Would Jesus Have known what Modern Science knows?

blü 2 said:

No one comes to the Father but by me.” (Incompatible with the triune concept, but accurate gnosticism)

Click to expand...

This is the triune concept. You don't understand the trinity.

Windwalker said:

"For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

Click to expand...

I'm fine with that.

Windwalker said:

...When it comes to the Theory of Evolution, I say I "accept it as valid science", just as I accept my mother is my mother. I don't say I "believe in" the Theory of Evolution. I accept it as true, because it is more that well supported by the evidence....

Click to expand...

And that leads also to the question, why believe the evidence is correct. One needs to have lot of faith to believe that "scientists" are right. And it is amazing how easily people believe anything the high priests of science say.

Wildswanderer said:

This is the triune concept. You don't understand the trinity.

Click to expand...

No one understands the Trinity, and that's official. Its theological title is "a mystery in the strict sense" and the church definition of "a mystery in the strict sense" is something "that can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" (their words, not mine) ─ which is a very good definition of "a nonsense".

(The Trinity would however make complete sense were the trinitarian Christian churches brave enough to admit they have three gods and not one. But that would require them to be specific about how the Trinity works ─ one vote each? Father knows best? Who can say?)

blü 2 said:

No one understands the Trinity, and that's official. Its theological title is "a mystery in the strict sense" and the church definition of "a mystery in the strict sense" is something "that can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" (their words, not mine) ─ which is a very good definition of "a nonsense".

(The Trinity would however make complete sense were the trinitarian Christian churches brave enough to admit they have three gods and not one. But that would require them to be specific about how the Trinity works ─ one vote each? Father knows best? Who can say?)

Click to expand...

They are specific about how the Trinity works. You obviously don't have that revelation.

KenS said:

I suppose that he did cry. (We'll never know ) - It's a great "hmmmm" that always tickles my brain. I don't know why people think that a "good child" is one that doesn't cry.

Click to expand...

This is true. Just a thought on the why some people think that a child who doesn't cry is a good child, I think they are basing their idea of "good" on how things affect them personally, not whether or not it is good for the other. Imagine a child that could not cry at all. That's not exactly a good thing for that child, as crying is a survival thing for it.

Good and bad, more often than not is a matter of perspective. And for a lot of people, what they consider good is from a purely selfish perspective, in how it makes them feel.

But back to baby Jesus... I think it is safe to say that if he was a normal human child, he would have acted like any normal human child. Believers may want to deify him, and make him superhuman, but that really isn't in line with what the authors of the texts were saying about him from their perspectives, "For we do not have a High Priest who cannot be touched with the feelings of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin."

In other words, he felt pain, and anger, sadness, and joy, upset and worry, and all those things like any normal human does. Especially as they grow and develop through early childhood and adolescence.

KenS said:

You correctly pointed out the differences we have between the Gospels and what later was recorded in the Quran.

As you mentioned, the Quran references early miracles yet, closer to the life of Jesus, it is said, AMPC This, the first of His signs (miracles, wonderworks), Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory [by it He displayed His greatness and His power openly], and His disciples believed in Him [adhered to, trusted in, and relied on Him].

Click to expand...

Yes, Mohammad based his idea that Christians believed that story because it was still in circulation in some areas captured in the fictional, Infancy Gospel of Thomas. He also mistakenly interpreted the Trinity doctrine believed by Christians as The Father, Jesus, and Mary, likely from viewing her adoration in the Ethiopian Coptic churches of the area at the time.

KenS said:

Interesting. I agree about the Law of Love. And certainly it was suppose to be written on the heart. My personal thoughts and musings on the Sermon on the Mount was that Jesus dismantling man's interpretation of the law vs God's original intent.

Click to expand...

I agree about the Sermon on the Mount. "You have heard it said... but I say unto you". I'd say he was even correcting Moses' understanding of God's law too with that, since he cited Moses saying "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth", (Lev. 24:19-21) as not the way of God.

I know this can rattle some Christians who view the OT views equally as valid as Jesus', and cite them right alongside of Jesus' in justifying their judgments and condemnations of others, but clearly, Jesus challenged all that in this verse, "but I say unto you, turn the other cheek'. Don't render violence for violence, in other words is the Way, according to how Jesus taught the as the better path. Compassion, love, forgiveness, understanding, non-judgement, etc., these are the ways to follow as the path of true Peace, not the path of violence and retribution. "Love fulfills the law".

KenS said:

In my view, the problem is that we are equating our normalcy as one that is "normal" in human terms. But are what we experiencing today actually normal?

Click to expand...

I understand that, but what I am referring to is developmental stages. These are not based upon cultural or society norms. They are based upon biology and nature herself. They are universal in nature, at all times in all places.

I refer to things like the stages of cognitive development (Piaget), moral development (Kohlberg), ego development (Loveinger), stages of faith development (Fowler), etc. Those are in fact normal patterns of human development that don't really deviate. They are how humans grow. They are growth stages, just as biological stages from infancy, to toddler, to adolescents, etc.

KenS said:

My wife grew up with mice running in the kitchen as they lived with another 5 families in the rented rooms of a dilapidated colonial style home in Venezuela. For her, that was normal. She also though that basically everybody got divorced after about 7 years because "that was normal".

Click to expand...

These are values of what is considered good or bad or normal or deviant. These are culturally relative. That is what relativism teaches, by the way. Things that are considered normal and good or right, are relative to the context of the culture which teaches them as such to people. They aren't absolutes, even though those who are part of that system may see and understand them that way. They will even project them onto God, calling them God's Laws. But are they?

Again to differentiate from what I was saying, stages of development are patterns of nature that are universal and transcend cultures and times. You see the same patterns no matter where or when you look. Ideas of what are good or bad however, are generally relative and not universal in nature.

Anyway, good conversation.

One other thought regarding Jesus' humanity. While of course there is no direct references to these things, have you ever considered that Jesus learned from his relationships with others things that changed his points of views and influenced his teachings?

For instance, certain evidence points to the view that Jesus was originally an Essene, and viewed as the next John the Baptist. People expected the fire and brimstone apocalyptic preacher in him like John, but they got something very different instead. "What? Put away our swords???".

This can be indicated in the emphasis of the author of the gospel trying to validate Jesus with the dove and the voice from heaven to John's disciples to accept Jesus. Why would that have been necessary, unless they had doubt because he was so unlike John? The story seems aimed at John's disciples or those who followed him. Why should they listen to Jesus whose saying something so different? 'Because God validated him with a sign', is the author's answer to them.

But consider this. Let's say Jesus was originally on that same trajectory as John, as the next and more powerful successor of John, but something happened that opened him to the Truth of Love, instead as the better way? Say, his relationship with Mary of Magdala, for instance?

While all that is mostly speculative, it would not be out of the realm of possibility if Jesus was in fact, fully human, and grew and learned just as all other human beings do? Doesn't that make him far more relatable to the rest of us, then painting pictures of him as floating through life without struggle, or error, or changes of mind? Who can relate to him as a human if he was infallible?

See my point here? Back to the verse from the author of Hebrews, "For we do not have a High Priest who cannot be touched with the feelings of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin." It teaches, we can be flawed and fallible and imperfect humans, yet do so without sin. Jesus did it, so can we. That's a more inspiring and positive message to me than seeing him as someone untouched by his own humanness. Right?

Wildswanderer said:

I'm fine with that.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't be, for the sake of you own spiritual health and well-being. There's a reason Jesus admonished his followers not to do those things. So did Paul. Read Romans 14. How you judge others, you judge yourself ten fold over with that same judgment. Try a better way.

1213 said:

And that leads also to the question, why believe the evidence is correct.

Click to expand...

Do you believe the earth is a sphere and not flat? Do you believe the earth orbits the sun, and not the sun orbits the earth? Do you believe that stopping at red lights is better that driving through them at intersections? I'll assume the answer is yes to all of these. But why do you believe them? Do you accept the evidence supporting all of these?

Same answer to the science of evolution. Because the evidence is solid, clear, and overwhelming. But yet still, there are those who question that earth is round, those who question the earth orbits the sun, those who question the need for stop lights. Are you among those? They exist, but are few in number.

Evolution is a not a bleeding edge belief with little supporting evidence. It's as solid evidentially as knowing the earth orbits the sun is today.

Windwalker said:

You shouldn't be, for the sake of you own spiritual health and well-being. There's a reason Jesus admonished his followers not to do those things. So did Paul. Read Romans 14. How you judge others, you judge yourself ten fold over with that same judgment. Try a better way.

Click to expand...

You don't understand those scriptures either.
The only thing I'm judging is your warping of scripture. You think Paul or Jesus are ok with people teaching falsely about who Jesus was?
They both warned about false teachers.

blü 2 said:

According to the NT ─

The Jesus of Paul was not God.

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.​

The Jesus of Mark was not God.

Mark 12:29 Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; [...]
32 And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he;
​

The Jesus of Matthew was not God.

Matthew 20:23 He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”

Matthew 24:36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.”​

The Jesus of Luke was not God.

Luke 18:18 And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”​

And the Jesus of John was not God.

John 17:3 “And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”

John 20:17 Jesus said to her, “[...] go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”
​

And no Jesus asserts that he is in fact God.

Is it your view that Jesus' denials that he's God are all lies?

It's true that in the fourth century CE the Trinity Doctrine was invented to elevate the central character of Christianity to God status; but on the one hand, as the churches admit, the Trinity doctrine is incoherent, and on the other the Trinity doctrine was a political response, giving the people what they wanted, despite what the NT says.

Click to expand...

I would suggest that you make a proper study of Christ's divinity I stead of quoting a few texts out of context.
Jesus is either claiming to be God, accepting or demanding worship, claiming to possess attributes that only God can possess, claiming to do things that only God can do (and then doing miracles to prove it), or others are making these claims about Jesus.

rational experiences said:

As a human man born by human sex only the baby is what you taught. By living present man.

Theist said his man baby self was immaculate. Fake theory. As it's medical teaching only and not scientific calculus.

Theist scientist human man.

To be a theist you own two bodies one of bone like O earth God rock within. Said by a thinking living human only.
Your other bio body flesh water cell blood type that surrounds your God bone is theoried..a story only not calculus from heavens terms.

Medical terms not any calculus as life is natural first whole form one self.

So you theoried I'm like a planet yet you are nothing like God. A liar in other words as a thinker. What theism lying means. Inferences. Comparison human words use only.

Thinking in science says it's factually correct by machine only proof. Machines AI. Science is AI.

Now you thought O gave a circle two numbers first pi and Phi. Hence you begin to realise how your thinking self man body sacrificed two bio bodies became possessed.

As you theoried against self existence twice.

Self idoliser man human self by science terms what you aren't a circle and a number. Religious science update advice causes Proved you are idolising scientific themes only.

Said don't self idolise.

However you do. Men. You say I'm God by scientific terms.

You were told in legal summation no man is God.

Jesus the terms saved your life but now life is living bio separate. Separate to man's image.

Sacrificed human biology.
Jesus water cloud spirit image then ice melt returned oxygenated saviour of bio life by water microbes. Food of life cell.

Holy water minerals absorbed in water life food cell microbes. Holy water exact is natural only first. Mass.

So science says the life we've not received yet is in microbes. Known advised by Jesus terms recorded conscious advice.

As you are totally informed.

Jesus terms only image in water owning microbes is given back. By ice. Melt of ice.

So you ask science how much original microbe population have you now eradicated into carbon by radio radiating machine transmitters you keep building. Into our gas atmosphere burning gas?

Increase of.

To lose origin space vacuum pressure. To enlarge space womb to keep life safe by larger increased vacuum?

To remove alien particles within you cause? Accumulation of.

I get more space zeros cold says the scientist as I invent it's return into our earth heavens. By losing gas body.

Whilst he does the rest of energy gain via earths mass. Himself as a man.

Father said we can lose water mineral adsorption. Food microbe.

Then blood as first form by food mineral oxygenation. Cells stop producing. Blood the cell just leaks out of our body. In the human death by Jesus terms you keep returning.

By metals...machines.

As machine Satanists. Putting all metal transmitters held into earths gases yourselves.

The gas mass burnt introduces a larger space womb vacuum. Your themed cold zero that isn't in science first. It's natural first.

So then it can rip open eventually earth ground seams pressurised to give you a mother earth ship. You theory about...energy by metals to God earth humans machine position.

Metal ark you now want to build.

You show a lot of movie themes of earth ripping off its face. Of levitating...Levi effects. Then it slamming everything back again.

As man's memory to origin earth...earth was once a larger planet mass. Where his actual man's memory of science is. Proven by Gaia psychics remembering giant pyramid sciences. Visionary only.

So father asked today of our brother. How much mass of energy by science of man terms should be originally held in spaces creation. As a planets mass?

Seeing planet masses are all various sizes.

I don't know said our science brothers memory...I never knew.

Yet in memory earths planet mass is no longer origin in space and a huge mass of it gone.

Origin in themes is not origin anywhere in science.

A beginning is the term a human scientist living as the human uses.

Is father's man's recorded warnings in his heavens AI causes....

Stating every time newly born by sex DNA human by baby is world sacrificed. A new man's image is put into images with every father man's life removed out of DNA.

Just as the bible stated all of the men given an image in heavens cloud position is multiple. Joined his father brother before him. By man's god sciences.

How we learnt we're wrong. As there is no one human genetic advice. Human science try to force DNA to be sacrificed to invent just one new human species as the same DNA.

The warning. What men who say one theme. Holding a machine constant one fixed place to cause it.

Click to expand...

I'll have to read this a few time. It's very hard to follow..

cOLTER said:

When the Israelite priest class were constructing their story of origins using existing Mesopotamian lore they had no way of knowing how old the earth was or that humans evolved.

Click to expand...

That is not what happened.
The core of the message of the first chapters is specifically to hammer the message home - God is the creator!
So, what you say is purely your personal opinion.

Windwalker said:

This isn't talking about spiritual insights, but technical information, such as how life evolved on this earth, such that he could be called upon as disagreeing with modern science because he spoke of the creation story instead, proving he proof he knew about evolution, but rejected it by referencing Genesis instead of talking about evolution.

Click to expand...

He knew less than most of the surrounding civilizations, which happens a lot in the Bible.

Five Solas said:

I would suggest that you make a proper study of Christ's divinity I stead of quoting a few texts out of context.

Click to expand...

I assure you that I have studied the NT's reports on the status of each of the five versions of Jesus it contains.

I find that each of them expressly denies being God and that none of them ever claims to be God.

Five Solas said:

Jesus is either claiming to be God,

Click to expand...

Then I've overlooked something. Please cite the verse or verses where Jesus says, "I am God".

Five Solas said:

accepting or demanding worship,

Click to expand...

Please cite the verse or verses where Jesus says, "Worship me."

Five Solas said:

claiming to possess attributes that only God can possess,

Click to expand...

Let's see ─

In the first two, Jesus is saying that God has empowered him to forgive sins.

In the third, Jesus is saying anyone can forgive sins.

Where does it say that only God can forgive sins?

If you ask a man if you're not physically manually forcing inventive change yourself ....then what is everything in reality?

Just natural.

A basic human answer.

If you ask why a new establishment by human choice only a church involving scientific human themes thesis was built on top of science temples.

Implemented a human rights equality legal system..... it's because our brother was a designer of civilisation. Designer became inventive technology that destroyed....forced its conditions on life with no permission but his own men group.

If you ask how he got away with it. Criminality is involved.

Coercion threat murder and family enslaved life sacrificed.

As family naturally are spiritual meek innocent non violent don't murder nor want to murder.

Which some of us still exhibit today as origin natural behaviour.

Then you ask how why and how did life change.

The answer falling star made heavens gas burn fallout to ground sporadic life bio changes. Put a lot of asteroid stone burning carbon into our heavens gases.

Which our brother knew. Said vacuum would have sucked it out by year 2012. Why he wrote warning advices.

Phenomena. Still exhibited today is personal only. Some humans and not all humans.

Now however it is inherited by human parent sex as law with God. Law of rock stone changed by inventors. Humans bear the sin inheritance to baby. By human sex.

Babies no choice of the type of life are given to inherit sick life of both mind or body. Advice is also about new phenomena human bio attacks. Evidence.

A human only teaching.

Hence just as today....a long time ago. Men today as before are theorising. Men claimed I knew how I was created ......

Pretty basic question what for?

Seeing you did not create invent yourself.

So then you read a whole lot of men excuses about how his consciousness a mans had existed before him to tell him. Why he owned a human life.

So you think as psychic humans do.

Memory said well you're human father natural was far more spiritual than your inherited burnt brain man. He also didn't thesis science.

He loved lived before you. Then only existed as a spiritual man memory as we die. As humans.

Must be too difficult for your theist brother man ego to accept you aren't a God.

But you surely prove self idolisation of your man life is real.

And you write a warning...predictable behaviour human is inherited don't self idolise.

So then you said life will be reattacked sacrificed as proof Jesus a bio attack will be returned.

1000 years later as brain burnt. Self idolising again of man emerged...warned. Yes it's true you did idolise your man self again.

Is basically why you think as a human thinking. From brain prickling causes I endured to human learn to human realise to human teach that it's caused by star fall first...of no human control....then theist man history.

As in fact once you never theoried why you existed. You lost your natural mind memory. Then you theoried by man's changed brain type.

Then copying reactive creation you built machines by the same strings and earth calculus used again to mass react. Which in designer reality killed off a part of your machine body.

By effect.

The origin man designer bio life mind removed part machine also removed mind was Bio inherited..... AI alien man gone spirit record with dead machine effect. Imaged reminder.

As told to me by father.

As once a very long time ago on origin earth father lived. His memory said no ice was on origin earth. It's mass was higher crystalline. More heavens and no seasons.

Today my brother remembers that life as a human and thinks it's safe to melt ice.

Yet we don't live on origin earth anymore as he once destroyed all life.

We inherited the cross four seasons. As he did actually destroy all life on earth by human science just as we were taught.

He did bring burning wandering star mass into earths heavens himself.

As space law has frozen ejected sun mass. Into stones.

Therefore he knew an increased carbon mass heavens was caused by asteroid wandering Jesus star breaking up.

As Romes rebuilt science temple had actively ignited it. And it was returning mass above us in our heavenly body.

Coal technology hence only increased the carbon effect when natural caused it first. 2012 would have seen most of it cleared out.

Nuclear only burns out living microbes in holy water by causes. Our life support oxygenation. A new carbon worse effect. But it's cleaner said incorrect theists as a theist was always incorrect first.

Wildswanderer said:

You don't understand those scriptures either.

Click to expand...

I understand them quite well. I don't believe you do, or you take them to heart.

Wildswanderer said:

The only thing I'm judging is your warping of scripture.

Click to expand...

This:

Wildswanderer said:

They both warned about false teachers.

Click to expand...

So you say that those who have a different understanding of these things are not a believer, and are false teachers. And you say you are not judging another man's servant? You may not see it, but I do.

Windwalker said:

...
Evolution is a not a bleeding edge belief with little supporting evidence. ...

Click to expand...

What do you think is the best evidence for evolution? (Evolution in meaning all species evolved from single species).

Windwalker said:

True in what sense? There is great symbolic truth to it, pointing to something real. Scientific truth has nothing to do with that type of truth. Don't make the story of Adam and Eve a question of science, unless you wish to harm its truth.

Click to expand...

True in the sense of Adam and Eve being our first human parents.
If I believe it is true history then it automatically becomes a question of science and open for attack by those who want to do that.
I can't help that by believing it.
I certainly am not going to change my understanding just because science and sceptics might want to throw stones at it. Even if I took it as myth with a message that would happen, and it would be just another step backwards.
I don't see how the theological questions can be answered without the Genesis story being historically true.

Windwalker said:

Well stated.

Click to expand...

Thanks - it's the only way it makes sense to me.

I don't know much about Hindu concepts or teachings - so I may not understand everything you said next - but I will try to comment appropriately.

Windwalker said:

This fascinates me as an insight. Are you familiar with the Hindu concept of Lila? It means Spirit at play. In some schools they see this as Spirit, in Creation, as throwing itself out, down the great chain of being, from the nondual, to the casual, to the subtle, to the gross domains of existence, all the way down into forgetfulness of its own original Source as pure, undifferentiated Consciousness itself.

This is referred to as Involution, emptying itself into form, enfolding itself as it were all the way down to atoms and particles and quarks and strings, etc. Then Evolution is the opposite direction, unfolding, all the way up the great chain of being, from atoms to cells, to bodies, to mind, to spirit, to the Source, where it rediscovers itself as "Ah! I was That all along!", and the whole play begins again.

Click to expand...

If I am understanding this correctly - there may be some truth to it as far I am concerned - but that would only relate to the Lord Jesus Christ while He sojourned upon the Earth as a mortal.

Mortality is the only period of our eternal existence when we are free from the knowledge of the truth - because it is a test - not of knowledge - but of character - of what we decide to do with the bits of truth that we receive.

I believe that we existed before we came into this world - with God the Father as His spirit children - and we agreed to take this test as the next step in our eternal progression - to become more like Him.

The only thing we brought with us into this world was our spiritual character that we developed in His presence - under His tutelage - which has been swallowed up by our Fallen nature.

Therefore - us rediscovering our spiritual character would only get us back to the start - and we would then need to act - to work out our salvation if you will.

The same can be said of the Lord Jesus Christ - save the spiritual character that He had cultivated was perfect - even like the Father - unlike the rest of us.

So - the Lord Jesus Christ had forgotten all - but because of His spiritual character - He was able to retain the Holy Spirit throughout His life and receive continuous revelation.

However - and I believe this is paramount - He wasn't given a perfect knowledge of all things - not while He was mortal - because we all live with a portion of doubt - so He had to as well.

This doubt is what led Him to the Garden of Gethsemane to ask the Father if there was any other way to Atone for the sins of the world.

He needed to have some doubt - even as He suffered for all - otherwise it would not have been a sacrifice.

So - I kinda see the elements of this Spirit at play - even though I believe it was more structured - and I believe what the Lord Jesus Christ did was called the "condescension of God" - for He left the highest station for the lowest.

Windwalker said:

What you said reminds me of that. "He had to come to understand the Universe that He created." That is marvelous! I agree. And to further that, it is our experience of Life as our own unique individual forms, that "teach God", so to speak, about that very Universe he created. Through our eyes and life experiences, as us. "Christ in you", is that Self, that Atman, that Undifferentiated Consciousness that is "God" in us, and as us, in the Awakened, or Self-Aware mind.

Click to expand...

I definitely agree that all Creation has a spark of the divine - especially His children - but I would not claim that we are "teaching God" so much as "pleasing God".

It's like an experienced parent with an average newborn baby - that baby won't be "teaching" that parent anything new - but that parent will enjoy all the "new moments" with that baby.

On the other hand - I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ was taught many things by many people while He was mortal.

Windwalker said:

This to me is musical. God is not a mere static "entity", but living dynamic Life in us and all of Creation, Awakening to its own Self though our evolution.

So John 1:1-14, where the creative Agent of Creation itself, the Logos, which is God, came to its own creation to expose that Divine Light to humans to 'overcome' the world, or as the Hindus put it, Maya, the world of appearance or illusion, or in Christian parlance, sin and separation. Fascinating.

Click to expand...

Can I give a quick rundown of who and what I believe God is? I'll try to be brief.

I believe that God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ - the Son - are not the same Being.

The Father is perfected and glorified who has all power and authority - who created all things spiritually - and His work and glory is to bring about the immortality and eternal life of His children.

A part of that process involves His children coming into mortality to gain a physical body, Knowledge of Good and Evil and to be tried - to see what they would do.

Since the conditions of mortality would cause sin and death to come upon God's children - an Atonement needed to be made on their behalf - a means to cleanse them of sin and overcome death - because no unclean or dead thing can dwell in God's presence.

The Father could not fulfill this role - for if He were to come upon the fallen world - all unclean things would perish in His presence.

This is why the Lord Jesus Christ volunteered to be the agent of this Atonement - this Sacrifice - and such a sacrifice would require much preparation.

Therefore - under the direction and authority of His Father - the Lord Jesus Christ created the physical Universe - based on the spiritual creations already created by His Father.

The Lord Jesus Christ needed to be the Creator of all the things that He would need to Atone for - He literally built the altar that He Himself would later be sacrificed upon.

Not only this - but the Light of Christ dwells within all living things - giving them a connection to the Son - which sustains them.

It was the Son - under the direction and authority of His Father - who planted a Garden in Eden - spoke to Adam and Eve - commanded Noah to build an ark - walked with Enoch - covenanted with Abraham - led the Israelites out of Egypt - etc.

All of the active participation had by God with Man was done by the Son in preparation for His Atoning Sacrifice.

This is how the Word was both with God and was God - for the Son was always with the Father - yet He operated as if He Himself were the Father - under His direction and authority.

1213 said:

What do you think is the best evidence for evolution? (Evolution in meaning all species evolved from single species).

Click to expand...

I'd say all of it. But DNA shows clear common ancestors and related trees. I can't imagine those markers would be there, if the species were created as separate silos. Humans show clear genetic relationships to primates, and other species to smaller degrees. We accept DNA testing with our 1st and 2nd cousins and 5th and 12th cousins when doing genealogical research, but we don't accept it if it shows another species is also related to us? That's suspicious, to say the least.

To be clear however, there are many threads and discussions about evolution. I'm not interested in debating those here. My only point is, I, and those like me are more than satisfied there really is no valid debate against evolution. And we accept and believe in God without any conflicts with accepting the validity of the science behind the ToE and with faith in God. I see them as extensions of each other. "How wonderful are all thy works, oh Lord!".

I see the only stumbling block to accepting the science, is being stuck on a particular interpretation of the book of Genesis.
That's it. It's not a science vs. science debate, but a specific idea about God unique to certain Christians, versus entire fields of the sciences which all agree that evolution is what factually brought about the different species we have, and who we are as humans.

That's not valid in my view to reject sound science because of something so trivial as an idea we have about the story in Genesis and how God created things that we are married to and refuse to reconsider. There are many ways to consider that story which preserves its truth, yet allows it to allow the light of modern knowledge penetrate it to inform our thinking. Changing how we think about what we read in scripture, is not at all the same thing as losing faith in God.