KeralaBrethren.net
New User? Register Today!
Registered Users, LOGIN
What we believe (Eng) What we believe (Mal) About Us Contact Us
Forums Home General Forum Youth Forum Sisters Forum Archives (2005-2007) Archives (2001-2004)
Listing of Brides Listing of Grooms
Assemblies in Kerala Evangelists in India Instituitions in India
Christian Albums Christian Songs
Audio Sermons Bible Wallpapers Brethren Links KB History (Eng) KB History (Mal)

K E R A L A  B R E T H R E N
General Forum

Forums Home ::
This Message Forum is to discuss spiritual topics only. Please avoid personal or assembly matters.
Let us use this facility for our spiritual enrichment and for bringing glory to our Lord almighty.
Webmasters reserve the right to delete any topic or posting partly or completely from this forum.
View Topics :: :: Post new topic


Keralabrethren.net: General Forum: Adam, A Figure Of Him To Come

Post Reply
Go to bottom of the page

# 11382 :  Adam, A Figure Of Him To Come

Adam was created from a virgin earth?

Shalom Malekim!!!

 

Post by : George P. Koshy  View Profile    since : 22 Apr 2019


Reply by : rajarajan   View Profile   Since : 24 Apr 2019 6:00:27 PM Close

Hello George,

That was a confusing statement. Did you mean earth was virgin?  How, I would appreciate if you elaborate it. By the way, Christian beliefs are confusing to me. Are Chritsian beliefs greater or equal or lower than HIndu beliefs?  Christians normally depend upon Bible to prove their beliefs. Can you cite some historical facts to prove the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ?  What is the necessary to speak so much to people about Jesus. Some quote from Bible and say Jesus told or conveyed that message to them. Some quote a verse or two from the Bible, like Colossians 1:23  Did not Jesus tell his disciples to make disciples rather than go and preach.  Some, who know Greek well say Matthew 28:19-20 is mistranslation.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 25 Apr 2019 2:46:04 PM Close

Dear Raja Rajan,

 

Did I address you properly? If not, please correct me.

 

Thank you for your questions. Before I answer them, I wish to know certain facts about you. Your answer will help me in forming the answers.

 

1.      You asked about ‘Christian belief’ and ‘Hindu belief.’ What I am interested to know is: are you a Christian or a Hindu? My answers will depend on your belief, so that I could help you.

2.      You also referred to Matthew 28:19-20 and stated that some who know Greek have the opinion that it is a mistranslation. I cannot answer this, without knowing which translation you are referring, in this case. There are many translations of the Bible. You may see different translation in English, as well as in many other languages. Please respond by giving the translation that you use. If you are using a translation other than in English, or Malayalam, I am not in a position to give an accurate answer.

 

I wait to hear from you.

 

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : guide   View Profile   Since : 2 May 2019 6:16:53 AM Close

 

Dear GPK,

What you mean by "Adam was created from a virgin earth?"

 

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 3 May 2019 2:07:49 PM Close

Dear ‘guide,’

Are you familiar with the following English expressions?

            Virgin Oil

            Extra Virgin Olive Oil

            Virgin Land

            Virgin Islands

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : allentvarghese   View Profile   Since : 3 May 2019 4:12:38 PM Close

 

Dear Br George,

If we strictly go by the meaning of the word ‘virgin’, it signifies someone or something which is unused, unexploited, or unprocessed.

So this would mean an earth which remained un-used/exploited/processed as there was no man to ‘till the earth’(Gen2:5).

Thus the statement “Adam was created or formed from a virgin earth” would stand true. And specially by the mention on the title of the thread, it makes for a great study between the “the first man of the earth” and “the second man from heaven” (1 Cor 15:47) both formed from 'virgins' through the will of God.

Regards,

Allen

 

 

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 6 May 2019 2:05:51 PM Close

Dear Allen T. Varghese,

 

You got it. Could you try to expand?

 

Please remember that there are at least three ‘virgins’ associated with Christ’s life.

 

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 7 May 2019 8:05:49 AM Close
Dear A T varghese, Is there any hints in the New Testament that validates this notion?
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 7 May 2019 1:59:22 PM Close

Dear 'kristianjude', a.k.a. 'kristine,'

Is there any New Testament passage that forbids its usage? If there is, please provide.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 8 May 2019 3:35:59 AM Close
When this usage was not at all in the thoughts of NT writers, where arise the question of forbidding it? Think wisely before asking questions .
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 8 May 2019 4:54:57 AM Close
And the NT writers could not have predicted that new writers would rise in later days with this novel thought.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 8 May 2019 7:55:12 AM Close
Novel thoughts are of three types, first one that stands in line with the Scripture, second one that falls out but promulgated with good intention and is not harmful (topic of this thread comes under this type) then the third one is that falls out and stands against Scripture.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 8 May 2019 8:13:07 AM Close
The subject of this thread seems to be borrowed from St. Irenaeus of Lyons. https://classicalchristianity.com/2011/10/24/virgin-earthvirgin-birth/
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 8 May 2019 2:25:42 PM Close
Dear A T varghese, Saying that earth was unused/unexploited as there was no man to till the ground does not mean for me that the earth was virgin. Not every plant and herb has grown (Genesis 2:5) signifies that the process was only incomplete and does not mean that the process has not at all started. Even before God created man, Earth had brought forth grass, herb and fruit trees (1:11, 12). Every winged bird (1:21) living creatures, cattle, creeping things and beast (1:24) were created out of ground (2:19). Earth had lost its virginity even before Adam was created. Earth was virgin by the time God called the dry land Earth (1:10).
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 9 May 2019 6:10:10 PM Close

Dear ‘kristianjude,’ a.k.a. ‘kristine,’

On May 8, 2019 you made a series of posting having one or more sentences. It appears that the flood of posting has come to an end and receded. Therefore, I am addressing your postings to show that you have no understanding of the Scriptures and also lack common honesty.

The posting of 8 May 2019 03:35:59 shows that you have no answer to my question that I posted on the day before. Not only that, you also are void of any understanding of the shades (shadows) in the Old Testament. Therefore, I ask you the following and challenge you to answer them.

How do you know that the shades in the OT were not in the minds of New Testament writers? Do you know that the New Testament writers did not write of their own? On the other hand, they wrote as they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Your posting of 8 May 2019 04:54:57 shows that you reject the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in writing the Old and New Testaments. The writers of the Scripture did not predict, but they prophesied. You do not know this or the differences. Gospel Literature Service (GLS), Mumbai, India has published a book, ‘The God of the Bible Is The God of Science.’ There is a section dealing with this problem of predicting and prophesying. Without knowing the difference, you made the Scriptures to be works of man and not the Word of God.

Your posting of 8 May 2019 07:55:12 shows that you are not aware of the fact that we are not discussing about ‘novel thoughts,’ but of thoughts according to Scriptures. However, your thoughts are ‘novel thoughts’ and not scriptural.

Your posting of 8 May 2019 08:13:07 deserve a thanks from me. Thank you for telling that there were others with the same thought about the subject of ‘virgin.’ I was not aware of St. Irenaeus of Lyons. I have not looked into his writings and am not thinking planning to do so, at this time.

Your posting of 8 May 2019 14:25:42 shows that you are reveling on your ignorance. You should read Genesis 2:5 in its context. Then you will know that you are even ignorant of what is meant by ‘context,’ forget about the expression ‘virgin’ or ‘virginity.’ Bringing forth grass, herbs, and trees did not violate the ‘virginity’ of the earth or land. On the other hand, it provided the functioning of the ‘virginity’ of earth that is capable to reproduce by having the seeds and fruits with seeds in them. Now, one should read Genesis 2:15 to understand the meaning of ‘tilling’ and ‘guarding’ the virgin earth. How come you missed that verse and found yourself reading verse 19?

In the above mentioned posting, you wrote, “Saying that earth was unused/unexploited as there was no man to till the ground does not mean for me that the earth was virgin.” You have made yourself superior to God, when you wrote about what you think is the final meaning of ‘tilling the ground.’ It was mentioned in the New Testament as a shadow or shade of things to come. You were ignorant about this fact.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 9 May 2019 6:51:55 PM Close
The fact is simple, when God called the dry land Earth, it had been virgin. When the earth started producing living creatures, plants and herbs, we understand the earth has been put in use which means earth is no more a virgin. A person with a common knowledge will understand this. Scripture does not say that Garden of Eden was virgin (Genesis 2:15). The above posting by George is full of non sense.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 9 May 2019 7:34:13 PM Close
Answering all his vain arguments is futile
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 10 May 2019 5:27:11 PM Close

The Lord Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, but he was not made from the virgin. He was from above, "the Word became flesh" - John 1:14, 3:21. Even if we call the earth as being 'virgin' at Adam's creation, Adam was of this earth and made from this earth ("until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return" - Gen 3:19).

So, it not correct to compare Adam to the Lord Jesus in respect to the virgin nature of the earth and of Mary.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 11 May 2019 2:57:54 PM Close

Dear ‘kristianjude,’ a.k.a. ‘kristine,’

You did not answer my questions that I posed in my posting of 5/9/2019. Therefore I am posting them again:

How do you know that the shades in the Old Testament were not in the minds of New Testament writers? Do you know that the New Testament writers did not write of their own?

Withoust answering the above two questions, you wrote, “The fact is simple, when God called the dry land Earth, it had been virgin.” I did not ask anything about why you consider earth was virgin at some time in the past. Why did you write this? It agains shows your lack of honesty and understanding of the Scriptural truth.

Since you voluntarily provided your definition for earth being ‘virgin’ at some time in the past, let me ask you the following and ask you to answer them.

1.      Are you saying that earth ceased to be ‘virgin’ on the third day, on the fifth day, or on the sixth day?

2.      You claim that you have the common knowledge, which is not common between us. Could you make it common between us?

3.      Could you show me the “non sense” in my posting of May 9, 2019?

I ask you to write answers to the five questions in this posting.

Thank you for admitting that you have no answer to my questions on 9 May 2019 19:34:13, while I have shown your lack of honesty. Let me explain: On 7th May 2019, I posted only one question and you came back with a barrage of postings on 8 May 2019. I showed the alck of honesty and logic in those barrage of posting from you and asked you to answer two other questions that are related to your barrage of postings. You have not answered those two questions, but have shown your lack of understanding of the Scriptures and honesty on 9 May 2019.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 11 May 2019 2:59:32 PM Close

Dear ‘moses2006,’

Please read Romans 5:14, which I inferred in my original posting. If you have any doubt, the title of this thread will make it celar to you.

You are exerting supremacy over the Scripture by writing, “So, it not correct to compare Adam to the Lord Jesus in respect to the virgin nature of the earth and of Mary.”

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 12 May 2019 10:24:18 AM Close
George, you have written "I did not ask anything about why you consider earth was virgin at some time in the past. Why did you write this?" George, what I should write here or should not, is my option and interest. You have no authority to command me. I made my first posting here addressing not you, but Mr. Varghese. In fact, I have no interest to interact a person like you who has a sickness for controversy. Don't think that I've no answers to your questions. I have sure answers, but it is your practice to go on asking questions upon question worthless.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 12 May 2019 1:52:25 PM Close
Dear 'moses2006' there are a few verses in NT reading which we can understand that Paul was not adamant to claim that everything he said should be taken as God ordained. Please read 1 Corinthian 7:6, 12, 25 & 40. It is true that Paul said that Adam was a figure of Christ.But he has not given any points of comparison between the two. But there are persons now a days who tend to explain this comparison with point of their own and claim it is scriptural.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 12 May 2019 3:31:01 PM Close
Dear 'moses2006' Can we Christians observe days, is it right or wrong to observe days, read Romans14:6. Though there was no command from God on this matter, Paul opened this as subject matter since it was an issue in Corinthian Churches and left this as choice to the believers.He did not say any thing claiming it scriptural. There is no Scriptural dictum and believers are at liberty to make a choice.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 13 May 2019 1:43:14 PM Close

Dear Mr. Koshy,

Its been a while since we communicated on this forum - I hope you are doing well!

Regarding this topic, I want to submit to whatever the Word of God states. I do not want to add or take away from what is revealed. At the same time, I do not have a perfect understanding of what God has revealed in His Word. Rom 5:14 states that Adam is a pattern for Christ - but based on my understanding most of the similarlities are inversed (negatives in Adam contrasted to positives in Christ). Please show from the scriptures how Mary and Earth are related in being virgins and how this is an example of the pattern described in Rom 5:14.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : abc   View Profile   Since : 13 May 2019 3:56:46 PM Close
Virgin Mary, Virgin Earth, Mother Earth, Mary woship, Earth worship and so on. Hope you can see a pattern when theological knowledge explodes in some people's brain.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : allentvarghese   View Profile   Since : 13 May 2019 5:15:09 PM Close

Dear Br George, 'kristianjude'

The usage of the word ‘virgin earth’ maybe distasteful to some but I would chose not to get caught up in them too much. One may opt to use the word, ‘untouched’ which would convey a similar meaning without sounding too offensive. 

My observations mainly came up from Gen 2:5. The verse is constructed in such a way that it gives an idea, that the process of growth had not yet taken place even though its essentials like trees and seed bearing capabilities were present. The verse specifically talks about the state of the earth before every herb and plants of the field existed on earth, before it grew/sprang up/to sprout. The process of growth had still not occurred because of two reasons- the lack of rain-(essential source of growth), and absence of man to till the ground(to process/cultivate/make it arable). 

Then Gen 2:6-7 talks about the formation of the these essentials. V6 talks about the fountain out of the earth which watered it and v7 talks about the way man is formed(like a work of a potter and his clay), -materially from the dust of the earth(adamah) and life from God- the breath of life, neshāmâh. Adam is thus formed from the dust of the earth- ‘adamah’- the relationship between which can be seen mentioned by various writers.

Man is then delegated dominion over God’s creation from the very beginning(Gen 1:28,29,30). God makes man capable of carrying out the role of being the master and king of this earth. He has the power and ability to use, exploit and process it’s resources to its full potential. But before this came to be, one would be led to agree to the fact that earth remained untouched and barren from the hand of its master-man, through the will of God (Gen 2:5-...For the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth.. and there was not a man to till the ground. )

Regards,

Allen

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 13 May 2019 7:23:36 PM Close
Dear Mr. Varghese Thanks for your post. I'm mulling over its content
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 29 May 2019 2:15:54 PM Close

Dear ‘kristianjude,’ a.k.a. ‘kristine,’

This is on your posting of 12 May 2019 10:24:18. On 5/11/2019 I wrote, <<“Without answering the above two questions, you wrote, “The fact is simple, when God called the dry land Earth, it had been virgin.” I did not ask anything about why you consider earth was virgin at some time in the past. Why did you write this? It agains shows your lack of honesty and understanding of the Scriptural truth.” >> You tried to change the subject. I asked you two questions to answer and you have not done that. That shows that you are not here to discuss, but to hinder. If you are here to discuss, then you should answer the questions that are posted to you. Let me once again post them for your convenience.

The questions were and are: First question, <<“How do you know that the shades in the Old Testament were not in the minds of New Testament writers?”>> Second question, <<“Do you know that the New Testament writers did not write of their own?”>>

This is a Forum and you cannot and should not demand who should answer and who should not answer on this Forum.

This is on your posting of 12 May 2019 13:52:25. You wrote, <<“There are a few verses in NT reading which we can understand that Paul was not adamant to claim that everything he said should be taken as God ordained. Please read 1 Corinthian 7:6, 12, 25 & 40.”>> Do you mean that Apostle Paul wrote those without being inspired by God? This is the third question I am asking you based on what you wrote.

This is on your posting of 12 May 2019 15:31:01. You wrote, <<“Can we Christians observe days, is it right or wrong to observe days, read Romans14:6. Though there was no command from God on this matter, Paul opened this as subject matter since it was an issue in Corinthian”>> Observing days are not the same as marrying and having a family life. Are you saying that the Epistle to the Romans was written to the Corinthians? This is the fourth question for you to answer. What you wrote was that the Epistle to the Romans was written to the Corinthians.

You continued on the same posting, <<“There is no Scriptural dictum and believers are at liberty to make a choice.”>> You wrote that there is no ‘scriptural dictum’ on the marriage relationship and it is left to the men and women and are free to make their own dictums as they wish. That is exactly what the homosexuals, including transgenders, also demand and teach. You are teaching what the homosexuals teach on marriage and family.

You are quoting the Scripture as Satan did when he tempted the Son in the wilderness as written in the Gospels written by Matthew and Luke.

You must be born from above before begin to teach the Word of God.

Shalom malekim!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 29 May 2019 2:17:34 PM Close

Dear Moses,

You wrote on 13 May 2019, “Rom 5:14 states that Adam is a pattern for Christ.” I do not know what translation you are using. We read in KJV, “Who is the figure of him that was to come.” You wrote ‘pattern’ and KJV it is read as ‘figure.’ There is a significant difference between these two words ‘pattern’ and ‘figure.’ Therefore, I wish to look into the original language as we read in TR (Received Text). There we read, OS ESTI TUPOS TOU MELLONTOS. A word-for-word translation is WHO IS A TYPE OF THE ONE COMING. The Greek word TUPOS is translated in Romans 5:14 in KJV as ‘figure,’ but you wrote it as ‘pattern.’

If we use ‘pattern,’ then Adam becomes the original after whom the ‘One Coming’ has to conform. When we talk about ‘type’ or ‘figure’ then that object is not the original but only a representation. Romans 5:14 states that Adam was a type or figure of Christ. Howevr, what you wrote was, “Adam is a pattern for Christ.” Your translation indicates that Christ has to conform to Adam. KJV indicates that Adam was an ensample or a figure of Christ conforming (very different from confirming) certain areas of Adam’s life to that of Christ.

You also wrote, “most of the similarities are inversed (negatives in Adam contrasted to positives in Christ).” If you read Roamsn 5:14 in its context, then it will become clear that Apostle Paul was not contrasting Adam to Christ, but was making a statement that God in His grace created Adam to be a type or a figure of Christ, who is to come in the future.

God created Adam as a type of the coming One. One of the figure in which he was created was from the dust form a virgin earth. This answers your request that followed the above expression that I quoted.

Shalom malekim!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : allentvarghese   View Profile   Since : 30 May 2019 2:12:32 PM Close

Dear Br George,

I am hoping that you would expand on this subject further. In your posting on 6 May 2019 14:05:51 you had mentioned, “Please remember that there are at least three ‘virgins’ associated with Christ’s life.”

In the beginning I was of the opinion that you were referring about His birth, life and resurrection as there are untouched by sin, death, but I then could be way off point. Could you shed some light on this as I don’t find any reference on it that comes to my mind?

Regards,

Allen

 

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 30 May 2019 6:22:50 PM Close

Dear Mr. Koshy,

Thanks for pointing out the error with my use of the word 'pattern' - I agree with your posting of 29 May 2019 14:17:34 except for the statement below:

"One of the figure in which he was created was from the dust form a virgin earth". Adam was indeed made of dust from the earth, but Christ was not made of anything from Mary. So Adam is not a "type" of Christ in that sense. This is my personal (probably flawed) opinion, but I am willinging to change this view if God's Word absolutely says so.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 31 May 2019 2:53:14 PM Close

Dear Allen,

The three virgins in the life of Jesus Christ on this earth are:

1.      He was born of virgin Mary;

2.      He was wraped in a virgin linen at His death;

3.      He was buried in a virgin tomb.

Shalom malekim!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 31 May 2019 3:19:09 PM Close

Dear ‘moses2006,’

You wrote, “I am willing to change this view if God's Word absolutely says so.”

I am not asking you to change your view. However, should the Word of God say something ‘absolutetly’ for a person to  have a view?

For example, let us consider what the Lord said as written in Matthew 5:39. What is written as an absolute statement from the Lord is one person getting smitten on the right cheek by another person. Let us say that Person-A was smitten on his right cheek by Person-B. If I say that Person-B was left-handed, how will you react? On the other hand, if I say that Person-A was smitten by Person-B with the back of his right hand and not with his palm-side, how will you react? The Word of God is silent on that and does not say anything absolutely. Let me leave this for you to ponder.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 3 Jun 2019 4:54:53 PM Close
Dear Mr. Allen, I could see that your posting dt. 13th is reasonably convincing. Paul has said that Adam was a figure of Christ, but he (Paul) has not produced any narratives on his own statement. As the fact being so, is there any Scriptural authority for one to claim that Adam's creation is a figure of Christ's birth? For me, it is only an interesting and good thought.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 10 Jun 2019 6:35:12 PM Close

Dear Mr. Koshy,

I do not see what the right handed and left handed striking has to do with our understanding of Matt 5:39. We know with absolute certainity that what Lord said applies in either case. That is my view.

My 'view' comes from my understanding of what is revealed in the scriptures. That is why, especially when we are talking about Adam as a type of the Son, I would like to base my understanding only on what is revealed with absolute certainity. Incorrect type applications can lead to misunderstandings which then can lead to a wrong view of the Son. I have been asking and raising this caution from my first post.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 13 Jun 2019 6:49:11 PM Close

Dear ‘moses2006,’

On May 31, 2019, I gave you two views of Matthew 5:39. Since you do not think about how a person will get slapped on the right cheek by another, you failed to see the significance of the view. You wrote that your view comes from your understanding of what is reealed in the Scirpture. In my example, it is revealed that a person (Person-A) was slapped on his right cheek by another person (Person-B). How that could happen? I gave two possibilities out of many.

Let us forget what I wrote on Matthew 5:39 and concentrate on what is the original subject of interest on this thread. It will help me, if you could tell how you view what we read in Romans 5:14 that Adam was a type (TUPOS is the Greek work used) of the One who is to come. I have already provided one of my views. Since you say that your view is different, please let me know what is your view.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 13 Jun 2019 10:09:13 PM Close

Dear Mr. Koshy,

I appreciate your asking me to look into Rom 5:14. This made me look closer at that verse and also in context, v12 to v21. The following are my findings on how Adam is a type/figure of Christ based on the context of Rom 5:14.

In the following statements, ‘a’ means the first half of a verse and ‘b’ means the second half of a verse (in KJV). I find it interesting that Adam, by his disobedience, caused 7 types of harm upon his children (all mankind). But Christ, by His righteous obedience, removes all 7 harms and replaces them with 7 blessings for His children (those who trust in Him).

Adam as Figure/Type of Christ:

(1)    Sin and death entered through one man and death passed upon all men, because of Adam (v12, v15)

(2)    Judgement and condemnation came on all by an act of sin by one man, Adam (v16-a)

(3)    Death reigns by the offence of one man, Adam (v17-a)

(4)    Judgement and condemnation came upon all men, by the offence of one man, Adam (b18-a)

(5)    Many are made sinners by the disobedience of one man, Adam (v19-a)

(6)    Due to the offense of one man, Adam, the law entered to make offences abound(v19-a)

(7)    Sin reigns unto death, because of one man’s offence, Adam (v21-a)

Christ:

(1)    God’s grace abounded to many by gift of one man, Christ Jesus (v15-b)

(2)    Free gift of many offences unto justification through one man, Christ Jesus (v16-b)

(3)    Abundance of grace and gift of righteousness reigns in life by one man, Christ Jesus (v17-b)

(4)    Justification and life comes as a free gift because of the righteousness of one man, Christ Jesus (v18-b)

(5)    Many are made righteous by the obedience of one man, Christ Jesus (v19-b)

(6)    Grace abounded even more than the offenses because of one man, Christ Jesus (v19-b)

(7)    Righteousness reigns to eternal life  because of one man, Christ Jesus (v21-b)

As we respectively compare each line between Adam and Christ, the meaning of ‘who is a figure of Him who was come’ becomes very clear. My understanding is this: Adam’s sin produced negative universal consequences for all his children. But Christ’s obedience produced positive universal consequences for all His children (i.e. those who trust Him for salvation). The manner in which their actions had universal consequences on their respective progeny – this is the reason why Adam is noted as a figure or type of Christ, who was to come later.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 18 Jun 2019 2:11:04 PM Close

Dear ‘moses2006,’

Before I respond to your analysis of verses from Romans 5, I wish to know about your approach in explaining the verses Romans 5:12 and 15-21.

1.      I would like to know why you skipped over verses 13 and 14, where the expression of interest is part of verse 14.

2.      Do you know that verses 13-17 are within parenthesis? I am refering to KJV, assuming that is what you are using.

3.      If those verses are parenthetical in Romans 5, what are we to learn from it?

I wait to hear from you.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 18 Jun 2019 10:16:43 PM Close

Dear Mr Koshy,

v13 and v14 were not ignored. v13 did not seem to add to this specific topic we are discussing. v14 is important to the topic and I just missed adding this to my (1) above: Sin and death entered through one man and death passed upon all men, because of Adam (v12, v14, v15). 

Yes I am aware of the parathesis used in KJV from v13 to v17. I have not given the parenthesis any particular importance, or in other words, I have given equal weight to these verses in parentheis as the other verses without the parenthesis.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 19 Jun 2019 6:39:37 AM Close
Dear 'moses2006', purpose for opening this thread is to equate Adam's creation with Christ's birth and to make this as point for the last part of Roman 5:14. But this view has no biblical support and I could find not even an iota of indication in all these verses of Roman 5. Ironically Adam has been compared in all these verses for negative reason. I could understand your explanations.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 19 Jun 2019 10:13:20 PM Close

Dear 'kristianjude'

I agree that Mr Koshy intended or intends to use the (virgin?) earth to compare with virgin Mary and use this to show how Adam is a type of Christ. I have been asking for some scriptural support since May 13, but so far have not seen anything. But, as I said in another post, I would support his ideas if he would back it with scriptural evidence.

(Please note that I do not agree with some of your postings also in this forum in past few years)

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kristianjude   View Profile   Since : 20 Jun 2019 2:08:19 PM Close
Dear 'moses2006' I'm confused with the word 'also' in your note at the end.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 9 Jul 2019 2:57:11 PM Close

Dear ‘moses2006,’

I waited for more than two weeks to see whethrer you have anything further to say about your denial of what is ‘absolutely’ stated in the Word of God. You said that you will change your view if anything is absolutely stated in “God’s Word” (May 30, 2019).

On June 10, 2019, you refused to answer my question based on what is absolutely stated in Matthew 5:39.

In 2013, you did a similar calim on Romans 10:4. You changed the English word “End” in KJV to ‘Burry” and claimed that was done by using rhetorical style of ‘quick writing English style.’

On this thread, you changed the English word ‘Type” in KJV to “Pattern” on (May 13,  2019). In KJV it is ‘absoltely’ printed as “type.” However, you changed that to ‘pattern.’ KJV states about ‘type’ because in Greek TR, it is TUPOS. You do not accept what is written in the Bible.

On 19 June 2019, you wrote That I have not given scriptural support for what I wrote. I gave you Romans 5:14 and you do not accept that verse, saying it is not according to your understanding. Maybe for you it is not an ‘absolute’ statement!

On the contrary, I told you that you changed the meaning of ‘type’ to ‘pattern.’ Let me tell you once again, Romans 5:14 it is ‘absolutely’ stated that Adam was a type of the One who is to come—which is a Hebraism for the coming Messiah. You may not know what I meant by Hebraism. If that is the case, please ask and I will explain it ‘absolutely.’

On 18 Jun 2019, you wrote, “v13 and v14 were not ignored. v13 did not seem to add to this specific topic we are discussing. v14 is important to the topic and I just missed adding this to my (1) above:” You wrote this, because I asked why you ignored those two verses in your posting of 13 June 2019. Could you exlain, how verse 14 is revelant in this discussion, while verse 13 is not. Are you saying that it is not an ‘absolute’ statement in “God’s Word?” It appears that you are placing yourself as the judge and jury to decide what is relevant and not revelant in “God’s Word.” Do you know what you once wrote about “God’s Word” in an earlier posting? Now you say that you are the one who will decide what God should say and how He should say and you will declare what is ‘absolute’ ot not.

On 18 June 2019, you also wrote, “Yes I am aware of the parenthesis used in KJV from v13 to v17. I have not given the parenthesis any particular importance, or in other words, I have given equal weight to these verses in parenthesis as the other verses without the parenthesis.” Could you explain this? I am interested to know the reason for your rejection of the parenthesis in KJV, and KJV is your accepted Bible translation.

Since, you do not give ‘particular importance’ of the parenthasis in KJV, could you tell me why verse 13 is not relevant, according to yor judgment? If verse 13 has no ‘particular improtance,’ how is verse 14 received its ‘particulat improtance?’ Both verses are part of the same parenthetical portion in KJV.

You wrote on 10 May 2019, “So, it not correct to compare Adam to the Lord Jesus in respect to the virgin nature of the earth and of Mary.” In Romans 5:14, I read that Adam was a type (TUPOS) of “Him who is to come.” You want to change that from a type (as in the original) to ‘pattern.’ I want you to justify this insistance from you to change what was originally given. I do not have to explain what I wrote,because that is what is written in Romans 5:14. It was ‘absolutely’ stated and you are the one who wants an ‘absolute’ statements from the Bible. When such ‘absolute’ statements are given from the bible, you want to change that ‘absolute’ statement with your personal preferences.

You wrote on 30 May 2019, “Adam was indeed made of dust from the earth, but Christ was not made of anything from Mary. So Adam is not a "type" of Christ in that sense. This is my personal (probably flawed) opinion, but I am willinging to change this view if God's Word absolutely says so.”  I ask you toread what you wrote and I quoted, especially the first sentence. You wrote, “Christ was not made of anything from Mary.” Is that true? Have you read about the “Seed of the woman?” It was in the first prophetical pronouncement by God and it was directly given to man by God. You say that Jesus was not made of anything from Mary. If that is your teaching, it is contrary to what is written in the Scripture as ‘absolutely’ true to take place. You who try to be an absolute-man is absolutely negating God’s statement regarding the birth of Jesus Christ.

With respect to the above paragraph, I ask you to read what is ‘positively’ written in Luke 1:31. There I read,but you do not, that Mary will conceive in her womb and bear a son. However, you had the audacity to say that Mary did not conceive in her womb. That is exactly what you wrote in 30 May 2019 and I quoted that for your convenience. By doing so, you denied the humanity of Lord Jesus Christ, so do many cults. You must humble yourself before God and confess your sin of joining with people who deny the perfect humanity of Lord Jesus Christ.

Apostle Paul, being inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote about the humanity of Lord Jesus Christ in his epistles. Let me refer one of them to you and that is in 1 Timothy 2:5 and I read, “the man Christ Jesus,” but you may read it differently. He is the only perfect Man who ever lived on this earth and He is my Lord, my God, my Savior, my Mediator, … I ask you to study the Scripture to  learn what God has revealed and not to established your pet-pee-wees.

I wait to read your answers to all my questions, sice you have claimed the judgship over “God’s Word.” Please answer them all. If you make another rhetorical declaration of not having time, that is another way of saying that you are caught in your scheme of exalting yourself over God and His Word.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 10 Jul 2019 3:36:13 PM Close

Dear Mr Koshy,

I see you have not changed - same contentious person as ever! I have no interest in further discussion if you are going to bring issues from long ago into this thread.

The implication of your virgin earth position is that Christ is of Mary, like Adam is of the earth. This is not per scripture. You keep pointing to Rom 5:14, but I already explained to you what Rom 5:14 means in its context. You need to study the meaning of the following verses, especially the highlighted part:

Heb 10:5 - Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me

John 1:14 - And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us...

John 8:23 - And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world

Do these verses indicate that Christ is of Mary, like Adam was of the dust of the earth? Instead of simply stating Rom 5:14, show how this verse supports your view. 

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page


Post reply Here

please login to continue..

Registered Users, Login below:

Username Password
Problem Login?

New User? Register Now

Forgot User Name or Password? Click Here

Go to top of the page

All times are GMT -5 Hours
Forums Home ::



HOME
Back to Top