----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Reisinger" <24jreisinger26@...>

> Is this the same "eternal life/righteousness/justification" that

> Adam, in the garden, could have earned by keeping the same law?



You're jumping ahead of the game(probably because you think you know where 
I'm going). :-)  I'd prefer to keep this discussion within the realm of 
Abraham and Moses, for the time being. :-)



There are a myriad of assumptions, some more highly warranted than others, 
that play into just *what* Adam would have earned, not the least of which is 
whether or not Abraham and Moses (and Christ) were using the same formula 
with the same kinds of obligations in the blessing and cursing with the same 
terms (or more crassly, whether or not they were playing the same game using 
the same set of rules, with only the amount of revelation concerning those 
same set of rules as the differences between them).  Not only does the 
progress of the revelation of redemption come into play, but also the unity 
of revelation and redemption.



So... hopefully avoiding a quagmire of discussion... :-)), let's start with 
simple logic used by the Creator and embedded in the text.  Every instance 
in the text in which God promises blessing for obedience and cursing for 
disobedience, the blessing and cursing are couched in terms of the eternal 
(or a better word is probably "ultimate").  This is true of both Abraham 
(Gen. 17 & 26) and Moses (Lev. 18, Deut. 6).  And it's not just true of 
Adam... Paul's eschatology itself sees a similar dualism... the antithesis 
of eternal salvation is eternal damnation.



For Adam, we have record of a curse couched in the eternal (Gen. 2:17).  If 
one half of the blessing/curse formula for Adam is eternal (eat/disobey and 
die), wouldn't the antithesis (not eat/obey and live) also be eternal?  And 
if the blessing/cursing formulas for Abraham and Moses are eternal, why 
wouldn't Adam's be eternal?  If the text overwhelmingly and explicitly 
attests to the disobey and die/obey and live formula, how is it that 1/1000 
of the text escapes such a reality, especially when one half of the formula 
(disobey and die) is explicitly present in that 1/1000 of the canon?  It's a 
no-brainer, IMHO, to affirm the blessing half of the formula when the curse 
half is clearly present.



Further, after listening to Greg Beale's "Eschatology of the Temple" series, 
I've come to believe that the typical view of the blessing half of the 
formula is not correct.  The typical view is that the blessing is implicit 
and, while present, is not explicit in the Genesis account.  I do not 
believe it is implicit... but, like Abraham's formula is found over the 
breadth of a few chapters in Genesis, the blessing is explicitly 
communicated to Adam.



But. that is beyond the conversation at this point.  :-)



Chad Bresson

Xenia, OH