Thanx for the thread
No, this is admitting to a weakness in BELIEVERS, not God. A line of questioning, a logical process which WE can not endure. As I asked, how would you feel if your daughter questioned you to this degree about your being her true father?
As I said before, I believe there are some things that God never intended HIS PEOPLE to even WANT to question.
Becky
Exactly! I went back and looked at my responses and I was speaking of BELIEVERS asking the type of questions that have been coming up here the longer we go on.
I ask because I want to see what answers I get from the other folks. You know. The folks here relying on the Holy Spirit to personally deliver them to all truth. I find there answers and methodologies interesting. Don't you?
Exactly!! The more and more of these questions that are asked, and in trying to answer such questions the human mind can't but we try and sometimes it all comes out wrong, because God never intended to be question to this degree, so the answers are coming from are finite (sp) minds not from the Holy Spirit guiding us. The questions are trick questions. I don't beleive God would approve of that. Are you doing it to teach, or just to be able to say "Gotcha" Just as you would never want to do a DNA test to prove to your daughter that you are her father would you?
Becky
We should also consider wether giving up His divinity would have still made the act worth wild. If Jesus was not God, what was the effect of the Cross? plenty of normal mortals have died in similar instances, how did Jesus help if he was just one of them?
Had Jesus invoked his divinity anywhere along the line, he would have been admitting that men could not accomplish what he'd set out to prove they could. He would have surrendered the battle then and there. Jesus was proving that men could follow the Will of God in all things and live a sinless life. In proving it and dying free of sin, he ransomed us all! That is why I continually say, he was a man. Had he not been, we'd all just be whistling dixie. Had he not been the Son of God, the same would be true. Had he not been 'God with us', the same would be true. He had to be three things at once, denying his divinity and denying the nature of man - following only God's will.
He relied on the Law and the will of God. Think about that. Christianity isn't a new phenomenon. It is an old one with a new sacrifice and a new direct handling of sin. That's all! Instead of relying on men, we now rely and trust only in God! That was the point of Jesus' sacrifice - a ransom once and for all, and taking men out of the loop. Salvation is now strictly between any individual and his God. No room for a magicsternum or a priesthood, or a bunch of philosophies, etc. Jesus preached Love for brother and the Law. He denounced tradition and rules of men. He denounced those who looked for outward signs. Jesus didn't replace the law, he fullfilled it. You guys are trying to add your own twists to it just as the Pharisees and Saducees had. Jesus called it what it was then. And I call it what it is now.
And very conveniently for you, he ended his earthly ministry about 1,970 years ago, and so now you can present your own interpretations, invoke his name for them, and he's not around to gainsay you.
Actually, he's very much with us - as much as when he walked the earth in flesh. He is here to gainsay me if I'm wrong. And I don't have to invoke his name in proclamation of scripture, the scripture does that quit well enough on it's own. It's just that some have their index fingers so deep in there ears and have nearly gauged their eyes out for fear of actually hearing or seeing the scripture. Some are more comfortable in clinging to their philosophies than in hearing and obeying God and coming out of them.
All I've heard from you so far is your private interpretations, Jack Chick/Lorraine Boettner stuff, and diatribes against history and philosophy.
Uh, no. You've heard scripture. Private interpretation has yet to much enter into it. And the Chick/Boettner charge... you guys need to get some new lines or something. I know they teach you to respond to Chick and Boettner. But, they don't ask you to fully defend, they just teach you to destroy the things those people apparently got wrong. Seems the Catholic church doesn't fully address their charges, just shruggs off all but what it can call absurd and paint them as absurdities. That is absolutely hilarious in its level of hypocrisy. Your so called 'church fathers' can't agree on things and get as much wrong as right even in your own estimations. If you applied the same standards to them as you apply to Chick and Boettner. Hypocrite. LOL. The funnier thing is, nobody is claiming Chick or Boettner to be inspired or scripture. Ya'll have elevated your 'church fathers' well beyond any status any of us might give either of the two you so lambaste. And I can't particularly remember quoting either of them - even once.
Whereas you, on the other hand, are receiving spiritual revelations?
"Oh ye of little faith," Revelations - it's always got to be the extreme with you because you lack faith. But, let's take the extreme, "But greater things shall ye do for I go to the Father." Where is your faith. I take your incredulous answer to mean you have no relationship with Christ, just a passing familiarity with the Bible and the world. How sad.
How would that have been acting "fully in divinity"? It would have been exercising the powers of the Divine, but would have totally blew the one chance for repairing the infinite rift.
We cannot command angels, we may ask God for them to protect us; but, only God may command them -for He alone is their master.
You mean Jesus taught them? He didn't just give them a book and say "maketh of this what ye will"? Maybe someday you will understand "vicarhood" and how the Magisterium does the same teaching function of Jesus. Maybe. (Or, did it ever occur to you that Jesus created the Magisterium, and not the other way around? He didn't need them, they need Him.)
Jesus taught them! Yes, you've got it. He taught them and charged them to pass it on. And they did so by teaching and writing what they taught. The writing of what they taught was intended to last as a proof of what they taught - something against which we should test what others teach and preach. They followed the example of the Jews in writing what happened. We don't need a magicsternum. I understand the Vicarhood already, it's man's attempt to usurp the authority of Jesus and make of themselves Kings of the Lord's Kingdom. It will be recompensed by Jesus himself.
The Magicsternum wasn't created by Jesus, it's a Catholic invention. Nor did Jesus lay upon them any authority or power. No one is your master but one, God. If your master is Jesus then serve and obey him. But if your master be the magicsternum, then serve and obey them - your reward will be according to the Word of God in each case. You can have but one master. Jesus didn't need a the magicsternum and neither does any man that has ever lived. We have the inspired word of God. And we are to find worthy teachers whose words align with those of God - without twisting or adding to them.
(Now watch me screw one up.)
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3bc5400947d0.htm
FOLLOWING is the latest update on the progress of a growing NYC WTC related Bible Code. ONE aspect of it already has odds of 1 in 4 million occuring by chance. Some aspects of it are entirely new to the phenomenon. The code's obvious relationship to the surface text (Ezek 7:2-8) is also quite sobering. This code has risen to one of the top 5 of all time in terms of statistical probabilities. This is a worthy site for interested people to signup for. Offered as fair use for educational discussion--Q
This one is an incredibly interesting code. There is such a diversity of high quality features rendering this well beyond remotely reasonably considered to ahve occurred by chance.
I hope the code might increase our prayerful support of our nation and one another in The Body.