"Organization"

[Steve Born]

Quote (Lanny): I feel like, you cannot understand what I say because you have a different paradigm.

And vice versa!  We agree on this.  But I note I've been mainly quoting the Bible on what it says is our only hope of righteousness since we cannot keep the Law.

"Christ is the exception to Romans 3 & 4."

Well, yes of course, because he is the promised Savior from sin who Romans 3 & 4 show fulfilled the Law's demands on our behalf and is thus the righteousness of God for us spoken of in those chapters.  He also fulfilled the entire Old Testament sacrificial system set up by God specifically to prefigure Christ and his work in every detail.

I must say I certainly must have misunderstood your teaching at the Chapel if you believed then that a tulip bulb could have just as easily satisfied God as Christ's life and death for us did.

[Helen]

Well, isn’t this the crux of the issue, that if just a human sacrifice was all that was needed; then why a sinless one?  Certainly since the OT type was just perfect as to the outward appearance; then certainly an outwardly unblemished human sacrifice would be all that was necessary for our atonement.  But we all know that we did need God Himself to save us and reconcile the world to Himself.  This is why the scripture does not say; ‘having made peace with the blood of His cross’.

For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. Col.1:19-20    NAS

“Through” and “in” are not just locations inside a jar that God was just put in.  The Greek eikon “image”, reveals who the human face of Jesus is; coming from the same word that Jesus used to call His disciples attention to the Greek coin that bore the image of Caesar.  Like Caesar’s face was given in monetary exchange, we have the face of God given in sin exchange.  Just like our face reveals us, the face of Jesus reveals God.    

In the same way that I do not call God just Christ; I do not call “Christ” just God.  I call “Jesus” God and He is ‘the Christ’.  The requirement is both God and man; according to my salvation’s need.  To say that Jesus was also ‘the Christ’ is just saying that God reached me not just anthropomorphically.  

Honestly, the ‘what God can and cannot do’ argument is moot here Lanny.  God cannot go against His own requirements.  Once He laid down the blood atonement, no other discussion is necessary.  I understand what paradigm you are coming from Lanny, but it would be purposely refusing to understand Steve to make arguments that divinity had to learn anything.  That is just the standard Chapel response and I have learned a lot more from the Bible since Chapel circa 1980’s.

Jesus just resembled man (likeness: Romans 8:3) and the scripture does not teach that He also had the sin nature.  Hebrews 2:14 makes it clear that Jesus shared with the children of men; flesh and blood.  

Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil. Hebrews 2:14  NAS

What kind of “exception” do we think Jesus is?  I’ve been over this fallibility of Jesus in the “temptation” discussion at length and know that according to James 1:13-14, for a person to have been tempted, they have to have had an evil lust from within.  Jesus had no evil lusts at all.

It is an assumption of Christ having the sin nature that assumes that Christ could have fell.  The scriptures says the Son can do nothing of Himself.  This is God's Word that says He was not able to go contrary to the Father.

Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner. John 5:19   NAS

If Jesus could have fallen, it would have been more correct for Him to say:

Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do things of Himself, even when it is not something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, I can also do those things in like manner.

[lanny]

---I am not sure I follow...If Jesus could not sin then why the 40 day fast and charade with Satan in the wilderness?
Lanny

[Steve Born]

Lanny,

It wasn't a charade - it was to demonstrate that Satan indeed had no power over Jesus and, conversely, that Jesus had power over Satan and could expose Satan's lying use of the Scriptures.  Satan tried to tempt Jesus but failed miserably.