Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

The status of Adam after creation

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00

eddif

Member
It has been a good while since I started a thread.

I wish to look at the condition of Adam (after creation).
Genesis 1:26-27

What does scripture say Adam / man was?

First off. Man is made in the image of God. Imagery points to a reality but is not the reality. So I know man is wonderfully made, but he still remains a man. Maybe I will discuss a little lower later.
If man is a tabernacle, his kidneys are lavers for washing, etc.

Later on I may start a thread on how man is born of the spirit, but right now I would like to stay on the flesh end of things.

eddif
 
We will have a whole bible and nature to help us understand God. It really is about understanding God that counts. Romans 1:19-20

Created man is lying on a table (physically complete. But not breathing). The Spirit breathed the breath of physical life (mind, will, emotions, and lungs full of air). The man Adam (the image of God is alive). He is not God (although shortly he will be tempted to be like God).

God the Father and God the Son ( the only begotten Son). God be done gotten Eve out of Adams side. Remember this is imagery and the reality of much of this is Jesus. The Father and the Son have been symbolized by Adam and Eve. God is doing the correct images (no false images).

eddif
 
Adam was the first Adam, representing God to all creation. Adam surrendered that authority to Satan in the fall.

Jesus was the second Adam and He never surrendered that authority to Satan.
 
Adam was the first Adam, representing God to all creation. Adam surrendered that authority to Satan in the fall.

Jesus was the second Adam and He never surrendered that authority to Satan.
Welcome Andrew.
God had all angels and universes under him.
Adam (the image) had one garden and instructions to populate the earth.

It really is hard to not run all the way to the final eternity. Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world . Help me with Adam in the garden if you can.

Adam had the garden planted for him. Adam listened to one under him (serpent).

eddif
 
I Corinthians 15:45-46
45. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
Comments:
45. The first Adam is an earthy image.
46. The first Adam was not real spiritual
(Later verses show he will eventually become spiritual, but now we are in the garden).
47. Jesus will be discussed later

Some think the first Adam was super spiritual, but I don't seem to find scriptures to support a first Adam being super spiritual.

eddif
 
The natural Adam had a natural pacemaker in his heart. This natural pacemaker looks like a cartoon crucified man. So the earthly Adam shows the need for a savior from the very first. Just because the symbol is in man, it does not mean the crucified Jesus is in man. It does (IMHO) show that there is a need in all men for a savior. Jesus needs to be invited into our being.

eddif
 
In the garden, Adam did not operate by a word of knowledge, etc. ; but depended on external conversations with God. Adam evidently did not have dreams, visions, spiritual gifts to guide him into dealing with satan's temptation through Eve. Discerning evil would have helped. This is mostly hindsight. Adam had given Eve part of himself.

Jesus did operate in / through spiritual gifts. If we are to function today, we need to be more than the original Adam. It is terrible (or wonderful) to recognize our need.

The Holy Spirit inside us directing.

eddif
 
lest we forget it was not Adam that came first but Jesus Christ and Adam was created in His image and likeness and not vice versa[Lk.3:38] - the image fell but not the reality - twinc
 
lest we forget it was not Adam that came first but Jesus Christ and Adam was created in His image and likeness and not vice versa[Lk.3:38] - the image fell but not the reality - twinc
Revelation 13:8
Jesus was slain from the foundation of earth.

The imagery in Adam is parable like.

The natural pacemaker of Adam's heart (our heart too) looks like a crucified man. The reality to come will be when we invite Jesus into our heart. A symbol in our heart is not the reality.

The kidneys in Adam (us too) take away toxins out of the body. The reality comes later when the stripes that pierced the kidneys of Jesus provide for our healing.
I Peter 2:24

The imagery of Adam is lower than the reality of God, but points to God. God is not in man till Jesus knocks at the door and we invite him in. Revelation 3:20

Adam had some imagery / symbolism, but it pointed to a future fulfillment. The tabernacle had imagery too, and is sort of like the vessel man is to be at the new birth.

It gets hard to look continually at Adam, when we know what will happen later. Our bodies will be changed at the resurrection, and move more toward the eternal spiritual.

Adam started off in a shadow existence, and not the ultimate reality of what he will be. No wonder we see through a glass darkly. We are looking at shadows of things to come.

eddif
 
If you're talking about Adam after creation, but before the fall, then, man was more a spiritual being than flesh. Some imagery here. Body--soul--spirit (from inside out). The flesh was inside. Because he hadn't fallen yet, the flesh portion of man was not dominant, the spirit was. He probably glowed with spiritual light because of this.

I know you didn't want to touch on the spirit portion yet, but before the fall, there's little to talk about concerning the flesh I think. The flesh was there but...largely like an unborn child of sorts. `(uh-oh, flashbacks of Alien, lol)

He hadn't lost anything yet, so was very probably hyper-dimensional at that time, and also still saw God as He is...a Spiritual being and with the capabilities of one. Perhaps Adam could fly or...teleport? Pre-fall man must've been something pretty magnificent. God was proud of him and loved him immensely (still does). He had one significant thing to do...don't pull the pin on the hand grenade. But Adam had never seen a hand grenade go off before. And he had never been lied to before. So it's akin to laying down a loaded gun in front of a toddler that's never seen one operate before. All he had was daddy's word for it, dangerous son, don't play with it, don't even pick it up.

But I'm not sure if Adam knew what trust was yet, for he had never been lied to before.
After the fall, he lost his spiritual identity. The Alien came out and was born. The flesh became dominant and he lost most of his spiritual capabilities. The light was gone. He was now spirit--soul--body. (from inside out).

...or so it seems to me.
 
So now we have to become "born again" born of the spirit, live for the spirit, cultivate the spirit man, so that the spirit man once again becomes dominant.
 
I Corinthians 15:42-45
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Actually I am looking at a realistic description of who Adam was at creation. Either Adam was a super spiritual creation who fell (that seems to describe Lucifer and not Adam), or Adam was a lower person who fell (and Jesus slain from the foundation of the world would finish redemption at the time of the passion).

The living soul is different ,IMHO, than a quickened spirit. Adam is defined as being created a living soul. Adam is described as being lower ( I have been through the Elohim discussion).

Jesus is exalted as being a quickening spirit ( having abilities beyond the original Adam). Through the work of Jesus, our flesh (living soul) becomes changed at the resurrection. Before the resurrection ( at the new birth) our spirit is born ( we are born again in a spiritual sense).

There are several doctrines regarding what Adam was like. As a Mississippi redneck I am trying to look at scripture, and I realize I see through a glass darkly.

We live in a flesh body (one that we will have changed at the last trump (resurrection). If we have accepted salvation in Jesus, we have been born again. IMHO, we have a spiritual birth through Jesus ( sinless life, death on cross, resurrection from grave, ascending into heaven, interceding for us, sending Holy Spirit, etc.)

Our benefits come from the second Adam. The first Adam did not seem to have spiritual gifts to overcome the works of satan. The new man is given spiritual gifts, but still exists in a body of flesh. Romans 7: 25

eddif
 
eddif
I just believe that Adam was created as a man who God had created with the ability to make decisions on his own and choose to act on them or not. He had no knowledge of what was good and what was evil. But he had a relationship with His creator. His task was follow and obey His creator no matter if he understood or not. He blew it and blamed God for it.
He could eat from the tree of life, he chose to eat from the tree of knowledge of good AND evil. We make the same choice. Do we keep eating from the tree of knowledge or do we eat from the tree of life, the bread from heaven? Abel chose the bread from heaven. Cain chose the tree of knowledge.
The tree of knowledge itself is not evil. But most men given the knowledge corrupt it. Romans 1.
Without the bread from heaven there is no restoration.
 
Restore in scriptures is usually about physical things that need to be restored. At times a humble attitude needs to be restored; Jesus came in humbleness.

IMHO the spiritual gifts on sons and daughters did not come till Pentecost. It is hard to restore something that is prophesied but not yet manifested. All the spiritual gifts (for the most part) were in prophets of the OT (thank god for Jewish prophets), but not given to individuals. The new birth (IMHO) was not a restored condition, but based on Jesus; who at the fullness of time came forth to be born... Galatians 4:4

It really is hard to see new things with a humble heart. We love to hear new things, but usually for prideful reasons. I have caught a lot of flack, because I think outside of most paradigms. I have no desire for anyone to shift to my box, but there are a few things in my box that I consider correct.

Adam and Eve had senses that could sense good and evil. By instruction Adam and Eve were told not to eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil (do not use senses to decide what is right).

Satan used our tree network of senses:
Look at the beauty of the forbidden tree
Taste the fruit of the forbidden tree

Satan used our soul (carnal mind) to question gods word. The word finally became flesh in the form of Jesus.

If anything feels good to our senses do it, may appeal to carnal mind, but our eyes of our understanding in Christ Jesus say this is wrong. We cut off some of our desires (by Holy Spirit working in us). We train our senses to discern the will of god. Jesus felt the power go out (we need to seek new trained senses).

The kingdom of Eden was a shadow of things to come. Heaven for eternity is a reality for us in the future. We have many of the benefits now, but the flesh will totally change at the resurrection.

Chase rabbits? Sure. LOL

eddif
 
If we see the first Adam as a perfect creation of God made in His image and given the very breath of God to become a living being then we see something that is beautiful and perfect in body/soul/spirit. From the fall of Adam began the beginning of Spiritual knowledge as through the generations many sought out seeking the Lord and being obedient to His will. When God asked Adam "where art thou" God knew were Adam was hiding as he was hiding in his shame. God covered his shame in His own righteousness and then sent Adam out of the garden to work out his own salvation through sorrow that led him to reconciled himself back to the grace of God. Adam was the shadow of who we have become today needing that of a Savior as we hide in our shame.
 
IMHO, Lucifer fits the description of the being with perfect beauty. Isaiah 14 calls the being Lucifer. Ezekiel 28 does not use this name, but is describing a power in Eden. I can see how that statement could be transferred to Adam, but IMHO Adam was either naked, clothed with fig leaves, or the hide garment god gave him. The serpent was the tempter of Eve, and satan promises the earthly kingdoms to those who will bow to him. Too bad; the serpent lost instead of getting gain. Eve and Adam lost too. Satan is a liar.

The book of Job describes satan in heaven as the accuser of Job. IMHO Job's friends accused Job of evil (led by the spirit of satan). Very similar to Eve and her temptation. Job's friends lost position by being tempted of satan (IMHO).

What happened at Pentecost was spoken of in prophecy. This was a new thing. Jesus came as the fullness of the godhead bodily. Jesus had to leave so the power might come (I have problems with my cloudy vision here).

eddif
 
Welcome Andrew.
God had all angels and universes under him.
Adam (the image) had one garden and instructions to populate the earth.
<SNIP>
eddif

What I made in bold red is grammatically impossible from Scripture, and here is why:

Genesis 1:
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: mand 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.
.​
What I underlined in bold blue are prepositional phrases. The prepositional phrases in every language answer the questions of which, who, what, where and how. When modifying verbs, the prepositional phrase is adverbial, and when they modify a noun, they are adjectival. We learned that in 6th grade Language Arts; but universally it is amazing that grammar works in the same manner in every language. Therefore while the structure of languages differ, the same 8 parts of grammar as in English are acting the same in all languages. Therefore, it is possible to analyze the original languages of Scripture by using the simple rules of grammar.

If you remember how to diagram a sentence (I loved doing that!) you first had to find the subject, and then the verb If we used that grammatical analysis, we would have diagrams like this:
26 God|said
27 God |created

In the verses above, the same preposition, in is used, and they explain WHAT God said, and HOW God created, they are adverbial prepositional phrases because they modify the verb. (Adjectives can only modify nouns). With me so far?

Therefore, the question of how God created humankind is the purpose of both verses. They then say the same thing: ALL humankind has the image of God imprinted on them. In practical terms, this means that to a much more limited extent, we share some of the same attributes that God has

The error of the poster is that she takes the words of the two adverbial prepositional phrases, and then creates a pronoun (another word that takes the place of a noun) when she calls Adam "the image". I submit that there is no grammatical reason in any language for her doing so.

Furthermore to call Adam "image" is to destroy the words and language of Scripture because doing such a thing reduces a human person to be no more real than the icons on our computer screen. that is the unseen and unplanned consequence for not following the rules of grammar.

I do not question her motives, nor am I criticizing her. Instead I offer up a grammatical analysis in order for her and others to avoid the pitfalls of calling Adam "the image".

More to the point of the terrible conclusion (IMHO) of such a grammatical gaff is to utterly destroy the Atonement, Please read this:

Romans 5: 12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many
.
Nah, I do not think that you thought it out this way, nor did I ever think that you were attempting to destroy the Atonement. So I hope that this helps you.
 
Last edited:
Bill and Jim are coworkers.
Compound subject - being verb - predicate nominative
If Bill and Jim work well together, then the product of their labor is (possibly) additive . 3+2=5

If Bill and Jim fight at work, the total output at work may be subtractive.
3-2=1

The artist and the math major may have differing thinking processes. The artist wonders if the math person will ever see the truth. The math major is worried about the artists thinking abilities. God confounded language at Babel.

3 to the 3rd power is twenty-7
I have no problem mixing English and Math in the same sentence. Jim being very, very, bad ; is possibly: bad to the third power.

PEMDAS
Parenthesis in this thread is Adam and his condition.
I see Adam as not being equal to God. Being in charge of Eden is an earthly picture of God in charge of everything. When the artist paints the picture, he may have metaphysical thoughts (thoughts he is trying to portray on canvas).

I am a redneck southern person. I do not do English well. I will / do appreciate your abilities. I am sorry you are offended. I hope we can get through this. There is the reality / body and there is the shadow / image. IMHO they do not have to be on the same plane.

You are welcome to try again.

eddif
 
MADAM EDDIF:

First, I must say that I was not offended.
Second I state that I was not attempting to offend you
Third I state that whatever education I may have is a gift to me and it was the result of being privileged to receive it; therefore whatever is entrusted to me is considered as a stewardship, and I am obligated to share it with whoever needs it, or requests it.

Bill and Jim are coworkers.
Compound subject - being verb - predicate nominative
If Bill and Jim work well together, then the product of their labor is (possibly) additive . 3+2=5

If Bill and Jim fight at work, the total output at work may be subtractive.
3-2=1

The artist and the math major may have differing thinking processes. The artist wonders if the math person will ever see the truth. The math major is worried about the artists thinking abilities. God confounded language at Babel.

3 to the 3rd power is twenty-7
I have no problem mixing English and Math in the same sentence. Jim being very, very, bad ; is possibly: bad to the third power.

PEMDAS [I do recognize that this is the math order of operations, but I cannot see its relevance to what I stated]
Parenthesis in this thread is Adam and his condition.
I see Adam as not being equal to God. Being in charge of Eden is an earthly picture of God in charge of everything. When the artist paints the picture, he may have metaphysical thoughts (thoughts he is trying to portray on canvas).
.

I have no idea what you are saying here. Could you restate that?
I am having a hard time refraining from a joke about it being the result of eating too much grits and okra, but I shall refrain because I have to be good! :hysterical

I am a redneck southern person. I do not do English well. I will / do appreciate your abilities. I am sorry you are offended. I hope we can get through this. There is the reality / body and there is the shadow / image. IMHO they do not have to be on the same plane.

You are welcome to try again.

eddif

It seems that you are confusing terms both directly above and in what you previously posted. The confusion lies in the area called "typology", and in the Bible when it refers specifically a situation that theologians refer to as ":type and antitypes"

Here is a thumbnail explanation:
"Type" refers to the Old Testament examples, and "antitype": refers to the New Testament fulfillment of the type mentioned in the OT. There are several sayings that are used to explain what is meant:
  1. The new Testament contains the Old Testament explicitly, and the Old Testament contains the New Testament implicitly.
  2. The NT is "enfolded" in the OT, and the NT unfolds the OT
  3. The New is in the Old contained; The Old is by the New explained. (originally stated by Augustine)
  4. The OT is the shadow, and the NT is the substance
When looking at # 4 above, it is important to see that whatever is in the OT is merely a shadow of what is in the NT, properly called the substance, or reality of what the OT hints at. Therefore to properly do typology there must be two distinct elements: Shadow and Substance. If there is two elements of the same sort, such as shadow and shadow, or substance and substance, then the typology expressed is invalid. there must be opposites expressed, not similar terms. And that is where the error lies.

In studying the "Types" the two comparative words "AS" and "SO" are forcibly called to our attention. The word "AS" is used for the "Type," and the word "SO" for the Antitype. The first is historic; the second is prophetic.

"AS in Adam all die, even SO in Christ shall all be made alive." 1 Cor. 15:22.

"AS the days of Noah were, SO shall also the corning of the Son of Man be." Matt. 24:37.

"AS Moses lifted up the serpent in the Wilderness, even SO must the Son of Man be lifted up." John 3:14.

"AS Jonah was three days and three nights in the Whale's belly; SO shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matt. 12:40.​
from https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/larkin/dt/28.cfm

In the original post to which I replied, you used terms like "type and image". In typology, they are synonyms. Here are NT examples that use "image"
.
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.

Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. (both from KJV)
and here are the verses that makes the issue of type and "antitype" so forcefully:

Romans 5: 12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come
<SNIP>
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
.​
So I hope that this clarifies things for you, and do not worry about your not understanding English grammar. As George Bush amply illustrated, mangling the English seems to be a trait of Texans! (sorry, but the devil made me do it! :biggrin )
 
Last edited:
IMHO, Lucifer fits the description of the being with perfect beauty. Isaiah 14 calls the being Lucifer. Ezekiel 28 does not use this name, but is describing a power in Eden. I can see how that statement could be transferred to Adam, but IMHO Adam was either naked, clothed with fig leaves, or the hide garment god gave him. The serpent was the tempter of Eve, and satan promises the earthly kingdoms to those who will bow to him. Too bad; the serpent lost instead of getting gain. Eve and Adam lost too. Satan is a liar.

The book of Job describes satan in heaven as the accuser of Job. IMHO Job's friends accused Job of evil (led by the spirit of satan). Very similar to Eve and her temptation. Job's friends lost position by being tempted of satan (IMHO).

What happened at Pentecost was spoken of in prophecy. This was a new thing. Jesus came as the fullness of the godhead bodily. Jesus had to leave so the power might come (I have problems with my cloudy vision here).

eddif

Many things in Gods word can be taken literal, but yet also has Spiritual implications. Example: God made skins to cover Adam, (literal), but yet it can be that of the Spiritual notation of God covering us in His righteousness (grace) that covers our shame (sin) as we are once again made righteous before Him.
 

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Back
Top