What 'exactly' changed in Adam when he sinned? (page 16)

Schizm

Boy, that little doggie of Elsewhere's is jumping on almost every leg he can find. Wonder who his next partner will be? LOL

Schizm

Here's that post of mine which AlanF found he couldn't deal with:

Hi AlanF,
: Also, since we have to eat in order to stay alive then it seems that *food* is the key to continual life.
Not at all. We breath air and we drink water in order to stay alive, but you're not proposing that *air* and *water* are keys to continual life. You're not arguing logically. Lack of any of these will kill us, but it doesn't follow that a sufficient supply or a supply of "the right kind" will allow us to live forever.
It is true that we also need air and water in order to stay alive. However, the "key" to continuous life without ever dying is Biblically linked to *food*. Nothing was said about any "air of life" or "water of life" there in the Genesis account. It was a "tree of life" which Adam was no longer allowed to EAT from, and which finally led to his death.
: All that we're told is that Adam and Eve themselves were allowed to do so.
No, Genesis doesn't say that. You're jumping to a conclusion.
According to Genesis 2:16, 17 Adam had permission to eat from "every" tree of the garden, except for ONE particular tree. So, how can you say that Genesis doesn't say that Adam had permission to eat from the tree of life?
From what's been said so far I see no reason to ditch my original statements. Which were in two parts, as follows:
[1] I believe that the "tree of life" contained the unique ingredients that Adam & Eve needed in order to sustain their lives forever. I also believe that they were at least periodically eating from this tree, for the reason that the other tree was the only one of the two that was off-grounds for them. It was only AFTER they disobeyed that they were prevented from eating of the tree of life any longer. Had they not disobeyed it appears that they would have continued to live for as long as they replenished the needs of their bodies by consuming the essential ingredients that could be found in the tree of life alone.
No question about it, they had permission to eat of the tree of life.
The fruit from the tree of life really had life-sustaining ingredients.
The fruit from the "other" tree was simply good for food, just plain ole food, and to eat from it was to disobey God and merit not being worthy of eating of the tree of life any longer.
So Adam and Eve would still be alive today had they not been disallowed from eating from the tree of life.
We die for the same reason that Adam and Eve died ... because we need the ingredients from the tree of life and aren't getting them.
[2] We die for the same reasons that Adam and Eve died. Namely, because we need the ingredients found in the tree of life, and can't have them. The reason we can't have them is because we fail to be fully righteous. We fail to be fully righteous because our fathers were unable to inculcate this quality into us by way of teaching us properly. Our fathers were unable to teach us properly because their fathers were just as incapable ... and so on all the way back to Adam. Ultimately it can all be blamed on "sin". Person's who "sin" aren't worthy of eating from the tree of life. Once we've been helped to overcome our sinfulness then we will be allowed to eat from the tree of life. That's apparently the reason for the mention of the "trees of life" in the book of Revelation. It has nothing at all to do with genes!
I look forward to any further comments that you may make.
Thanks,
Schizm

I asked AlanF why he didn't reply to my comments, and this is what he said:

: Also, I had hoped that you would've made it back in order to offer a reply to my last post, addressed to you, but you never replied.
I chose not to because you simply danced around my points, and I don't much feel like dancing with people about this topic. Really, since I believe it's like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, I'll take the time only as long as I have nothing more pressing to do. It's only of minor academic interest.

For any of you who might not recognize it, this tactic, as used by AlanF, is as old as the hills. The idea is to make it look like the other person is the one who is side-stepping the issue when in fact it's ole AlanF himself that's doing all the side-stepping.

Schism

Schizm

Nice pair of shoes you have on there, minimus. LOL Also, when it comes to what type of fabric you prefer for your pants, is denim your first choice?

Schizm

Hey Big Tex,

I noticed that you removed the little doggie from my post up above. If that offended you, are you going to remove the one that Elsewhere posted here?: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/15/71596/4.ashx

All I was doing was following the example set by Elsewhere. Now, is that really so bad?

Schizm

gumby

Gumby this post sure keeps on going.
I told you before, the only thing Adam changed was his pants, the talking snake scared the shit out of him!

Shotgun ya dumb ol' bastard......Adam never saw the snake. ....only Eve did. She told him bout the snake and he believed her and she fooled the whole damn bunch of us. There was never a snake.....she just said that. She was a typical woman who was eating something she wasn't supposed to (like women do with chocolate) and she made up a big ass lie like women do to justify it! *just realises he's going to get his arse kicked by women* Schizm, I've never known Alan to dodge anything.....ever. If you play fair, so does he. Questiones need to be answered. You didn't address my question either about the tree being available to all mankind or not. I'm sure your a cool guy....you seem like it, but be honest and be real till points are satisfied. Gumby

Schizm

I've never known Alan to dodge anything.....ever. If you play fair, so does he.

That's not at all true!

Schizm

Gumby,

You need to start paying more attention, man! Do you come to this forum in a sober state? If your problem has to do with "drinking" you really ought to try coming here while sober. Whether you like being sober or not at least then I might not have to hold you by the hand and show you all the things you've missed. You damn sure have blurred vision for SOME reason. Maybe it's drugs instead, eh?

gumby

Do you come to this forum in a sober state? If your problem has to do with "drinking" you really ought to try coming here while sober. . You damn sure have blurred vision for SOME reason. Maybe it's drugs instead, eh?

Well at first I said you was a nice guy....now I think your an [deleted].

Gumby

Schizm

Well at first I said you was a nice guy....now I think your [deleted].

I'm anxiously awaiting to see whether or not Big Tex is gonna let you get by with calling me that. Only a few minutes ago he deleted the BS word that I used. I merely said "BS" ... but you called me a dirty name. Hey, Big Tex, where are you when the shoe is on the other foot?

Schizm

BTW, Gumby, that post of mine you replied to was not meant to be taken all that seriously. I quess I should have used some smilies, or a "LOL" or two. Sometimes I take it for granted that others know how to take me. My mistake.

Schizm

What 'exactly' changed in Adam when he sinned?

Share this