And if he isnt risen...

[Grand Admiral Crunch]

We are all like Adam, in the sense that we all have the same choice to make; obedience or disobedience, life or death, light or darkness.

"There is nothing new under the sun".

Are you agreeing with me? Because I very much enjoy it when people do.

 

[wool]

Are you agreeing with me? Because I very much enjoy it when people do.

Yep. The part about how Adam represents all of us. I'm just adding to that idea.

 

[wool]

I'm not sure why the interlocutor would think that. if God is "god" he can do whatever he wants.

I don't really like the pat answers of "some things you just don't know until you do." it's true that we don't know what we don't know, but usually it's just used as an easy answer for someone who believes something because they really believe it, and if others only experienced what they did, then they would have to believe it too. yeah, but... no.

I mean, I was a believer in that tradition while many others I knew fell away. I was serious about my faith, and I know my own motivations, and so I kept searching and digging and trying to understand... and that search led me out of the mindset I previously had so that by the end of my 30's I just didn't want to go to those kinds of churches anymore / hold that particular worldview. it cost me a lot to leave, but... the Search for Truth, you know? My road led me into a different place.

I could just say from MY perspective that "well, you guys who still believe what I used to believe? You just don't know what's right until you do, by stepping outside yourself!" And I could be right. But it doesn't really prove or show anything, it's just a possibility to keep in mind.

When were you baptized?

 

[wool]

I know that each sacrifice was supposed to make people realize the truth and severity of Christ's future death to save humanity

Do you really though? Because it didn't seem like you knew that in your last post.

 

[Ojian]

We are now sequencing the genome cheaply, easily, and quickly for any living thing. As well we can sequence the genome of any DNA that remains after death. And we have been able to locate all life within an evolving web of DNA. So we know with precision where we have come from.

So all life uses DNA. So what? That does not explain where life came from. What do you mean by "So we know with precision where we have come from."?

And we have not come from Eve and Adam as they didn't exist, and so didn't commit original sin, and so we have no need of a saviour.

How can you say this with confidence? It is at least genetically possible that all humans came from one pair.

 

[Ojian]

It makes Adam seem more like Pandora. Once he opened the box of sin, there was no putting it back. Even Jesus' death didn't put it back, it just paid forever the collective human penalty for it.

I can see how it is like Pandora. Perhaps one story was based off of the other. But Jesus death paying for man's sins is just one part of a much bigger picture. Jesus death hasn't 'put it back'.....yet. Per the Bible there is still more outworking of God's purpose to be accomplished before everything is made right again. Jesus sacrificial death was a vital component in that purpose, but it isn't the whole story.

But wouldn't the death of one sinless human simply pay for the sins of one sinful human, if we don't count Jesus' life of more value because he is God?

No, not necessarily. Whether Jesus was God or not does not matter in this case. What does matter is that he was a perfect human. It balances the scales.

Adam's sin was willful, consciously chosen. There was nothing about him that made him sin. It was his own choice using his free will that God gave him. But his decision doomed his kids in a manner of speaking in that they had no initial choice. They were sinners at birth/conception. It is not fair for the rest of mankind, yes, but the unfairness about it was because of Adam's decision, not because of the universal standard that had been put in place prior to Adam's sin. So it was by one perfect man's actions that all mankind was doomed, and it was by one man's perfect action that mankind can be saved. Balance.

But if you need to think of it as one sinless human simply paying for the sins of one sinful human, then realize that it is Jesus paying for the sins of Adam (on behalf of his kids).

An interesting idea. It seems to me instead that God could just forgive humanity and wipe away that penalty without going through the whole death and resurrection process. He's God after all, and he imposed the penalty to begin with. This is the sort of mental gymnastics that never made sense to me.

Of course he could have, but that would have created problems in other areas. As I said before, there is more to the greater story than just redeeming mankind. Adam's sin raised other issues related to free will, God's sovereignty (right to rule), who can set the objective moral standards for man,..... The best course of action was to proceed as he did.

 

[wool]

I can see how it is like Pandora. Perhaps one story was based off of the other. But Jesus death paying for man's sins is just one part of a much bigger picture. Jesus death hasn't 'put it back'.....yet. Per the Bible there is still more outworking of God's purpose to be accomplished before everything is made right again. Jesus sacrificial death was a vital component in that purpose, but it isn't the whole story.

Well, satan is defeated and his fate has been sealed. There is still work to be done, though. Not every soul has made their choice.

Whether Jesus was God or not does not matter in this case. What does matter is that he was a perfect human. It balances the scales.

Yes it does matter, because only He who created man had the power to redeem him. The Son of God created man. "Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made." John 1:2,3

Christ is God. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

Christ is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8), meaning the plan of redemption was laid before the fall of man, even before the earth was created.

You never answered my question as to why you don't believe Jesus is God. Can you even be a Christian if you don't believe Jesus is God? I don't think you can.

 

[Ojian]

Yes it does matter, because only He who created man had the power to redeem him. The Son of God created man. "Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made." John 1:2,3

It does not follow from that scripture that only Jesus as God can redeem man. Jesus as God could redeem man through his sacrificial death, or Jesus not as God but as a perfect man could as well redeem man. My point is that whether or not Jesus is God, in this situation (the matter of providing a ransom) it is irrelevant. For all that it is worth, God could have sent an angel (another perfect being) as a man and accomplished the same thing. But he chose to send his best, his son to do the job. - John 3:16, 1 John 4:9,10

The ransom was simply a corresponding action to cover over, or corresponded to what was lost with Adam. There was no need for it to be a 'God' that did the covering over. - Romans 5:19; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 22.

You never answered my question as to why you don't believe Jesus is God. Can you even be a Christian if you don't believe Jesus is God? I don't think you can.

Cause you didnt ask a question of why. You merely asked a yes/no question that i thought was rhetorical since the answer was already established in my prior post.

You need to support a requirement that belief that Jesus is God is needed to be a Christian.

But why don't I? Not wanting to derail the subject of this thread anymore, I will keep it real brief,-
The scriptures, and Jesus himself, spoke of himself and his Father (God) as distinct and separate individuals - Matt 26:39, John 8:17,18
Scriptures indicate that Jesus was created - Col 1:15, Rev 3:14, Proverbs 8:22
Jesus doesn't know all the Father does - Mark 13:32
Jesus did not have authority to do certain things - Matt 20:20-23
Father is greater than Jesus, is subject to God (even after his return to heaven) - John 14:28, 1 Cor 15:27,28
Jesus has a head (meaning one in authority over him) - 1 Cor 11:3
Jesus prayed to and acknowledged his Father as God, even over himself - John 17:3, John 20:17, Rev 3:12

 

[tinker683]

What is your thinking, also could you say whether or not you a believer and whether or not the whole conquered death thing is that important or not to you.

As a believer, it wouldn't matter to me. My worship of Christ is because of the man, of who he was and the message he was trying to send. Whether he literally rose from the dead or whether it was just a story doesn't dilute his message.

 

[wool]

It does not follow from that scripture that only Jesus as God can redeem man. Jesus as God could redeem man through his sacrificial death, or Jesus not as God but as a perfect man could as well redeem man. My point is that whether or not Jesus is God, in this situation (the matter of providing a ransom) it is irrelevant. For all that it is worth, God could have sent an angel (another perfect being) as a man and accomplished the same thing. But he chose to send his best, his son to do the job. - John 3:16, 1 John 4:9,10

The ransom was simply a corresponding action to cover over, or corresponded to what was lost with Adam. There was no need for it to be a 'God' that did the covering over. - Romans 5:19; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 22.



Cause you didnt ask a question of why. You merely asked a yes/no question that i thought was rhetorical since the answer was already established in my prior post.

You need to support a requirement that belief that Jesus is God is needed to be a Christian.

But why don't I? Not wanting to derail the subject of this thread anymore, I will keep it real brief,-
The scriptures, and Jesus himself, spoke of himself and his Father (God) as distinct and separate individuals - Matt 26:39, John 8:17,18
Scriptures indicate that Jesus was created - Col 1:15, Rev 3:14, Proverbs 8:22
Jesus doesn't know all the Father does - Mark 13:32
Jesus did not have authority to do certain things - Matt 20:20-23
Father is greater than Jesus, is subject to God (even after his return to heaven) - John 14:28, 1 Cor 15:27,28
Jesus has a head (meaning one in authority over him) - 1 Cor 11:3
Jesus prayed to and acknowledged his Father as God, even over himself - John 17:3, John 20:17, Rev 3:12

You are a false teacher. The Son is not a created being, He was with God in the beginning. They are one.

 

[Coriolis]

Speaking of religion I would recommend getting off the cross before you talk to others about it.

Your point escapes me, especially since I am not a Christian, and especially not someone who proselytizes.

yeah, that was an eye opener for me when I branched outside Christianity. Like, even talking with Jewish people -- I was kind of shocked to realize that different rabbis might disagree on certain interpretations but they were still all held as credible teachers, and it was okay to look at something from different perspectives or have a different way of reading something. I was brought up to always view Bible interpretation as "there is one true right answer out there and the rest are wrong in some way." So it's a matter of being "most right" and NEEDING to have the "right" answer in very clear terms.

I was thinking about Jewish people, too, but couldn't quite line up my thoughts, so did not reference them. The impression I get from Jewish friends and Jewish authors I have read is that, even though they share the first part of the OT with Christians, they take it in a much more allegorical fashion. The Jewish faith has always seemed more practical, experiential, less up tight, than many Christians make Christianity. Even the very orthodox seem to obsess more about the processes (e.g. keeping Kosher, rules about the Sabbath, etc.) and the theological interpretations, without worrying about historical veracity.

Not all of Christianity is like that, it's just those approaches are kind of overshadowed by the binary approach to the faith and individuals who hold a more open/multi-faceted view tend to be attacked / dismissed as infidels by those with more voice/power in the public sphere.

I also did note that Islam seemed to run in that direction too, with the right/wrong either/or approach. Other faiths, not as much. It took time for me to hear and then understand and then accept since I was raised in the other mindset; we are blind to our own frameworks until we step outside of them.

Sure - I have seen that from certain Christians. Of all the religious groups I have associated with, only the Christians - and only some Christians, at that - have expected believers to follow their faith exclusively. The rest are not put off if you embrace other faiths as well, or as I do, the commonality among them. I have not known enough Muslims personally to have a sense of how they are. The ones I know have been quite open-minded and progressive, but then I probably don't have occasion to run into the others.

Anyway, as can be expected, everyone here with one view is "This is what I believe from the Bible," so it's a theological approach... "I believe this because it is what I believe." if you don't view the Bible the same way, then there's not really a basis for a discussion -- aside from framing one's assumptions so they are at least clear.

I agree to a point, but I like to try to understand why other people believe what they do, and what exactly they do believe, even if I don't share their beliefs. It gives me a better frame of reference for their perspectives. Plus, I usually learn something worthwhile in the process.

You should read the story of Cain and Abel. There is a lesson to be learned specifically for someone like you.

I have read it. What lesson did you have in mind? I can think of several, but they are rather universal.

We are all like Adam, in the sense that we all have the same choice to make; obedience or disobedience, life or death, light or darkness.

But several people have made the point that after Adam sinned, humanity is doomed to further sin and death. No one after Adam has the choice to be sinless. In that crucial sense, we are quite different from Adam.

I know you don't. Everything you're saying makes sense. I'm just admitting to being bad at discussing some aspects of faith.

That's fair. It can be hard to put into words sometimes, especially if someone isn't used to doing that. As an Ni-dom, the idea of not being able to know until you just somehow do actually makes sense to me.

 

[Zangetshumody]

Well... I disagree with a lot of doctrinal discussion that has taken place here...

there are more than a few matters which I believe are sorely misunderstood.

The Resurrection itself is a secret part to the process of salvation, it must be decoded as a mystery of the doctrine, a doctrine that is very easy to misinterpret, when other questions of doctrine have already been incorrectly ascertained.

There is no divinity of person, God is not a lover a persons, and Jesus Christ, is not the name of a person: The character of Jesus was never to be received as a man, but only through the auspices of "the Father".

The man that took on the Christ mantle, expressly un-writ himself from the doctrine: this is the meaning behind his own confession on the Cross, a false confession, in which Jesus joins the world in mockery of his personage, thus overcoming the identification of his faith, from the pure message of the faith he vindicated, this was patently what precipitated the communication of his Holy Spirit.

The resurrection, is the fulfillment of a reconstituted identity in the wake of surrendering the integrity of the Holy Ghost in the doing of faithful works (which amounts to surrendering righteousness), very technically it was a sin by the Son of Man, but a sin not unto death, which was not some vicarious redemption to be joined, but the model of an actualized salvation to be reworked and independently invested in by all true followers. Thus the Son of Man receded its own eminence, granting the Son of God to the collective noun, presided over through sharing of the Holy Ghost by a donative faith invested in communion [a communion that is the transposition of integrity begotten by the Son of Man's confession, that bequests the Son of Man be exported from some mere historic and prophetic singular event— echo'd in the doctrine's claim that salvation and the Kingdom of God is always near at hand], even overcoming the shared transgression of faith regarding a singular Son of Man, yet an individual life shall resurrect, this is the promise made by the doctrine, to those who will engage in all the dynamics of a real communion (all the spiritual gifts must be actively involved to constitute the life of the Son).

The doctrine of Christ, is one of Christ consciousness, the scriptures are quite clear. If your not in it for "the mind of Christ", your not in it.

 

[wool]

I have read it. What lesson did you have in mind? I can think of several, but they are rather universal.

The importance of the blood of Christ who is symbolized by the lamb.

"There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." "Neither is there salvation in any other." Acts 4:12.

Cain represents those who choose rebellion. He did not recognize his need of a redeemer, so he was rejected by God.

But several people have made the point that after Adam sinned, humanity is doomed to further sin and death. No one after Adam has the choice to be sinless. In that crucial sense, we are quite different from Adam.

Through faith and obedience we are saved. We have the same choice Adam and Eve had, which is life or death. After we are resurrected we will be given new bodies free of sin.

"The dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For the perishable must be clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality." 1 Corinthians 15:52,53

It's the most important choice one can make. Everything else is meaningless.

I was thinking about Jewish people, too, but couldn't quite line up my thoughts, so did not reference them. The impression I get from Jewish friends and Jewish authors I have read is that, even though they share the first part of the OT with Christians, they take it in a much more allegorical fashion. The Jewish faith has always seemed more practical, experiential, less up tight, than many Christians make Christianity. Even the very orthodox seem to obsess more about the processes (e.g. keeping Kosher, rules about the Sabbath, etc.) and the theological interpretations, without worrying about historical veracity.

The Jews are still waiting for their messiah to come. They misunderstood their own prophecies and when He came, they failed to recognize Him, and rejected Him, fulfilling their own prophecy.

They expected Christ to establish a temporal kingdom rather than a spiritual one. They were spiritually blind.

 

[Coriolis]

The importance of the blood of Christ who is symbolized by the lamb.

"There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." "Neither is there salvation in any other." Acts 4:12.

Cain represents those who choose rebellion. He did not recognize his need of a redeemer, so he was rejected by God.

Ah, yes. Well, first off, I guess God isn't a vegetarian. Not all forms of rebellion are equivalent, though. Sometimes rebellion is justified, even necessary, as in the civil rights movement. Killing without cause, though, is frowned upon in most parts.

I do wonder, though: after Cain killed Abel, the Bible states

Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”

But the Lord said to him, “Not so; anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. So Cain went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod,[f] east of Eden.

Given that so far, we have just Adam, Eve, and Cain, who exactly is out there that would be in a position to kill Cain? For that matter, where did Cain get his wife? Presumably there are other people around, people not descended from Adam and Eve, perhaps outside the garden of eden all along, and not subject to this whole calculus of sin, death, life, and redemption.

Through faith and obedience we are saved. We have the same choice Adam and Eve had, which is life or death. After we are resurrected we will be given new bodies free of sin.

How so? If no one after Adam can escape sin, then no one can escape death.

 

[wool]

Given that so far, we have just Adam, Eve, and Cain, who exactly is out there that would be in a position to kill Cain? For that matter, where did Cain get his wife? Presumably there are other people around, people not descended from Adam and Eve, perhaps outside the garden of eden all along, and not subject to this whole calculus of sin, death, life, and redemption.

Cain married a sister or niece. Every human is a descendant from Adam and Eve. "And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living." Genesis 3:20

They had more than two children.

How so? If no one after Adam can escape sin, then no one can escape death.

The resurrection?

 

[Lark]

As a believer, it wouldn't matter to me. My worship of Christ is because of the man, of who he was and the message he was trying to send. Whether he literally rose from the dead or whether it was just a story doesn't dilute his message.

I'm inclined to think so too.

I think the triumph of Christianity will come about when people will believe, and practice their beliefs, without the need of miracles, eternal life and resurrection from the dead as enticements, just pleasing God and living well, living without fear of suffering or death.

 

[wool]

I'm inclined to think so too.

I think the triumph of Christianity will come about when people will believe, and practice their beliefs, without the need of miracles, eternal life and resurrection from the dead as enticements, just pleasing God and living well, living without fear of suffering or death.

Eternal life is not "an enticement", it's what satan stole from us.

 

[Lark]

Eternal life is not "an enticement", it's what satan stole from us.

Really? Do you speak for everyone?

I've seen lots of bill boards across the north of ireland with the tag line "Eternity where?", "Eternity when?" when I've spoke to any of the people who paid for them they speak precisely of eternal life as an enticement, reward for believers, reward of the elected few.

 

[wool]

Really? Do you speak for everyone? I've seen lots of bill boards across the north of ireland with the tag line "Eternity where?", "Eternity when?" when I've spoke to any of the people who paid for them they speak precisely of eternal life as an enticement, reward for believers, reward of the elected few.

The word enticement possesses negative connotations. God doesn't entice, He rewards.

Satan enticed Eve to eat the fruit.

 

[Lark]

The word enticement possesses negatively connotations. God doesn't entice, He rewards.

Satan enticed Eve to eat the fruit.

Reward, enticement, it all means the same thing.

I believe because of the life and ministry of Jesus, it matters not to me whether there is or isnt eternal life or any other supernatural dimension to what I believe is the metaphysical/cosmic reality, God may well have decided to give us all one life and that is all, we are made from dust, animated by the breath of God and return to it.

The narrative that you're constructing about Satan seems Manichean to me BTW, Satan is not as powerful as God or able to so easily undoing his pre-ordained plans either.