[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by sky.

Genesis 2:16

That's a good point I guess but really if they ate the "fruit" of plants then they ate the seeds so they ate the baby plants.

I suppose they ate the baby plants. But did it have life before it was planted? LOL. Of course, and then again there is that seed which falls to the ground.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by lifeisgood

1 Cor. 5:5 To deliver such an one (the one committing the sin of incest) unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh (it refers to ceasing all prayer for such an individual, and can be done by the local Body, providing the Church is correct in its position; God will no more honor wrong committed by the Church than He will by an individual), that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (it is hoped that such action will cause the person to repent).

Swaggart, J. (2005). The Expositor's Study Bible (2008–2009). Baton Rouge, LA: World Evangelism Press.

Is the goal always restoration?

I believe so.

And how could this person be brought back into the fellowship of the church, and not unless he repents.

He who is spiritual should restore the one who sins, being careful that he not get caught up in the sin (to condone it, etc...) himself.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by lifeisgood

We say YES TO CHRIST not no to sin.

I can say no to something that I know is wrong all day long, all week long, all month long, all year long, but I will still do that which I know is wrong, however, if I keep coming back to Christ and what He did every day, then and only then will the Holy Spirit, not I, help me so that I, eventually, will not be 'dominated' by that sin.

If I keep trying to do it myself, I AM DOOMED to failure. Because if I could stop sinning by myself, then Christ died in vain.

And yes.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by lifeisgood

He decided before the foundation of the world to justify me, he did justify me, He continues to justify me. He does everything because of what he did at the Cross.

Can you provide verses to support these positions on justification?

I'm disagreeing that He continues to justify me because I believe if I am justified I don't need justified again.

[sky.]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

I suppose they ate the baby plants. But did it have life before it was planted? LOL. Of course, and then again there is that seed which falls to the ground.

And what about that lone leaf or tender shoot that breaks off, is it a plant? I wonder what the animals ate?

[lifeisgood]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

My original question was what sin reigned in death means, because it seems that death is the consequence of sin. It must be that the consequence has it's effect for more sin. I'm wondering how sin is reigning or reigned (namely, reigns?) in death.

Have you noticed how you are answering your own questions?

It must be that the consequence of sin has its effect for more sin. Absolutely yes.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by lifeisgood

1 Cor. 5:5 To deliver such an one (the one committing the sin of incest) unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh (it refers to ceasing all prayer for such an individual, and can be done by the local Body, providing the Church is correct in its position; God will no more honor wrong committed by the Church than He will by an individual), that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (it is hoped that such action will cause the person to repent).

Swaggart, J. (2005). The Expositor's Study Bible (2008–2009). Baton Rouge, LA: World Evangelism Press.

So this person was either a believer or an unbeliever. Was the distinction made in the text?

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by sky.

And what about that lone leaf or tender shoot that breaks off, is it a plant? I wonder what the animals ate?

The shoots that broke off must have,

well never mind. It's really not my point anyway, but useful to talk about.

And still would someone say that the plants you speak of were only outside the garden or only existed after the fall?

The animals must have eaten something.

It was okay for man to eat, so eating was before the fall.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by lifeisgood

Have you noticed how you are answering your own questions?

It must be that the consequence of sin has its effect for more sin. Absolutely yes.

In the death of sin, people sin more.

[lifeisgood]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

Is this for the unbeliever, the one who would say they have not sinned?

No. The book is written to believers. It is for the believer.

The unbeliever can care less if they sin or not. The unbeliever will laugh at us if we say to them they are sinning, because they, the unbeliever, do not believe they are sinning.

[lifeisgood]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

Is the goal always restoration?

I believe so.

And how could this person be brought back into the fellowship of the church, and not unless he repents.

He who is spiritual should restore the one who sins, being careful that he not get caught up in the sin (to condone it, etc...) himself.

Yes.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by lifeisgood

No. The book is written to believers. It is for the believer.

The unbeliever can care less if they sin or not. The unbeliever will laugh at us if we say to them they are sinning, because they, the unbeliever, do not believe they are sinning.

Or they believe that everyone sins so if you call sin out it has to be that you are a religious bigot and a hypocrite.

I don't have a lot of experience with this one, but I see people struggling with sin in the world from time to time.

[lifeisgood]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

Can you provide verses to support these positions on justification?

I'm disagreeing that He continues to justify me because I believe if I am justified I don't need justified again.

What I meant to say is that I am totally justified --- past, present, future --- that's why I did it this way.

[lifeisgood]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

So this person was either a believer or an unbeliever. Was the distinction made in the text?

He is a believer because if he was an unbeliever, Paul would not have told the Church to stop fellowship with him.

[sky.]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

The shoots that broke off must have,

well never mind. It's really not my point anyway, but useful to talk about.

And still would someone say that the plants you speak of were only outside the garden or only existed after the fall?

The animals must have eaten something.

It was okay for man to eat, so eating was before the fall.

I don't want to detract from the OP but the plants existed before the fall so did the animals. So to answer the question did death in plants exist before the fall? I would say yes but the Bible doesn't really address that issue.