Post Reply
Page 10 of 12  •  Prev 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Could Jesus' Sin Have Ended The Universe?
3 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 4:00AM #91
Adelphe
Posts: 28,744

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:44PM, SecondSonOfDavid wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, Adelphe wrote:


This doesn't read as if He could have sinned (not that He would have, anyway.)




I disagree.  The fact that Satan tried to tempt Christ proves the possibility that Christ could sin.




That would imply that Satan is omniscient.  Moreover, Satan's other three tactics in the desert failed.  Historically and theologically, of course, Satan is no match for Christ/God.

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 4:06AM #92
Adelphe
Posts: 28,744

Apr 21, 2012 -- 2:34PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


I suggest that Jesus could have picked up his powers at any time, but doing so would have forfeited the mission (part of which was to live wholly and totally as a man). Thus, to succumb to the temptation to turn stones into bread, would have been a fatal mistake (IMvhO).



But He certainly did pick up His powers as His many miracles attest so this can't be right.  Don't forget He also performed a miracle with respect to paying the Temple tax.



Apr 21, 2012 -- 2:40PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


(#87 continued) Adelphe, if you will look at your example you will see that Jesus first asked the disciples to feed the multitude (You give them something to eat). Was he asking them to act supernaturally? No. He was giving them an example as to how to act through faith, how to be conduits for the power of God (which they did later demonstrate). The failing of today's church is not to be able to do likewise, as Jesus said we could do and would do. Something is wrong here.


sdp   




?


I know plenty of Christian ministries the world over that multiply loaves and fishes through the grace of God.


Don't forget the OT promise--the only one where God actually invites a test:


10  Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. And thereby put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need.  (Mal 3)


Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 12:39PM #93
Iwantamotto
Posts: 8,493

davelaw40:  because despite your assertations to the contrary-Jesus honored His mother


Obeyed, maybe.  You have no evidence of a loving relationship, as curt as He always is with her.

Knock and the door shall open.  It's not my fault if you don't like the decor.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 12:55PM #94
mainecaptain
Posts: 21,790

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:39PM, Iwantamotto wrote:


davelaw40:  because despite your assertations to the contrary-Jesus honored His mother


Obeyed, maybe.  You have no evidence of a loving relationship, as curt as He always is with her.




Unfortunately Iwanta I see that as well.

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 4:53PM #95
SecondSonOfDavid
Posts: 3,344

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:00AM, Adelphe wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:44PM, SecondSonOfDavid wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, Adelphe wrote:


This doesn't read as if He could have sinned (not that He would have, anyway.)




I disagree.  The fact that Satan tried to tempt Christ proves the possibility that Christ could sin.




That would imply that Satan is omniscient.  Moreover, Satan's other three tactics in the desert failed.  Historically and theologically, of course, Satan is no match for Christ/God.




I never claimed Satan was omniscient.  If he were, he would have not bothered to try to tempt Christ, as he would have known in advance the outcome (and for that matter, if Satan were omniscient, he would have known the futulity of rebelling against God before he ever did it, and so the rebellion proves a limited knowledge).  


But you have missed the quesiton of why Satan would try to tempt Christ at all.  Satan certainly knew WHO Christ was, so his attempt tells us he had reason to believe that in human form, even God could be tempted.


I forget where, but isn't there a verse about Satan knowing Scripture better than any man?  So Satan's error was not in what God COULD do, but what Christ WOULD do.


The choice was effecacious and relevant.

That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 9:45PM #96
davelaw40
Posts: 19,669

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:39PM, Iwantamotto wrote:


davelaw40:  because despite your assertations to the contrary-Jesus honored His mother


Obeyed, maybe.  You have no evidence of a loving relationship, as curt as He always is with her.




thats  just the nature of using a patois created for business instead of an emotionally deeper language like classical Greek

Non Quis, Sed Quid
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 24, 2012 - 6:38AM #97
Miguel_de_servet
Posts: 17,100

Dave


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:29PM, davelaw40 wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:11PM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:

1) ... I believe that you are not reading properly: Hebrews says crystal clearly that Jesus was "without sin" [Heb 4:15], which, for someone who is God's literal Son and the Incarnation of God's Eternal Word is simply normal. Jesus could, perhaps, have abandoned his Mission — and that would have been bad enough for us all.


1) yes, you are being strictly (uber) literal-choris hamartia-separated from sin-I am interperting it-and yet, he did not sin.-to me this better fits the context of the passage about a High Priest who feels our pain


1) I read both the Greek (chôris amartias) and the English literal translation ("without sin") for what they are. You prefer to add your spin ... er ... "interpretation" ...


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:32PM, davelaw40 wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:11PM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:

2) I don't see how, with his never abandoned divine nature, he could have sinned. Can you? Please explain.


2) Jesus was fully Human (the second Adam)


He was created innocent and fully capable of making choices.


2) There is a ... er ... slight difference:


Adam was a mere human being "created innocent and fully capable of making choices".


Jesus was fully human AND fully God, NOT created, BUT generated.


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:38PM, davelaw40 wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:11PM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:


3) I appreciate that you are modest enough and honest enough to call yours an "interpretation" of Colossians 1.


From my interpretative POV, I simply reject the notion of "Cosmic Christ", and attribute all that you say about "hold[ing] the Universe together" to God's Eternal Word: an attribute of God, NOT a "pre-existent person" in/of God.


[4] It certainly puts you at odds with those who entertain a radical understanding of the kenosis ...


3) agree to disagree (I think Adam was created to resemble Jesus, Jesus walked in garden, wrestled with Jacob and appeared in the fiery furnace)


4) yes it does


3) Agree to disagree ...


... and, once again, those "walked in garden, wrestled with Jacob and appeared in the fiery furnace" attributed to some imaginary "pre-incarnated" Jesus are nothing but "trinitarian" projection, of course ...


3) Agreed ...


MdS

Revelation is above, not against Reason

“The everlasting God is a refuge, and underneath you are his eternal arms ...” (Deut 33:27)
“Do you have an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like his?” (Job 40:9)
“By the Lord’s word [dabar] the heavens were made; and by the breath [ruwach] of his mouth all their host.” (Psalm 33:6)
“Who would have believed what we just heard? When was the arm of the Lord revealed through him?” (Isaiah 53:1)
“Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” (John 12:38)
“For not the hearers of the law are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be declared righteous.” (Romans 2:13)

“Owe no one anything, except to love one another, for the one who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.”(Romans 13:8)
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 24, 2012 - 6:56AM #98
Miguel_de_servet
Posts: 17,100

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:59PM, Adelphe wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:21AM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:

tfvespasianus, as you have a solid background in Ancient History, there are three questions (plus a fourth one) that I would like to ask you.


Hopefully you don't think you need a "solid background in Ancient History" to answer any of these questions.  In fact, you'd need a solid background in the New Testament, if anything.


It is revealing how the lady thinks that, to speak about the Roman Emperor Titus, the end of Paul, the First Jewish- Roman War,  the Roman philosopher Seneca, advisor of Emperor Nero, "a solid background in the New Testament" would be all that is needed ... [:embarrassed:]



1. It is consistent with Acts that "[Paul] arrived in Rome c 60 and spent two years under house arrest." Also, "[n]either the Bible nor other history says how or when Paul died, but Ignatius, probably around 110 AD, writes that he was martyred. [Letter to the Ephesians, Chapter XII] According to Christian tradition, Paul, was beheaded in Rome during the reign of Nero around the mid-60s at Tre Fontane Abbey (English: Three Fountains Abbey)." [Wikipedia > Paul the Apostle > Arrest and death]. Question: if Paul died by 67 AD, how did he manage to write a letter to Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus Augustus, who "was Roman Emperor from 79 to 81"?

Indeed, how did he?


It would be interesting to hear it from the lady, who seems to be so full of ... er ... interesting ideas ... [:Wink:]



2. Let's assume (for mere argument's sake) that Paul's Epistle to Titus is authentic, and that it was written to the future Emperor Titus way before he became emperor (after Nero, after Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and his father Vespasian). Question: can the fanta-historical spin go as far as suggesting that Paul urged the young future emperor to crack down on the Jews even before they rebelled in 67 AD, and rightly so because they had rejected their rightful Anointed King?

Not if you've read any of the New Testament whatsoever.


What a ludicrous, preposterous, irrelevant comment ... [:embarrassed:]



3. The Epistle to Seneca the Younger is "a collection of correspondence claiming to be from Paul of Tarsus to Seneca the Younger". Question: if we are to make room for some wild speculation on Paul writing to the (future) Emperor Titus, then why not also for Paul writing to Seneca, advisor of Emperor Nero?

Why not?  Some do.  I've read them and I don't.


The lady seems to manage (occasionally ...) to retain some common sense ...


MdS

Revelation is above, not against Reason

“The everlasting God is a refuge, and underneath you are his eternal arms ...” (Deut 33:27)
“Do you have an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like his?” (Job 40:9)
“By the Lord’s word [dabar] the heavens were made; and by the breath [ruwach] of his mouth all their host.” (Psalm 33:6)
“Who would have believed what we just heard? When was the arm of the Lord revealed through him?” (Isaiah 53:1)
“Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” (John 12:38)
“For not the hearers of the law are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be declared righteous.” (Romans 2:13)

“Owe no one anything, except to love one another, for the one who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.”(Romans 13:8)
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 26, 2012 - 5:49AM #99
Adelphe
Posts: 28,744

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:56AM, Miguel_de_servet wrote:

It is revealing how the lady thinks that, to speak about the Roman Emperor Titus, the end of Paul, the First Jewish- Roman War,  the Roman philosopher Seneca, advisor of Emperor Nero, "a solid background in the New Testament" would be all that is needed ... [:embarrassed:]



Here are your questions:


1.  if Paul died by 67 AD, how did he manage to write a letter to Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus Augustus, who "was Roman Emperor from 79 to 81"?


For this one, you simply need a brain...


2.  can the fanta-historical spin go as far as suggesting that Paul urged the young future emperor to crack down on the Jews even before they rebelled in 67 AD, and rightly so because they had rejected their rightful Anointed King?


For this one, you need to know the NT and Paul...


3.  if we are to make room for some wild speculation on Paul writing to the (future) Emperor Titus, then why not also for Paul writing to Seneca, advisor of Emperor Nero?


For this one, you need to know the NT and Paul...


Now tell me again one needs a "solid background in Ancient History" (and not the New Testament, if anything) to answer those.


[:embarrassed:...yourself]


It would be interesting to hear it from the lady, who seems to be so full of ... er ... interesting ideas ... [:Wink:]



He didn't. [:Wink:]


What a ludicrous, preposterous, irrelevant comment ... [:embarrassed:]



I'm sure it appears that way to someone who neither knows the New Testament or Ancient History...


Where do you see anywhere in the NT Paul being authorized to and/or authorizing a "crack down on the Jews" or anyone?


Have you entirely missed the message of the NT???


[:embarrassed:...yourself]


The lady seems to manage (occasionally ...) to retain some common sense ...


MdS




While I suppose this is to be understood as some "sort" of backhanded "compliment" in benign condescension, I very muchhighly doubt you've read them in order to make any judgment on what's common sense here whatsoever. 


We know you haven't even read all of Paul's canonical letters.

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 26, 2012 - 6:16AM #100
Adelphe
Posts: 28,744

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:53PM, SecondSonOfDavid wrote:


But you have missed the quesiton of why Satan would try to tempt Christ at all.  Satan certainly knew WHO Christ was, so his attempt tells us he had reason to believe that in human form, even God could be tempted.



Well, Satan had no idea of--nor the implications of--the hypostatic union, that's for sure...



I forget where, but isn't there a verse about Satan knowing Scripture better than any man?  So Satan's error was not in what God COULD do, but what Christ WOULD do.



Satan first doesn't even bother with Scripture.  It appears, first, he had his suspicions and was looking for a sign/confirmation--"IF you are the Son of God..."  "then just do some magic and...eat already!  Hell, I would..."


Jesus answers him with Scripture.


Satan catches on "Oh, I've got a guy who's going to be quoting Scripture.  Well I can do that..."  "So now, again, IF you are the Son of God...it is written..."


Jesus then proves He knows Scripture better than Satan.


Then, it seems those two exchanges confirm for Satan that He IS the Son of God so he offers Him a "shortcut" to His destiny of ruling all the kingdoms of the world.  He obviously didn't know what The Plan was...



The choice was effecacious and relevant.




Of course it was--and the choices would have been properly made with the "help" of Satan or not.  The exchange is important for His followers because it demonstrates that Jesus was a REAL man and COULD be tempted and those temptations can be overcome:


For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.


For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.


(btw, I (as a Sola Scriptura Protestant), of course, note the way Jesus fought temptations--immersion in the word of God...)

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 10 of 12  •  Prev 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook