[soundofgrace] Re: [soundofgrace] Re: Adam and the garden

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : September 2004 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "Chad Richard Bresson" <breusswane@...>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 23:18:05 -0400
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Reisinger" <24jreisinger26@...>
>THERE IS NEITHER GRACE OR
> EARNING BY WORKS IN THE GARDEN - SHOW ME OTHERWISE IN THE TEXT.

If Adam obeys, he lives.  If Adam disobeys, he dies.  There is "earning" on 
both sides of the equation.  Whatever you say about the one, you must say 
about the other.  The inference is in the text.  The exegesis demands we 
treat both sides of the formula the same (and given the way the 
obey/disobey, life/death formula is handled in the rest of the canon that 
kind of exegesis and inference is not only good but necessary... but like I 
said... the rest of the canon and its biblical theology is merely the trump 
card... we need go no further than exegesis of Genesis 2:17 itself).

>There is a
> clear commandment from a sovereign Creator to a sinless man not eat of a
> specific tree upon pain of death.

If eat eats of the tree he "earns" death (Romans 6:23).  The necessary 
inference is if he doesn't eat, he "earns" life.  If the disobedience is an 
evil "work" (Romans 3 is clear that it is), the obedience is automatically a 
righteous "work".  What you say about disobedience and death, you must say 
about obedience and life.

You're suggesting that his disobedience was not a "work" and did not "earn" 
death?  If you say "no", at least you're being consistent with what you 
believe to be true about obedience and life.  But what the scriptures tell 
us about disobedience and death (and obedience and life... Lev. 18:5) is not 
in your favor.

Chad Bresson
Xenia, OH