APL,

There is no special agenda. It was a sincere question. I had not laid eyes upon that statement. Thank you for finding that. Perhaps that gives us a good clue.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

While John was contemplating the scenes of Horeb, the Spirit of Him who sanctified the seventh day came upon him. He contemplated the sin of Adam in transgressing the divine law, and the fearful result of that transgression. {SL 75.1}

Sin is the transgression of the law. If the sin of Adam brought such inexpressible wretchedness, requiring the sacrifice of God's dear Son, what will be the punishment of those, who, seeing the light of truth, set at nought the fourth commandment of the Lord? {4T 251.2}

I presented before my hearers the sin of Adam in the transgression of the Father's express commands. God made man upright, perfectly holy and happy; but he lost the divine favor and destroyed his own happiness by disobedience to the Father's law. The sin of Adam plunged the race in hopeless misery and despair. {4T 293.2}

God has seen fit plainly to present in His holy word the consequences of the sin of Adam, which opened the flood-gates of woe upon our world, that men might be warned not to do as did Adam. The penalty of sin is death; and to listen to the deceitful temptations of Satan, to venture in the path of transgression, is to imperil the soul. We are not to follow the words of men, however wise they may appear to be, unless their testimony is in harmony with a "thus saith the Lord." Temptations will come to us in the most seductive guise, but it is at our peril that we turn from the plain command of God to follow the assertions of men. {BEcho, December 17, 1894 par. 2}

Our first parents by their disobedience opened the floodgates of woe to the race, and notwithstanding we have before us their sad experience in transgression, and the terrible result, we do not cease to sin; but while we deplore the sin of Adam, which was attended with such fearful consequences, we follow in the same course and realize the penalty of our own sins; for which suffering we alone are accountable. The providence of God is not responsible for the woes of man; his own course of action brings the sure result. {FPR, March 30, 1879 par. 5}

The sin of Adam brought a deplorable state of things. {RH, February 24, 1874 par. 22}

Though the moral image of God was almost obliterated by the sin of Adam, through the merits and power of Jesus it may be renewed. Man may stand with the moral image of God in his character; for Jesus will give it to him. Unless the moral image of God is seen in man, he can never enter the city of God as a conqueror. {RH, June 10, 1890 par. 6}

In how short a time from the first sin of Adam did sin increase and spread like the leprosy. It is the nature of sin to increase. From generation to generation sin has spread like a contagious disease. {ST, December 20, 1877 par. 2}

I presented before my hearers the sin of Adam in the transgression of the Father's express commands. God made man upright, perfectly holy and happy; but he lost the favor of God, and destroyed his own happiness by disobedience of the Father's law. The sin of Adam plunged the race in hopeless misery and despair. {ST, August 1, 1878 par. 6}

Funny how all these quotes only mention Adam. Why do you think that is?

APL,

My opening post would answer that question. Go back and read it carefully, and if you still don't understand, study Genesis 5:2.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Adam chose to sin. And repeatedly, Adam's sin is the one pointed to that brought down the race. Adam could have stopped the problem, but chose to propagate it. Do you not find that interesting?

I think EGW has given you the answer.

Actually, it is. If Adam's sin was worse, and if He would be in heaven, why wouldn't Eve, who was deceived and did not sin fully knowing what she was doing? If Adam will be in heaven, we can be sure Eve will be, too.

Now that may not be on topic. And you have little support, if any.

kland,

Perhaps you are not aware that the sin of eating the forbidden fruit would not have been the only reason to keep either Adam or Eve out of Heaven. Unconfessed, unforgiven, unrepented of sins surely would, and may have followed in the wake of their original sin.

As for crimes of greater magnitude, consider murderers like David who will be in Heaven. Surely, kland, you do recognize that killing someone is more egregious than eating a piece of fruit.

Or are you under the mistaken impression that Adam and Eve only sinned in eating the fruit, and never sinned again afterward?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Was the ban on eating the fruit and arbitrary ban? Why is it that Adam's sin, eating the fruit, is presented to us as being so egregious?

To the contrary.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

This does not answer the second question. And it does not say WHY God banned the fruit.

I considers APL's citation to be of value.