01 Apr 05
Originally posted by kirksey957I can't presume to know the mind of God - but my gut feel is that, if that could've been done, He would've done it.
Maybe he could have sacrificed a flea or maybe a rock would have been sufficient.
No, reuniting Mankind with God required the free assent of a man representing mankind, willing and able to do whatever it took for such a reunification to take place.
The other option God had was to reject mankind altogether and let it perish.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerNo...the other option would have been to create mankind in such a fashion so that he would not require salvation in the first place. An omniscient god would have known in advance that mankind would require salvation and an omnipotent god could have created mankind in such a fashion as to never require salvation. If god is omnipotent and omniscient then mankind was meant to fail. And, in fact, the very first man did so.
I can't presume to know the mind of God - but my gut feel is that, if that could've been done, He would've done it.
No, reuniting Mankind with God required the free assent of a man representing mankind, willing and able to do whatever it took for such a reunification to take place.
The other option God had was to reject mankind altogether and let it perish.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by ColettiNonsense. If god is all powerful, he could simply have expunged all sins - no need for sacrifice whatsoever.
God had to sacrifice a man for the sins of the world. A perfect sacrifice was called for, a perfect man, without sin. Something only God could do. There was no other option.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by jimmyb270The options are set by God, not you little man.
Nonsense. If god is all powerful, he could simply have expunged all sins - no need for sacrifice whatsoever.
The options were expunge man (as God did in the flood) or pay it by the blood of Christ. So God, to show his grace and glory, paid the price, he did expunge sin, through the sacrifice which God demands, Christ on the cross.
Since He is all powerfull, He does things as He see fit.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by ColettiIf god is all powerful then he would not be constrained to the two options you have limited him to. As you stated, the options are set by god, not by you. If god is indeed omnipotent then he could have come up with any number of solutions to the problem which, I'm sure, would have been far more elegant than the two you have tried to limit him to.
The options are set by God, not you little man.
The options were expunge man (as God did in the flood) or pay it by the blood of Christ. So God, to show his grace and glory, paid the price, he did expunge sin, through the sacrifice which God demands, Christ on the cross.
Since He is all powerfull, He does things as He see fit.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by rwingettYou are right. God could have done anything at all..except defy his own will.
If god is all powerful then he would not be constrained to the two options you have limited him to. As you stated, the options are set by god, not by you. If god is indeed omnipotent then he could have come up with any number of solutions to the problem which, I'm sure, would have been far more elegant than the two you have tried to limit him to.
An all powerful being, can not violate his own will, that is not logical. So to be logical, God wills what he wills, and does what he does. And it is not logical for you to think you can say what are God's options, God has to tell us what he wills and does.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by ColettiI'm not the one who said what god's options were. It was you that tried to claim god had only one of two options: The options were expunge man (as God did in the flood) or pay it by the blood of Christ
You are right. God could have done anything at all..except defy his own will.
An all powerful being, can not violate his own will, that is not logical. So to be logical, God wills what he wills, and does what he does. And it is not logical for you to think you can say what are God's options, God has to tell us what he wills and does.
Do you admit that your statement was completely wrong and that god had an unlimited number of potential options at his disposal? Even though he chose the blood sacrifice he could have devised an infinite number of solutions. Or as I alluded in my earlier post, he could have forseen the problem and taken measures to prevent its occurance in the first place.
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by rwingettWhat is your authority to make the statement that God's options are limitless with regard to sin? I think perhaps you pulled that out of your ear (or some other bodily orifice). 😲
I'm not the one who said what god's options were. It was you that tried to claim god had only one of two options: [b]The options were expunge man (as God did in the flood) or pay it by the blood of Christ
Do you admit that your statement was completely wrong and that god had an unlimited number of potential options at his disposal? Even though he c ...[text shortened]... could have forseen the problem and taken measures to prevent its occurance in the first place. [/b]
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by ColettiWhat is your authority to make the statement that god's options consist of only the two you have put forward? I think perhaps you pulled that out of your ear (or some other bodily orifice). 😲
What is your authority to make the statement that God's options are limitless with regard to sin? I think perhaps you pulled that out of your ear (or some other bodily orifice). 😲
01 Apr 05
Originally posted by rwingettGod's revealed knowledge to man, his verbal and plenary revelation, a.k.a. the Bible.
What is your authority to make the statement that god's options consist of only the two you have put forward? I think perhaps you pulled that out of your ear (or some other bodily orifice). 😲
(Available at your local Barnes and Noble, Books-a-Million, or Super 8 Motel).
Your turn.