Quote:
Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!
But there was something not good in man, right? As evidenced by the eating in the garden of the bad fruit, a poison was taken into mankind which was genetically passed along. Adam & Eve weren't the only ones to die as their children had the malady too, and therefore also physically died. Outward actions, like the law, could not take care of the poison itself, only the resultant behaviors. Mankind needed a New Adam, with a new life, to be descendant from.
|
We can't help but draw pictures in our head of how it must be, based upon Bible stories. So we draw poison into the story of the "fall," when it's not even in the story. And then claim that we're all born with that poison in us, and that's why all men are flawed and broken ...
...
and that's why there are LGBTQIA++.
Here's the problem with the fall doctrine, as I see it : we're all fallen going back to Adam, and Eve, specially Eve.
So it was fallen man that wrote the books of the Bible ; it was fallen man that selected the books that formed the Canon. Therefore, the Bible is a fallen book. It does, after all, tell of good and evil.
Do you see the problem with the doctrine of the fall?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by StG
God saved some through the flood, but sin and therefore death still reigned after the flood, right? There was still corruption in the flesh. Again, mankind needed a New Adam to be descendant from.
|
God wasn't satisfied with the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross. Or He would have reversed the damage done by the fall. He didn't.