Is destruction inevitable by a loving Creator?

[Guest]

Well brothers, you are free to believe what you will. God is saving me from self destruction,(sin dwells in me.)not from Him.

Sin is what is destructive. Before sin the universe was at peace. I refuse to believe that Satan taught God how to be a psychotic murderer. The God I have come to love doesn't use force(death threats is force) like the god of this world does.

Anyways, peace.

Here's a sample Rich.

[Guest]

Hey Gail

[Gail]

Hi, Richard

[pnattmbtc]

He doesn't change, but his role does, and this is the part you fail to comprehend. And by doing such, you misrepresent his character.

[pnattmbtc]

If there was, this discussion would be over long before now.

Why? It's not necessary to believe man will kill Satan to believe that God does not destroy the wicked by setting them on fire.

[epaminondas]

The question doesn't assume that you want to be God. I'm asking you to think about-- and perhaps express your thoughts about-- how God is dealing with the problems of rebellion, sin and death in His universe. For instance, as you study the Bible about what God has done and will do, do you believe the verses that say God destroys should be taken literally, just as they read, or do you think that God does not actually kill or destroy?

The Bible says it'll be whoosh, and they're gone.

What could be done? There are only so many possibilities.

• Remake them. Change them so they're good boys and girls, whether they want it or not. This negates their freedom of choice.
• As they will be a corrupting influence, banish them to their own care. It will be a dog eat dog place with Satan the top dog. A grim scenario. Ultimately Hayflick's limit will catch up with them. Unlike the saved, telomerase will still be inactive in them - a minor genetic modification which they didn't have, so they will still die. It will be very unpleasant to their saved loved ones knowing sons, daughters, fathers and mothers are where they are till they die, which will be a merciful release from such a place.
• A quick euthanasia. They'll just be gone - no pain, no suffering, not even rest, just gone. Even though their saved friends and relatives would have wished for a different ending, this is preferable to the second option.

I cannot think of other possibilities. The last one is most likely the best.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: Richard

He doesn't change, but his role does, and this is the part you fail to comprehend. And by doing such, you misrepresent his character.

What does it mean to say He doesn't change? It must mean His character doesn't change, correct? You're saying that by not recognizing that His role changes, His character is being misrepresented. I don't see how this idea fits in with the following:

Quote:

All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son.

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." John 1:18.

Taking humanity upon Him, Christ came to be one with humanity and at the same time to reveal our heavenly Father to sinful human beings. He was in all things made like unto His brethren. He became flesh, even as we are. (8T 216)

"All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son."

This says it all. This is another precious ray of light from the Father of lights. If we accept this statement as the truth, we may know that God is never the executioner of the sentence against transgression. One day the disciples of Christ asked Him to call fire from God out of heaven to fall upon a village of the Samaritans. They felt that a great insult had been done to their Master by refusing to put them up for the nite. But the Father's loving reply to them through Christ was, "You know not of what spirit you are actuated!"

"There can be no more conclusive evidence that we possess the spirit of Satan then the dispostion to hurt or destroy those who do not appreciate our work or who act contrary to our ideas." D.A.487.

John the Baptist expected Christ to reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire! (D.A.215) He was mistaken just as many of us are today.

sky

*"When one ray of light is disregarded, there is a partial benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned." D.A.322.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

It is clear that the destruction comes with fire.

But remember the burning bush.

It was not an "earthly" fire.

But it was still described as a fire.

It will look like a fire and have the effects of fire, but to define it beyond that is more than I believe the scripture reveals.

Just like the burning bush, the nature of the fire is not revealed there, it is just stated as a fact.

We must not use our "concept" of fire, to limit what the bible describes, but just accept the plain statements by faith (unless we have a good reason not to) and discuss the details if God reveals it.

All other discussions on the subject would be conjecture and "opinion".

God bless,

Mark :-)

So it sounds like your answer is "something else"? That is, it's not items 1, 2, or 3 on my list. Is that correct? [/quote']for myself i would have to say i just accepted the statements at face value, til challenged to look deeper and study more.

it has caused me to think about statements i had seen but not given any thought to.

i would prefer praying and studying more before dismissing any "radical" thoughts to keep my previous "pre-conceived" opinions.

knowing that for ellen white when she first heard about the sabbath...

Quote:

Elder B. was keeping the Sabbath, and urged its importance. I did not feel its importance, and thought that Elder B. erred in dwelling upon the fourth commandment more than upon the other nine.

and her reaction when first confronted with no eternal burning hell!.....

Quote:

“Why, mother!” cried I, in astonishment, “this is strange talk for you! If you believe this strange theory, do not let any one know of it; for I fear that sinners would gather security from this belief, and never desire to seek the Lord.” {1T 39.5}

so with these examples and her admonition that we didnt have all the light there is and to study....

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: John317

The question doesn't assume that you want to be God. I'm asking you to think about-- and perhaps express your thoughts about-- how God is dealing with the problems of rebellion, sin and death in His universe. For instance, as you study the Bible about what God has done and will do, do you believe the verses that say God destroys should be taken literally, just as they read, or do you think that God does not actually kill or destroy?

The Bible says it'll be whoosh, and they're gone.

What could be done? There are only so many possibilities.

• Remake them. Change them so they're good boys and girls, whether they want it or not. This negates their freedom of choice.
• As they will be a corrupting influence, banish them to their own care. It will be a dog eat dog place with Satan the top dog. A grim scenario. Ultimately Hayflick's limit will catch up with them. Unlike the saved, telomerase will still be inactive in them - a minor genetic modification which they didn't have, so they will still die. It will be very unpleasant to their saved loved ones knowing sons, daughters, fathers and mothers are where they are till they die, which will be a merciful release from such a place.
• A quick euthanasia. They'll just be gone - no pain, no suffering, not even rest, just gone. Even though their saved friends and relatives would have wished for a different ending, this is preferable to the second option.

I cannot think of other possibilities. The last one is most likely the best.

i would like the last the best also. ive learned not to be out for vengence here and now, as in wanting any to suffer...i should say i am learning. so i cant see that i want any to suffer in that horrible day either.

we will know for sure on that day, tho, one way or the other.

[LifeHiscost]

He dosn't change, but his role does, and this is the part you fail to comprehend. And by doing such, you misrepresent his character.

many would be led to believe that the threatenings of God's word would not be literally fulfilled; for it would be against his character of benevolence and love,.... Satan has led them to another extreme, to entirely overlook the justice of God, and the threatenings in his Word, and represent him as being all mercy, {1SG 115}

Excellent text. However I'm suggesting when His justice is being meted out with destruction, it reveals mercy to the ones who would have to live on in their miserable state were God not to mercifully draw their existence to an end, not to mention the many who will be mercifully delivered from the assaults perpetrated by the wicked before they lost their capacity to work evil in the lives of those around them.

Blessings!

[LifeHiscost]

I am astonished at you who profess to believe that her writings are inspired that you would be so astonished at me for believing that they are inspired. The testimonies are not above the Word of God. They shed light on the Word of God.

sky

Any servant of Jesus is meant to reveal consistent truth, not inconsistent with previous pillars of faith. While one brother or sister in the body of Christ may, for whatever reason, have greater knowledge that when known will uplift previous truths revealed, it will not destroy that which is already known to be true.

"But as for me, this secret has not been revealed to me because I have more wisdom than anyone living, but for our sakes who make known the interpretation to the king, and that you may know the thoughts of your heart." Daniel 2:30 NKJV

Regards!

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Totally conclusive Richard?

It is from my viewpoint.

Mine too' date=' but you could raise one from the dead and it wouldn't convince them of anything. God has to be totally passive. There is no way he could do what he has said he will do.

They are locked into that train of thought, and it's really not worth the time to argue any further with them. [/quote']

Seeds my friend. Seeds. :-)

The Holy Spirit can work with seeds.

It sometimes takes men many years to reliquish error, the important work here has been done.

The planting of seeds.

God bless,

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I think Jesus revealed God's character of love perfectly at the cross.

But I do not think I understand it.

It is one thing for it to be revealed, it is another for a "finite" mind to claim to understand.

This is why I urge caution when we say that God does not "destroy", we are making a judgement of character.

And if we are wrong, we have sinned.

Mark :-)

I'm asking this:

Quote:

It sounds like you do not believe that Jesus Christ in His humanity provided a full revelation of God's character. (i.e., all that man needs to know or can know of God). We need to supplement what Christ revealed in His humanity with other things, such as stories of destruction.[/quote']

I'm asking if I've understood you correctly. This is a yes or no question. To help me out, please start with "yes" or "no" and then explain your answer as you wish.

Thanks!

Ok my friend. :-)

Yes, Christ has revealed sufficiently what man needs to know of Gods Character.

But that revealing was not just done during those 3 1/2 years.

It is threaded throughout the history of humanity and recorded in the bible.

It is also prophetically laid down as to His activities now and in the future.

It is when we consider "all" of this, we have a panarama to view.

Not to claim to fully comprehend, but one to view.

I hold to the position that we have to look at all of Jesus' roles to gauge His character (as much as we are able).

Gods self sacrificing love however was revealed in its fullest on the cross.

I hope that answers your question?

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

It is clear that the destruction comes with fire.

But remember the burning bush.

It was not an "earthly" fire.

But it was still described as a fire.

It will look like a fire and have the effects of fire, but to define it beyond that is more than I believe the scripture reveals.

Just like the burning bush, the nature of the fire is not revealed there, it is just stated as a fact.

We must not use our "concept" of fire, to limit what the bible describes, but just accept the plain statements by faith (unless we have a good reason not to) and discuss the details if God reveals it.

All other discussions on the subject would be conjecture and "opinion".

God bless,

Mark :-) [/quote']

So it sounds like your answer is "something else"? That is, it's not items 1, 2, or 3 on my list. Is that correct?

I view it like this:

If we could take that fire, bottle it, examine it in a laboratory.

Identify the forms of energy or its nature.

Then we could say it is this and it is not that.

But because God has not given us that opportunity and is highly unlikely that He would do so...

The only thing I can do is accept by faith the description in Gods word of what it looks like and what it does.

I cannot go beyond that, because God has not given me that option.

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I would not for one second claim to know the answer to that question. :-)

Mark [/quote']

To confirm I'm understanding this post correctly, you are saying that you have no idea why Jesus Christ was not set on fire on the cross. Do I understand you correctly?

Not at all.

I am saying I do not understand the method of death for Jesus is different for the wicked.

That has not been revealed to me, so how could I understand it?

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I would not for one second claim to know the answer to that question. :-)

Mark [/quote']

To confirm I'm understanding this post correctly, you are saying that you have no idea why Jesus Christ was not set on fire on the cross. Do I understand you correctly?

Not at all. :-)

I am saying I do not know why there is a difference in the forms of death that our Saviour suffered compared to the wicked. :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

Of, for that matter, where does one get that Jesus died of a broken heart from the weight of all of the sins of the wicked? I never read that in the bible. Maybe it came from a fictional book.

I've heard that the mixture of blood and water that came out of Jesus' side when the spear was thrust there is a physical symptom of just that- a broken heart.

When we understand the connection between the "spirit" of a man and his heart and the connection between our spirit and the Holy Spirit, we can understand that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were seperated.

That seperation would be a breaking of Jesus heart.

Mark

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Richard

He doesn't change, but his role does, and this is the part you fail to comprehend. And by doing such, you misrepresent his character.

What does it mean to say He doesn't change? It must mean His character doesn't change, correct? You're saying that by not recognizing that His role changes, His character is being misrepresented. I don't see how this idea fits in with the following:

Quote:

All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son.

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." John 1:18.

Taking humanity upon Him, Christ came to be one with humanity and at the same time to reveal our heavenly Father to sinful human beings. He was in all things made like unto His brethren. He became flesh, even as we are. (8T 216)

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." John 1:18.

So did Jesus "only" declare the Father for those 3 1/2 years?

Did He not declare Him at any other time?

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Richard

If there was, this discussion would be over long before now.

Why? It's not necessary to believe man will kill Satan to believe that God does not destroy the wicked by setting them on fire.

What of Ellen Whites statement above plainly declaring Holy Angels destroy?

Here it is again:

The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere.--GC 614 (1911). {LDE 243.4}

[pnattmbtc]

Read my post please. I pointed out the paragraph immediately preceding and asked some questions regarding it. It doesn't appear you're taking into account the context of the statement. I'm interested in your response to me questions.

In regards to your question about the statement, I will admit that, taken out of context, it can be understood to present a contrary idea to what she says in the paragraph immediately preceding it, or in the paragraphs following it.

Remember she's dealing with the plagues here. She's also said this:

Quote:

I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord upon them, but in this way: They place themselves beyond His protection. He warns, corrects, reproves, and points out the only path of safety; then if those who have been the objects of His special care will follow their own course independent of the Spirit of God, after repeated warnings, if they choose their own way, then He does not commission His angels to prevent Satan's decided attacks upon them. It is Satan's power that is at work at sea and on land, bringing calamity and distress, and sweeping off multitudes to make sure of his prey. And storm and tempest both by sea and land will be, for Satan has come down in great wrath. He is at work. He knows his time is short and, if he is not restrained, we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of. (14MR 3)

This brings out that Satan is coming in great wrath, and when not restrained, "we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of." It brings out how Satan's power is already at work, and it is the restraining work of the angels that prevents Satan from carrying out his purposes.

One can "prove" almost anything by consider statements without regards to context, or what an author has written elsewhere.

[skyblue888]

Read my post please. I pointed out the paragraph immediately preceding and asked some questions regarding it. It doesn't appear you're taking into account the context of the statement. I'm interested in your response to me questions.

In regards to your question about the statement, I will admit that, taken out of context, it can be understood to present a contrary idea to what she says in the paragraph immediately preceding it, or in the paragraphs following it.

Remember she's dealing with the plagues here. She's also said this:

Quote:

I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord upon them, but in this way: They place themselves beyond His protection. He warns, corrects, reproves, and points out the only path of safety; then if those who have been the objects of His special care will follow their own course independent of the Spirit of God, after repeated warnings, if they choose their own way, then He does not commission His angels to prevent Satan's decided attacks upon them. It is Satan's power that is at work at sea and on land, bringing calamity and distress, and sweeping off multitudes to make sure of his prey. And storm and tempest both by sea and land will be, for Satan has come down in great wrath. He is at work. He knows his time is short and, if he is not restrained, we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of. (14MR 3)

This brings out that Satan is coming in great wrath, and when not restrained, "we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of." It brings out how Satan's power is already at work, and it is the restraining work of the angels that prevents Satan from carrying out his purposes.

One can "prove" almost anything by considering statements without regards to context, or what an author has written elsewhere.

To me it is simply a matter of accepting or rejecting light. There is absolutely no need to speculate. Some of us think they are in a position to argue with the Lord, as though they were saying to Him, Let me tell You how to teach Your message! but only to their own peril. On these threads, again and again the Lord is telling us that His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the wicked but that they place themselves beyond His protection. The Lord has also explained to us how holy angels "destroy" at His command, that He gives them command to no longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy simply because there comes the time when He will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work. When it gets to that point, it is said that His "wrath" is complete. He has also told us many times that His restraining power is in a measure removed from the agencies of evil so that a train of circumstances will arise that will punish sin with sin, before it is fully removed. These declarations are so clear and simple that a child can understand them. They are so clear that no one has any excuse not to understand them. And they prove beyond any shadow of doubt that God is never the executioner of the sentence against transgression. Thus the language of the Bible is, by the Holy Spirit, clearly explained or interpreted to correct our errors so that we will no longer see God in a false light as we have for thousands of years.

The warning is that "When one ray of light is resisted there is a benunbming of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned." D.A.322.

It is very serious to disregard one ray of light.

sky

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I'm asking this:

Quote:

It sounds like you do not believe that Jesus Christ in His humanity provided a full revelation of God's character. (i.e., all that man needs to know or can know of God). We need to supplement what Christ revealed in His humanity with other things, such as stories of destruction.[/quote']

I'm asking if I've understood you correctly. This is a yes or no question. To help me out, please start with "yes" or "no" and then explain your answer as you wish.

Thanks!

Ok my friend. :-)

Yes, Christ has revealed sufficiently what man needs to know of Gods Character.

But that revealing was not just done during those 3 1/2 years.

It is threaded throughout the history of humanity and recorded in the bible.

It is also prophetically laid down as to His activities now and in the future.

It is when we consider "all" of this, we have a panarama to view.

Not to claim to fully comprehend, but one to view.

I hold to the position that we have to look at all of Jesus' roles to gauge His character (as much as we are able).

Gods self sacrificing love however was revealed in its fullest on the cross.

I hope that answers your question?

Mark :-)

No, Mark, this isn't clear to me. Sorry. You answered the question "yes", but then everything after that "yes" seems to mean "no."

By the way, Christ wasn't human for only 3 1/2 years. "In His humanity" covers the 33 years of His incarnation.

I don't know if you're saying "yes" or "no." You said "yes," but then your explanation says "no" to me, so I don't know whether to hear the "yes" or the rest which says to me "no."

Let me try, and see if you agree with what I'm saying. I would say "yes," all that man can know of God was revealed by Christ during His incarnation, *but* He also revealed these things (at least some of them) at other times (before His incarnation and after it). Is this what you mean to say?

Or are you saying, "No, Christ did not reveal all man can know of God in His incarnation. He revealed all man can know of God in the combination of His incarnation and times preceding and following."?

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I view it like this:

If we could take that fire, bottle it, examine it in a laboratory.

Identify the forms of energy or its nature.

Then we could say it is this and it is not that.

But because God has not given us that opportunity and is highly unlikely that He would do so...

The only thing I can do is accept by faith the description in Gods word of what it looks like and what it does.

I cannot go beyond that, because God has not given me that option.

Mark :-)

So you're saying basically that you don't know, right? So it sounds like you're open to the possibility that the view I'm presenting is correct? That is, I'm saying that Jesus Christ is the light of the glory of God who gives life to the righteous. He (or one could say God) is a consuming fire for the wicked, which destroys them. He does so not by literally setting them on fire, but because they have formed characters so out of harmony with Him and His principles that His mere presence is to them a consuming fire.

Given your answer, that you don't know what the fire is, it would seem to me this explanation should be possible, from your perspective. Is it? If not, please explain why not.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Read my post please. I pointed out the paragraph immediately preceding and asked some questions regarding it. It doesn't appear you're taking into account the context of the statement. I'm interested in your response to me questions.

In regards to your question about the statement, I will admit that, taken out of context, it can be understood to present a contrary idea to what she says in the paragraph immediately preceding it, or in the paragraphs following it.

Remember she's dealing with the plagues here. She's also said this:

Quote:

I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord upon them, but in this way: They place themselves beyond His protection. He warns, corrects, reproves, and points out the only path of safety; then if those who have been the objects of His special care will follow their own course independent of the Spirit of God, after repeated warnings, if they choose their own way, then He does not commission His angels to prevent Satan's decided attacks upon them. It is Satan's power that is at work at sea and on land, bringing calamity and distress, and sweeping off multitudes to make sure of his prey. And storm and tempest both by sea and land will be, for Satan has come down in great wrath. He is at work. He knows his time is short and, if he is not restrained, we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of. (14MR 3)

This brings out that Satan is coming in great wrath, and when not restrained, "we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of." It brings out how Satan's power is already at work, and it is the restraining work of the angels that prevents Satan from carrying out his purposes.

One can "prove" almost anything by considering statements without regards to context, or what an author has written elsewhere.

To me it is simply a matter of accepting or rejecting light. There is absolutely no need to speculate. Some of us think they are in a position to argue with the Lord, as though they were saying to Him, Let me tell You how to teach Your message! but only to their own peril. On these threads, again and again the Lord is telling us that His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the wicked but that they place themselves beyond His protection. The Lord has also explained to us how holy angels "destroy" at His command, that He gives them command to no longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy simply because there comes the time when He will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work. When it gets to that point, it is said that His "wrath" is complete. He has also told us many times that His restraining power is in a measure removed from the agencies of evil so that a train of circumstances will arise that will punish sin with sin, before it is fully removed. These declarations are so clear and simple that a child can understand them. They are so clear that no one has any excuse not to understand them. And they prove beyond any shadow of doubt that God is never the executioner of the sentence against transgression. Thus the language of the Bible is, by the Holy Spirit, clearly explained or interpreted to correct our errors so that we will no longer see God in a false light as we have for thousands of years.

The warning is that "When one ray of light is resisted there is a benunbming of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned." D.A.322.

It is very serious to disregard one ray of light.

sky

Yes my friend.

This message that God does not destroy, will benumb and cloud the mind so that light cannot enter in.

It will make one incapable of studying the issue in a dispassionate manner.

It will take an emotional ideal and apply it to God no matter what the SOP and Bible states.

As this light is rejected, more and more absurd doctrines will be imbibed.

Until the very work a person is given is lost sight of, because they are busy chasing squirrels in the woods.

This message is deceipt, it is not from God.

In love,

Mark

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I'm asking this:

Quote:

It sounds like you do not believe that Jesus Christ in His humanity provided a full revelation of God's character. (i.e., all that man needs to know or can know of God). We need to supplement what Christ revealed in His humanity with other things, such as stories of destruction.[/quote']

I'm asking if I've understood you correctly. This is a yes or no question. To help me out, please start with "yes" or "no" and then explain your answer as you wish.

Thanks!

Ok my friend. :-)

Yes, Christ has revealed sufficiently what man needs to know of Gods Character.

But that revealing was not just done during those 3 1/2 years.

It is threaded throughout the history of humanity and recorded in the bible.

It is also prophetically laid down as to His activities now and in the future.

It is when we consider "all" of this, we have a panarama to view.

Not to claim to fully comprehend, but one to view.

I hold to the position that we have to look at all of Jesus' roles to gauge His character (as much as we are able).

Gods self sacrificing love however was revealed in its fullest on the cross.

I hope that answers your question?

Mark :-)

No, Mark, this isn't clear to me. Sorry. You answered the question "yes", but then everything after that "yes" seems to mean "no."

By the way, Christ wasn't human for only 3 1/2 years. "In His humanity" covers the 33 years of His incarnation.

I don't know if you're saying "yes" or "no." You said "yes," but then your explanation says "no" to me, so I don't know whether to hear the "yes" or the rest which says to me "no."

Let me try, and see if you agree with what I'm saying. I would say "yes," all that man can know of God was revealed by Christ during His incarnation, *but* He also revealed these things (at least some of them) at other times (before His incarnation and after it). Is this what you mean to say?

Or are you saying, "No, Christ did not reveal all man can know of God in His incarnation. He revealed all man can know of God in the combination of His incarnation and times preceding and following."?

I am saying that Christ reveals God eternally.

That the years as the Lamb of God is not a full revealing of Gods Character, in the sense that certain aspects of Gods Character, shadowed through the different roles of Christ were not shown.

Christ however revealed enough of Gods character at the cross for a man to be saved.

If the man receives it.

I would not dare to suggest that a man can look at Jesus' life during those 3 1/2 years and be able to "measure" God.

That is my understanding.

Mark :-)