(January 6, 2014 at 12:52 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Do I even have to remind you that Adam was a pre-fall man, and hence under your own definition not responsible for his sin?Adam knew what death was. God told him if he ate from the tree of knoweledge he would die. knoweledge of sin is not required for knoweledge of death. My nephew is 4 my dog got sick and died, because she got cancer. He knows my dog is gone/dead because cancer killed her. yet he has no real understanding of sin.
So either you're wrong, or your definitions are wrong, or god is wrong.
Quote:So would Adam have been able to kill Eve and gotten away with it if he hadn't eaten the fruit? And if you're going to dodge by saying death came after the fall, let me broaden the scope: could Adam have committed any sin, sans fruit, and gone on scot-free?no because it would not be sin.
you assume that our acts/deeds have an intrinsic value.(that the intintional death of another is always wrong) They don't, even in our soceity. (per my example of the 3 year old and 30 year killing his brother)
Without knoweledge of sin, the acts loose the sin value.