Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You're really not catching what we're saying. Christ was FULLY Human. That is why He is called the second Adam. Just like Adam came into this world without sin, so did Christ. Unlike Adam however, who choose to sin, Christ choose not to sin. If there was no choice involved, then Christ was never tempted. He was never tried. He cannot be our Advocate as the scripture says. He would not know how to succor us. It's really that simple.
So Jesus was born FULLY human. Exactly like us? Did he have original sin? He was a pretty unique and different human if not.. Getting off topic but it just seems to me there are some differences between Jesus and your average human.
Did God know for 100% certain that Jesus would not fail?
Sorry you seem so confused on this issue. For all that you willingly accept from your church, something like this should be child's play. No one is denying that Christ was foretold to come and conquer sin. I believe that 100% That however doesn't change the fact that there was still risk involved.
Stryder said:Again, and it's very simple. IF Christ had freedom of choice, then there was RISK invoved, simply because He had a choice.
According to the Bible God knows the end from the beginning & as Tall73 has said...
...That God would come and WOULD SAVE us was spelled out most explicitly.
..."In the Bible" - therefore God via the Bible told us HOW it was going to end up. Exactly.
Kira brought up a very good point in her post & that was that if you are right...
...Everything EXCEPT the Father's continued existence was 'conditional'.
...And that means EVERY prophecy and EVERY promise God ever made to Abraham, etc.
Jesus said that He "ALWAYS did the Will of the Father"....
...Do you take that to mean as only applying post Incarnation?
...Contrasted with my view that always ( in this case ) equates to "eternally did the will of the Father".
God knew exactly how things would end up and we were taught in Scripture what God's purpose and Will was...
...As far as "God's part" of what God said He would do.
...So, if God told you what He would do before He actually delivered it - do you have a right.
...To say God might not have been able to deliver?
1st, I never denied that God knows the beginning from the end.
Stryder said:2nd, the vast majority of God's promises are conditional. Some of the prophecies were as well in regards to certain kingdoms.
Stryder said:3rd, Kira is a he
Stryder said:God has said He'd do many a thing, based on my obedience. He promised to saved me. That's not written in stone though in the sense that I have no choice but to be saved. Again, God knowing the outcome does not mean that God is forcing it to be that way.
Stryder said:God allows us to choose our own way. He saw the life Christ would live, and how He choose to remain obedient unto death, thus overcoming sin, etc. This is why the prophesies say what they say. Not because God forced the outcome to be that way, but because God saw how things would play out.
Sorry you seem so confused on this issue. For all that you willingly accept from your church, something like this should be child's play. No one is denying that Christ was foretold to come and conquer sin. I believe that 100% That however doesn't change the fact that there was still risk involved.
Again, and it's very simple. IF Christ had freedom of choice, then there was RISK invoved, simply because He had a choice.
God knows the end from the beginning....or does He?
Tall, you assume God knows the end like you look at the past from the present.
However God has no concept of time, so He would look at the beginning and the end both as the present. From the present point of view, there would be risk because Christ took on human nature and humans are subject to risk and failure.
But either way what's the point? Even if I did have a problem with EGW's writing on this, how does it effect my salvation? I'm not going to weigh the two isolated quotes against everything else that was written. It does not present a theological or salvational problem.
Tall, you assume God knows the end like you look at the past from the present.
However God has no concept of time, so He would look at the beginning and the end both as the present. From the present point of view, there would be risk because Christ took on human nature and humans are subject to risk and failure.
But either way what's the point? Even if I did have a problem with EGW's writing on this, how does it effect my salvation? I'm not going to weigh the two isolated quotes against everything else that was written. It does not present a theological or salvational problem.
If all the past and future is the present to God, then Jesus life on earth is still the present for God right now. That means Jesus is still, RIGHT NOW, being tempted and will possibly fail, which would cause him to lose his eternal life and no doubt cause all kinds of paradoxes in space time probably blowing up the entire universe.
I'm pretty sure if we can't fully comprehend God's personality, then we aren't going to know how He perceives time.
There are some things that we just won't understand while on this blighted rock... it's hard for us to admit that sometimes as we are arrogant and wise in our own eyes...
If EGW contradicted the Bible, as some would say she has done in this case, you wouldn't question her other statements? Just hypothetically, if you saw an instance where EGW plainly contradicted the Bible would you still believe her to be the spirit of prophecy?
I think you said in another thread that a person must believe in the Investigative Judgement to be saved. Without EGW it is pretty hard to make the case for the IJ (among other things) existence, isn't it?
There are some apparent contradictions in the bible, do we throw those books out of the bible?
I don't think so. There are not salvational and are isolated incidents. I treat EGW writings the same way. I found nothing that presents a theological and salvational issue.
I'm pretty sure if we can't fully comprehend God's personality, then we aren't going to know how He perceives time.
There are some things that we just won't understand while on this blighted rock... it's hard for us to admit that sometimes as we are arrogant and wise in our own eyes...
Tall, you assume God knows the end like you look at the past from the present.
However God has no concept of time, so He would look at the beginning and the end both as the present. From the present point of view, there would be risk because Christ took on human nature and humans are subject to risk and failure.
Even if I did have a problem with EGW's writing on this, how does it effect my salvation? I'm not going to weigh the two isolated quotes against everything else that was written. It does not present a theological or salvational problem.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?