ECT Understand the Fall of Adam according to Covenant

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I agree with you. If you read all what AMR linked, it has some deep theological concepts, many I find quite reverent.
I've read all of scripture.
And there is not one single verse in scripture that says that the skins GOD covered Adam's nakedness with was from an animal that GOD killed, spilled it's blood, and skinned.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
I agree with you. If you read all what AMR linked, it has some deep theological concepts, many I find quite reverent.

Why don't you ask AMR if God covered A&E with bloody, sacrificial, animal skins, to temporarily cover their sin, or not.

If he is so theologically deep and reverent, that is . . .

Does he agree with me . . or with you, Tam, and defiant MADists?

Only AMR can say.
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Why don't you ask AMR if God covered A&E with bloody, sacrificial, animal skins, to temporarily cover their sin, or not.

If he is so theologically deep and reverent, that is . . .

Does he agree with me . . or with you, Tam, and defiant MADists?

Only AMR can say.

You know well AMR does not hold to MAD, he is very much reformed theology.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
And, frankly, if AMR fails to back me up on this crucial theological point, he will be considered seriously off track by me and mine.
 

intojoy

BANNED
Banned
Here it is for YOU to open your eyes, ears, heart, and brain.

Genesis 3:21 KJV
(21) Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.



Not a peep about killing an animal, spilling it's blood, or skinning it.
It is not there, and if some spirit has told it is, then you are listening to an evil spirit.

Would it be a problem for mad theology if it did specify that innocent blood was shed?

The first person to know and understand the sacrificial work of the Servant was Isaiah. How do you reconcile that?


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
Wrong ! One of the consequences of Adam's disobedience was their children would be born with a sin nature that they ,Adam and Eve, were not created with.

Eph 2:3
Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

Gosh, the Gentiles must have a better parentage. :think:

Romans 1:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:​
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Would it be a problem for mad theology if it did specify that innocent blood was shed?
Scripture doesn't specify it, and has nothing to do with whether one accepts MAD or not.
It's about whether it is in scripture or not.
 

intojoy

BANNED
Banned
Would it be a problem for mad theology if it did specify that innocent blood was shed?

The first person to know and understand the sacrificial work of the Servant was Isaiah. How do you reconcile that?


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

“Yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt

make his soul an offering for sin,

he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:

by the knowledge of himself shall my righteous servant justify many; and he shall bear their iniquities.”
??Isaiah? ?53:10-11? ?ASV??
http://bible.com/12/isa.53.10-11.asv


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
The wages of sin is death.

Adam and Eve did not die immediately when their original sin was committed, simply because a substitutional death was provided by God, on their behalf.

An animal lost its life and it's blood was applied by God to temporarily cover the sin of A&E. There is no sound Christian believer or theologian I have ever heard of, who denies this Truth.

Only a couple of MAD women deny this Truth.

Let AMR give answer to this himself . . .
 
Top