The defining Question about Sola Scriptura and Tradition

Apologetics and Agape ^ | May 25, 2016 | Ken Temple

[DungeonMaster]

In other words, whatever the RCC declares must be believed as Apostolic tradition cannot be proven to have come from either Jesus or His Apostles outside of what was written down in Holy Scripture.

Oh that's what that means. Well that's nice, but it sure isn't true. Immaculate conception, ever virgin, intercessor, assumption, queen of heaven for example.

[imardmd1]

Thank you for taking the time to respond without being miffed. I agree with most of your analysis, but your answer is beyond what I asked.

The first question was about whether Adam believed that what God told him was true.

To answer that matter, one must look at the Genesis Creation account.

By the end of Chapter 1, it is clear that God has on the sixth day created both Adam and Eve (them); God has communicated to humans several commands (you plural); and both Adam and Eve were quite sound in mind, heart, body, and spirit, and able to receive, acknowledge, honor, and keep God's communications. Since both of them were in a perfect state of goodness, it must be that they were entirely disposed to choose to follow God's commands instantly, thoroughly, and precisely.

It is not possible that either Adam or Eve were rebellious in any way at the very first, because Jehovah Elohim who is omniscient and omnipotent, thus pronounced both their state and their standing very good. Not only were they obedient in activity, but also in will, where alternatives are/were presented and individualized choices came into play,

Reading on, Chapter 2 recapitulates material presented in Chapter 1. Verse 7 places the reader back into the time frame of Day Six of the Creation Week, leading up to God's discussion of the circumstances regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So far in Chapter 2, Eve has not been formed from Adam's body, Adam's faith in the Entity speaking to him is perfect, and he has experienced nothing but good.

Then in His first recorded speech to man, God said to Adam:

"Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:
for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (verses 16 and 17).

At this moment, Adam is informed of the existence of evil, but has experiential knowledge only of good, including the expectation of continuing to live and move and have his being. Now God warns him that though he may eat of this tree without hindrance, his condition will surely change. Furthermore, he learns that the will of God is that he not eat of this particular tree, for if he does he will die.

But what kind of death is God talking about? It is not clear that at this point Adam is aware that there are three kinds of death: physical death, spiritual death, ans eternal death.

Aside from this, there is no reason for us to believe that Adam would not believe that God's statement was anything but a precise, accurate description of the consequences of eating of the tree; its wood, bark, leaves, sap, or fruit, though he had the choices of (a) believing that God's statement is true and in the nature of a command, and (b) even if true, he still had the choice of eating of the tree though it was contrary to God's will.

That is the answer to the first question, but we are not informed in a detailed way what the result would be if Adam continually and without fail declined to eat of the tree, forever. We tend to presume that in this case, Adam would continue to have the three desirable kinds of life: physical, spiritual, and eternal life without interruption.

Remember, Eve is not yet made and (shaving closely) at that point the scripture does not tell us of her arrival nor of what would happen if she and rather than Adam were to initiate the partaking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Now, regarding question 2, it was simply asked whether you had a choice to believe or to not believe that the translation of the pertinent Scripture (and hence the underlying apograph) is true.

I don't see that you answered that proposition. You gave another answer, with elaboration, that was not to the point.

The issue is not the consequences of believing the Scripture. The issue, in both cases, for Adam's (unfallen) predicament and yours (fallen, though putatively restored), is the matter of choice. Do you have it (and did Adam, in his pristine state) or do you not? if you have the choice, and can exercise that choice, then human depravity does not extend to the point where one cannot make a repentant/believing choice to be saved when faced with the convincing truth of the gracious gospel. Unconditional election falls with it, and grace is not so irresistible that a determined human cannot choose to refuse it (Gen. 6:3).

(Let's keep in mind that we have not yet discussed why Adam chose to partake of the tree, and whether or not he did it rebelliously.)

[Chaguito]

Have you read Tom Torrance’s book, “The Mediation of Christ?” This is one of his fundamental arguments (if one can sort through the dense writing).

[HarleyD]

I believe your answer is far more complex and beyond the question of whether Adam had "free choice" to break the covenant. Whether he was concerned about what type of death he would face is immaterial. God simply told him not to do it. He willfully did it. Adam was unfaithful in trusting God not to do it and broke the covenant. (Eve was deceived into breaking the covenant, but that did not excuse her.)

As far as "if you have the choice, and can exercise that choice, then human depravity does not extend to the point where one cannot make a repentant" that would be true IF you could choose to do good-all the time. Not only does the scripture teach us that we do not rise to the level of God's goodness, we can simply examine ourselves to see how much we fail. Furthermore, scripture teaches that only God can grant us the ability to repent. It isn't that we can't repent-it that we won't repent. That is how nasty we are. God must give us this ability to turn from our sin.

Thus human depravity does exist. We simply don't want to admit that we're depraved individuals. And we willfully choose to do what is wrong unless God gives us a new heart and spirit. And even then it doesn't stop us from sinning. That is our rebellious nature.