Trinity diagram

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by Russ

Of course God knows the outcome of all things. That's not the question, mon frere. The question is: Can God do something contrary to his nature? He cannot.

You are right.

He does not make moral choices. His nature prevents him from being tempted in the slightest. Does God have to stop and think about which way to go? Does God have to make a decision about morality? Never. He is the author of it.

You are not right. He is doing moral choices for every soul.

Exodus 4:11
So the Lord said to him, "Who has made man's mouth? Or who makes the mute, the deaf, the seeing, or the blind? Have not I, the Lord?

Trinity

[nrajeff]

I agree with Trinity's statement. God makes nothing but moral choices because He is a very moral person.

[Trinity]

Hi nrajeff,

Originally Posted by nrajeff

I agree with Trinity's statement. God makes nothing but moral choices because He is a very moral person.

I also agree with Russ that God would not act otherwise than by his ontological nature, and only according to the holiness of his being. There is no evil in Him. However, we experience pain, many sufferings and finally the death, because he has decided that for us. We are learning to live with infirmities and the adversity.

Trinity

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Trinity

Hi nrajeff,I also agree with Russ that God would not act otherwise than by his ontological nature, and only according to the holiness of his being. There is no evil in Him. However, we experience pain, many sufferings and finally the death, because he has decided that for us. We are learning to live with infirmities and the adversity. Trinity

--Well, you are allowed to agree with Russ occasionally....

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Trinity

Exodus 4:11
So the Lord said to him, "Who has made man's mouth? Or who makes the mute, the deaf, the seeing, or the blind? Have not I, the Lord?

Trinity

Because it is impossible for Him to do otherwise.

God's own laws cannot be broken.

God does not have to ask, "What choice do I have?"

His nature is pure and holy and will never ask any such question.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

--Well, you are allowed to agree with Russ occasionally....

Well, I've agreed with you on occasion, e.g. gun rights. U da man.

But that doesn't mean that we've built any theological agreement whatsoever.

Jesus is the brother of Satan?

God is an exalted man?

Your theology remains strange and aberrant, Jeff, Biblically speaking.

That doesn't mean you're "bad." It just means you've unfortunately aligned yourself with the system.

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by Russ

Because it is impossible for Him to do otherwise.

Jesus has healed some blinds and some deaf. He did act otherwise. He changed their destinies.

Trinity

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

--Well, you are allowed to agree with Russ occasionally....

Thank you.

You can be stubborn but you are a good fellow. I am happy to chat with you.

Trinity

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Trinity

Jesus has healed some blinds and some deaf. He did act otherwise. He changed their destinies.

Trinity

Sure, the destinies of men can be changed by the unchangeable.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

When Jesus was being tempted by Satan, was Jesus able to give in to those temptations had He wanted to? Was He literally unable to give in to them?

Jesus was completely incapable of giving over to Satan.

Every time, he said, "Get behind me, Satan."

Every time, he said, "It is WRITTEN."

You can't do that.

Neither can I.

That's why Jesus is God. Not "a" god. Not "another" god.

God.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Trinity

Thank you.

You can be stubborn but you are a good fellow. I am happy to chat with you.

Trinity

You can be stubborn too, but I'm also happy to chat with you.

We Internet types like the stubborn folks.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Russ

Jesus was completely incapable of giving over to Satan.

--If Jesus lacked the ability to give in to temptations, then it diminishes the significance of His resisting them. It takes much more self-control and strength of character to have the ability to sin but to refrain from sinning. A Jesus who was unable to sin is a Jesus without free will.

[Pro-Truth]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

--If Jesus lacked the ability to give in to temptations, then it diminishes the significance of His resisting them. It takes much more self-control and strength of character to have the ability to sin but to refrain from sinning. A Jesus who was unable to sin is a Jesus without free will.

When Jesus was being tempted, we must keep in mind that He was 100% man and 100% God. Jesus literally had two natures.

Jesus was literally unable to sin because He's God.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Pro-Truth

When Jesus was being tempted, we must keep in mind that He was 100% man and 100% God. Jesus literally had two natures.

Jesus was literally unable to sin because He's God.

Bingo.

Jesus Christ didn't "progress" his way to Godhood, Jeff, as Mormonism would have us believe. He didn't have to make "choices" along the way to "remain worthy." Sure, he walked on earth and experienced pain and hunger, but he in no way had to think, "Hmmm. Satan's got a pretty good offer there. Should I or shouldn't I? To be or not to be? That is the question."

There was never any question and there was never any doubt.

Jesus is God and he literally has two natures. Man and God. The God man. And that ain't you, bubaloo. And it sure isn't me.

Where you and I are creation and prone to sin, Jesus, being God, is unable to sin.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Yes, that was understandable and I agree with you. Thanks. But I hope you will agree with me that anything that is good, God will do because it's good, and because God is able to do it.

More than God being "able" to do it, God cannot BUT do it because it's his nature to do so.

God will always do what's right.

Even if that means saying to some, "Depart from me. I never knew you."

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Pro-Truth

When Jesus was being tempted, we must keep in mind that He was 100% man and 100% God. Jesus literally had two natures.

---Bingo.

Jesus was literally unable to sin because He's God.

--Yet He was ABLE to sin, because He is also human. (100% human, in fact) Right?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Pro-Truth

Russ brings up a point that is absolutely critical regarding the nature of God. God is literally incapable of sin. God is the very definition of "Holy"; therefore, He is literally incapable of sin.

Now, God did create those that have chosen to go against Him and His holiness: I am one of them. I am a pathetic sinner completely unworthy of Him in every single way; however, He loves me and Christ has made me justified before God by His blood. Christ's blood completely covers my sinful nature; therefore, justifying me before God.

I am a born again Christian because I am a pathetically weak sinner - not even qualified to be algae stuck on the side of a goldfish fish tank. I'm not a born again Christian because I am worthy to God. I'm worthy because of the blood of Christ - and only because of Him will I live in God's eternal Kingdom forever.

This has always been an interesting concept to me.

(I too am weak when it comes to sinning.)

But the concept that has been asked is--does God have agency to act as He chooses? Your statement that He would not sin does not answer this question. Does God have the ability to choose?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

This has always been an interesting concept to me.

(I too am weak when it comes to sinning.)

But the concept that has been asked is--does God have agency to act as He chooses? Your statement that He would not sin does not answer this question. Does God have the ability to choose?

Hey, your first post. Welcome. Pull up a chair, pull your shoes off. Have some coffee.

I don't believe God has any such choice as to sin. To state that God has a choice or could face such a decision over a moral dilemma implies that he has ability to be tempted.

He has no weakness, no temptation and therefore no choice to make.

To claim that God could make a choice to sin is to say there is some character defect in God's character.

We're the en***ies with defects, due to sin nature.

(And to think that Mormons believe the Fall of mankind was a good and necessary thing. Oh, Bro-ther!)

[Russ]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Bingo.



--Yet He was ABLE to sin, because He is also human. (100% human, in fact) Right?

Nope.

He's God, Jeff.

He was not born with a sin nature, like humans.

His human condition was limited, in that good way.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Russ

His human condition was limited, in that good way.

---Limited human-ness? So to you, Jesus is not 100% human? Plus, you used the past tense "was limited," so now it's unlimited? So now Jesus is able to sin if He wanted to, but previously, when His condition was limited, He wasn't able to?

[Trinity]

Hello Russ,

Originally Posted by Russ

He has no weakness, no temptation and therefore no choice to make. To claim that God could make a choice to sin is to say there is some character defect in God's character. We're the en***ies with defects, due to sin nature.

How God had known the distinction between good and evil before the creation? The omniscience of God implied that he knew about this distinction before the creation of Lucifer, the demons, and the men.

*** 2:10
What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?

Trinity

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by Russ

Hey, your first post. Welcome. Pull up a chair, pull your shoes off. Have some coffee.

I don't believe God has any such choice as to sin. To state that God has a choice or could face such a decision over a moral dilemma implies that he has ability to be tempted.

He has no weakness, no temptation and therefore no choice to make.

To claim that God could make a choice to sin is to say there is some character defect in God's character.

We're the en***ies with defects, due to sin nature.

(And to think that Mormons believe the Fall of mankind was a good and necessary thing. Oh, Bro-ther!)

Thank you for the warm welcome Russ. I can understand what you are saying that God is not tempted, and I can see others have already addressed this idea that I still don't see answered. That is, does God have agency?

The way I see it is that God emcomp***es all that is good. And if God does not have agency; then agency must not be a good thing. And if agency is not a good thing; why do we think that slavery (which takes away someones agency to a degree) would be a bad thing? This logic to me just does not add up as I can't reconsile slavery as a good thing; even if that salvery compells one to do only good.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by Russ

Nope.

He's God, Jeff.

He was not born with a sin nature, like humans.

His human condition was limited, in that good way.

I would maintain that Jesus has the ability to choose. But, being the Son of God, he will (and did) always choose righteousness.

How else could he understand what we face in temptation and the weakness of the flesh if he was totally inoculated from feeling what we feel?

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

Heb. 4: 15.
15 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.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Thank you for the warm welcome Russ. I can understand what you are saying that God is not tempted, and I can see others have already addressed this idea that I still don't see answered. That is, does God have agency?

The way I see it is that God emcomp***es all that is good. And if God does not have agency; then agency must not be a good thing. And if agency is not a good thing; why do we think that slavery (which takes away someones agency to a degree) would be a bad thing? This logic to me just does not add up as I can't reconsile slavery as a good thing; even if that salvery compells one to do only good.

Simple. God doesn't "have" agency.

God is the author of it.

His laws, his rules, his universe, his game.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle

I would maintain that Jesus has the ability to choose. But, being the Son of God, he will (and did) always choose righteousness.

How else could he understand what we face in temptation and the weakness of the flesh if he was totally inoculated from feeling what we feel?

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

Heb. 4: 15.
15 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.

As a person, Jesus experienced what we experience. Hunger, loneliness, pain. He could relate. He knew what it was to experience what humans experience. Through all of that, however, there was never any doubt in his mind to simply say no.

The LDS religion is foolish to proclaim that Jesus was a person who became God, rather "a" god" or "another God," by choice of agency. Jesus is God.

No sin was found in him. Nor will there ever be.