In all frankness, your hermeneutic is that of the cults.
Now that is not a very nice thing to say. I was just trying to be nice and you slam me?
I beg of you if you cannot control your emotions please desist in answering me further. I am trying to have congenial, mature dialog here without emotional slams.
Can it not be good as far as God's plan was concerned that Adam was created soulish and flesh?
Where you quote: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin….Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression…”
Paul was saying that death reigned from Adam to Moses even though they did not eat of any tree of the knowledge of good and evil like Adam did. They died because death passed through into them whether they like it or not. They have no say in the matter.
"The creature (lit. "creation") was made subject to vanity, not willingly" (Rom.8). Adam did not willingly subject himself to vanity. God subjected him to it. And for good reason: "but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope, 21 Because the creature (lit. "creation") itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God."
Is that not "good"? It is very good.
How could Adam's eyes be opened when he had not the knowledge of good and evil yet? The only way to get that was to sin and they only way to sin was to break God's commandment and the only way to break God's law was to be made flesh. "7 Because the carnal mind (lit. "flesh") is enmity against God: for it (flesh) is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can (the flesh) be" (Romans 8:7). (I supplied the elipsis in parenthesis).
Is this not good? God is working all together for good is He not? Had Adam not sinned the Saviour could not come to save us from sin. Is this not good?
