Skip to main content

Personality Types and the Fall of Man Argument

   There will be some who will want to say that I was being illogical or unbiblical when I wrote the post about how personality differences get misunderstood.  Their argument is basically that differing personalities are a consequence of the Fall of Man- a consequence of the DNA getting disordered.  Therefore, they will say, that people who don't fit the "perfect personality" are sinful. God created one man, they will say, with a perfect personality (Adam).  In truth, they can cite Adam, Eve, and Jesus.  That argument is not correct, and I will stand my ground on this.
   The reason why they are not correct is because they are making the unwarranted assumption all of Adam's descendants would have had the same personality had the Fall never happened. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that had the Fall never happened, there would have been different kinds of people with different personalities, it just would have been a more perfect world.
  In 1 Corinthians 12:14-31 Paul wrote about how there are different types of people in the body of Christ, or the church body, to serve different functions.  There should never be an aim to pound everybody into the same cookie-cutter mold to make everyone the same. That is idiocy.  Believers are conformed more and more to the image of Christ by a work of God. People don't have to pound one another into submission in order to make them the same as everyone else.
   I have no problem with the part of the argument which states that the original creation (before the Fall) was really good.  Personality, talents, skills, gifts, are different categories from morals/morality.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Going Against One's Word or Breaking Vows

    Inherent in the problem having to do with breaking a vow that one has previously made (from a Biblical point of view) is the classic distinction between "law" and "grace" which is talked about a great in the writings of Paul. It is not advisable to make a vow (Matthew 5:34-35), or to break a vow (Matthew 5:33), obviously because of the strict justice of God and His righteous standard. However, to think that a vow made foolishly, rashly, in error, while intoxicated, poisoned, mentally compromised, etc, must always be observed forever, is not only a wrong way or practice for being too legalistic, it would practically be heresy because one would be ignoring what Jesus Christ accomplished on the cross. The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross does away with the ceremonial ordinances of the Old Testament by fulfilling them, bringing them to completion in the bringing of a new covenant in Him. Well guess what? In the Old Testament ceremonial ordinances the Jews had a way t...
Post a Comment
Read more

I don’t have legalism. That should explain things

    Many of you probably noticed that I have referred to secular songs multiple times in my posts. The reason why I can be a professing Christian and listen to and/or refer to secular songs is because I do not have the heresy of legalism. Others who adhere to legalism have been trying to say (wrongfully so) that believers in Christ are not ever allowed to listen to any “secular music.” That would be incorrect as speaking too simply and drawing a hard and fast boundary line for everyone where no hard and fast boundary exists.    If you want to know what legalism is, I am providing a few links here to explain it-  https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-Christian-legalism.html     https://carm.org/what-is-legalism   Legalism (when it occurs in the church) is basically (typically) the erroneous belief system which states that a person’s salvation depends on the continual adherence to rules of conduct and behavior (either to attain or mainta...
Post a Comment
Read more