No you don't. And my advice is that you do not unless it makes sense in the practical and when you put it in motion. And you better stay out of Hebrews.
It would be a good discussion but Adam and Eve were not under the Mosaic Law.
I disagree on them not being living souls.
We are all sons of God in sense but Adam was a created being.
Changes in the blood is not really something that could be specifically defined in the Bible....analogies aside, their not going to get into the DNA.
We do not have a gauge, meter, or test for incorruptible blood. On the other hand the spiritual and physical aspect of Christ's blood are very real and there effects are noted in the scriptures and tradition.
This is an absolute fact.
Spirit and seed of God....I believe this very much.
Ding ding! Right on!
No you don't.
Yes I do.
And my advice is that you do not unless it makes sense in the practical and when you put it in motion.
We are talking about what makes sense to God in His Spirit and the eternal things of the Spirit. Not what makes sense to our own minds, that is but a puff of smoke. The spiritual compares things to the eternal things of the kingdom of God that is not seen with eyes of flesh, and they are more real and enduring, than the carnal mind comparing things to our own world and experience, which can be blind to the things of the Spirit.
When Hebrews says the law is changed of necessity with the priesthood, then I take it literally to mean that the law of God by Moses was changed to that of Christ, even as the Levitical priesthood was changed to that of Jesus and His saints. Many don't want to be so literal, because they want certain of Moses and the old covenant to remain in place, for such things as circumcision of the flesh and Sabbath-keeping by commandment.
When Romans says there is no Jew that is outward, and no circumcision that is in the flesh, I take that literal to mean that there are no more outward Jews on earth, and all born of flesh are born into uncircumcision, all nations alike, including the one still calling itself Israel after the flesh. Many don't like that so literally read and concluded, because they like a physical seed of promise to be on earth, so that they can keep their learned prophecies intact that require it.
The woman clothed in the Sun is not literal, because Scripture calls her a wonder, even as the dragon is not a literal dragon, and Babylon the Great is a not a literal woman riding upon a scarlet beast, because Scripture calls her a mystery.
It would be a good discussion but Adam and Eve were not under the Mosaic Law.
The law of sin and death began when God made the 1st commandment and law defining transgression as eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. That law of sin and death remains, in which we are alive to God, when dead to sin, and become dead to God by sin, who's wages is death.
When the eyes of Adam and Eve were both opened to sin and shame by transgression, they died to God. They were no longer living souls, even as their seed by flesh are born in sin and dead to God: not souls. By flesh we are born as souls alive to sin and flesh, but not living souls alive to God and His righteousness.
A living soul is alive to God with eternal life by the Spirit of God. Souls abiding in sin are dead to God, though they have continued existence beyond the grave.
We are all sons of God in sense but Adam was a created being.
Once again, this 'in sense' is a rationale of the mind, not the true sense of Scripture:
They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
We are all creatures created by God in His image physically, but we are not all children and sons of God created in Christ unto good works:
Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
In things pertaining to truth of God and eternity of the spiritual things of life, I do not use my own reasoning, but speak and give my sense of Scripture only.
Changes in the blood is not really something that could be specifically defined in the Bible....analogies aside, their not going to get into the DNA.
Scripture plainly states that the life is in the blood. And the eternal life of God is breathed into a soul, in which it becomes a living soul by that life within the blood. Scripture states Jesus is the 2nd Adam, and the only man on earth to ever be born after the Spirit as was the 1st Adam, and His blood is called after His resurrection
incorruptible.
And since Adam died to God by transgression, no longer having the life of God in his soul, then his blood was no longer pure, but corrupted as is the seed and flesh born of that one corrupted blood (Acts 17). And so, I have made a sensible argument, that the 1st Adam's blood was uncorrupted by sin at birth, being born with the Spirit breathed into Him, and the 2nd Adam came from heaven with uncorrupted blood by the Spirit overshadowing the woman.
The 1st Adam transgressed and corrupted himself
and his blood, and died to God, and the 2nd Adam did not sin, nor corrupt Himself, but is resurrected with
incorruptible blood forever, which blood He commands us to drink indeed, that we may have life in us: His eternal life in His blood.
Ding ding! Right on!
And so we agree in the first principles of Christ, which are all that matter, and we disagree in the understanding of some spiritual things of Scripture, which really don't matter, except as a matter rational dispute:
The former renew the mind in Christ with great profit, and the latter exercise the mind in Scriptural things, with a little profit. Sort of like godliness is profitable in all things, whily bodily exercise profiteth little.