• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Gabriel as Messiah

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
Please back up statements with scripture or it is useless to just post an opinion on what you think the scriptures say.

God's angels can die, just like us. The first humans had no natural cause of death, and the angels don't either. Because they are not material beings, they do not require life support like we do...air....food....water.

When satan rebelled and took a third of the angels with him, Jesus said that their fate was everlasting death. (Matthew 25:41) The lake of fire is "the second death" a kind of death that never ends.
Hi.

It is interesting that "non trinitarians" basically have no problem with the proposition that a perfect human life, as defined by the Law and the prophets, was all that was needed as the sacrifice and that perfect obedience was the key. For thousands of years their have been Christians who have no problem with the idea that a perfect creation was sent by the Father to redeem mankind.

The trinitarians on the other hand seem to have the need to say that because Jesus is God then God must have been the only one that could have supplied the sacrifice, because it was God who supplied the sacrifice. Yet they also agree, when you pin them on it, that it was the perfect HUMAN nature of Christ that was obedient to the divine nature. An each way better i would suggest.

It seems clear that whether he was Almighty God or not, at the end of the day, even the trinitarians admit that it was the HUMAN Jesus who saves.

(Imagine the kerfuffle if i had suggested Michael for this exercise instead of Gabriel)

Peace.
How is it that a perfect human nature needs to be obedient ?
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
Hi Deeji.... He is right you now..... but so are you.

He is referring to Angels as the ones after the fall who remained faithful. They will never die.

You are referring to the generic class of Angels, effectively before the fall. Some of these Angels do indeed die.

I am sure that he would agree that the demons will die. (Even if only spiritual death and not the real thing.) The Demons sinned and the wages are death.
Peace.
The reward of faithfulness is deathlessness. Once a person receives deathlessness he cannot revert back to possibly being unfaithful. The result would be death.
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
Hi Deeji.... He is right you now..... but so are you.

He is referring to Angels as the ones after the fall who remained faithful. They will never die.

You are referring to the generic class of Angels, effectively before the fall. Some of these Angels do indeed die.

I am sure that he would agree that the demons will die. (Even if only spiritual death and not the real thing.) The Demons sinned and the wages are death.
Peace.
There is no connection in Scripture between angels and demons.
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
Please back up statements with scripture or it is useless to just post an opinion on what you think the scriptures say.

God's angels can die, just like us. The first humans had no natural cause of death, and the angels don't either. Because they are not material beings, they do not require life support like we do...air....food....water.

When satan rebelled and took a third of the angels with him, Jesus said that their fate was everlasting death. (Matthew 25:41) The lake of fire is "the second death" a kind of death that never ends.
When Jesus was raised from the dead death has no more lordship over him. Before he was raised from the dead he was the natural man of flesh and blood (son of Adam) and death had lordship over him just as it does everyone. The reason death has lordship over the natural man is because they ALL sinned in Adam and death has passed to ALL of them.
The hope of the Christian is to escape the condemnation of death. And the only way that is possible is to be IN CHRIST.
When the faithful in Christ are raised from the dead they never die again because their nature has been changed from the natural body to the spiritual body. The spiritual body can not sin because it would be subject to death. And if it could be subject to death by sin then death could never be destroyed.
God's angels in heaven have spiritual bodies and therefore never die because they never sin.

34Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. 37But even Moses showed in the burning bush passage that the dead are raised, when he called the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ 38For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him.”
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Hi.

It is interesting that "non trinitarians" basically have no problem with the proposition that a perfect human life, as defined by the Law and the prophets, was all that was needed as the sacrifice and that perfect obedience was the key. For thousands of years their have been Christians who have no problem with the idea that a perfect creation was sent by the Father to redeem mankind.

The trinitarians on the other hand seem to have the need to say that because Jesus is God then God must have been the only one that could have supplied the sacrifice, because it was God who supplied the sacrifice. Yet they also agree, when you pin them on it, that it was the perfect HUMAN nature of Christ that was obedient to the divine nature. An each way better i would suggest.

It seems clear that whether he was Almighty God or not, at the end of the day, even the trinitarians admit that it was the HUMAN Jesus who saves.

(Imagine the kerfuffle if i had suggested Michael for this exercise instead of Gabriel)

Peace.
Why do you think trinitarians have problems with the incarnated Christ and His sacrifice ?

God supplied the sacrifice. He decided what was required, I don´t worry about His decision.

Why do you have to pin a trinatarian down ? What is patently obvious is patently obvious.

It is Jesus who saves. Period. As scripture says, He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Hi Deeji.... He is right you now..... but so are you.

He is referring to Angels as the ones after the fall who remained faithful. They will never die.

You are referring to the generic class of Angels, effectively before the fall. Some of these Angels do indeed die.

You will have to clarify that statement for me. What is "a generic class of angels"?

Angels would never die anyway unless they are disobedient to the Creator...just like us. Humans had no natural cause of death before they disobeyed an express command and suffered the death penalty, which was administered by God removing access to "the tree of life". (Genesis 3:22-24)

Angels never had a tree of life because only God can cause their death. Humans can die from a multitude of causes. But it was not in God's original purpose for them to ever die. Continued obedience would have guaranteed continued life.....it was really that simple. Does that make God a dictator? Yes it does....but an extremely benevolent one. Nothing he commands is to our detriment because he loves us like a Father.

Everlasting life on earth, free from sin, suffering and death, should have been our bright future. But three rebels messed that up, forcing God to use the rebellion to his own advantage.....and ours in the long run. By allowing humans to choose their god, Jehovah gave them all equal opportunity to see for themselves who is the rightful Sovereign over mankind. When we choose our God...we choose our future.

The lake of fire is always there to receive any who may fail to obey the Creator in the future for whatever reason. (Angels and humans all retain free will) There is nothing to say that it is done away with.
Death and hades (the result of Adam's sin) will be thrown into the lake of fire, (Revelation 20:13-15) but the lake itself remains. Nothing that goes in there will ever be seen again.

This life provides the basis for never disobeying God again. Precedents are set for all eternity...case closed. Disobey God after the Kingdom has put God's purpose back on track, and your demise will be instantaneous. (unlike Adam and his wife) There is nothing more to prove about the Creator's right to set the rules for our existence. This life has been one very long court case. It is about to conclude.

I am sure that he would agree that the demons will die. (Even if only spiritual death and not the real thing.)

He will probably not agree with anything.....judging by past comments. o_O

The Demons sinned and the wages are death.

Yes, they are free-willed like we are, but a higher form of life....and way more powerful than we are.

What is "the real thing"? If God says that the "lake of fire" is the receptacle for everything that doesn't belong in the "new earth"...(the wicked, along with the god they chose...satan and his demons)...and even "death and the grave" end up in the lake of fire. Revelation 20:14-15)....then whatever goes into that fire, never comes out......Jesus said "gehenna" is complete destruction.

"And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Ge·henʹna." (Matthew 10:28)
 
Last edited:

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
How is it that a perfect human nature needs to be obedient ?
Hi.. ...........Free Will.
Bad options are never eliminated.Bad choices and actions will always be possible...

Human nature perfected through the blood and teachings of Christ will still be subject to moral and ethical standards.

Once perfected each individual will not get to write their own rules will they?

While the obedience will be interalised, written on your Heart so to speak, the fundamental universal constant of
Sin = Death will always exist.
Peace
 

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
You will have to clarify that statement for me. What is "a generic class of angels"?

Angels would never die anyway unless they are disobedient to the Creator...just like us. Humans had no natural cause of death before they disobeyed an express command and suffered the death penalty, which was administered by God removing access to "the tree of life". (Genesis 3:22-24)

Angels never had a tree of life because only God can cause their death. Humans can die from a multitude of causes. But it was not in God's original purpose for them to ever die. Continued obedience would have guaranteed continued life.....it was really that simple. Does that make God a dictator? Yes it does....but an extremely benevolent one. Nothing he commands is to our detriment because he loves us like a Father.

Everlasting life on earth, free from sin, suffering and death, should have been our bright future. But three rebels messed that up, forcing God to use the rebellion to his own advantage.....and ours in the long run. By allowing humans to choose their god, Jehovah gave them all equal opportunity to see for themselves who is the rightful Sovereign over mankind. When we choose our God...we choose our future.

The lake of fire is always there to receive any who may fail to obey the Creator in the future for whatever reason. (Angels and humans all retain free will) There is nothing to say that it is done away with.
Death and hades (the result of Adam's sin) will be thrown into the lake of fire, (Revelation 20:13-15) but the lake itself remains. Nothing that goes in there will ever be seen again.

This life provides the basis for never doing disobeying God again. Precedents are set for all eternity...case closed. Disobey God after the Kingdom has put God's purpose back on track, and your demise will be instantaneous. (unlike Adam and his wife) There is nothing more to prove about the Creator's right to set the rules for our existence. This life has been one very long court case. It is about to conclude.



He will probably not agree with anything.....judging by past comments. o_O



Yes, they are free-willed like we are, but a higher form of life....and way more powerful than we are.

What is "the real thing"? If God says that the "lake of fire" is the receptacle for everything that doesn't belong in the "new earth"...(the wicked, along with the god they chose...satan and his demons)...and even "death and the grave" end up in the lake of fire. Revelation 20:14-15)....then whatever goes into that fire, never comes out......Jesus said "gehenna" is complete destruction.

"And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Ge·henʹna." (Matthew 10:28)
Hi Deeje.

The generic class of Angels was just meant to indicate that it is taking into account all those who are classed as Angelic at any time in the story. The fallen as well as those that stood.

My "real thing" comment about death was just to avoid opening the what is death can of worms, this is complicated enough without getting that mixed up in this thread. I agree that dead actually means dead, not a different form of life, otherwise why use the word. I've seen dead and it is not an afterlife it is a nolife.

Peace
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
How is it that a perfect human nature needs to be obedient ?

Because of free will. Humans were created with the ability to make their own decisions, but free will is not totally free if disobeying the Creator means an abuse of that free will. Imposing your will on others always leads to a bad outcome....Children learn through experience to be mature adults. (at least some of them do.:rolleyes:) This life is teaching us many things...especially about the abuse of what was supposed to be a gift....disobedience turned it into a curse.

The reward of faithfulness is deathlessness. Once a person receives deathlessness he cannot revert back to possibly being unfaithful. The result would be death.

Yes, that is what humans were offered in the beginning....life without end...but they abused their free will and caused a whole lot of trouble. The lake of fire remains for all eternity as the place for disobedient ones to go....so the death penalty still applies for disobedience and has done so since the garden of Eden. God will eliminate "Adamic death"...but as he purposed from the beginning, death will always remain as a possibility for the disobedient.

There is no connection in Scripture between angels and demons.

What do you think demons are?

When Jesus was raised from the dead death has no more lordship over him. Before he was raised from the dead he was the natural man of flesh and blood (son of Adam) and death had lordship over him just as it does everyone.

Jesus was "the son of God"...NOT the son of Adam. Had he been a son of Adam, then he would not have been sinless. The ransom required the payment of an equivalent life....no son of Adam could offer the needed payment....a perfect life for a perfect life.

The reason death has lordship over the natural man is because they ALL sinned in Adam and death has passed to ALL of them.
The hope of the Christian is to escape the condemnation of death. And the only way that is possible is to be IN CHRIST.
When the faithful in Christ are raised from the dead they never die again because their nature has been changed from the natural body to the spiritual body.

You are speaking about the anointed ones who will rule with Christ in heaven. Not all Christians have the heavenly calling. (Hebrews 3:1) Not all Christians will receive the "first resurrection" because not all are chosen to be "kings and priests". (Revelation 20:6) Kings need subject and priests need sinners for whom to serve as priests. Who are these ones in your belief system?

The spiritual body can not sin because it would be subject to death. And if it could be subject to death by sin then death could never be destroyed.

You are correct with regard to those who are called to heaven for their specific predetermined role role.....it does not apply to all though.

Everything will go back to the way it was meant to be....(Isaiah 55:11)....perfect sinless humans living on this beautiful planet for all eternity, enjoying "everlasting life"...which is not "immortality". Only those who go to heaven are granted that privilege...and they have' remained faithful to death and so receive the crown of life'.

God's angels in heaven have spiritual bodies and therefore never die because they never sin.

Satan was once a perfect angel with privileges granted to him in the garden....but he chose to disobey and to deceive the humans by lying to them about God. He abused his free will and led the humans into abusing theirs. We are living in the results of that rebellion......it will end well however for those who have not been led astray by the devil's influence. In this "time of the end" he has been very successful because humans nature does not change. He knows how to manipulate the human heart into getting what it wants. (Jeremiah 17:9)

Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. 37But even Moses showed in the burning bush passage that the dead are raised, when he called the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ 38For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him.”

The general resurrection (John 5:28-29) is going to be a time of wonder. Those we have lost in death will be returned to us here. It seems as if marriage may not be on the agenda of those returned to life on earth because, if you think about it, if those widowed had married again and their former marriage mate was to come back...how awkward would that be? :oops:

Perhaps only the survivors of the great tribulation will continue to populate the earth? At this stage, we really don't know. But whatever God has planned for us.....we will love it. (Psalm 145:16; Revelation 21:2-4)
 

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
Why do you think trinitarians have problems with the incarnated Christ and His sacrifice ?

God supplied the sacrifice. He decided what was required, I don´t worry about His decision.

Why do you have to pin a trinatarian down ? What is patently obvious is patently obvious.

It is Jesus who saves. Period. As scripture says, He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Hi.

I don't think that trinitarians have problems with Christ and His sacrifice i just think that because they come at the problem from the Angle that Jesus is Almighty God the sacrifice becomes Gods life and not a mans.

They say that ONLY God could offer the perfect sacrifice therefore Jesus must be God. They use the reasoning as a trinitarian proof. This is not tenable.
One of the main arguments that Athanasius used at Nicaea was that only Gods Life had enough majesty and value to cover the sins of the world and ipso facto Jesus MUST be Almighty God.
Arius contended that it was the First Creation of God that was sent, and the obedience of the perfect human was sufficient to cover the sacrifice.
Which is it and why?

See...... you show the schizophrenic flavour of this view by saying.....It is Jesus who saves. Period

Is it the Man or the God/Man who saves? And if the God/man ,why was the perfect mans sacrifice not enough?


Peace
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Hi Deeje.

The generic class of Angels was just meant to indicate that it is taking into account all those who are classed as Angelic at any time in the story. The fallen as well as those that stood.

Thank you for the clarification. It is apparent that angels had no reason to sin before the creation of man. Even if the rebel satan had entertained ideas about becoming a rival god...who would worship him? His fellow angels were his equals...he needed lower intelligent lifeforms in order to become a god to them. Humans fitted the bill nicely.

My "real thing" comment about death was just to avoid opening the what is death can of worms, this is complicated enough without getting that mixed up in this thread. I agree that dead actually means dead, not a different form of life, otherwise why use the word. I've seen dead and it is not an afterlife it is a nolife.

I understand. Death is a subject open to much speculation...but the Bible is not ambiguous about it if you know what it says in the context in which it is written......it is the opposite of life. Since there was no idea about immortal souls in the mind of God, no scripture supports the notion at all. Misinterpretation is responsible for that....influenced by the fact that satan promotes it to validate the first lie that he ever told..."You surely will not die".....
 

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
Thank you for the clarification. It is apparent that angels had no reason to sin before the creation of man. Even if the rebel satan had entertained ideas about becoming a rival god...who would worship him? His fellow angels were his equals...he needed lower intelligent lifeforms in order to become a god to them. Humans fitted the bill nicely.



I understand. Death is a subject open to much speculation...but the Bible is not ambiguous about it if you know what it says in the context in which it is written......it is the opposite of life. Since there was no idea about immortal souls in the mind of God, no scripture supports the notion at all. Misinterpretation is responsible for that....influenced by the fact that satan promotes it to validate the first lie that he ever told..."You surely will not die".....
Hi. Yes, i find it amazing that mankind validates the first lie with the immortal soul teaching. Peace
 

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
Atonement required a man who was of the same nature as all man to live a sinless life. A representative man, not a substitute man. Paul says that the sin in the flesh was condemned by God with the death of His son. if there was no sin in his flesh then how could God condemn that sin by the death of His son?
Hi
I find that whole line of "theology" an arguemnet to nowhere with little or no meaning other than to cause contention.

It is this type of thing that 1tim4:7. 1Cor 3:19 and Job5:13 warn against.
Peace
 

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
All men are mortal because they all sinned in Adam. Jesus was mortal because he too sinned in Adam by being of the same flesh.
Hi
I think again you're, just trying to be too clever by half and fall into a hole.

The clasical, and dare i say biblical, opinion is that Sin was transmited through the fraternal line. The consistent reasoning from this is that Jesus was not sublect to inherited sin as his Father was not of Adam.

He was not, in this context, son of Adam, he was son of man. Yes yes i know his genealogy goes back to Adam but that is a maternal line.

To say Jesus "sinned in Adam" is really an outrageous claim to make and is only invoked to justify the higher level mistake of the whole unecessary substitution representitive theology. I am sure that at some level you must acknowledge that Jesus was free from sin.
Do not build unnecessary structures.
Peace.
 

Rise

Well-Known Member
Hi.

You said.... Your conclusion is premised on the assumption that it would have been possible for an already created angel to incarnate into a new birth.

All i have done is to propose that the exact SAME mechanism that transferred the Word from a heavenly existence could no doubt have been applied to an angelic existence.You do believe that Jesus existed in heaven as a spirit before he came to earth don't you?

There are two assumptions underlying your claim.

1. Your assumption about the mechanism God used to incarnate in Jesus.
2. Your assumption about what is possible or allowed for angels to do, and that God's uniqueness (like being uncreated) does not alone entitle Him to incarnating as Jesus.

Neither of your assumptions are proven first to be true. Which makes them invalid as supports for your conclusions.
You cannot state your conclusion is true if you can't first prove the assumptions behind your premise to be true.
If your assumption can be disproven then your conclusion is false.
If the truth cannot be established either way about your assumptions then all have is opinion and unsupported speculation.

The onus is on you to first establish what factual or logic basis you have for concluding that the mechanism your describe is what Jesus used and then to provide why we have reason to believe angels could be expected to do the same thing.

When you have given your reasons for why we should believe it is true, I can then pose logical or facual objections to your reasons.

If you cannot give facts or logical reasoning to support the truth of your assumptions then they are just unsupported opinions and cannot be used as the basis for proving the truth of your claims.


You say....
Who says He can't make the choice to leave mankind in the consequence of sin?

He did when he declared the creation of man GOOD.

You've committed the logical fallacy of nonsequitur. Your conclusion does not logically have anything to do with your premise.


I asked you to prove your claim that God is forced to save mankind.

You did not do that.

All your quote proves is that God said creation was good when He first made it. No where in that quote is the implication that God is forced to save mankind after they make a choice to sin.


Your assumption has no Biblical basis. You just made it up. And your conclusion depends on your made up assumption being true. If you can't prove your assumption is true then we have no reason to accept your conclusion is true.

You say ....Your conclusion rests on the premise that it would be possible for an angel to live a sinless life if reborn - but you have no reason to assume that is true, as I pointed out.

My premise, i suppose, is that a TRUE test of obedience is for a perfect human to show perfect obedience and injecting God Almighty into the picture is overkill and makes the whole issue of obedience to God moot.

God who cannot sin, did not sin...... well i'm glad we had to go through 5000 years of crap to prove that tautology. Seems pretty self evident if you ask me.


Also it seems from your comments that you think it was impossible for Adam to have remained faithful. That Gods human creation is somehow inherently flawed, by design i suppose, and that if Jesus is not God Almighty himself then his obedience would not have been possible. You seem to forget that one day millions upon millions will perfectly serve God in the flesh for eternity.

You are now committing the logical fallacy of "avoiding the issue" and "red herring".

What I listed is still a premise of your argument. You haven't disputed that you assume an angel could live a sinless life in man'sbody.

Changing the topic doesn't change the fact that you still need to prove why that premise of yours I cited is true.

You did not respond to the points I made from scripture which disproves your assumption.

You have not offered any evidence that your assumption is true either.

A premise is:
"something assumed or taken for granted"


You assume that it's possible for an angel to live sinless in a human body when you claim they could have done what God did.

Your conclusion that God wasn't the only one who could do it depends on your assumption being true.

Rather than defend your premise directly you avoided the issue and tried to redirect the topic to something that is not relevant to proving your premise that was challenged.
 
Last edited:

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
There are two assumptions underlying your claim.
1. Your assumption about the mechanism God used to incarnate in Jesus.
2. Your assumption about what is possible or allowed for angels to do, and that God's uniqueness (like being uncreated) does not alone entitle Him to incarnating as Jesus.

Neither of your assumptions are proven first to be true. Which makes them invalid as supports for your conclusions.
You cannot state your conclusion is true if you can't first prove the assumptions behind your premise to be true.
If your assumption can be disproven then your conclusion is false.
If the truth cannot be established either way about your assumptions then all have is opinion and unsupported speculation.

The onus is on you to first establish what factual or logic basis you have for concluding that the mechanism your describe is what Jesus used and then to provide why we have reason to believe angels could be expected to do the same thing.

When you have given your reasons for why we should believe it is true, I can then pose logical or facual objections to your reasons.

If you cannot give facts or logical reasoning to support the truth of your assumptions then they are just unsupported opinions and cannot be used as the basis for proving the truth of your claims.




You've committed the logical fallacy of nonsequitur. Your conclusion does not logically have anything to do with your premise.


I asked you to prove your claim that God is forced to save mankind.

You did not do that.

All your quote proves is that God said creation was good when He first made it. No where in that quote is the implication that God is forced to save mankind after they make a choice to sin.


Your assumption has no Biblical basis. You just made it up. And your conclusion depends on your made up assumption being true. If you can't prove your assumption is true then we have no reason to accept your conclusion is true.



You are now committing the logical fallacy of "avoiding the issue" and "red herring".

What I listed is still a premise if your argument. Changing the topic to another premise doesn't change the fact that you still need to prove why the premise I listed if yours is true.

You did not respond to the points I made from scripture which disproves your assumption.

You have not offered any evidence that your assumption is true either.

A premise is:
"something assumed or taken for granted"


You assume that it's possible for an angel to live sinless in a human body when you claim they could have done what God did.

Your conclusion that God wasn't the only one who could do it depends on your assumption being true.

Rather than defend your premise directly you avoided the issue and tried to redirect the topic to something that is not relevant to proving your premise that was challenged.
Hi.


Ok it seems to me you are more interested arguing than in discussing this. So forget the hypothetical. t did not cut through the higher level objections as i hoped. Just answer the underlying question.

Non trintirarions for 2000 years have believed that it was a creation that was sent by the Father. All the objections to the "premise" that you raise have been covered ad-nauseum in the agrument that established the trinity doctrine.

Do i have to re state every nontrinitiarian line of reasoning before you will address the underlying question...

Godls Life or a perfect human life?


Even Athanasius was not so obtuse as to say the senario was imposslble. He just reasoned that ONLY GOD had the intrinsic value to offer his life for mankind. Therefor Jesus MUST be God.
He mocked Arius, in his letters which you can read btw, over his beleif that a CREATION saved him.

You seem pretty up on this....isn't that circular logic? Does the fact that Jesus was the one sent really prove that he is GOD Almighty?

And yes i do ........assume that it's possible for an angel to live sinless in a human body .In this way it is a REAL test and the OBEDIENCE to God shown by the one sent actually establishes something. God being loyal to God proves what?

Peace
 

Rise

Well-Known Member
Hi .
Sorry i missed this i'll be quick...

You said ...Who says God needed to be able to fail? Doesn't say that anywhere in the Bible.

Do you agree that Heb 4:15 , as one among many scriptures, speaks of Jesus being tested. By it's very nature a test implies a pass fail. (At least it used to).

Would you really have God take test and expect the outcome be anything but pass?
It proves God is sinless that's all. Since by definition sin is whatever God says it is then wow. He gets to write the rules for the test... to write the questions for the test... and set the pass/fail value for the test.

And if you come back with the standard line it was the human nature that was tested you will be making my point exactly. Humanity not divinity was the needed sacrifice.

Your assumption is false.
There is nothing in the Greek word peirazō that implies a requirement of failure being possible. The word does not even require it be used to denote a pass/fail test at all.
According to Thayer's Greek Lexicon.

By the way, almost all versions of the Bible translate that passage as "tempted" not "tested".

The rest of your argumentation is invalidated by the fact that the assumption behind your premise was false to begin with.
 

Rise

Well-Known Member
Hi.


Ok it seems to me you are more interested arguing than in discussing this. So forget the hypothetical. t did not cut through the higher level objections as i hoped. Just answer the underlying question.

Look at the forum you are in - This is a "debate" forum. You have no reason to expect to be able to make claims here about what is true without being challenged to prove your premises are true.

You are commiting the logical fallacy of "avoiding the issue" and "handwaving".

I identified the premises behind your claim and challenged you to prove your assumptions are true.
Rather than support the truth of your premises with reasoned arguments and facts, you instead try to ignore it and try to act like you don't need to prove the premises that your conclusion depends on.

You dont get to claim something is true and have your claim be accepted if you can't back up your claim with proof. Otherwise it's just an unsupported opinion and will be treated as such.

Non trintirarions for 2000 years have believed that it was a creation that was sent by the Father. All the objections to the "premise" that you raise have been covered ad-nauseum in the agrument that established the trinity doctrine.

You are committing the logical fallacy of "red herring".
The objections I raised to your premise have nothing to do with the doctrine of the trinity itself.

I challenged a specific assumption you had that said the incarnation happened in a way that an angel could duplicate. You are making assumptions about both God and angels with that statement that you can't support.
You have no Biblical basis for believing that.

There are many Biblical reasons to believe what you say would likely be impossible.

We know God's abilities cannot even begin to be compared with an angel. The fact that some things are reserved only for Him and not angels is not Biblically disputable.

We know it would be impossible for the spirit of man to reincarnate because the Bible says they are given to die once and then face judgement, leading to thier eternal fate.

We know angels are also judged and have one of two eternal fates.

Angels and man are both created. God is uncreated.

God imprisons the angels for not keeping their proper place in heaven, and will judge them.

We see demonic possession never involves reincarnation of any sort. But is a demonic spirit acting to enslave a created and born human spirit. Jesus refers to thier activities as unlawful in His parables, and casts them out of people everywhere He goes.

We never see angels even engaged in possession, further confirming that possession is illegal acitivity in terms of God's ways.

There is not the remotest hint anywhere in the Bible that an angel had the physical ability or the moral right to reincarnate as a baby human.

Angels are said to be ministering spirits to man. And angels are always seen performing a task or acivity of some sort. God has created them with a purpose and place in mind just as the Bible tells us the Heavens, animals, and man all have their God ordained place and role.

Everything we see suggests it would grossly violate God's established order, where God clearly creates new life with the intention of letting them grow and play out thier life to it's consequence without reincarnating them to try again. Shoving an spirit of one order of things into another order would also be suggestive violate the intended place and purpose of that spirit.

All these are some reasons why we would doubt the possibility of your claim, as they run counter to what we consistently see in the Bible.
We can state factually what you claim is found no where in the Bible. And that what you claim goes against the trend of how God appears to do things in the Bible.

This makes it all the more damaging for your claim that you cannot provide a single reason why your claim is true. You just have an opinion with no basis for it. The onus is on you as the one making the claim to prove the truth of your claim.

Do i have to re state every nontrinitiarian line of reasoning before you will address the underlying question...

Godls Life or a perfect human life?

You are committing the logical fallacy of "red herring".

Rather than address the logical objections I raised to your premises you try to change the topic.

Your question would only be a logically legitimate rebuttal if you explained why your new topic answers all my points or renders them moot. You haven't established that to be the case. You merely act as though you don't need to address them without giving valid reasons why you don't, which is the logical fallacy of "handwaving".

Even Athanasius was not so obtuse as to say the senario was imposslble.

Logical fallacy, appeal to authority. Whether or not Athanasius agrees with you neither proves nor disproves the truth of your claims.

You seem pretty up on this....isn't that circular logic?
Does the fact that Jesus was the one sent really prove that he is GOD Almighty?

Is what cicular logic? Athanasius's argument? I am not required to defend Athanasius's arguments. I am responsible only for my arguments. You are engaging in a type of logical fallacy known as "strawman" by attempting to make me defend what someone else has said instead of dealing with what I said.

And yes i do ........assume that it's possible for an angel to live sinless in a human body .

Which brings us to back to what I originally challenged you with: You have no basis for your assumption. You claim it's true but you have no proof. If it's not true then your conclusion falls apart. The onus is on you as the one making the claim to prove the truth of it.

And I also gave you several Scriptures which disprove the idea that you can take your assumption for granted, which you haven't attempted to refute.

In this way it is a REAL test and the OBEDIENCE to God shown by the one sent actually establishes something. God being loyal to God proves what?

Your claim is still based on unproven or false assumptions.
1. The assumption that God's plan of salvation needed to involve a pass/fail test.
2. The assumption that a pass/fail test is required to "establish something" (establish what exactly?)
3. The assumption that God needs to prove something to someone.

You don't have a single piece of evidence for why any of those assumptions would be true.
The Bible also directly contradicts you when it is outright stated numerous places why Jesus did what he did, and none of the assumptions you just made are given in there as reasons, nor could they even be reasoned to be true from exegesis of the scripture. If you believe otherwise you are welcome to quote Scripture you think does prove your assumptions to be true.
 
Last edited:

Moz

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.
Why do you think trinitarians have problems with the incarnated Christ and His sacrifice ?

God supplied the sacrifice. He decided what was required, I don´t worry about His decision.

Why do you have to pin a trinatarian down ? What is patently obvious is patently obvious.

It is Jesus who saves. Period. As scripture says, He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Hi. It is Jesus who saves.Cool. Oh wait ..
is that the Man part or the God part. It was the humanity right?

That's why the trinitarians need to be pinned down on this, they use it as "proof" that Jesus is God.

Their construction is ........
Jesus was sacrificed...
Only Gods life could cover sin.... Or ....
only God could be sinless ....
Therefore Jesus is God.

Peace.
Peace
 
Top