Zakuska Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Board rules make this topic very close to the line so Im walking on eggshells here. Im going to repeat half a sentence..."For that is how God gained his Knowledge."How literal or far does this suggestion go? Scripture to back it up? Thoughts?
Calm Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Board rules make this topic very close to the line so Im walking on eggshells here. Im going to repeat half a sentence..."For that is how God gained his Knowledge."How literal or far does this suggestion go? Scripture to back it up? Thoughts?I think you need to provide more context as in what is "that" referring to....
Calm Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 I think you need to provide more context as in what is "that" referring to....add-on: if you are saying that same as the below, I think the option that he was a transgressor is certainly there, but also that he was a sinless Saviour as God the Son was (and personally since other scriptures back up that Christ was repeating what the Father did I believe the second option is more likely).After We Have Endured to the EndWhat happens when we have endured to the end in faithful discipleship to Christ? The Lord has said,
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Board rules make this topic very close to the line so Im walking on eggshells here. Im going to repeat half a sentence..."For that is how God gained his Knowledge."How literal or far does this suggestion go? Scripture to back it up? Thoughts?I believe that Christ's life mirrored his Father's exactly. "All that I have done, I have seen the father do". So no
Senator Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 I think you need to provide more context as in what is "that" referring to....And you also have to consider who was saying "that".
BCSpace Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 "For that is how God gained his Knowledge."How literal or far does this suggestion go? Scripture to back it up? Thoughts?Unless God the Father was a Savior for another world or universe, He most assuredly was a sinner in need of repentance and an atonement just like any of us during His mortal life.
Calm Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Unless God the Father was a Savior for another world or universe, He most assuredly was a sinner in need of repentance and an atonement just like any of us during His mortal life.There is no reason to assume he lived on this world and much to assume that he did not (the whole pre-existence existing prior to the creation of the world for example, the scriptures in the Pearl of Great Price for another), so the option for being a Saviour is open.
Calm Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 And you also have to consider who was saying "that".And I would suggest the 'target audience' is likely important as well.
thesometimesaint Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 I don't know as that is supportable from the Bible. Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.
staccato Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Take a look at the world around you. The very creation of the earth was and is a transgression. It was made deliberately to cause harm.
notHagoth7 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 I believe that Christ's life mirrored his Father's exactly. "All that I have done, I have seen the father do". So no
thesometimesaint Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 staccato:I don't see what you are talking about.
bluebell Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Take a look at the world around you. The very creation of the earth was and is a transgression. It was made deliberately to cause harm.Only in the sense that we mortals have children to "deliberately cause harm".A mother, for example, brings a child into the world knowing that the child will suffer to some degree and knowing that the child will cause others to suffer to some degree. A mother is willing to allow that because they believe the opportunity for good (both to the child and to the community) is worth the suffering.All the dramatics about how evil God is because of the suffering of mankind is really just that-dramatics.
Zakuska Posted October 26, 2009 Author Posted October 26, 2009 I think you need to provide more context as in what is "that" referring to....It is a line from the endowment. If God gained his Knowledge the same way Adam did his. That would mean the God had to pass through the same process. He would have had to Die, be ressurected, etc etc. as a natural consiquence.Thus he would have had to transgress the law too.
thesometimesaint Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Zakuska:Non Sequitur. Christ did not transgress the law. He had to die, and be Resurrected.
Jason Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Jesus never transgressed the law, and was able to attain divine status. That would lead me to think that God the Father can have a working knowledge of good and evil without ever having transgressed.
notHagoth7 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 ...If God gained his Knowledge the same way Adam did his...But that's a somewhat shaky if. Especially if you consider the source.
Zakuska Posted October 26, 2009 Author Posted October 26, 2009 Zakuska:Non Sequitur. Christ did not transgress the law. He had to die, and be Resurrected.Yet he was still numbered among the "transgressors".Luke 22 37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. 38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. Is there a difference between sin and transgression?
notHagoth7 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Yet he was still numbered among the "transgressors".Even that passage isn't conclusive.Being reckoned among the transgressors does not, by association, mean one actually ever transgressed.Depends entirely on who was doing the reckoning.
notHagoth7 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Is there a difference between sin and transgression?Yes. A vast difference.Sin is outright rebellion.Transgression is what Adam did in the garden. (He transgressed one law in the desire to honor what he and Eve deemed to be a higher law.)So Adam was essentially trying to obey God. In that sense, he didn't rebel.
Zakuska Posted October 26, 2009 Author Posted October 26, 2009 If Christ never sinned how could he save a sinner? How could he decend below all?
Zakuska Posted October 26, 2009 Author Posted October 26, 2009 But that's a somewhat shaky if. Especially if you consider the source.Very true. But not everything Satan says is a lie. "doing what has been done on other worlds tha have already been created."
notHagoth7 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Very true. But not everything Satan says is a lie.No argument there.Just a big glaring caveat.
notHagoth7 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 If Christ never sinned how could he save a sinner? How could he decend below all?Descending below all can simply mean he was more humble than anyone else. And that he meekly submitted to everything the Father deemed to put upon him.As to sin, I don't buy the argument. A heart surgeon doesn't need to have had his own chest cracked to be capable of saving other lives.He just needed to submit himself to the proper training, discipline, and credentialing processes.
CV75 Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 If Christ never sinned how could he save a sinner? How could he decend below all?Precisely by not being a sinner. This gave Him the requisite strength to help anyone with anything. It gave Him the infinite resources with which to pay the price for the sinner's sins. He could descend below all for the purpose of lifting and then carrying them all, and then drawing them all after Him with the momentum.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.