Lucifer/ADAM

[Molly]

In the thread concerning lucifer, we have a man who ruled the earth and his ambition was to become as God.

Adam ruled the earth for a very short time, chapter 2 of Genesis, he got to name the animals and his wife--that's it. 

Then he lost dominion to Satan, who is currently the god of this age.

Don't forget--Adam was never deceived, therefore he did not believe the Shining One in the garden, therefore, he did not eat of the tree for purposes of becoming like God because he knew he would die instead.

Sorry, but I can't stand by and watch Adam maligned and not say something.  So --carry on.


Adam.... who is the figure of him that was to come.   [Rom 5:14]

[micah7:9]

We are the prisoners of the beast, his children. Maybe that's why humanity is so evil. We are the offspring of the beast. So in order to become children of God we must be adopted into Christ.

There is a SOUND beginning to rise up . . .a symphony of revelation given by individuals whom God has directly unveiled Christ's nature to.  It's not like any other noise relisgious men have heard or can connect with or identify.  But to those to whom the song was given, it makes them resonate with the glory of his light and freedom.  Some may be singing a differnt pitch, but it harmonizes with the lyrics of God in us.  Once the song begins to come forth from our mouths, it reaches past our minds and into our loins.  It's desire is to reproduce that very same avenue of discourse through every being he's created.  Let the river flow!

Sounds Good!

[eaglesway]

"Since Babylon is Sodom and Egypt where our Lord was crucified (Revelation)" Eaglesway

Rev 11:8  And their dead bodies lie upon the broadway of the great city, the which is called, spiritually,
Sodom and Egypt, where, their Lord also was crucified.

Wasn't Jesus crucifed in Jerusalem?
"lie upon the broadway of the "great" city," The city is
"spiritually called Sodom and Egypt,"
But in true understanding it was in Jerusalem where He was crucified, was it not?

Absolutely, my point exactly...... the prophetic identity runs through all who "rule". Babylon, Egypt, Jerusalem. As Jesus said to those who ruled Jerusalem "You are of your father the devil" and "You are the sons of Cain, a murderer from the beginning". Abel serves, Cain murders. "Wherein our Lord was crucified". Therefore I am suggesting the prophesies run through Adam, to Satan.....Father of lies, author of confusion, a murderer from the beginning.   I do not think it can be authoritatively interpreted that Lucifer is Adam, but, with respect, I am just offering evidence to that effect and it is my opinion :o)

[eaglesway]

Thank God that He is reconciling all things to Himself through the blood of Christ. whether things on earth or things in heaven, things visible and things invisible. 

1Co 2:6-8  However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.  (7)  But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory,  (8)  which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

When Satan nailed Christ to the cross in Jerusalem, it was like a defiant note nailed to God's door."I just killed your King right here in the apple of your eye, at the footstool of your feet." What he didnt understand was that his act of defiance was planned by God before the creation of the world and actually nailed the door open for the reconciliation of all things....."For so it pleased the Father to make all fulness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile all things to himself by the blood of his cross".  All things work together for good to those who are called according to His purpose, who works all things according to the counsel of His will, and His kind intention which He purposed in Christ.

[redhotmagma]

I'm not saying that Lucifer = Satan, or that Lucifer is a proper name in my OP.  I don't quite know who or what satan is.  What I was saying is that the one called lucifer, is adam the light bearer, not a fallen angel.  Nowhere are cherubs called angels in the bible btw.

Just clarifying.

[thinktank]

In the thread concerning lucifer, we have a man who ruled the earth and his ambition was to become as God.

Adam ruled the earth for a very short time, chapter 2 of Genesis, he got to name the animals and his wife--that's it. 

Then he lost dominion to Satan, who is currently the god of this age.

Don't forget--Adam was never deceived, therefore he did not believe the Shining One in the garden, therefore, he did not eat of the tree for purposes of becoming like God because he knew he would die instead.

Sorry, but I can't stand by and watch Adam maligned and not say something.  So --carry on.


Adam.... who is the figure of him that was to come.   [Rom 5:14]

Feel free to voice your opinion. I do look for any witnesses, via christ.

Adam partaked the tree of good and evil. We don't know if he had any negotiations with the serpent. An interesting thing is that after being driven from the garden, there is no scripture showing God and Adam conversing. The scriptures show that in Enoch times, "Then men began to call upon the name of the lord"

But yesterday night, I watched a film called Eli. I did not plan to watch this film. This film is about the last surviving bible on earth.
Interesting things was that in the film an old couple decided to play a song on a record player. The song was a "rings my bell"
sang over and over. I immediately thought of my question, "ring any bells?" in my post. It was almost as if God was answering me.


But here is something else. Adam was made in Gods image, but after he fell, he now as the beast desires to set up his own image, the abomination of desolation.

[Cardinal]

  Again, it's revelation that I share, another piece of the puzzle is all we can bring, and the witness within will say yea or nay at the appointed time.

It was years before I understood because line upon line and precept upon precept have be laid first, but I had a night vision, plain as day, one day when I fell asleep reading the Word, when I first came to the Lord. I saw stones set in gold in my chest and the Lord spoke to me, "Restoration back to the anointed cherub that covereth."

Spiritual position speaking, Adam and Eve were drawing their life from the Holly of Holies, figuratively bowing in submission and reverence (as in the cherubim on the ark of the covenant).

Their location, was in the garden AS the TWO TREES in the midst of the garden (inner court). The two trees in the inner court are represented by the candlestick (spirit) and the table of shewbread (soul). This is the place of rightly dividing the Word of God, the separation of light from darkness, where we behold Satan fall as lightning from heaven, which is what happens every time a fresh revelation comes by His breath and he is cast down out of his position of rulership over that particular area the LIVING Word, just revealed. The letter kills (soul/Eve) but the Spirit giveth life.

We knew not what sin was until the law came, ie. the serpent/darkness is part of the experience of eating of the shewbread and learning to discern good and evil. The shewbread speaks of the 12 tribes, symbolic of all life experienced in the flesh, that will ultimately produce the Son. The serpent's "seed" was the "leaven" that was snuck in while Adam "slept", ie. the tares that were planted in Matt. 13.

The law/bread ministered condemnation which ministers death to the hearer, witnessed by the what happened when some took the mercy seat off the ark of the covenant and were immediately struck dead = the serpent was there as a murderer from the beginning.

Then they were cast out (into the outer court, place of weeping and gnashing of teeth, outer darkness), to a place that only produces thistles and thorns without works, and since the HG does the works (which is why it's an inner court experience) it's a dry place (wilderness of sin) without the baptism of the Spirit.

Adam was not deceived because he was a priest, and as a High Priest he sacrificed himself for her, knowing that the Father would not suffer his son to see corruption (forever), and so would ultimately raise him up (and since they were one, her with him). The laying down of one's life IS the nature of the Spirit, and symbolically what the High Priest as a type of Head does once a year on the Day of Atonement, where he sacrifices for his sins AND the sins of the people ("Eve" the body), then risks his life by going into His presence in their place. This is the pure motive of the heart, the laying down of one's life for another.

Essentially, what he was doing, was "lowering" himself to take on the image of flesh via the death of sin. My    Blessings...


@ Nate.....a resounding AMEN!

[Taffy]

 
awesome word~

[eaglesway]

Again, it's revelation that I share, another piece of the puzzle is all we can bring, and the witness within will say yea or nay at the appointed time.

It was years before I understood because line upon line and precept upon precept have be laid first, but I had a night vision, plain as day, one day when I fell asleep reading the Word, when I first came to the Lord. I saw stones set in gold in my chest and the Lord spoke to me, "Restoration back to the anointed cherub that covereth."

Spiritual position speaking, Adam and Eve were drawing their life from the Holly of Holies, figuratively bowing in submission and reverence (as cherubim on the ark of the covenant).

Their location, was in the garden AS the TWO TREES in the midst of the garden (inner court). The two trees in the inner court are represented by the candlestick (spirit) and the table of shewbread (soul). This is the place of rightly dividing the Word of God, the separation of light from darkness, where we behold Satan fall as lightning from heaven, which is what happens every time a fresh revelation comes by His breath and he is cast down out of his position of rulership over that particular area the LIVING Word, just revealed. The letter kills (soul/Eve) but the Spirit giveth life.

We knew not what sin was until the law came, ie. the serpent/darkness is part of the experience of eating of the shewbread and learning to discern good and evil. The shewbread speaks of the 12 tribes, symbolic of all life experienced in the flesh, that will ultimately produce the Son. The serpent's "seed" was the "leaven" that was snuck in while Adam "slept", ie. the tares that were planted in Matt. 13.

The law/bread ministered condemnation which ministers death to the hearer, witness by the what happened when some took the mercy seat off the ark of the covenant and were immediately struck dead = the serpent was there as a murderer from the beginning.

Then they were cast out (into the outer court, place of weeping and gnashing of teeth, outer darkness), to a place that only produces thistles and thorns without works, and since the HG does the works (which is why it's an inner court experience) it's a dry place (wilderness of sin) without the baptism of the Spirit.

Adam was not deceived because he was a priest, and as a High Priest he sacrificed himself for her, knowing that the Father would not suffer his son to see corruption (forever), and so would ultimately raise him up (and since they were one, her with him). The laying down of one's life IS the nature of the Spirit, and symbolically what the High Priest as a type of Head does once a year on the Day of Atonement, where he sacrifices for his sins AND the sins of the people ("Eve" the body), then risks his life by going into His presence in their place. This is the pure motive of the heart, the laying down of one's life for another.

Essentially, what he was doing, was "lowering" himself to take on the image of flesh via the death of sin. My    Blessings...


@ Nate.....a resounding AMEN!

I don't really have a problem with Adam as a priest. I think the idea that Adam was/is a cherub is unclear, taken in context with all that is written of cherubs. I think the idea that Adam "sacrificed himself" as a high priest for Eve, is an error of understanding, if that is what is meant. Death entered through one man's sin. Life entered all through one man's righteousness. This was the plan from the beginning.The similtude of Adam and Christ alluded to by Paul in Roman's is in this respect- through one man. One old man, who sinned in his own desire. One new man, who sacrificed His desire in order to save all. Looking backward from Christ as a type, towards Adam is not the intent of the example IMO. Adam needs no defence, he has been forgiven. He did not need to be forgiven of a selfless sacrifice. Death could not enter through such a door IMO.

[Cardinal]

  I totally understand what you are saying. But......what he did was "good", which is STILL eating of the wrong tree, which produces death. We can have a right motive, but if the Lord didn't tell us to do something, it still produces death. IF the Lord by His breath had told him to do it, there would have been no sin.

He was perceiving thru a glass darkly (darkened soul) what the Lord does, in the laying down of life. It's the same thing as doing good works without faith (which comes from the Spirit speaking), which still is death, or death-producing.

Every think about the fact the VEIL had winged (which means feathers, a type of covering) cherubims woven into it by His decree? Blessings....

[Molly]

Adam was not deceived because he was a priest, and as a High Priest he sacrificed himself for her, knowing that the Father would not suffer his son to see corruption (forever), and so would ultimately raise him up (and since they were one, her with him). The laying down of one's life IS the nature of the Spirit, and symbolically what the High Priest as a type of Head does once a year on the Day of Atonement, where he sacrifices for his sins AND the sins of the people ("Eve" the body), then risks his life by going into His presence in their place. This is the pure motive of the heart, the laying down of one's life for another.

Essentially, what he was doing, was "lowering" himself to take on the image of flesh via the death of sin. My  Blessings...

Adam was without sin before he partook of the tree, nor was he deceived.  It was Eve who sinned.

And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result.  [1 Tim 2:14]

Thus, Adam as the firstborn without spot or blemish was able to offer himself for his wife.  Like Jesus, he acted as high priest offering his life for another.  Adam is the first sacrifice made for sin, done by his own hand, and the first priest, offering that sacrifice to God.

Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats, [Exo 12:5]

It was Adam's own decision, and here is the transgression, he made the decision knowing full well he would die, and that he would lose his dominion,  but knowing God, in hope, that this would save Eve and her children and all of creation.

For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope

that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. [Rom 8:21]

Therefore, he is a figure [the spitting image] of the one to come, for no greater love hath man than he lay down his life for his friends.

None of this in any way resembles Heylel, the Shining One, of Isaiah 14, who also walked in the garden.

Adam, the first human Christ bearer,  is the lamb slain from the casting down of the world order of God.  It is his death that casts down the order set up by God where Adam would rule.  All those written in the Book of life of this lamb is all of humanity, awaiting their order of salvation given to them by their kinsman Redeemer, the Son of Adam,  the Lord Jesus Christ.


Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. [Heb 2:14, 15]

[micah7:9]

Again, it's revelation that I share, another piece of the puzzle is all we can bring, and the witness within will say yea or nay at the appointed time.

It was years before I understood because line upon line and precept upon precept have be laid first, but I had a night vision, plain as day, one day when I fell asleep reading the Word, when I first came to the Lord. I saw stones set in gold in my chest and the Lord spoke to me, "Restoration back to the anointed cherub that covereth."

Spiritual position speaking, Adam and Eve were drawing their life from the Holly of Holies, figuratively bowing in submission and reverence (as cherubim on the ark of the covenant).

Their location, was in the garden AS the TWO TREES in the midst of the garden (inner court). The two trees in the inner court are represented by the candlestick (spirit) and the table of shewbread (soul). This is the place of rightly dividing the Word of God, the separation of light from darkness, where we behold Satan fall as lightning from heaven, which is what happens every time a fresh revelation comes by His breath and he is cast down out of his position of rulership over that particular area the LIVING Word, just revealed. The letter kills (soul/Eve) but the Spirit giveth life.

We knew not what sin was until the law came, ie. the serpent/darkness is part of the experience of eating of the shewbread and learning to discern good and evil. The shewbread speaks of the 12 tribes, symbolic of all life experienced in the flesh, that will ultimately produce the Son. The serpent's "seed" was the "leaven" that was snuck in while Adam "slept", ie. the tares that were planted in Matt. 13.

The law/bread ministered condemnation which ministers death to the hearer, witness by the what happened when some took the mercy seat off the ark of the covenant and were immediately struck dead = the serpent was there as a murderer from the beginning.

Then they were cast out (into the outer court, place of weeping and gnashing of teeth, outer darkness), to a place that only produces thistles and thorns without works, and since the HG does the works (which is why it's an inner court experience) it's a dry place (wilderness of sin) without the baptism of the Spirit.

Adam was not deceived because he was a priest, and as a High Priest he sacrificed himself for her, knowing that the Father would not suffer his son to see corruption (forever), and so would ultimately raise him up (and since they were one, her with him). The laying down of one's life IS the nature of the Spirit, and symbolically what the High Priest as a type of Head does once a year on the Day of Atonement, where he sacrifices for his sins AND the sins of the people ("Eve" the body), then risks his life by going into His presence in their place. This is the pure motive of the heart, the laying down of one's life for another.

Essentially, what he was doing, was "lowering" himself to take on the image of flesh via the death of sin. My    Blessings...


@ Nate.....a resounding AMEN!

I don't really have a problem with Adam as a priest. I think the idea that Adam was/is a cherub is unclear, taken in context with all that is written of cherubs. I think the idea that Adam "sacrificed himself" as a high priest for Eve, is an error of understanding, if that is what is meant. Death entered through one man's sin. Life entered all through one man's righteousness. This was the plan from the beginning.The similtude of Adam and Christ alluded to by Paul in Roman's is in this respect- through one man. One old man, who sinned in his own desire. One new man, who sacrificed His desire in order to save all. Looking backward from Christ as a type, towards Adam is not the intent of the example IMO. Adam needs no defence, he has been forgiven. He did not need to be forgiven of a selfless sacrifice. Death could not enter through such a door IMO.

Reads like sound reasoning. Thanks EW

[micah7:9]

I'm not saying that Lucifer = Satan, or that Lucifer is a proper name in my OP.  I don't quite know who or what satan is.  What I was saying is that the one called lucifer, is adam the light bearer, not a fallen angel.  Nowhere are cherubs called angels in the bible btw.

Just clarifying.

I cant find "fallen angels" in my Bible.

[micah7:9]

In the thread concerning lucifer, we have a man who ruled the earth and his ambition was to become as God.

Adam ruled the earth for a very short time, chapter 2 of Genesis, he got to name the animals and his wife--that's it. 

Then he lost dominion to Satan, who is currently the god of this age.

Don't forget--Adam was never deceived, therefore he did not believe the Shining One in the garden, therefore, he did not eat of the tree for purposes of becoming like God because he knew he would die instead.

Sorry, but I can't stand by and watch Adam maligned and not say something.  So --carry on.


Adam.... who is the figure of him that was to come.   [Rom 5:14]

Feel free to voice your opinion. I do look for any witnesses, via christ.

Adam partaked the tree of good and evil. We don't know if he had any negotiations with the serpent. An interesting thing is that after being driven from the garden, there is no scripture showing God and Adam conversing. The scriptures show that in Enoch times, "Then men began to call upon the name of the lord"

But yesterday night, I watched a film called Eli. I did not plan to watch this film. This film is about the last surviving bible on earth.
Interesting things was that in the film an old couple decided to play a song on a record player. The song was a "rings my bell"
sang over and over. I immediately thought of my question, "ring any bells?" in my post. It was almost as if God was answering me.


But here is something else. Adam was made in Gods image, but after he fell, he now as the beast desires to set up his own image, the abomination of desolation.

"Adam was made in Gods image..." TT

I don't see that. Should Adam have been made in God"s image, there would never have been the "fall" you speak of, I don't believe that God would have eaten of the fruit.
I don't try to find indifference, its just that all the old "stories," have left my heart to wonder.

[Molly]

Fallen Angels

And angels that kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation, he hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.[Jude 1:6

[thinktank]

I don't see that. Should Adam have been made in God"s image, there would never have been the "fall" you speak of, I don't believe that God would have eaten of the fruit.
I don't try to find indifference, its just that all the old "stories," have left my heart to wonder.

TT
I'm just quoting scripture. We each have our interpretation of that image.

[Molly]

Adam is the image bearer, as are we.  And, one day we shall be like him whose image we now bear



Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. [1 John 3:2]

[Nathan]

Adam was not deceived because he was a priest, and as a High Priest he sacrificed himself for her, knowing that the Father would not suffer his son to see corruption (forever), and so would ultimately raise him up (and since they were one, her with him). The laying down of one's life IS the nature of the Spirit, and symbolically what the High Priest as a type of Head does once a year on the Day of Atonement, where he sacrifices for his sins AND the sins of the people ("Eve" the body), then risks his life by going into His presence in their place. This is the pure motive of the heart, the laying down of one's life for another.

Essentially, what he was doing, was "lowering" himself to take on the image of flesh via the death of sin. My  Blessings...

Adam was without sin before he partook of the tree, nor was he deceived.  It was Eve who sinned.

And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result.  [1 Tim 2:14]

Thus, Adam as the firstborn without spot or blemish was able to offer himself for his wife.  Like Jesus, he acted as high priest offering his life for another.  Adam is the first sacrifice made for sin, done by his own hand, and the first priest, offering that sacrifice to God.

Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats, [Exo 12:5]

It was Adam's own decision, and here is the transgression, he made the decision knowing full well he would die, and that he would lose his dominion,  but knowing God, in hope, that this would save Eve and her children and all of creation.

For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope

that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. [Rom 8:21]

Therefore, he is a figure [the spitting image] of the one to come, for no greater love hath man than he lay down his life for his friends.

None of this in any way resembles Heylel, the Shining One, of Isaiah 14, who also walked in the garden.

Adam, the first human Christ bearer,  is the lamb slain from the casting down of the world order of God.  It is his death that casts down the order set up by God where Adam would rule.  All those written in the Book of life of this lamb is all of humanity, awaiting their order of salvation given to them by their kinsman Redeemer, the Son of Adam,  the Lord Jesus Christ.


Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. [Heb 2:14, 15]

I've heard this one befoer, not sure I agree with it partly because of the verse you quoted where the sin didn't begin when Adam ate of the tree, but when Eve ate of it.  Note that when she ate, nothing happened.  Knowledge didn't affect her until Adam ate . . .my question then is, which was worse, Adam "eating" of the tree's fruit, or receiving the fruit from Eve and then eating it.  He didn't take fruit on his own, he only ate what she had already picked and eaten.

Thing of it is, "if" Adam was as wise and fore-knowing as this theory implies, where he wasn't deceived but he "chose" to rebel because he felt he needed to pay for her weakness, why then didn't he, in all that wisdom, take the issue up with God?  Why didn't he just turn down her offer and let God deal with it?  Wouldn't "that" have been what wisdom would have done? 

There are many unanswered questions and unless we just let God show us what the purpose of all of it was directly, our reasoning may never find rest at all.

But for me, when I look at it as Adam being spirit and Eve being soul, it kinda reveals the problem that led to the separation.  Spirit should NEVER "RECEIVE" from flesh.  Which coincides with what Paul stated about women being silent in the church.  "What?"  "Know ye not that YOU are a temple of the Holy Ghost?"  It all just seems to fall in to place.  When Noah found the ark coming to rest (Noah literally means rest as well) when the ark came to rest on Mt. Ararat, it was another signpost pointing to the finished works of the cross.  Ararat means the curse is reversed.  What's the curse?  It was when Adam took the fruit of knowledge . . Eve is directily connected to the "mind" which relies on knowledge, but Adam represents "spirit" and when Spirit submits to knowledge, it throws the original order of God out of alignment.  Which brought on the curse.  Jesus reverses the curse by coming in the flesh and redeeming flesh back to the Father . . .he was the flood that covered the earth.  That act wiped out the power of carnality in man . . .sin was "taken away" as John the Baptist proclaimed.  And as 1 John 3 states, because his light is in us, we can not sin.  It's not that sin doesn't still exist IN THIS REALM, it means that the carnality, which is the drive force that leads us to sin . . .it no longer has power over us.

That for me has a much more profound affect on my than just concerning myself with whether or not what is literally written has literally happened.  I'm not saying it didn't, I'm saying the power of what's been written lies beneath what we can read with natural eyes and thought.  Not by might, not by power . . . .

[micah7:9]

I don't see that. Should Adam have been made in God"s image, there would never have been the "fall" you speak of, I don't believe that God would have eaten of the fruit.
I don't try to find indifference, its just that all the old "stories," have left my heart to wonder.

TT
I'm just quoting scripture. We each have our interpretation of that image.

Thus the error of our path. And yes you are just quoting scripture as we all do, but what good is "just quoting" scripture?
I have known and know brothers and sister who have memorized scripture and quote it, in my opinion that is good for the individual.

[micah7:9]

Adam was not deceived because he was a priest, and as a High Priest he sacrificed himself for her, knowing that the Father would not suffer his son to see corruption (forever), and so would ultimately raise him up (and since they were one, her with him). The laying down of one's life IS the nature of the Spirit, and symbolically what the High Priest as a type of Head does once a year on the Day of Atonement, where he sacrifices for his sins AND the sins of the people ("Eve" the body), then risks his life by going into His presence in their place. This is the pure motive of the heart, the laying down of one's life for another.

Essentially, what he was doing, was "lowering" himself to take on the image of flesh via the death of sin. My  Blessings...

Adam was without sin before he partook of the tree, nor was he deceived.  It was Eve who sinned.

And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result.  [1 Tim 2:14]

Thus, Adam as the firstborn without spot or blemish was able to offer himself for his wife.  Like Jesus, he acted as high priest offering his life for another.  Adam is the first sacrifice made for sin, done by his own hand, and the first priest, offering that sacrifice to God.

Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats, [Exo 12:5]

It was Adam's own decision, and here is the transgression, he made the decision knowing full well he would die, and that he would lose his dominion,  but knowing God, in hope, that this would save Eve and her children and all of creation.

For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope

that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. [Rom 8:21]

Therefore, he is a figure [the spitting image] of the one to come, for no greater love hath man than he lay down his life for his friends.

None of this in any way resembles Heylel, the Shining One, of Isaiah 14, who also walked in the garden.

Adam, the first human Christ bearer,  is the lamb slain from the casting down of the world order of God.  It is his death that casts down the order set up by God where Adam would rule.  All those written in the Book of life of this lamb is all of humanity, awaiting their order of salvation given to them by their kinsman Redeemer, the Son of Adam,  the Lord Jesus Christ.


Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. [Heb 2:14, 15]

I've heard this one befoer, not sure I agree with it partly because of the verse you quoted where the sin didn't begin when Adam ate of the tree, but when Eve ate of it.  Note that when she ate, nothing happened.  Knowledge didn't affect her until Adam ate . . .my question then is, which was worse, Adam "eating" of the tree's fruit, or receiving the fruit from Eve and then eating it.  He didn't take fruit on his own, he only ate what she had already picked and eaten.

Thing of it is, "if" Adam was as wise and fore-knowing as this theory implies, where he wasn't deceived but he "chose" to rebel because he felt he needed to pay for her weakness, why then didn't he, in all that wisdom, take the issue up with God?  Why didn't he just turn down her offer and let God deal with it?  Wouldn't "that" have been what wisdom would have done? 

There are many unanswered questions and unless we just let God show us what the purpose of all of it was directly, our reasoning may never find rest at all.

But for me, when I look at it as Adam being spirit and Eve being soul, it kinda reveals the problem that led to the separation.  Spirit should NEVER

Gen 2:23  and the man saith, `This is the proper step! bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh!' for this it is called Woman, for from a man hath this been taken;
Gen 2:24  therefore doth a man leave his father and his mother, and hath cleaved unto his wife, and they have become one flesh.

I remain totally outside looking in about this "theological and religious hypothesis" of this "spirit-soul-man-woman." In my opinion when ever it is attempted to be explained, it all seems to come from how one sees it and has a desire for me and others to see it that way. I have honestly tried and it is just very un solid and very evasive, and anymore its not just looking through a glass darkly.

[Nathan]

I don't see that. Should Adam have been made in God"s image, there would never have been the "fall" you speak of, I don't believe that God would have eaten of the fruit.
I don't try to find indifference, its just that all the old "stories," have left my heart to wonder.

TT
I'm just quoting scripture. We each have our interpretation of that image.

Thus the error of our path. And yes you are just quoting scripture as we all do, but what good is "just quoting" scripture?
I have known and know brothers and sister who have memorized scripture and quote it, in my opinion that is good for the individual.

Okay, if you disagree that Adam was made in God's image, how do "you" understand the verse that says that man was made in God's image?

And the post you responded to from me wasn't completed . . it somehow posted while I was in the middle of writing it.  I've since edited it.  And I don't deny "desiring" others to see what I see and how I see it . . .don't see anything wrong with having a desire for others to see what I'm saying . . .otherwise, what's the point of saying it at all?  I'm not trying to force you to see it, I'm not condemning you if you don't see it . . .but of course I have a desire that you "would" see it.  Doesn't everyone???

[micah7:9]

I don't see that. Should Adam have been made in God"s image, there would never have been the "fall" you speak of, I don't believe that God would have eaten of the fruit.
I don't try to find indifference, its just that all the old "stories," have left my heart to wonder.

TT
I'm just quoting scripture. We each have our interpretation of that image.

Thus the error of our path. And yes you are just quoting scripture as we all do, but what good is "just quoting" scripture?
I have known and know brothers and sister who have memorized scripture and quote it, in my opinion that is good for the individual.

Okay, if you disagree that Adam was made in God's image, how do "you" understand the verse that says that man was made in God's image?

And the post you responded to from me wasn't completed . . it somehow posted while I was in the middle of writing it.  I've since edited it.  And I don't deny "desiring" others to see what I see and how I see it . . .don't see anything wrong with having a desire for others to see what I'm saying . . .otherwise, what's the point of saying it at all?  I'm not trying to force you to see it, I'm not condemning you if you don't see it . . .but of course I have a desire that you "would" see it.  Doesn't everyone???

My disagreement is that man in Genesis 1 is not that that man wasn't made the image of "us(God)," but the way I see and understand and reason, is that that man is not finished. To use part of Molly's post... Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. [1 John 3:2]
Should it be true that we/man was made in the image and likeness of "us(God)" there is no way that man would have ate of the tree of K of G and E.

[redhotmagma]

I don't see that. Should Adam have been made in God"s image, there would never have been the "fall" you speak of, I don't believe that God would have eaten of the fruit.
I don't try to find indifference, its just that all the old "stories," have left my heart to wonder.

TT
I'm just quoting scripture. We each have our interpretation of that image.

Thus the error of our path. And yes you are just quoting scripture as we all do, but what good is "just quoting" scripture?
I have known and know brothers and sister who have memorized scripture and quote it, in my opinion that is good for the individual.

Okay, if you disagree that Adam was made in God's image, how do "you" understand the verse that says that man was made in God's image?

And the post you responded to from me wasn't completed . . it somehow posted while I was in the middle of writing it.  I've since edited it.  And I don't deny "desiring" others to see what I see and how I see it . . .don't see anything wrong with having a desire for others to see what I'm saying . . .otherwise, what's the point of saying it at all?  I'm not trying to force you to see it, I'm not condemning you if you don't see it . . .but of course I have a desire that you "would" see it.  Doesn't everyone???

My disagreement is that man in Genesis 1 is not that that man wasn't made the image of "us(God)," but the way I see and understand and reason, is that that man is not finished. To use part of Molly's post... Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. [1 John 3:2]
Should it be true that we/man was made in the image and likeness of "us(God)" there is no way that man would have ate of the tree of K of G and E.

Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"

Micah I think I agree with what you're saying, otherwise they wouldn't have become like God by eating the fruit, I think you're saying they made an error and wouldn't have if they were already in the image, I agree it was an error(on their part not on Gods), but I think this points out that it was necessary for the becoming like God, there is no plan B

[micah7:9]

WHY would God need a plan "b"?
The man of Genesis 1 is being worked out in man/adam  the living soul of Gen.2.

Rev 13:8  And bow before it shall all who are dwelling upon the land, whose names have not been written in the scroll of the life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world;

God/the Creator/ the Father/ the Son did not begin what HE began with being fully in charge of ALL the goings on before, now, and the end.

Rev 1:8  `I am the Alpha and the Omega, beginning and end, saith the Lord, who is, and who was, and who is coming--the Almighty.'

[redhotmagma]

WHY would God need a plan "b"?
The man of Genesis 1 is being worked out in man/adam  the living soul of Gen.2.

Rev 13:8  And bow before it shall all who are dwelling upon the land, whose names have not been written in the scroll of the life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world;

God/the Creator/ the Father/ the Son did not begin what HE began with being fully in charge of ALL the goings on before, now, and the end.

Rev 1:8  `I am the Alpha and the Omega, beginning and end, saith the Lord, who is, and who was, and who is coming--the Almighty.'

I'm saying there is no plan B, they were in error in taking the fruit at that point, but it was no mistake on Gods part.