The Fall of Adam in Christian Perception 3

The Christian Perception 

There is mention of a curse in the in the verse 17, but it is not the curse of inherent sin. The ground has been cursed because of Adams sin. Somebody please come to the rescue of this “original sin ideology”. The punishments are clear, unambiguous and complete. There is no more. Where is the concept of “original sin”? Maybe, it too had it’s origin within the Church’s imagination. I will close this section in the same way I closed this section in the Jewish discourse with:

 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”(1) The Rabbis explanation of this verse differs from our Christian brother, they have said, “sin, or, sin-offering.( 2) In Hebrew the same word is used for "sin," and "sin- offering," thus emphasizing in a remarkable way the complete identification of the believer's sin with his sin offering.( 3) Here both meanings are brought together. "Sin lieth at the door," but so also "a sin-offering croucheth at the tent door." It is "where sin abounded" that "grace did much more abound".(4) Abel's offering implies a previous instruction(5) for it was "by faith" Hebrews 11:4 and faith is taking God at His word; so that Cain's unbloody offering was a refusal of the divine way.

But Jehovah made a last appeal to Cain (6) even yet to bring the required offering.” I took the time to read all the verses given in this lengthy commentary and so not to be biased; I will leave it to the reader to try to make the connection between the verses in the commentary and the given verse. It should be noted all of these verses are from the New Testament none are from the Old and none are cited by Christ. Here the commentators are trying to say that Cain bought forward the wrong offering. This is unfounded because God never mentions what should be given as an offering. They have decided to say because Cain’s offering was unbloody that it was a refusal to divine way.

Even at the end of the verse there is no mention of God telling Cain to change his offering. Verses 4-5 states “4 Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his offering, 5 but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.” Abel presented his best, could it be possible that Cain didn’t, this will be discussed later. The Christians are pointing to the “blood sacrifice” of Christ. In this whole account of Eden given by the Bible I have yet to come across one verse asking for a blood sacrifice. Remember this:

WITHOUT THE CONCEPT OF “THE ORIGINAL SIN” THERE IS NO CHRISTIANITY!

Just as we did in the Jewish discourse, the last verses to be discussed will be those that address the creation of man.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them(7).

The commentators have said: (8) “Man was made in the “image” and likeness of God. This image is chiefly in the fact that man is a personal, rational, and moral being. While God is infinite and man finite, nevertheless man posses the elements of personality similar to those of the Divine Person: thinking, feeling, willing.” At this point they warn that man is a trinity, made up of body, soul and spirit: then continue to say, “but because “God is Spirit” this tripartite nature of man is not to be confused with the original “image and likeness of God” which, being spiritual, relates to the elements of personality”. Most Christians when asked are under the impression that this verse refers to a physical likeness, not personality which is correct. The image of man is a weak and needy image unworthy of the Creator of All. The last verse is:

 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.(9) This verse has no commentary from the Scofield. This verse just shows again that man is corporal made of dust and to dust he must return. 

Conclusion of the Christian Perception 

It is my opinion that a lot of Christians believe in what has been taught to them without any self study. I have talked to them concerning many issues that were raised here and the one that keeps coming to the forefront is “original sin”. God knows his creation and he knew what his creation was and is capable of. When our “parents” Adam and Eve ate of the tree God was not surprised, it was already known by God what they would do, however there was no compulsion.

The plan for man’s redemption didn’t take 4000 years (the time from Adam to Jesus) to be realized. According to the Bible, it was at the latest when Cain killed Abel and God assured Cain before he committed that horrible act that if he did good it would be accepted from him.(10) According to the information given in this section, the original sin has yet to be proven as a fact. It is an unfounded teaching of the church. I believe that any reader will be able to see the plan of God after this idea of original sin has been completely removed from their minds.

This doctrine of original sin shows God as being hardhearted and unforgiving. For men that lived directly after Adam and worked righteousness where are their rewards. If there was no forgiveness before the death of Christ, God is unjust. We will show later from the Bible that God did rewarded his righteous servants by bringing them to heaven with him even before the advent of Christ. I pray that this is received in the spirit that it is given.  

Notes:

________________________________________________

1. Gen 4:7

2. Scofield page 10

3. compare John 3:14; 2 Corinthians 5:21

4. Romans 5:20

5. compare Genesis 3:21

6. Genesis 4:7

7. Gen. 1:26-27

8. Scofield page 4

9. Gen 2:7

10. Gen. 4:7