Is Jesus a Man That God Selected?

[Bob Estey]

Not true at all. There are 4 major examples.

1. Adam & Eve Did Not Die The Day They Ate the Forbidden Fruit.
2. God lied to 400 prophets.
3. God hates lying but honored the Midwives of Moses time and Rahab the prostitute because they lied.
4. Jesus did not rebuild the temple in 3 days.

Now, if you want to say these things are true 'from a certain POV,' a relative or qualified, non-absolute saying, then we agree.

The Bible sometimes speaks figuratively.

 

[Wrangler]

The Bible sometimes speaks figuratively.

Agreed, figurative language is an example of relative truth.

 

[Bob Estey]

Agreed, figurative language is an example of relative truth.

Relative truth?

 

[bbyrd009]

cept this generation . they believe truth to be relevant to what a person believes . Talk about delusion . TRUTH IS ABSOLUTE .
No matter if we know it or not .

well, i would likely have debated you on the matter before, but it strikes me that the fact there is a debate to be had there at all more or less makes the point anyway

 

[bbyrd009]

How many ways are there to interpret statements such as, "Do not commit adultery" or “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination”?

i would agree that those seem pretty straightforward

Thanks. Sadly, I heard a pastor say that a priest long ago could have substituted his words for God's words in the Bible, to further his own agenda. That would be the same as saying the Bible is lying. One thing I take on faith is that the Bible does not lie.

well, but we do have passages that tell us that to those who cannot hear the truth, the Bible is def lying to them

Relative truth?

what you bless will be blessed and what you curse will be cursed
a sin for you may not be a sin for me

 

[marks]

well, i would likely have debated you on the matter before, but it strikes me that the fact there is a debate to be had there at all more or less makes the point anyway

That's circular.

The [whatever] is debatable because I can debate it because it's debatable because I debate it . . .

So what point are we trying to make?

Much love!

 

[marks]

well, i would likely have debated you on the matter before, but it strikes me that the fact there is a debate to be had there at all more or less makes the point anyway

Not that I'm saying you should or shouldn't debate it, there are probably enough endless debates going on already.

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

So what point are we trying to make?

right? When one is no longer interested in making a point, the debate becomes moot, imo; "that dog has four legs" obviously an Absolute Truth, "Jesus is returning very soon" obviously not so much

 

[Wrangler]

Relative truth?

Yes, the truth is relative to how you apply the figurative language you mentioned in the Bible. Here are 2 opposing figurative phrases:

1. The early bird gets the worm.
2. The 2nd mouse gets the cheese.

The validity of the figurative phrases is relative to the circumstances.

 

[marks]

right? When one is no longer interested in making a point, the debate becomes moot, imo; "that dog has four legs" obviously an Absolute Truth, "Jesus is returning very soon" obviously not so much

Absolute truth is what is obvious?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Yes, the truth is relative to how you apply the figurative language you mentioned in the Bible. Here are 2 opposing figurative phrases:

1. The early bird gets the worm.
2. The 2nd mouse gets the cheese.

The validity of the figurative phrases is relative to the circumstances.

And the commonality is the availability of the food. The one who gets there at the right time . . .

Much love!

 

[Wynona]

Using standard language usage and keeping 2 COR 1:13, in mind, (there is no hidden meaning in our letters) the inescapable conclusion or take away from the verse below is yes. Based on this verse, if you conclude the answer is no, what reading skills, logic and definitions supports that conclusion?

To re-iterate, this thread is only studying one verse, Acts 17:31. If you recognize the answer is affirmative, you have to ask yourself, in keeping 2 COR 1:13 in mind, why would there be such a verse in Scripture worded like this?


He has fixed a day of accountability, when the whole world will be justly evaluated by a new, higher standard: not by a statue, but by a living man. God selected this man and made Him credible to all by raising Him from the dead.
Acts 17:31 (Voice)

I see you are using the Voice translation.

The KJV says 'by that man who he hath ordained. I believe this fits more with the belief that Jesus is not merely a man that God selected but God Himself come down in the flesh.

Also consider John 8:58, Colossians 14, and John 1

 

[APAK]

The word there is from Horidzo, to bound. We see this word in conjection with "pro", prohoridzo is translated predestine. It comes to us as the English word Horizon.

There are 8 places various forms of horidzo are used in the NT,

Luke 22:22 KJV
And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!

Acts 11:29 KJV
Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea:

Acts 17:26 KJV
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Acts 10:42 KJV
And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

Acts 17:31 KJV
Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Romans 1:4 KJV
And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

The main idea using this word is to say God limits the possibilities to This Man.

Not that God looked at all men, and "selected" this one from among the rest.

Ordain, appoint, these don't imply other possible choices. Select does. I don't see that as a faithful translation, and I find it misleading, myself.

Much love!

Why don't you just come out and say that this man, the Son of God, cannot be selected FIRST, by his Father, to become ordained, for the purpose of judging mankind?

Do you want me to explain why you believe this?

And why is this translation not FAITHFUL and misleading marks? Which translation suits you, and why...

 

[bbyrd009]

Absolute truth is what is obvious?

Much love!

dunno if "obvious" is a prerequisite, but it does seem to be a valid extraction of the dictionary definition

 

[APAK]

I see you are using the Voice translation.

The KJV says 'by that man who he hath ordained. I believe this fits more with the belief that Jesus is not merely a man that God selected but God Himself come down in the flesh.

Also consider John 8:58, Colossians 14, and John 1

Wynona, do you think Luke, the writer of this inspired verse, would agree with your assessment, that God himself, the Father of Christ the man in question, was this same man that was ordained to judge mankind and also raised himself up to life after he was truly dead? This then means this one same man did it all, raised himself up from death and selected himself to be ordained and the judge of us all. A solo act!

Or would Luke agree with this assessment: that this man was of his Father called God, who raised him to life after he was dead as proof that his Father first selected, then ordained this man to become the judge of mankind?

As a note, Luke was a Judean, and his ancestry went back to Abraham and the Hebrews. He was also a disciple of Christ, who would never consider that the one God of Abraham was in his midst as the Christ, the Son of man and also the Son of God, of Abraham. He never knew of the concept of incarnation that was created and codified some 400 years later, after his time.

APAK

 

[Wynona]

Wynona, do you think Luke, the writer of this inspired verse, would agree with your assessment, that God himself, the Father of Christ the man in question, was this same man that was ordained to judge mankind and also raised himself up to life after he was truly dead?

Yes.

Jesus said I and the Father are One.

Is there Scripture that shows that my stance is wrong?

 

[APAK]

Yes.

Jesus said I and the Father are One.

Is there Scripture that shows that my stance is wrong?

Can you answer my query first before going off subject to another area of scripture?

 

[Bob Estey]

i would agree that those seem pretty straightforward
well, but we do have passages that tell us that to those who cannot hear the truth, the Bible is def lying to them

what you bless will be blessed and what you curse will be cursed
a sin for you may not be a sin for me

I believe is says that what you allow on earth will be allowed in heaven.

 

[Bob Estey]

Yes, the truth is relative to how you apply the figurative language you mentioned in the Bible. Here are 2 opposing figurative phrases:

1. The early bird gets the worm.
2. The 2nd mouse gets the cheese.

The validity of the figurative phrases is relative to the circumstances.

Statements like "Thou shall not steal" are pretty clear.

 

[bbyrd009]

I believe is says that what you allow on earth will be allowed in heaven.

regardless, it seems like "so much for absolute truth?"