Death and Dying, part deux

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stunnedbygrace

Senior Member
Nov 12, 2015
9,112
822
113
When I mentioned "God is light" and you come back with turning a light on and off . . . I said that it wasn't that simple - God IS light. . . . That is one of God's attributes, characteristics - what He IS. It was to prove that there is NO darkness in Him AT ALL and "darkness" would have to be in Him in order to give Satan "permission" to do "darkness". . . . nothing to do with the demons asking permission to go into the pigs, nothing about "outer darkness. I don't see what the demons had to do with being in God's presence; they weren't in the light in the first place to have God turn them away from His presence.

I am sending you to them (Gentiles) to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God (Acts 26:18a) See the correlation: turn them from darkness to light, from the power of Satan (darkness) to God (light)​
Well, I think I've said all I have to say on it, PB. I said I was okay with you just setting aside the parts you didn't understand, weren't ready for, couldn't handle, or for whatever reason. I personally don't set them aside though. I read job and satan asking to sift him and to sift peter and it is a comfort to me that he has to get permission to touch me or sift me or harass me. It's one of the greatest comforts i have to know He guides my every step and His eye is always on me. I don't want to traumatize anyone or take their comfort from them or harm their trust or bully them to grow up faster than they can bear yet, but neither will I let them bully from me my own comfort in God or turn me from what He's taught me or from sharing what I've learned.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,027
26,752
113
Not necessarily. The temptation may have been very real in the eyes of the Tempter (since he did not understand who Christ is), but for Jesus (who had no sin nature) the temptation was meaningless. God cannot be tempted to sin or do evil. Satan thought that because of His humanity and his fasting condition, Christ would be like any other man. But the Son of Man is also the Son of God.
How could it be meaningless when we are told He was tempted just as we are? What did He overcome if not sin and death, by not giving in to temptation, thereby refraining from sinning when tempted?

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. Hebrews 4:1
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,766
13,129
113
How could it be meaningless when we are told He was tempted just as we are?
It was meaningful to the Tempter (or to any ordinary human being), but it was meaningless to God manifest in the flesh. As to Heb 4:15, it needs to be interpreted properly and I will quote the KJV, since it is closer to the truth.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Strong's Concordance
chóris: separately, separate from
Original Word: χωρίς
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: chóris
Phonetic Spelling: (kho-rece')
Short Definition: apart from, without
Definition: apart from, separately from; without.

The focus should be on apart from, separately from.

So what that verse says is that Jesus was tempted as we are BUT apart from or separate from sin. What that means is that He was the SINLESS Son of God, and did not have a sin nature inherited from Adam. Hence those temptations had no impact on His holy soul.
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
I find this very interesting, this came up on another thread and it was argued that Jesus was tempted by every sin, i.e. murder and all others, I found that very disturbing.

This really gives a better way of understanding His temptation.


It was meaningful to the Tempter (or to any ordinary human being), but it was meaningless to God manifest in the flesh. As to Heb 4:15, it needs to be interpreted properly and I will quote the KJV, since it is closer to the truth.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Strong's Concordance
chóris: separately, separate from
Original Word: χωρίς
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: chóris
Phonetic Spelling: (kho-rece')
Short Definition: apart from, without
Definition: apart from, separately from; without.

The focus should be on apart from, separately from.

So what that verse says is that Jesus was tempted as we are BUT apart from or separate from sin. What that means is that He was the SINLESS Son of God, and did not have a sin nature inherited from Adam. Hence those temptations had no impact on His holy soul.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,027
26,752
113
It was meaningful to the Tempter (or to any ordinary human being), but it was meaningless to God manifest in the flesh. As to Heb 4:15, it needs to be interpreted properly and I will quote the KJV, since it is closer to the truth.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Strong's Concordance
chóris: separately, separate from
Original Word: χωρίς
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: chóris
Phonetic Spelling: (kho-rece')
Short Definition: apart from, without
Definition: apart from, separately from; without.

The focus should be on apart from, separately from.

So what that verse says is that Jesus was tempted as we are BUT apart from or separate from sin. What that means is that He was the SINLESS Son of God, and did not have a sin nature inherited from Adam. Hence those temptations had no impact on His holy soul.
Thank you for explaining. Yet, are we not given to understand that Jesus is/was able to empathize with us because He was exposed to temptation just as we are? If you render it meaningless because He was/is God in the flesh and God cannot be tempted, what then of His humanity? It seems the text is saying He can empathize with our weakness specifically because temptation had meaning to Him personally, though He overcame it, triumphed over it. Certainly we are in agreement that He is, was, and forever shall remain sinless :)
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,027
26,752
113
I find this very interesting, this came up on another thread and it was argued that Jesus was tempted by every sin, i.e. murder and all others, I found that very disturbing.

This really gives a better way of understanding His temptation.
Are you thinking of the same thread I am? :eek:

Yes, there were some very disturbing views/beliefs expressed therein :(
 
Feb 21, 2012
3,794
199
63
She said satan is in control but can't run amuck (unlimited) because her prayers hinder what he can do.
So yes, her post did say something about limiting or controlling satan to some extent.

She has also said that God does not have control over what evil is permitted to touch us. She has said that if He could control the tragedy of evil hurting us but allowed it to happen, then that would make him responsible for sin and evil.

So she thinks her prayers have more to do with what satan is allowed to do than God Himself.
I said: Does that mean that he can run amuck? NO, Christian's prayers, love and stance upon the word given to them to fight the spiritual battle hinders what he can do.

Who the heck do Christian's pray to? Why wouldn't we expect God to answer our prayers? We pray for healing, for help in times of trouble, we pray for many, many different things. This is a spiritual battle - remember?

After telling us to put on the whole armor of God to stand against the devil's schemes, listing each part of the armor - we are told: And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord's people.


Originally Posted by peacefulbeliever

Yes, Jesus came to give us life - abundant life. NOT rape, murder, disease, hate, etc. Those things are the result of the fall, the result of mankind's continued disobedience to God and we live in a world in which the devil is in control - if I am to believe what is written.
Does that mean
that he can run amuck? No, Christian's prayers, love and stance upon the word given to them to fight the spiritual battle hinders what he can do.
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Yes that would be the one. :(

What you and Nehemiah have written has really helped me understand that verse better. :)


Are you thinking of the same thread I am? :eek:

Yes, there were some very disturbing views/beliefs expressed therein :(
 
Feb 21, 2012
3,794
199
63
There is a shocking amount of wisdom here. It will probably just be glossed over.

Not only are we, as you say, using feeble human words to try to grasp and explain Gods' ways and judgements, we are doing so with a feeble and limited human mind. And even knowing of that mind that is feeble and far below the task of understanding God, we still do not hesitate (or even get a hinky feeling that maybe we should refrain) from, hurling accusations at others trying with their own feeble minds just as we are. As you say, it is so far above us and our capacity, that it would be the height of prudence to NOT act as we do with each other. But your post will be glossed over and trampled as worthless whn it is the most wisdom filled post this thread has yet had. But take heart fis - you have helped to remind me and I'm thankful. :)
Isaiah 55:7 Let the wicked forsake their ways and the unrighteous their thoughts. Let them turn to the LORD, and he will have mercy on them, and to our God, for he will freely pardon. 8) For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways.

Who is God speaking to: let the wicked forsake their ways . . . the unrighteous their thoughts - So nope Gods thoughts are not the thoughts of the unrighteous, nor are his ways the ways of the wicked.

God tells us: Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children. Eph. 5:1 - that word "followers" means imitators - If we are to imitate God - we better know who he is.

We have the mind of Christ . . . we are not to be ignorant

Just saying​
:eek:
 

Stunnedbygrace

Senior Member
Nov 12, 2015
9,112
822
113
I said: Does that mean that he can run amuck? NO, Christian's prayers, love and stance upon the word given to them to fight the spiritual battle hinders what he can do.

Who the heck do Christian's pray to? Why wouldn't we expect God to answer our prayers? We pray for healing, for help in times of trouble, we pray for many, many different things. This is a spiritual battle - remember?

After telling us to put on the whole armor of God to stand against the devil's schemes, listing each part of the armor - we are told: And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord's people.
I definitely believe in prayer!
But previously you put forth that God does not or cannot control or have control of evil done to us, because if He could stop some evil buffeting us and didnt, then He would be the author of evil and would have some fault for sins of satan or men. Now you are saying if we pray about it, He will hinder evil touching us or at least lessen it, in answer to our prayers. But how can He answer our prayers in something He has not got control over in order TO answer...?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,027
26,752
113
I think that people who call themselves calvinist are not doing it for admiring Calvin so much. Calvin is not some kind of prophet (like SDA´ Ellen White) or some kind of pope like in the RCC.
Calvin is still the originator of Calvinism though.

Thats why people are not taking all his teachings or words but still consider themselves calvinist because they accept main points like 5 points of calvinism and some reformed creeds like the second helvetic confession (its rather European thing, I am sure in the USA there is some similar creed - probably westminster creed? Not sure).
Why call yourself a Calvinist if you disagree with the man?
Not you personally, but them. Seems counter-productive.


I still generally accept 5 points of calvinism. I think these points are biblical.

But I do not accept all the teaching around these points, explaining why God does it (well, calvinism does not have any good explanation anyway... just like "God can do whatever He wants")
Yes, I think you have a point there :)

Also, I do not think that calvinism has a good theory about how our choices and God´s predestination work together so that God is not active in our sins and we are responsible for our actions (both good and evil) but on the other hand God is micromanaging everything.
Are you saying Calvinism teaches that God is micromanaging everything? I am seeking clarity on this issue because it is a point of contention with the Calvinist.

I found better (and more loving) system in Leibniz´ best world of all worlds hypothesis and I also try not to be closed in one theology or camp and therefore I try to merge all facts I can get (from science, physics, logic, theology etc) together so my views are not very traditional... lets say.

I have adopted this attitude also from Leibniz, who was a Lutheran but also a scientist, trying to merge together theology and knowledge about the universe.
Thank you for your response, Trofimus, it has been a pleasure as always :) My apologies for my tardy reply; I was having computer issues, and had two different devices on the go at one point, with my initial response lost when I went to post it because the token had expired :p Any ways, I am glad you have moved beyond Calvinism, as I agree, there are more loving theologies, superior understandings, and explanations. I do not think I have heard of Leibniz before. He sounds interesting and someone I may benefit from reading :) Thanks again for the recommendation!
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,027
26,752
113
Yes that would be the one. :(

What you and Nehemiah have written has really helped me understand that verse better. :)
Thank you UnderGrace, that is very heartening to hear :)
God has worked something good out of all this :)
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,766
13,129
113
Thank you for explaining. Yet, are we not given to understand that Jesus is/was able to empathize with us because He was exposed to temptation just as we are? If you render it meaningless because He was/is God in the flesh and God cannot be tempted, what then of His humanity?
Christ's empathy for sinners lies in the fact that He SUFFERED while being tempted.

For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. (Heb 2:18)

We may never understand this fully, but the Satanic assaults on the soul of Christ brought Him suffering, thus He understands how Christians suffer when being tempted, and He sympathizes and empathizes with us.
 

Stunnedbygrace

Senior Member
Nov 12, 2015
9,112
822
113
Isaiah 55:7 Let the wicked forsake their ways and the unrighteous their thoughts. Let them turn to the LORD, and he will have mercy on them, and to our God, for he will freely pardon. 8) For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways.

Who is God speaking to: let the wicked forsake their ways . . . the unrighteous their thoughts - So nope Gods thoughts are not the thoughts of the unrighteous, nor are his ways the ways of the wicked.

God tells us: Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children. Eph. 5:1 - that word "followers" means imitators - If we are to imitate God - we better know who he is.

We have the mind of Christ . . . we are not to be ignorant

Just saying​
:eek:
I'm not sure you understood the point I was trying to make about keeping humble in our behavior to each other since we know how feeble and prone to mistakes we are. Additionally, I'm not sure what your rebuttal to my post is trying to say or even if you are agreeing or disagreeing with either what fisnook or i wrote. Maybe coffee will magically fix it! Be right back! :D
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,027
26,752
113
Christ's empathy for sinners lies in the fact that He SUFFERED while being tempted.

For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.(Heb 2:18)

We may never understand this fully, but the Satanic assaults on the soul of Christ brought Him suffering, thus He understands how Christians suffer when being tempted, and He sympathizes and empathizes with us.
If temptation caused Christ to suffer, how can it then be called meaningless? I am trying to understand your saying it was meaningless. Do you just mean because temptation did not produce sin that it was meaningless? Is there a different word you could use to express the idea more succinctly?
 

Stunnedbygrace

Senior Member
Nov 12, 2015
9,112
822
113
In the other thread (part one), the most surprising statement I've found so far is: if God were omnipotent [all powerful] we would not sin.

Because satan sinned or man sinned or sins, God is not all powerful?

Was God all powerful BEFORE satan and men sinned? How is it that the sin of a created being caused God to no longer be all powerful?

I find it bizarre.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
Fyi Stunned...

Paraphrasing or only using parts of a persons writing is not hearsay.

As well, words by someone who is entered his work in the public forum by writing a book, research article etc., should and can be critiqued on a public forum, just as our ideas on here can be critiqued, if this was not allowed the Universities and Colleges might as well pack up.

A dead person cannot claim any rights with regards to defamation or slander

While context is important it is perfectly acceptable to quote part of what some has said to support one's argument.

Certainly, the person using the quote has to ensure that the theme/idea of the quote is reflective and is indeed representative of the person's stance or beliefs and for that everyone has to do their own research rather than just call it lies
Good idea to know what you're talking about before you "educate."

FREX, the word is plagiarism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.