Is it necessary to satisfy justice? Yes it is. For Christ came to fulfill the Law, not to destroy the Law.
I disagree. The Bible teaches us that our sins are forgiven.
Yes the Bible teach that. But that does not take away the truth that it was necessary that Jesus lives and does things in keeping with the Law and satisfy the Law. Besides, the law foreshadows, if not speaks of what were necessarily to be done according to the justice of God, to keep the chosen people reconciled to God, keep God’s wrath from coming upon them, to offer peace offering, to offer sacrifices of atonement, and sacrifices for the forgiveness of sin, and so on. And in God’s time, the true and real Lamb of God came. Christ came to fulfill the law, and that, once and for all. Further, in the justice of God, according to the law, almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission, there is no forgiveness of sin.
We both believe that Jesus is human, like us. So, if humans could die, so does he. But we also know that He is God, and have eternal indestructible life.
I also disagree with you here. Jesus' indestructibility is not a characteristic of his intrinsic nature. If it were then we would also be God at our resurrection. 1 Corinthians 15:50-57.
This obviously has to do with the matter that while Jesus is truly and fully human, He is truly and fully Divine.
Further, I think this has to do with our understanding of what death is.
Also perhaps of what we take of “indestructible” to be, at least.
But let's not lose Paul's point. The fact that Jesus has an indestructible life has meaning and significance for those of us who put our hope in him for the resurrection. That is, since he has an indestructible life, he will be alive when it's time to blow the trumpet. That's the main point.
Yes. Needless to say, Jesus, who resurrected and is now alive for ever and ever, is ever there for all time, living to the ages of the ages, and will resurrect the chosen children of God unto eternal life.
There is no contraction to avoid, at least for me. For Jesus is both human and divine.
Well, there is a contradiction, but it may be hard to see because the hypostatic union is hard to navigate (and I include myself in that category.) Here is what I have discovered. When the Bible is talking Jesus in his humanity, it refers to him as "Jesus" or "Jesus Christ" or "Jesus Christ our Lord." When it speaks about him in his divinity, it refers to him as "Word" or "The Word". Jesus (the man) didn't have an indestructible life for obvious reasons. He died. If someone with an indestructible life can die, then the word indestructible is meaningless. If someone with an indestructible life needs to be raised from the dead, again, the word indestructible is meaningless.
What contradiction is there in your view?
<<<Jesus (the man) didn't have an indestructible life for obvious reasons. He died.>>>
I won’t put it that way. For while that emphasizes the humanity of Jesus Christ, it unnecessarily de/emphasizes His Deity.
<<<If someone with an indestructible life can die, then the word indestructible is meaningless.>>>
As I said, I think this has to do with our understanding of what death is. Also perhaps of what we take of “indestructible” to be, at least.
That Jesus Christ tasted death does not in any way, shape, or form, mean to say that the life in Him is destroyed or that His life is destructible.
We should talk about the resurrection of Jesus Christ as often as we talk about His death, would you agree?
Yes, but we must also include the ascension, which gets even less attention than the resurrection, I think.
I agree.
Tong
R4518