Posted on 01/25/2012 10:45:09 AM PST by Teófilo
I don’t.
How would you go about proving to someone that your sins have been forgiven, or that you’ve been saved?
Re #51: Very good! Thanks.
—Because it’s one of the things I enjoy doing on FR.—
Entertainment purposes only? I’m skeptical. Why should I believe you?
—How would you go about proving to someone that your sins have been forgiven, or that you’ve been saved?—
By pointing to the data.
I have no idea why you should care. Apparently you do though. Gotta go.
Excellent try, later.
The first reference to the devil in Genesis is found in Genesis 1:2 the rebellion. The Bible only names one entity by name that has already been judge for ‘death’ on judgment day the devil, and he knows his time is short. There are a numbered of his disciples called fallen angels, that will ‘die’ upon the return of Christ. This bunch is referred to as the Sons of God in one place Genesis 6, the book of Jude gives more information. Among other prophets.
Just a thought, God may know the outcome, but did not deny the angels of using their free will...just as he does not deny us the use of free will. What we do with that will God gave us determines what we will become...We have a choice, just as scripture says**** I put before you this day life and death that you may choose, choose life(paraphrasing)
Even though we are not to tempt God, he does tell us to put him to the test as a prophet of old did with dew and the skin of a lamb...
To those that think they have a special calling from God, perhaps to be a prophet they should put God to the test to make sure its coming from God and not our own minds and desires..Just a thought......GG
Do you have scriptural evidence to back up this statement?
I asked ..did God know that Lucifer would “fail” that Adam would fail” before hand?
We are not told 'what' specifically God knew. Lucifer did not 'fail', he rebelled. Isaiah 14:12 and Ezekiel 28:12 discusses the most in depth of the origin of 'Lucifer', what position he held and what he did that caused him to be sentenced to 'death'.
I 'believe' there was a contingency plan already established IF 'the' Adam succumbed to the deception of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil also called the serpent.
At some future point all 'rebels' against the Creator will no longer exist. The Creator sent an instruction manual penned by the elected prophets of His choosing, as to what is 'required' to pass this test to live for eternity. Messing with or around the cheap imitation also call the devil is NOT going to be rewarded with an eternal living. There really will be a time when all the trouble makers are gone.
Since God created us all to love Him and this a free gift requiring a free decision for us to accept-the test is our free will decision to love God and others more than ourselves in various situations throughout our lives.It;s not that God moves people to test us but rather God knowing all in one now all human and angelic interaction,thus, God knows what our free will decision will be within one NOW since God is not bound by time and can not be moved.
All of this testing verifies God’s love is not forced and the importance of God giving us and the angels free will
The mistake so many people make is not understanding how God see’s everything in one now and our concept of time here on earth is very different.
An old friend explained this to me in this way ...
Imagine a very large mountain. Now picture many hundreds of people standing around this mountain. Now, each of these people represent a person doing something in one month of time. Each person is representative of a particular month and year. So you would have 12 people representative of “year 1”, and so forth. Now, these people. They are facing another person of the “past” months and years. They cannot face into the “future” months and years. This is how we see time. We can look at ourselves (present) OR the past time that has gone by. Now God. Let’s say God has a bird’s eye view above this mountain. He looks down at all of these people. His “view” takes in ALL of the people. He is able to see “Jan, year 1”, all the way to the last month and year, say “Mar 2079”. Thus, God’s view of time is all-encompassing. He sees all time as one present event. Also, He is not subject to it. He can “reach down” into the “people”, the “times”, and give them help or gifts. God is accessible to ALL times, since He can reach every person surrounding the mountain at any “time” He desires - while time is not moving forward for us.
With this analogy, it becomes a bit easier to see how God is able to reach into various points of time - while also viewing thousands of years later during the “same instant”. With this in mind, there is no past or future. To God, all is one PRESENT. One NOW. As He does things “within time”, time isn’t changing, for Him. Those people still represent the same month and date - thus, no time changed. He is able to effect any point of time - while viewing how man or time will change - by looking at a “future” month and year.
Does that help?
Any other explanation I have heard is our view of God on a time line. For example, saying that one day to God is 1000 years to us. It is a human way of saying that God’s “time” is not our “time”. But it doesn’t explain how God is unchanging. IF God’s time WAS “one day” to our “one thousand years”, literally, then God WOULD change! The above is the best way to try to explain how God is unchanging and is able to see ALL time simultaneously
ok thanks
Time is an island in the sea of God’s eternity.
Talmudic scholars and Catholic (and Orthodox) Christians share one thing in common: we understand that Revelation transcends the Written Word but that the key to understanding and explaining the Written Word was transmitted orally through various vehicles. We Christians differ with Talmudic scholars as to the source, contents, and purpose of this "key".
In other words, I'm not beholden to sola scriptura. Holy Scripture, as holy and valuable (and Sacrmental!) as it is, is not the sole rule of faith and morals for Christians. Not even Scripture attests to that. Nor do I think that Holy Scripture is a collection of propositional truths - although it does contain a number of propositional truths - to which theological research must be beholden to. Such a restriction was the Reformers' invention and I reject their rubric.
However, I respect your choice of abiding by their judgment. I'm not interested in getting into an extended discussion on the demerits of sola scriptura for others have done a better job at that than I.
I understand that a strict adhesion to sola scriptura will keep you away from a deeper Catholic exegesis of the Word because it chunks the Word of its interpretative key as known and handed down by the Apostles, Fathers, and Doctors of the Church. I'll have to leave it at that.
+JMJ,
-Theo
Yes.
Did God know that the lead angel would be cast down to the earth?
Yes.
Did God know that the angel would tempt man and man would fail ?
Does one need to give a “test” when you already know who will pass and who will fail? Why??
Again, I repeat, the test is not for the examiner's benefit, but for the examinee's. The matter is akin to that of an old, wise professor who knows, by long experience and by direct knowledge, which student is likely to fail the final and which student will not. He administers the exam anyway, for the student needs to measure his or her knowledge against that imparted by the professor in class.
I hope the analogy serves. If not, then this is the best I can do. Your answer lies elsewhere.
+JMJ,
-Theo
A fair question. There is no explicit verse of Scripture asserting this, but I don't consider this lack as an absolute limit or prohibition for theological inquiry. As I explained to another Freeper, In other words, I'm not beholden to sola scriptura. Holy Scripture, as holy and valuable (and Sacrmental!) as it is, is not the sole rule of faith and morals for Christians. Not even Scripture attests to that. Nor do I think that Holy Scripture is a collection of propositional truths - although it does contain a number of propositional truths - to which theological research must be beholden to. Such a restriction was the Reformers' invention and I reject their rubric.
The statement about the angels' being also created in God's image and likeness derives from what we know about human nature itself, through an analogy of faith.
1. God is a personal being, that is, He has an intellect and a will (actually, He *is* both intellect and will, but I digress)
2. God created personal beings who are also gifted with intellects and wills.
3. Angels are personal beings gifted with intellects and wills;
4. Human beings are personal beings gifted with intellects and wills;
5. Therefore, angels and humans bear that image and likeness of God manifested in their respective natures, in that they are personal beings with intellects and wills.
There is also an argument that we may call "argument by default." It goes like this: God created angels as personal beings gifted with intelligence and will before He made material creation. Which other "model" was available for God to create the angels except Himself? Therefore, God created angelic nature in accordance to his own image and likeness.
One objection that I can foresee is that we might have to constrain the statement "image and likeness" to "likeness" alone. That is to say that God created the angels in his likeness but not in His image, as God imprinted His "iconic image" in man in attention to the Incarnation of the Word in time.
This would be a restriction more in accord with the Scriptural data I would be happy to admit. :-)
+JMJ,
-Theo
God also tested Himself with the temptations of the wilderness and certainly in the Garden.
God in human flesh did not exempt Himself from tests, yes.
-Theo
The Reformers have their own views but I can do no better than Christ when he said, “It is written”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.