Sacrifice

Hi Buzz..

quote:

---

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

---

I can't believe you don't believe Jesus is God so there must be some simple misunderstanding.

Buz you are kinda missing the point.Are freewill and prophecy compatible?Can man use his freewill such that biblical prophecy can be avoided?
If the future is known, and therefore fixed, can man truly exhibit freewill?
If freewill is not the ability to choose between alternate futures then what is it?These are the questions that need answering.I don't claim to have any answers to these questions (but then I am deeply cynical of the concept of biblical, or indeed any other kind of, prophecy which only ever seems to be recognised as such after the event and which also seems to involve a lot of hindsight based interpretation - But that is a whole other topic in it's own right).However you must admit that combining the concept of freewill and the concept of foretold predetermined futures raises some interesting questions and possible paradoxes.And it must also be acknowledged that these paradoxes and questions can be applied to the freewill of Christ? No?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

I believe in the Trinity of one god, Jehovah, the head of the Trinity, one son of the Biblical god, Jehovah, Jesus Christ and one spirit which both share, i.e. the multipresent Holy Spirit of the father and the son. It is the multipresent Holy Spirit that is in both the father and the son which makes them one, i.e. the three in one You're right. There are a variety of views about the Trinity. Most do not even try to understand what they say they believe, including the pastors and teachers. I find the only way to understand it is to keep it simple and literal. Jesus always referred to God as his god or his father. In John 14 in one of the earlier verses he says he and his father are one. Then towards the end of the chapter he says his father is greater than he. He speaks of the Holy Spirit as what makes Christians and he one with the father, i.e. one spirit.The apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, I think about verse 52 or so Paul says after Jesus puts all adversaries of God under his feet that he will again become subject to God. Sons are always subject to the fathers, Biblically speaking.Having said the above, for sure, Jesus is deity and worthy of worship. He never forbade anyone to worship him as some did when he was on earth. God has ordained him to become the supreme majesty/lord of planet earth at his soon to come 2nd advent when he destroys the armies of the world and sets up shop/his kingdom.I've tried to explain this relative to the topic in that contrary to what we hear so often in pulpits GOD DID NOT COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN AND DIE ON THE CROSS AS A SACRIFICE FOR SIN. GOD, JEHOVAH, FROM HIS THRONE IN HEAVEN SENT HIS ONLY BORN/BEGOTTEN SON JESUS VIA THE VIRGIN BIRTH, BORN OF THE HOLY SPIRIT TO DO THAT. See John 3:16There is a chain of command established by God. Paul says God is head of Jesus, Jesus head of the man and man head of the woman. See I Corinthians 11:3This is not to claim I understand in deb th all about the Trinity. I do not. Nevertheless, we have been given data throughout scripture that informs us much that we can comprehend.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Straggler, you keep thinking in terms like predetermined. When you begin to understand in terms like forknown, it all makes sense. Jehovah, god, is omniscient, i.e. all knowing.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Hi Strag, We are on the same page here. That said ... Biblical prophecy appears to deal primarily with civilization more than individuals. Even so, we would say yes ... now, will the species manipulate freewill to change civilization? lol - not likely, it would take the collective majority; most all limit what they feel the Father is capable of, and many others see no need for change. Reality suggests jews/muslims/catholics/protestants/athiests,etc. may prove to rigid to welcome change. The Father Loves civilization enough to oppose rigidity; agnostics and samaritans may be His underdogs. A paradox may be found in the usefullness of spiritually impotent religious rigidity.It is expediting a more Loving (agape) civilization; one that can learn from true ignorance (good) & the black art of religion (evil). Everyday, freewill decisions permit and deny one's willingness to accept the fullness of Reality.
By allowing individual realities to evolve, we engage in freewill.Perhaps freewill may disengage if we knew the specific details of our individual future? That is what it is.Our 'future' is not much more than what we permit within our individual Realities'. If we do not choose to evolve, Reality simply evolves past us. Evolution may not reside in ones Reality, providing one does not lend it reason and logic; but, ignorance will not cause evolution to desist. Ultimately, our most longstanding freewill decision dictates whether one cleaves to a spiritual existence that is temporal (death) or one that is continuous (Life).We have acquired the ability to choose between alternate futures.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : grammar

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, I'm just a fool playing with ideas.
My only intention is to tickle your thinker. Trust nothing I say. Learn for yourself.
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

I wrote a reply to this last night but it appears that I closed everything down without hittting the submit buttton. I had a feeling that you would be disinclined to consider a Jesus utterly devoid of love. At any point. It seems incompatible with Christian thought. Even I can see that. Therefore, in absolute terms at least, the separation from God experienced by Christ pales into insignificance as compared to those human souls who face complete separation, true forsakenness and utter damnation in hell for all eternity. Whatever Christ experienced on the cross he could apparently console himself with the fact that in absolute terms his position could have been a whole lot worse!You have done an admirable and convincing job of redefining the set that is “those human souls who face complete separation, true forsakenness and utter damnation in hell for all eternity” from that which I initially assumed you would advocate. The God you have described throughout this conversation is much more compatible with the idea of a just God (at least in comparison to the version of God advocated by more fundamentalist Christians).However the point remains that Christ’s sacrifice, the supreme sacrifice, the sacrifice that underpins the whole of Christianity must be viewed in highly subjective relative terms in order for the nature of the forsakenness and associated “pain” experienced by Christ to be considered in any way the “ultimate” in suffering.Now whether one is subjectively willing to place the relative benchmarking of hypothetical degrees of suffering, forsakenness and hell-like-horror such that Christ’s suffering can be considered “supreme” will probably depend on ones position and inclinations regarding the Christian faith. As such it is wholly subjective and probably therefore an irreconcilable argument.BUT from the analysis of relative suffering that you have provided, it could be construed that a key message of Christianity is “Let those who have known the most suffering continue to suffer the most for they suffer less than those who have not experienced such suffering” (clumsily expressed but hopefully you get the gist).If the key element of the Christian story relies on the concept of relative suffering derived from what one is accustomed to then is not such a conclusion more widely applied to humanity arguably valid as a result? That is surely not a message that Christians would wish to convey? The issue at hand is neither what God knows nor how he knows this. The issue that need be considered is that which man has been told as immutable truth by a God that cannot lie and the paradox that thisknowledge causes with regard to man's free-will.Again you insist on viewing this from the perspective of an eternal, omniscient God. Such a perspective is irrelevant to the problem at hand. Not only is such a perspective irrelevant, it is also highly open to the insertion of preconceived notions and baseless conjecture under the guise of “fact”. From our mutual platform of ignorance such a perspective is, in this context, best left alone.
Instead this issue needs to be viewed from the far more familiar and concrete perspective of man. A perspective that Jesus, unless he was “man” in only the most shallow and trivial of respects (i.e. only physically), presumably shared during his time amongst us. If freewill is not the ability to choose between alternate futures what is it?From man’s perspective, the perspective of real-time choices and a future path as yet unknown, an immutable and untransgressable predetermined future that can be described and detailed before it has happened quite evidently consigns any notion of freewill to the scrapheap of falsified philosophical musings.
If ones future decisions are already cast in stone such that all men can know them now, then freewill and the notion that we are making decisions as time progresses is but an illusion. How can it possibly be otherwise?If freewill is not the ability to choose between alternate futures what is it?How could Jesus choose an alternate future when it had already been widely reported to man, as God given immutable fact, that crucifixion and sacrifice was his inevitable fate to be? No. But for the sake of a harmonious marriage you may have to self-impose strict limits on your time spent conversing here!I once foolishly suggested that my wife join up and take part in the EvC debate. After a brief perusal of the site she declared that it was full of “geeks, fanatics and lunatics” and refused to consider the matter any further. I never did find out which of those categories she thinks I fall into........ Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

Thank you for the exchange. lol - by listening to His disciples and enacting a decision to evade punishment.Perhaps the Servant of mankind would have had to live temporally and simply ignore some things.All the rumors about Himself, His fate, and lastly the advice of the One Who Loves the most; His Father.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : grammar

As Bailey has hit on, prophecy is relative to global and national events. The individuals within the nations are benefited in that knowing the future they can know who wins and who looses. This knowledge allows them the advantage over the ignorant individuals of going with the winners.For example, Christians who refuse to take the mark or number of the emerging global regime in their right hand or forehead will be denied the right to buy and sell, but they will be resurrected to rule and reign with Jesus, messiah, in the blissful messianic kingdom.Because of the raging warfare between good and evil, Christians are forewarned that they will suffer as Jesus and the apostles suffered. We have the knowledge to avoid receiving a mark in our bodies to buy or sell so as to avoid the consequences of doing so, which are the plagues of God's wrath listed in Revelation 16.Muslims like the son of one of the Hammas founders, recent convert to Christianity, at the risk of death as per the Fox story last weekend, exercised the choice to face death to gain the blessings of the resurrection and eternal life. He made that free will individual choice based on prophecy.The above cited prophecies are not actions of God. They are actions of evil regimes which were foreknown by God. Evil regimes and individuals are inspired an driven by Satan. God, in his foreknowledge shares that knowledge with individuals who read it so as for the individuals to make personal judgments as to what action they will take and which way they choose to go. That is free will based on knowledge. Edited by Buzsaw, : minor fix

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The point of dispute here is not what God knows. The problem, dilemma and paradox as far as free-will is concerned relates to what man knows of the future. God is merely the source of such knowledge. How he himself acquires it is not relevant to this issue..Imagine Buz if I were to somehow become privy to all of the future choices that you will make in life. The good choices that you will be proud of and the bad choices that result in shame, pain and regret. Imagine, if you will, that God sees fit to inform me of your immutable destiny as observed by Him.Now imagine that I post this information here for all, including you, to view.Every single choice. Every single decision in your life to come published for all to see.So now we have a situation whereby not just God but all of us non-omniscient, non-eternal beings including you are fully cognisant of your every choice.Now let us, for the sake of argument, assume that the net result of your future choices is a scenario that, with the benefit of hindsight, you consider far from ideal and in fact wish to avoid.At the moment of each choice in your life your action is predermined. Even if the result of that choice you know to be pain, suffering and regret. Choices, that given genuine freewill, you would make differently armed, as you now are, with the benefit of hindsight regarding your future decisions.If God's foresight is immutable and man knows of this foresight in the form of prediction then freewill is inevitably and undeniably compromised.Do you see the problem now?

Really? But that would have broken the immutable truth as foretold by God. A God that cannot lie.So either freewill allows God to be wrong.
Or there is no freewill regarding this action.Do you see the problem now?

OK. The question is as to whether or not Jesus had freewill to choose between alternate futures. Specifically regarding his foretold "sacrifice".This was an action pertaining specifically to Jesus foretold and revealed to man well before the event took place. Revealed as an immutable truth by a God that cannot lie.If Jesus were to have freewill regarding this action then at the point of making that decision he could potentially cause the immutable truth revealed to man by God to be wrong. If he chose not to sacrifice himself.This obviously cannot happen.Thus we must conclude that at the point of deciding whether or not to accept his fate there was in fact no choice, no alternate future possible and therefore no act of freewill involved.I think this reduces the significance somewhat of this "sacrifice".What do you think?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

I don't mind. Feel free to pursue this if you so wish but let's not get drawn into something extensive if you think this discussion will be majorly off topic. There will no doubt be other topics and other occasions..... We once started on this area here Message 63. We could reignite that discussion if you think it would be interesting or fruitful? Regarding the necessity of Christ's sacrifice this does seem somewhat relevant as it could be argued that if God is not bound by such laws then the whole sacrifice was completely unneceesary. What do you think?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

The prophecy specifically regarding the sacrifice of Jesus however was not. It was a specific prophecy regarding a specific event and a very specific individual.Given that this had been foretold and widely publicised as an immutable truth by a God that cannot lie it seems impossible that Jesus can have had any freewill regarding this action. Even non-specific prophecies like the ones you speak of here inevitably compromise the free-will of men.According to this no matter how well 'the word' is spread, no matter what lengths are sought to ensure peace and no matter even how many can be convinced of the miraculous veracity of these prophecies - We are all destined to Armeggadon.The free-will of men, whether individually or collectively, cannot stop this immutable truth.So we might almost as well not bother trying........?

Sorry I didn't get to your post today Straggler. Will try over the weekend.x

I agree. According to the foreknowledge of God, the nations will have issues with Israel's right to the land and will invade the land to drive out the Jews. Bordering nations to Israel will claim that land as theirs, i.e. claiming two lands as theirs as per the prophets.According to the foreknowledge of God the above events will be at a time when a world government has emerged into reality with power over all nations, tribes and tongues.According to the foreknowledge of God the above events will be at a time when the races mingle with one another, i.e. integration of the races as per the prophet Daniel (chapter 7?)According to the foreknowledge of God, the gospel of salvation, i.e. sacrificial redemption will be preached world wide, and according to Revelation 7, perhaps via satellite, i.e. an angel/messenger "flying in the midst of heaven."Get the picture, Straggler, it pretty much all began to escalate by man at the Industrial Revolution as per man's free will.This is not to say that God didn't have a role as per the timing, etc. Perhaps the Tower Of Babel event, confusing and scattering the languages/races was to slow Armageddon down for a few millenniums.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.