jaybird18c

The Roman soldiers were tasked with ensuring his death. You could postulate lots of crazy stuff but it doesn't fit the circumstance.

The authors of the gospels, except for Luke, were contempraries of Jesus.

Exactly the same way we know santa claus is real. Ha! Ha! Good one! Ha!

After crucifixion, the Roman soldiers would spear them in the side to ensure death. Jesus was speared in the side in this manner.

I did say that there are unexplainable things in the Bible. The resurrection, for example. However, there are eye-witness accounts that it occurred. Just because I don't understand how it happened and it's not revealed in scripture how it happened doesn't mean that it didn't.

How do we know the Bible is true? (Dr. Ravi Zacharias) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fngw6Br65BI

It's like stirring up an atheist hornet nest. Awesome! Busy now but will respond later.

QuoteOf course you believe that stuff. But how do you know? To be credible why not precede your statements with: I believe or my guess is or something similar? First - How do I know? 1. Inner witness of the Holy Spirit. 2. Preponderance of the evidence. Second - I don't need to seek your approval. Although, as Christians, we are to give answers for what we believe, truth does not need my defense. Truth stands whether or not either of us believe. And the truth is you will have to give an account one day for every thought, word, and deed in this lifetime.

I can't convince you of anything. Only the Holy Spirit can do that. But that first requires humility. Not much of that around here. The Bible isn’t clear on everything. It was not intended nor is it necessary. However, those things necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation are clear (perspicuity/clarity of scripture). Any punishment you would receive isn't even comparable to that which Jesus endured on your behalf on the cross. Apples to oranges. You are equivocating the two in asking which you would prefer as if you were even on the same playing field. You're not. It's like asking would I rather be something impossible for me to be as opposed to something else. It's just a stupid question. Maybe I should have just said that was a stupid question. Is that better? I never said "God crushed God" and neither does scripture.

I can’t have it both ways but God apparently can. Trinity – God in three persons. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. God in essence. Individual in person. I also can’t explain it. If that’s what does it for you, then so be it. It is what it is. There are big topics like that which are unexplainable. Another big one would be the Incarnation. I’m saying both. Now that’s a “false equivalence.” Again. Trinity. Unexplainable. The Bible refers to stuff like that as a mystery. Nothing wrong with that. It just means we can’t understand it, as intended. Not really. Those would just be nonsensical statements.

God is neither male nor female. He is spirit. Reference in the masculine has to do with role or position rather than sex. Jesus is also presented that way because the culture was set up that way. The male represented his family line. He was the authority or head of household. He was responsible for them “Federal Headship.” He was the protector, the provider, etc.

Jesus never relinquished his deity or ceased to be God in essence. Jesus is God in the flesh (e.g. Emmanuel). Fully God (e.g. Trinity) and fully human. Both of which were necessary in order to accomplish what was required to pay what was owed. He never stopped being “like God,” as you put it. He humbled himself, choosing to put aside some of his attributes for a time (Philippians 2:7). This was necessary for him to adequately represent us and to be a substitute (propitiation). His being fully human was demonstrated in that he anguished and cried tears of blood in anticipation of what was required. He even asked the Father if the task could be removed from him. Yet he was obedient. He also asked why God had forsaken him as he hung on the cross. The reason Jesus’ sacrifice was worthy and yours wouldn’t be is because his worth is incomprehensible. He is worth more than all of us put together and that’s not even a good comparison. That was demonstrated by his being raised from the dead by God himself, vindicating his sacrifice. Also, the bible says that “It pleased Yahweh to crush him.” Jesus paid the fine you owe by enduring the wrath of God himself. If you don’t repent, you’ll just go to hell forever.

Man was created in the image of God. That means we were created to be like him in that we have the ability to share many of his attributes (communicable attributes). The “fruits of the spirit” would be an example. They include but aren’t limited to Joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. On the other hand, there are attributes which are his alone (incommunicable attributes). An example of these would be omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence. There are many more. I quoted Psalm 50:21. It means that although God has demonstrated much patience allowing time to repent, his patience is not without limit and justice will be done. He is NOT like fallen man with indifference to sin.

Mistake #1: Assuming you are like God (Psalm 50:21). It's not possible to compare human suffering to that of Jesus as the hands of God on our behalf, even an eternity in hell.

The bible isn't explicit on this topic. However, it does imply that children of believers before an age of understanding and, therefore, accountability are somehow covered by grace. An example would be with King David when his child died and he said "He cannot come to me, but I shall go to him." A scriptural typeological parallelism being between King David and Jesus. As for others, it just isn't clear. So an assumption can't be made either way, in my opinion. I would think, at least for the most part, the principal would still apply. However, an answer can only be given in as much as scripture reveals. Most likely. No. We have no way to even comprehend the immesurable suffering Jesus endured on the cross. Much more happened there than merely that which occured at the hands of Roman soldiers.

Logically, what’s the difference? In questioning theological answers, you are in fact asking theological questions. But you don’t, correct? You don’t want to believe. And you ridicule what you don’t really even want to understand. Deep down, you, on the surface, hate the idea of the church, a supreme authority, rules in that regard, control over your life, etc. But even deeper down, even though you say you don’t believe in God, you hate even the thought of him with every fiber of your being. Hell bent on autonomy, if you will. I know. I used to be exactly that way. Codification of beliefs have always come about as a result of aberrant or heretical teachings creeping into the church. That’s the case whether you’re Catholic or Protestant. It’s the reason for all the assemblies and confessions throughout the years. The Westminster Confession is but one of many very fine documents which accurately detail theological orthodoxy. Many learned theologians came together for its composition. Any confession is only as good as it is biblically accurate and helpful. It is authoritative for the church in that way only. It in no way supersedes the authority of scripture. It is a helpful tool, if you will. QuoteI put it to Ron differently but I believe the same of you: if you really believe as you claim why do you protest as you do? “Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.” (1 Peter 3:13-17)

Ok. Whatever. You ask theological questions but you don't want theological answers. You don't really want to understand. You only ask to criticize and ridicule. The Westminster Confession of Faith, by the way, is a little more authoritative (in as much as it accurately explains Christian doctrine) than the guy in the next pew up.

QuoteOK then - how many real lies do you think you've told in your life which actualy resulted in hurting another person? Just answer in figure/s .... ? A bunch.

That doesn't answer the question.

Can I answer Jakee and you at the same time? Chapter 3 of the Westminster Confession speaks of God’s eternal decree and states: “God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.” Scriptural reference includes: Eph. 1:11, Rom. 11:33, Heb. 6:17, Rom. 9:15 ,18, Jam. 1:13,17, 1 John 1:5, Acts 2:23, Matt. 17:12, Acts 4:27,28, John 19:11, Prov. 16:33. Your question has to do with the concept of primary and secondary causation. God does in fact ordain everything that comes to pass “in a certain sense.” A primary sense. He did in fact create people whom he foreknew would sin against him. Although he knows what they will do, he never causes them, in a secondary sense, to sin. This does not make God the author of sin. God knows before I sin that I will. God often times chooses to allow me to do it rather than not (God’s permissive will). He could stop me and punish me on the spot but chooses not to. We have free will to choose. In choosing to sin (secondary cause), I retain full responsibility. God is glorified when his full attributes are put on display. This is also for our good. In order to do that, he has to allow sin. Without it, it would not be possible for him to put on display all the other aspects of how he deals with sinners (e.g. justice, wrath, judgment, mercy, grace, compassion, forgiveness). Like I said before, God uses or, in theological terms, overrules even the evil deeds of men for his purposes, for good, and for his glory.

[Reply]Ron thinks you're ignoring biblical teaching when you say that. What do you think? Nope. We're saying the same thing.

God uses or, as in theological terms, overrules even the evil deeds of men for his purposes. An example being when Joseph's brothers sold him into slavery. Because of Joseph's faith and obedience, he was blessed and eventually rose to a position of importance in Egypt second only to the Pharaoh. Joseph later was confronted by the brothers who betrayed him. Instead of condemnation, he showed mercy and forgiveness (also an OT foreshadow) resulting in their redemption.

Well put up or shut up. To which verse are you referring? Plenty of very learned biblical scholars back up what I told you with regard to the judgment of Jerusalem as the meaning of what would occur during their generation (e.g. AD 70). It does not say that Jesus will return in the lifetime of any 1st Century Jew. And you obviously don’t understand the differences and meaning behind the laws described in the bible. That being civil (that pertaining only to the Nation of Israel), ceremonial (those whose purpose was to foreshadow the perfect sacrifice which was to come; one which wouldn’t merely “cover” their sin but take it away; fulfilled in the work of Christ on the cross), and moral (which still are applicable for us today). The bible is a progressive revelation of God's plan of salvation for his people. It describes the historical trials and tribulations, successes and failures, of a people who repeatedly turned away from and back towards God as he directed them out of a pagan, polytheistic, culture. And you definitely do not comprehend the holiness of God who cannot be in the presence of even the smallest sin. However, you are correct in that there are some more grievous than others. There are also more severe levels of punishment in hell. However, at that point, it doesn’t really matter. It’s still hell. That’s why people often refer to all sin being the same. Please review what was discussed concerning the unconverted vs. the converted nature of man. QuoteWould you think that someone who proclaims that they have been "saved" yet absolutely, completely and totally refuse to follow Jesus' teachings while still here on earth to be a "true Christian"? No.

The God who is perfectly holy and righteous thinks lying is a pretty big deal. (Proverbs 12:22) But let's say just for the sake of argument that you are correct. Forget whichever little white lies you want to discount. How many real lies do you think you've told in your life which actually resulted in hurting another person? Corrupted by sin. Not by God. Whether a person is a follower of Christ or not, they still freely choose. The unconverted nature always has the propensity to choose that which is in opposition to God. The converted nature, even though they will still sin because of their fallen nature; albeit not an excuse to habitually sin, has a new propensity to think and do that which is in accordance with God’s will. QuoteJust so we're clear then - god could choose to regenerate my nature, and the very nature of creation, and enable me to live a life free of sin? That sounds like a pretty textbook definition of 'so it's his responsibility. No one is free of sin until they die. If they’ve repented and placed their faith in Jesus Christ, they will be what the bible terms as “glorified.” Cleansed of all sin. But not until then. The difference, however, during this lifetime was previously described.

Here’s the problem with cherry picking verses and inserting your own meaning into them. If you read what’s before and after, it explains things which will occur with the judgment of Jerusalem which did occur. But it does not say that Jesus will return in the lifetime of the apostles. Actually, in other verses, it explains that it will be a very long time before he returns. That’s good for those of us who need time to come to our senses. You just said “While I am a sinner (biblical term).” Sin is defined in scripture as “transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4),” referring to God’s moral Law (The 10 Commandments). You weren’t created to be a sinner. You’re a sinner because you choose to sin. The “Devil made me do it” excuse doesn’t even work in our judicial system. It won’t in God’s court either. (1 Peter 4:5) “but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.”