Who is the One New Man Created on the Cross?

[Wingnut]

I thought of this today.  

From creation to flood was 1600 years.

In that time Abel, Enoch and Noah only were righteous (Noah's family were along to feed the animals).

Look at what God says...

 

Genesis 6:6

And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

God is having a serious case of "Creators Remorse".

 

My spiritual mentor and I agree that God was pretty close to pulling the plug on "Project Man".  

Of course this presupposes a God who learns, which my mentor and I agree with.

 

That is the background.

If God were to pull the plug then, I very much doubt that Christ would have had to die for just 3.

These could just have been saved, the universe destroyed, and God could have gone back to the peaceful life before "Project Man".

But God so loved the world, that He persisted.  It may have been at this foundation of the new world that Christ was slain.

Just thinking aloud and out of the box.  No sin in that, and of course I may be completely wrong.

 

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

You're asking whether "knowing" and "controlling" are the same.  I say NO.  Because God "knew" that Adam (or anyone else) would sin, does NOT mean God made Adam sin.  That would negate free will.  God does not prevent our sinning.  He leaves us with choice.

Controling isn't an issue.

The issue is an ontological one, not an expistemological one.  God is irrelevant to the question, as the same issue would exist for any being, or thing, with the ability to detect the future.  Say there's a computer, we'll call "X", which by some new development in physics is able to detect and map out the future, the same paradox I described would apply.

The free will is negated by logic, not by power.  If there is a future (i.e one "for certain" future) which is knowable, then it's not changeable.  Even if you were the omniscient being, you wouldn't have free will, because you wouldn't be able to change the future you yourself were seeing.

And this is another problem with the idea of a fixed future, as even God Himself wouldn't have free will under such a scenario, because He could see what He would do, but wouldn't be able to do something different.

The whole idea is filled with logical problems from beginning to end.  There's no such thing as "the future"; there are only possible things which might happen.

[pnattmbtc]

4 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

I thought of this today.  

From creation to flood was 1600 years.

In that time Abel, Enoch and Noah only were righteous (Noah's family were along to feed the animals).

Look at what God says...

 

Genesis 6:6

And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

God is having a serious case of "Creators Remorse".

 

My spiritual mentor and I agree that God was pretty close to pulling the plug on "Project Man".  

Of course this presupposes a God who learns, which my mentor and I agree with.

 

That is the background.

If God were to pull the plug then, I very much doubt that Christ would have had to die for just 3.

These could just have been saved, the universe destroyed, and God could have gone back to the peaceful life before "Project Man".

But God so loved the world, that He persisted.  It may have been at this foundation of the new world that Christ was slain.

Just thinking aloud and out of the box.  No sin in that, and of course I may be completely wrong.

 

1.There were a lot more than three.  

2.The issue of sin doesn't just involve man.

3.The way to save the "three" (although actually many more), would have been the same way as saving the others.

[Wingnut]

5 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

Controling isn't an issue.

The issue is an ontological one anyway, not an expistemological one.  God is irrelevant to the question, as the same issue would exist for any being, or thing, with the ability to detect the future.  Say there's a computer, we'll call "X", which by some new development in physics is able to detect and map out the future, the same paradox I described would apply.

The free will is negated by logic, not by power.  If there is a future (i.e one "for certain" future) which is knowable, then it's not changeable.  Even if you were the omniscient future, you wouldn't have free will, because you wouldn't be able to change the future you yourself were seeing.

And this is another problem with the idea of a fixed future, as even God Himself wouldn't have free will under such a scenario, because He could see what He would do, but wouldn't be able to do something different.

The whole idea is filled with logical problems from beginning to end.  There's no such thing as "the future"; there are only possible things which might happen.

I agree with you.

Suppose I was God and said to Pnatt "In 5 seconds I know you are going to eat some bread."  All you would have to do is outwait  those 5 seconds to invalidate the future.  One thing is for sure, God could never tell a free will being what he was going to do in 5 sec, because that being could then do the opposite.

 

And imagine a God powerless to change the future because it is predetermined.  It makes him no longer a creator, since that would involve making something new.

[Samie]

When asked whether Jesus died for believers only, you replied:

5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

It's an interesting question.  Would God have given His own Son to death, IF no created being would be reconciled to Him thereby?  I say no. 

So you believe He died for believers and non-believers. And that simply means He died for all.

 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵ and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

 Now, notice the phrase “if One died for all, then all died”. How so?  On the cross, God through Christ fashioned us into the body of His Son thereby creating a New Man: Christ the Head, Jews & Gentiles (believers and non-believers alike) the body (Eph 2:11-19). We were with Him when He died, when He resurrected, we, being His Body, were made alive TOGETHER with Him (Eph 2:4-6; Col 2:13), born again into a living hope of life eternal (1 Pet 1:3).

 Now that we are alive, we are admonished to live for Him Who died for us and rose again. And living for Him simply translates into overcoming evil with good! And only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL (Rev 3:5).

 

[Samie]

5 hours ago, pnattmbtc said:

I don't think the future is fixed.  I posted a proof on this.  Maybe I'll repeat it.

Let's say the future is such that God can peer into it and see what will happen, so He commissions an angel
to write down everything that will happen, who does so, the book of all facts.  You look into the book, and sure
enough it says that you are looking into the book at the time you are looking into it.  You decide to do the following:

You look forward in the book to see what you will be doing an hour hence, and if it says you will be looking in the book, you will not look in the book, but if it says you will not be looking in the book, you will look in the book.

This is a proof by contradcion.  Since we've ended in a contradiction either way, the premise must be false; the futue is not fixed.

God knows the future, but He did not fix it.

As to your proof, that has already been proven false, and I'll repeat it.

You look forward in the book to see what you will be doing an hour hence, and if it says you will be looking in the book, you will not look in the book, BUT God will cause your eyes to remain open and hold the book before your eyes, but if it says you will not be looking in the book, you will look in the book, BUT God will make the book invisible you won't see it.

God had done much more difficult things than just holding your eyes open or making the book invisible. And your proof crumbles into dust.

 

 

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

God knows the future, but He did not fix it.

When you say, "God knows the future" you are supposing there is such a thing as "the future", which is one thing, which is what I disagree with.  There is not such thing as "the future", there are only possibilities which might happen, and this is what God sees.  God cannot see something which does not exist.

Quote

 

As to your proof, that has already been proven false, and I'll repeat it.

You look forward in the book to see what you will be doing an hour hence, and if it says you will be looking in the book, you will not look in the book, BUT God will cause your eyes to remain open and hold the book before your eyes, but if it says you will not be looking in the book, you will look in the book, BUT God will make the book invisible you won't see it.

God had done much more difficult things than just holding your eyes open or making the book invisible. And your proof crumbles into dust.

 

I saw you cited this, and it was clear, and is clear, that this is not an area (by which I mean logical proofs) of which you have any background.  The basic problem here starts with your statement "BUT God will cause ..."  This is completely irrelevant to the proof.

 

[8thdaypriest]

16 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

When you say, "God knows the future" you are supposing there is such a thing as "the future", which is one thing, which is what I disagree with.  There is not such thing as "the future", there are only possibilities which might happen, and this is what God sees.  God cannot see something which does not exist.

I saw you cited this, and it was clear, and is clear, that this is not an area (by which I mean logical proofs) of which you have any background.  The basic problem here starts with your statement "BUT God will cause ..."  This is completely irrelevant to the proof.

 

I may not have a "background" in "logical proofs" but I do have good sense. 

I believe that God created a dimension called "linear time".  It is only a dimension.  We live in a 3 or 4 dimensional world, but scientists have said there may be as many as 12 dimensions.  God exists OUTSIDE of our dimensional world.  He exists OUTSIDE of - yet through all time.  I believe he can "see" the future, BECAUSE He is already there. 

He has left promises and prophecies for us in His word.  They tell us of what will be, and of what He will bring about.  They do NOT mean that God controls my choices in this existence. 

[Samie]

13 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

When you say, "God knows the future" you are supposing there is such a thing as "the future", which is one thing, which is what I disagree with.  There is not such thing as "the future", there are only possibilities which might happen, and this is what God sees.  God cannot see something which does not exist.

Owww?

^NAS Daniel 8:26 "And the vision of the evenings and mornings Which has been told is ^atrue; But ^bkeep the vision secret, For it pertains to many ^cdays in the future."

And were back to my question which could have fallen on deaf ears but which you may want to answer now:  Before God created this earth, did He already know that Adam will fall into sin?

13 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

I saw you cited this, and it was clear, and is clear, that this is not an area (by which I mean logical proofs) of which you have any background.  The basic problem here starts with your statement "BUT God will cause ..."  This is completely irrelevant to the proof.

Good. I am seeing an ostrich hiding its head in the sand.

[8thdaypriest]

1 hour ago, Samie said:

So you believe He died for believers and non-believers. And that simply means He died for all.

 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵ and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

 Now, notice the phrase “if One died for all, then all died”. How so? 

On the cross, God through Christ fashioned us into the body of His Son thereby creating a New Man: [WRONG]

Christ the Head, Jews & Gentiles (believers and non-believers alike) the body (Eph 2:11-19).

We were with Him when He died, when He resurrected, [WRONG] we, being His Body, were made alive TOGETHER with Him (Eph 2:4-6; Col 2:13), born again into a living hope of life eternal (1 Pet 1:3).

 Jesus died for ALL human beings.

Some would BELIEVE.  Those who BELIEVE are then regarded by the Father as "in Him" (in Christ).  They become part of "His body", and are regarded as having "died with Him". 

 

Jesus died for ALL human beings.

Some would BELIEVE.  Those who BELIEVE are then regarded by the Father as "in Him" (in Christ).  They become part of "His body", and are regarded as having "died with Him". 

ALL human beings are NOT regarded as "in Him", and are NOT regarded as part of "His body".  His body is "the church".  At least 5 references say so. 

Acts 10:43 "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins."

IF - as you say - all mankind DIED the "second dead" (which you say Christ died on the cross) - then all mankind has already paid the penalty for sin, and NO ONE should then have to ever die the "second death".  Since we KNOW this will not be the case, it follows that ALL MANKIND, did NOT "die" on that cross. 

 

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

 

Owww?

NAS Daniel 8:26 "And the vision of the evenings and mornings Which has been told is atrue; But bkeep the vision secret, For it pertains to many cdays in the future."

 

The future is not fixed, but God sees all the possibilities, and from all the possibilities, God can make inferences.  Also don't forget that God can and does act in human history.  He doesn't override our free will, but He acts according to the counsel of His own wisdom, and does things.

Quote

 

Samie: And were back to my question which could have fallen on deaf ears but which you may want to answer now:  Before God created this earth, did He already know that Adam will fall into sin?  

 

Once again, your question assumes a false premise.  You're simply reasking the same question doesn't make the false premise go away.  You would have to ask a different question.  The false premise is supposing there is such a thing as "the future".  There is no such thing.  There are only things which may possibly happen, all of which God, being omniscient, foresees.

 

Quote

 

36 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

I saw you cited this, and it was clear, and is clear, that this is not an area (by which I mean logical proofs) of which you have any background.  The basic problem here starts with your statement "BUT God will cause ..."  This is completely irrelevant to the proof.

Samie: Good. I am seeing an ostrich hiding its head in the sand.

 

I studied for a phd. in Mathematics.  I know something about proofs.  If you'd like some help, I can point out to you how to get started.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

8thday: I may not have a "background" in "logical proofs" but I do have good sense.

 

Hopefully you can see that God causing us to do something has nothing to do with the proof.

Quote

 

I believe that God created a dimension called "linear time".  It is only a dimension.  We live in a 3 or 4 dimensional world, but scientists have said there may be as many as 12 dimensions.  God exists OUTSIDE of our dimensional world.  He exists OUTSIDE of - yet through all time.  I believe he can "see" the future, BECAUSE He is already there. 

He has left promises and prophecies for us in His word.  They tell us of what will be, and of what He will bring about.  They do NOT mean that God controls my choices in this existence.

 

From my perspective, there are a number of problems with this idea, the greatest of which is (again, of course, from my POV) that it completely contradicts how God has revealed Himself to us in Scripture.  God has revealed us as a Being who makes plans, who reacts, who reasons, who feels pain and other emotions, and none of these things are possible for a timeless Being.

Regarding free will, the problem has nothing to do with God's knowing or doing something, but with the fact that's it's possible for such things to be known as certain to occur.  That is, if there is such a thing as "the future", and a Being who has special powers can tell you what it is, then this future prevents you from doing something contrary to what it is by virtue of its existence.  The issue isn't that its contents are knowable, or known, but that it has contents which are knowable or can be known.

To put it another way, God knows things as they are, so if God knows "the future" as a certain thing which will certainly occur, then that's the way that thing (i.e. the future) is.  In other words, it is certain/fixed/determined.  But *you* haven't acted to make it certain.  You haven't determined the future yet.  So if it is determined, yet you haven't acted, then you do not have free will, according to the Arminian definition (but you may have free will according to the Calvinist definition; the difference being in whether you have actual options as opposed to being merely freely to do that which you desire to do).

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

The issue isn't that its contents are knowable, or known, but that it has contents which are knowable or can be known.

This is a very important point, so I'm giving it its own box and its own post.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

8thday: IF - as you say - all mankind DIED the "second dead" (which you say Christ died on the cross) - then all mankind has already paid the penalty for sin, and NO ONE should then have to ever die the "second death".  Since we KNOW this will not be the case, it follows that ALL MANKIND, did NOT "die" on that cross. 

Isn't this assuming the issue is a legal one?  Maybe yo're coming at this from Samie's perspective, in which case, it's a good question.  You're basically asking if the penalty has already been paid, then why or how could any person die the second death.

[pnattmbtc]

(addressing to 8thday) Another point that came to mind, even if God were as you say, the proof would still hold.  That is, God could still have everything written in a book, and the paradox would apply as explained.

[Samie]

14 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

The future is not fixed, but God sees all the possibilities, and from all the possibilities, God can make inferences. 

Really?

^NKJ John 14:29 "And now I have told you before it comes, that when it does come to pass, you may believe.

 

14 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

Once again, your question assumes a false premise.  You're simply reasking the same question doesn't make the false premise go away.  You would have to ask a different question. 

Just because your position does not allow you to answer the question and be proven wrong, you want me to ask another question.  Pretending that the question is based on a false premise, does not make it so. Just like ostriches do.

14 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

I studied for a phd. in Mathematics.  I know something about proofs.  If you'd like some help, I can point out to you how to get started.

Well, I studied in the school of Christ. In that school, we are told:

^NKJ 1 Corinthians 3:19-21   ¹⁹ For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, "He catches the wise in their own craftiness";  ²⁰ and again, "The LORD knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile

[Samie]

13 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

(addressing to 8thday) Another point that came to mind, even if God were as you say, the proof would still hold.  That is, God could still have everything written in a book, and the paradox would apply as explained.

Your proof didn't hold, as I have shown:

1 hour ago, Samie said:

You look forward in the book to see what you will be doing an hour hence, and if it says you will be looking in the book, you will not look in the book, BUT God will cause your eyes to remain open and hold the book before your eyes, but if it says you will not be looking in the book, you will look in the book, BUT God will make the book invisible you won't see it.

God had done much more difficult things than just holding your eyes open or making the book invisible. And your proof crumbles into dust.

But you hide your head in the sand.

[Samie]

 

53 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

Hopefully you can see that God causing us to do something has nothing to do with the proof.

From my perspective, there are a number of problems with this idea, the greatest of which is (again, of course, from my POV) that it completely contradicts how God has revealed Himself to us in Scripture.  God has revealed us as a Being who makes plans, who reacts, who reasons, who feels pain and other emotions, and none of these things are possible for a timeless Being.

Regarding free will, the problem has nothing to do with God's knowing or doing something, but with the fact that's it's possible for such things to be known as certain to occur.  That is, if there is such a thing as "the future", and a Being who has special powers can tell you what it is, then this future prevents you from doing something contrary to what it is by virtue of its existence.  The issue isn't that its contents are knowable, or known, but that it has contents which are knowable or can be known.

To put it another way, God knows things as they are, so if God knows "the future" as a certain thing which will certainly occur, then that's the way that thing (i.e. the future) is.  In other words, it is certain/fixed/determined.  But *you* haven't acted to make it certain.  You haven't determined the future yet.  So if it is determined, yet you haven't acted, then you do not have free will, according to the Arminian definition (but you may have free will according to the Calvinist definition; the difference being in whether you have actual options as opposed to being merely freely to do that which you desire to do).

Sorry, but seems like a poor reasoning from a Ph.D.  God knows the future, but it does not mean it is fixed. He can alter it for our benefit. He is God. What can prevent Him from doing it?

^NKJ Isaiah 46:9-11   ⁹ Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me,  ¹⁰ Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,'  ¹¹ Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it.

[Samie]

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Jesus died for ALL human beings.

And by His death, ALL human beings died:

 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵ and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

The Biblical logic is simple: if one died for all, then all died. It follows that if Christ died for all human beings (and He did), then all human beings died.

So how were those who died made alive? Your position is:

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Jesus died for ALL human beings.

Some would BELIEVE.  Those who BELIEVE are then regarded by the Father as "in Him" (in Christ).  They become part of "His body", and are regarded as having "died with Him". 

Sorry, but your order of events is incorrect. In your order of events, one first believes before being regarded as having died with Him. But when were they made alive?

In Scriptures, one dies first by virtue of Christ's death (2 Cor 5:14), and then made alive TOGETHER with Him when He resurrected (Col 2:13; Eph 2:4-6), being part of His body (Eph 2:11-19). Then one can believe, that is, overcome the evil of unbelief.

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

ALL human beings are NOT regarded as "in Him", and are NOT regarded as part of "His body".  His body is "the church".  At least 5 references say so.

Did you forget that the church is that which God purchased with His own blood - the blood of Christ? And Christ had purchased all human beings with His blood, having died for them all. But only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL.

1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Acts 10:43 "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins."

IF - as you say - all mankind DIED the "second dead" (which you say Christ died on the cross) - then all mankind has already paid the penalty for sin, and NO ONE should then have to ever die the "second death".  Since we KNOW this will not be the case, it follows that ALL MANKIND, did NOT "die" on that cross. 

When did I say, since I joined CA, that "all mankind DIED the "second death"? 

What I said was that Jesus died that death which no one before has experienced nor will ever experience after. Only Jesus went there.  That death was represented by the uninhabited place where Jesus as our Scapegoat was led to by the Fit Man (He Himself) at Yom Kippur.  That death was not the Second Death. The lake of fire is the Second Death which is reserved for Satan and his host and the non-overcomers - those whose names were blotted out from the BOL.

[Wingnut]

1 hour ago, Samie said:

 

Well, I studied in the school of Christ. In that school, we are told:

^NKJ 1 Corinthians 3:19-21   ¹⁹ For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, "He catches the wise in their own craftiness";  ²⁰ and again, "The LORD knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile

That sounds like homeschooling  

[Wingnut]

Samie

I am really interested to know where you got your life-raft theory from, together with the idea that all are born in the life-raft.

Did you think of it yourself, or did someone teach you it.  And for how long have you believed it?

[Samie]

13 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

Samie

I am really interested to know where you got your life-raft theory from, together with the idea that all are born in the life-raft.

Did you think of it yourself, or did someone teach you it. 

I can only quote Scriptures for the appropriate answer I can give and ascribe all glory to Him Who is the Source of all wisdom:

^KJV Galatians 1:11-12   ¹¹ But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.  ¹² For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

 But I am not saying I have the same experience as that of apostle Paul while on his way to Damascus. Far from it.  I learned this directly from personal study Scriptures.

 

14 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

And for how long have you believed it?

Quite a long while, my brother.  There are some here in CA who I told in private messages that I had submitted my position paper to this effect to the North Philippine Union Conference of SDAs sometime in 2012. NPUC had promised to set up a panel to meet with me to be headed by the chair of BRI reading committee for Southern Asia-Pacific Division or a professor from Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies (AIIAS).  Until now, I am still waiting in the hope that it will soon come.

[Wingnut]

5 minutes ago, Samie said:

I can only quote Scriptures for the appropriate answer I can give and ascribe all glory to Him Who is the Source of all wisdom:

^KJV Galatians 1:11-12   ¹¹ But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.  ¹² For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

 But I am not saying I have the same experience as that of apostle Paul while on his way to Damascus. Far from it.  I learned this directly from personal study Scriptures.

 

Quite a long while, my brother.  There are some here in CA who I told in private messages that I had submitted my position paper to this effect to the North Philippine Union Conference of SDAs sometime in 2012. NPUC had promised to set up a panel to meet with me to be headed by the chair of BRI reading committee for Southern Asia-Pacific Division or a professor from Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies (AIIAS).  Until now, I am still waiting in the hope that it will soon come.

And in the meantime, what sort of reaction have you received from friends and family and church members?  Have you managed to "convert", say your wife, to your position?  

[Wingnut]

17 minutes ago, Samie said:

 

Quite a long while, my brother.  There are some here in CA who I told in private messages that I had submitted my position paper to this effect to the North Philippine Union Conference of SDAs sometime in 2012. NPUC had promised to set up a panel to meet with me to be headed by the chair of BRI reading committee for Southern Asia-Pacific Division or a professor from Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies (AIIAS).  Until now, I am still waiting in the hope that it will soon come.

Is it possible to change any SDA doctrine?  In the last 100 years have any major changes ever happened?  With that in mind, do you think you are in for a long wait?  

[Samie]

14 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

And in the meantime, what sort of reaction have you received from friends and family and church members?  Have you managed to "convert", say your wife, to your position?  

I am not very vocal about this in the local churches. But I have experienced being ostracized, and even my only daughter was affected when he heard her Bible teacher talking against me behind my back when she was in junior high school. Upon learning about this incident, my wife ordered me to stop then.  But that was long ago.  A number of my friends are also with me.  And Yes, my wife and my daughter are with me now, too, not of course outside the church, but with me in this position. We are all currently members of the SDA Church. I usually attend Sabbath worship services at AIIAS SDA Church.

My intention is simply to propagate what I believe is truth. Not to have followers. I am not into fishing expedition in the aquarium of the SDA church, nor into the aquariums of others.