviours to other than shame and guilt?

You only think I'm all over the place. And that's because you haven't really followed my posts. What you have just said inaccurately depicts what I have shared on the subject. And I don't hammer anyone. If you can share with me where you believe I have treated you poorly, I will be more than happy to apologize.
As it stands, you have accused me of deceit. You would be doing me a great favor if you can show this to me from my posts, as it is never my intention to deceive, either wittingly or unwittingly.

Such is the testimony of many.

I may have put words in your mouth when I posted "You might want to consider my picture! It's a breath of fresh air! ".
Therefore, I'll let you off the hook. Thank goodness my disclaimer was there when I made that post!