- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Berean: SINCE GOD IS OMNIPOTENT, WHY THEN MAKE A MIRACLE FOR HIS SON TO CREATE THE UNIVERSE WHEN HE CAN EVERYTHING.
THIS THESIS DOESN’T STAND UP … (that’s my opinion)THEN IN THE CASE ( This is what I believe) OR GOD HAS CREATED EVERYTHING BY HIS OMNIPOTENT WORKER, WHY WOULD HE CHOOSE TO ACT SO ????
God often does things through intermediaries that He could do by Himself. He created a nation for Himself through Abraham – even though He could create children for Abraham from stones if He wanted to. He sent an angel to wipe out 185,000 Assyrians once – even though He could have done that Himself. He sends prophets to speak His words to the people – even though He could just speak His own words from heaven like He did once while the Israelites were in the wilderness.
So I don’t know the answer to your question about why God would choose to do things this way. I only know that according to scripture, God usually chooses to act through intermediaries.
Berean: MY ANSWER IS THAT GOD NEEDS A SON (OMNIPOTENT) BUT NOT THAT, IN ORDER TO FULFILL HIS PURPOSES IN CASE HIS FREE WILL CREATURES WOULD COME TO REBELL AGAINST HIS GOVERNMENT.
THEREFORE THE SON TAKEN CARE OF EVERYTHING ( in agreement with his father)
CREATION
REDEMPTION
THE JUGEMENTI wouldn’t say that God needs someone else in the position you describe – but it’s scriptural that God has someone in that position… His firstborn Son.
Proclaimer: Men once thought the earth was flat and the stars were lights in a solid dome.
Men thought this because it is not only what they could experience for themselves, but also precisely how God described His own world through Moses.
Proclaimer: Then we realised we were one planet in a solar system with other planets.
It’s true that a lot of people (sadly even self-proclaimed followers of God) have come to believe this nonsense. It is undeniably false that anybody – in the entire history of the world – has come to realize any such thing. The heliocentric model has never once been scientifically proven or verified, while the actual scientific evidence that any of us can gather for ourselves has consistently pointed to a flat and stationary plane with a firmament over it – in which the sun, moon, and stars run appointed circuits like a giant sky-clock.
I ask any Christian or Jew on this forum to consider just one thing for a moment…
Isaiah 45:18… For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens— He is God; He formed the earth and fashioned it; He established it; He did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited: “I am the LORD, and there is no other.”
On day 1, God created the earth with the sole intent that it would be inhabited by his crowning jewel of creation: mankind. On day 4, God created the sun as one of many lights that He placed in the firmament. Which of these is more likely to be the centerpiece of the things God created for the benefit of man? The earth? Or one of the many lights in the firmament above the earth that wasn’t even created until 4 days later?
Yet some would have you believe that the sun is the grand salvational centerpiece of our world, while the earth is an insignificant rock (among trillions) that just happens to revolve around it.
I’m not asking for a response… just that you consider these things. Think about how many times the creation of the earth is mentioned in the scriptures. How many times is the creation of the sun mentioned? And consider that when the battle was raging, Joshua did not command the earth to stop spinning – but the sun to stop moving across the sky.
This is scripture, folks. You either believe it – or you believe that it was written by ignorant goat herders who didn’t know what they were talking about. Of course if you choose the latter, than you’ll have to accept that they might not have known what they were talking about when it came to the other things they wrote down for us.
God is spirit. When he works in the material, he often uses others who are composed of material.
In the case of the divine Word that was with him in the beginning, it makes sense that there is an intermediatory between God and his material creation.
If God is love, then love requires someone to love. It is because of love that anyone exists and it is because of love that the universe exists in order to house his Sons and creatures.
Logically speaking, there had to be a being who was first to be with God.
Yes God could do it all on his own. But to my way of thinking, that is like going on holiday by yourself. It’s so much better when you have someone to share these experiences.
LU: If not, then is it remotely possible that God asexually reproduced?
Is it remotely possible that on a particular day, God begat a Son for Himself?
Psalm 2:7… I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
On day 1, God created the earth with the sole intent that it would be inhabited by his crowning jewel of creation: mankind. On day 4, God created the sun as one of many lights that He placed in the firmament.
There are two options that you are not considering. Planets wander through their galaxies and then get caught up in gravitational fields. This means our planet could have been void and then was caught in the solar system and bathed in natural light and heat.
Secondly, the earth had a thick atmosphere from super eruptions etc. The planet settled down and the lights appeared in the firmanent / the sky above us.
Then God said, “Let lights appear in the sky to separate the day from the night. Let them be signs to mark the seasons, days, and years.
Your argument that science contradicts scripture is invalid. Science is simply knowledge. Granted that not all science is truth, but neither does science and scripture conflict if both are true. And in this case, there is no conflict at all. It is an unnecessary distraction and only makes you look foolish. But the worse part is this. If people believe your argument, then they will simply draw the conclusion that scripture is a myth. It’s sad that you misrepresent scripture like this. I hope that you do not inflict that on anyone as every soul is precious and your stubbornness here seems to be very selfish IMO. Why introduce a stumbling block?
Adam: The concept of (individual) resurrection was not developed in the Torah but it is visible in the Tanakh especially in the later books like Daniel.
Thanks for those four scriptures. It’s interesting to note that the concept was not in the Torah. But that leads me back to the question of God’s servant David, who will rule forever. The concept of everlasting life was only included in the Daniel passage. Do you consider Daniel as bonafide scripture since it’s not a part of the Torah?
I guess I’m asking if you – as a Jew but not Christian – believe in a resurrection to eternal life.
Adam: So where does these Christian concepts of the so called mythical eternal life or eternal salvation stand? These strange ideas of the NT writers no where visible in the Hebrew Bible.
Seems I got my answer in the very next post you made to Gene. Okay… so no everlasting life. How then can God’s servant David rule forever?
Berean: Yes but Satan does not have IN HIM THE ETERNAL POWER TO CREATE THE UNIVERSE, HE IS A DEPENDENT CREATURE ON GOD FOR HIS SURVIVAL.
Jesus doesn’t have that power independent of his God either. Jesus is also a creature who is dependent on his God for survival.
Berean: IN THE BIGINNING, CHRIST HIM WAS GOD OF THE SAME SUBSTANCE OF GOD THE FATHER, AND IN HIMSELF WAS THE ETERNAL POWER THAT ALLOWS HIM TO CREATE AND SUSTAIN THE UNIVERSE …
Those are just words you are saying. They have no basis in scripture, and are therefore irrelevant to our discussion.
Mike. There is a difference between being created and being begotten. Creation is that which comes through the Word of God. That exempts the Word of God.
Berean: Mike
WHAT THE FATHER IS, IN THE BIGINNING
THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON WAS ALSOWHEN WILL YOU UNDERSTAND THIS VERY SIMPLE THING?
I do understand it. The Father is a spirit being. The Son he created in the beginning is also a spirit being. The sons God created after that first one are also spirit beings.
But you try to take it farther than that. You try to say that since God was omnipotent, then His Son Jesus must automatically be omnipotent too. That’s like saying that since David was King of Israel, his children were not only human like him, but also kings of Israel.
Berean, God has a lot of spirit sons… spirit brothers of Jesus. If Jesus is omnipotent because his Father is, then all of God’s other spirit sons are equally omnipotent. What say you?
Gene: And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
This is the only TRUE GOD that is important to consider along with the Lord Jesus Christ.
This is the same as before Gene… an emphatic statement. It’s just like this one from Paul…
1 Cor 8:5-6… For though there be those called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Paul clearly tells us that there are other gods and other lords, so when he says that for us there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, he is not saying that YHWH is not also our Lord.
Likewise, Jesus isn’t saying that all the other gods (himself, Michael the archangel, Gabriel, etc) are false gods… he’s just emphatically stating that his own God, YHWH, is the greatest of all the gods.
And in that sense, YHWH actually is the only “true” God, because without him, none of those other gods (Jesus included) would even have the power to blow their noses. All power comes from the Most High God of gods, YHWH.
Yahweh is the ULTIMATE God, but not literally the only god.
Seems I got my answer in the very next post you made to Gene. Okay… so no everlasting life. How then can God’s servant David rule forever?
Hi Mike, thanks again for your replies to my posts. In fact the Jews believe lot of things like eternal life, immortality of souls, resurrection…so on and so forth. But I am not interested in such news ideas developed during the Intertestamental period. You can find lot of Jewish Apocryphal books like Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Testament of Patriarchs, Ben Sirach and lot of Apocalyptic books where you can find so many mystical concepts similar to Christianity. I am only investigating the so called greater claims of Christianity with reference to the Hebrew Bible. Yes there are number of different concepts on death and afterlife even in Hebrew Bible but they are in dormant stage. One of such new ideas is the resurrection of the dead. I am studying much on “Death and afterlife” these days from different religions.
Please remember I am on the neutral ground and studying these religious concepts with a critical outlook.
Mike and Proclaimer
You do not understand Hebrews 1:13
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person,
Person
hupostasis
hoop-os’-tas-is
from a compound of upo – hupo 5259 and isthmi – histemi 2476; a setting under (support), i.e. (figuratively) concretely, essence, or abstractly, assurance (objectively or subjectively):–confidence, confident, person, substance.Hi gadam.
Is that relevant to John 1:1?
I am sorry I think most of the posts have already deviated from the topic. I was just replying to Mike on resurrection and afterlife. It’s good to remind.
Mike…..When Jesus said to God the Father, “you are the “ONLY” true God, he was referencing his own personal belief , AND PERSPECTIVE, I also believe the same way. But that is not to say there are not other true Gods, to others OUT THERE, now is it? But we who believe like Jesus “ONLY” have “ONE” , WE CALL GOD, That is YEHOVAH. , “ONLY ONE”, WE LEAN ON AND TRUST IN AS “OUR” GOD, The source of our power, STRENGTH and eternal life, WHO WE LEAN ON AND TRUST IN FOR OUR SUPPORT, only One, no other GOD.
ALL THE REST SO-CALLED ARE NOT GOD’S TO US, MIGHT BE TO THEM , BUT NOT US.
The word GOD is a DESCRIPTOR OF A PERSONS “RELATIONSHIP”, with something , anything that exists.
peace and love to you and yours……….gene
I am sorry I think most of the posts have already deviated from the topic. I was just replying to Mike on resurrection and afterlife. It’s good to remind.
No problem.
I just thought you might want it in a more topical discussion as it would get more views because people will search for stuff based on the topic’s title.
Diverging is fine, but the idea is that it relates to the topic or eventually gets back to it.
🙂
from a compound of upo – hupo 5259 and isthmi – histemi 2476; a setting under (support), i.e. (figuratively) concretely, essence, or abstractly, assurance (objectively or subjectively):–confidence, confident, person, substance.
A person has substance.
A substance doesn’t have a person.
The Trinity assumes the latter simply because there is one divine substance but more than one person who is composed of that. And because God is one, not three, thus God means the one substance. At least the Trinity spells out that there is a difference between a person and substance. However, it is very difficult to undo centuries of tradition.
God is a person or single identity. He is the Father.
“For us there is one God the Father”…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
