Christian Forums

THE PURPOSE OF GOD FOR CREATING THE UNIVERSE

This post will be outside of God creating the Universe for His own glory. This is from a tape I transcribed many years ago.

We have heard various views about the purpose of God. Many believed that it originally was to people the earth with Adam and Eve, and righteous perfect offspring of that couple. However, if we should hold this belief, we would have to say that God's purpose was seriously and severely interfered with in the more than a six thousand year interruption with the devil inducing Adam to sin.

After that they say, God has postponed the fulfillment of his purpose busying himself with the efforts to save the human race, or as many as possible. Others feeling the necessity to explain God's allowance of sin and evil in the universe have developed the theory that Satan raised a great issue, challenging the rightfulness of God's Sovereignty, claiming God could not put a man on earth who would remain faithful if he, Satan, tested him. Thus the vindication of God's name became the major issue, side tracking God's purpose and forcing him to occupy the six thousand or more years since then to devote his efforts to this purpose.

Hmmm, I don't believe it's true to God's character to present Him as operating in some kind of defensive mode with regard to Satan's operations.  God has never had an "Ooops" moment - ever. 

My opinion for God's purpose in creating the universe?  To illustrate that any created being, whether human or angelic, if given the freedom of choice (free will), will inevitably sooner or later decide to make a disobedient choice, thus ruining themselves and causing separation between themselves and their Creator, resulting in death.

Conclusion?  No created being can ever be trusted with the terrible power of free will.  It becomes a self-destructive tool in our hands.  God the Creator of all things is the only one who has this power that can be depended on to NEVER exercise the option of choosing evil.  "I CHANGE NOT", He told the children of Israel.  His character is constant and faithful, regardless of the vacillation of men and angels.

: 3 Resurrections  Wed May 08, 2019 - 13:04:42
  My opinion for God's purpose in creating the universe?  To illustrate that any created being, whether human or angelic, if given the freedom of choice (free will), will inevitably sooner or later decide to make a disobedient choice, thus ruining themselves and causing separation and between themselves and their Creator, resulting in death.

Conclusion?  No created being can ever be trusted with the terrible power of free will.  It becomes a self-destructive tool in our hands.  God the Creator of all things is the only one who has this power and can be depended on to NEVER exercise the option of choosing evil.  "I CHANGE NOT", He told the children of Israel.  His character is constant and faithful, regardless of the vacillation of men and angels.

So, you believe the reason why God created the universe is to prove a point? ::headscratch::

It seems to me, if you want to know the purpose behind a decision, an action, you do it by looking at the desired end result. The end result, the consummation of all that has been done, will be the return of Christ and the entering into glory with God of all the faithful throughout all of the ages. It seems to me that, at least to a great extent, the purpose behind the creation is that God wanted to share His glory with beings created in His image.

Sure, soterion, I believe God had a purpose and a point to make in creating the universe.  God doesn't NEED humanity for this, but has chosen the means of creating the world and its inhabitants to manifest His glory to them.

Remember when Jesus told His disciples that "Without me, ye can do nothing" ?  That has been the case throughout history.  Humanity left to its own devices is its own worst enemy.  God doesn't need us, but we desperately need Him.

We need deliverance from the disastrous results of using our option to make good or evil choices.  The free will of mankind is not a desirable right to possess.  It is an addictive poison with deadly consequences.  Free will in our hands is a self-destructive tool.  I believe this will be abundantly clear to all the saints in the final resurrection and judgment.  Meanwhile, we have deluded ourselves into thinking it should be an inviolate right to which we are entitled.  It has become a sacred cow which the entire world worships - even Christians.

In the final resurrection and judgment, in order to have the universe purged of any possibile risk of resurrected saints making another choice to sin again, this choice to commit evil must be removed.  If that involves having to surrender free will in our glorified state, then count me in. 

I think the answer to why God created our universe might be "what is on the other side of the universe"?
If we're really good, we may find out one day.  ::smile::

THE PURPOSE OF GOD FOR CREATING THE UNIVERSE

The bible is not about religion, it is about a predestine Family Arrangement

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also PREDESTINED TO BE CONFORMED TO THE LIKENESS OF HIS SON, THAT HE MIGHT BE THE FIRSTBORN AMONG MANY BROTHERS. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, HE ALSO GLORIFIED. Romans 8:28-30

"The rest of the chapter here describes the Son superiority over all others, expect God. So God, and Christ are far above all others, they are what might be termed the ROYAL FAMILY . No others are like them. Christ is the only begotten Son. When he goes forth, yes even in past ages when he went forth, and spoke before his human existence he was recognized by all as the royal Son, and as speaking for God. It was the royal house, or the very throne speaking. Only these two formed the Royal Family, but the bible says GOD PURPOSED TO EXPAND THAT FAMILY. Hebrews 2: 10-13 reads,"

IN BRINGING MANY SONS TO GLORY, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. 11 BOTH THE ONE WHO MAKES MEN HOLY AND THOSE WHO ARE MADE HOLY ARE OF THE SAME FAMILY. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers. 12 He says, "I will declare your name to my brothers; in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises." 13 And again, "I will put my trust in him." And again he says, "HERE AM I, AND THE CHILDREN GOD HAS GIVEN ME."

"As to the expansion of GOD'S IMMEDIATE INTIMATE FAMILY to include many brothers of Christ, we need to know what this means, what the greatness of the Son of God is. For whom God purposes to bring forth many sons in his image. He purposed before the founding of the world that his Son should die in the carrying out of his plan."

Romans 8:15 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "ABBA,  FATHER."

: 3 Resurrections  Wed May 08, 2019 - 16:15:07
Sure, soterion, I believe God had a purpose and a point to make in creating the universe.  God doesn't NEED humanity for this, but has chosen the means of creating the world and its inhabitants to manifest His glory to them.

Yet, it seems to me, in the entirety of scripture, that the purpose behind the creation directly involves humanity, and is not separate from us. Without man, there is no purpose.

Remember when Jesus told His disciples that "Without me, ye can do nothing" ?  That has been the case throughout history.  Humanity left to its own devices is its own worst enemy.  God doesn't need us, but we desperately need Him.

We need deliverance from the disastrous results of using our option to make good or evil choices.  The free will of mankind is not a desirable right to possess.  It is an addictive poison with deadly consequences.  Free will in our hands is a self-destructive tool.  I believe this will be abundantly clear to all the saints in the final resurrection and judgment.  Meanwhile, we have deluded ourselves into thinking it should be an inviolate right to which we are entitled.  It has become a sacred cow which the entire world worships - even Christians.

In the final resurrection and judgment, in order to have the universe purged of any possibile risk of resurrected saints making another choice to sin again, this choice to commit evil must be removed.  If that involves having to surrender free will in our glorified state, then count me in.

By making this the purpose behind why God created all creation, you make Him out to be...what's the word...petty, weak...no, it's shallow. With what you are proposing to be the reason behind creation, you make God out to be as shallow-minded as a man.

In truth, I believe, freewill is a gift from God. If it was "an addictive poison with deadly consequences" then you imply blaming God on our choosing sin. He is the One who created us to be freewill beings and gave us the choices we have in life, including good or evil.

Through freewill, God has chosen to elect those who elect to respond to Him by faith, when He calls. While God wants all saved, it will be only those of faith, faith that is freely given, who will be saved. Heavenly glory in the end will be populated by those who have chosen to freely give Him their/our love and devotion. That can be said to be one of the purposes of freewill, if not the ultimate purpose.

Your view of God and how He has chosen to work with man, as you have stated them in this thread, are shallow.

Hi 3 Res Thanks for the reply, but I did not understand how you came to a conclusion of your reply from my opening post. It seems to me it had nothing to do with it. Was it something I said?

Conclusion?  No created being can ever be trusted with the terrible power of free will.  It becomes a self-destructive tool in our hands.  God the Creator of all things is the only one who has this power that can be depended on to NEVER exercise the option of choosing evil.  "I CHANGE NOT", He told the children of Israel.  His character is constant and faithful, regardless of the vacillation of men and angels.

I'm surprised of your comment with the world the way it is, how can we suggest this is all under a predestinated state. Child molester, murder rape etc. What can man do with the power of free will go beyond that. However what I believe is predestine is God's unchanging  purpose, and humans have a free will to be part of it.

Hi soterion,

I fail to see how extolling God's unchangeable nature and recognizing mankind's weakness for making evil choices can possibly be construed as being "shallow-minded".  That appears to be upside-down thinking at work.

True it is that free will was set up at creation for Adam and Eve.  God set before them life and death, and stated the consequences for their choosing either option.  That left the blame for choosing to disobey on the original couple alone - not God. 

He knew that their option to choose either good or evil would eventually result in a rebellious choice, and He allowed this chance, knowing that His grace and mercy to fallen creatures would be magnified in the end. 

In a fallen state, mankind's exercise of choice is blighted by their proclivity to sin.  It is not a wonderful thing to be able to choose evil.  What WOULD be wonderful would be the condition of being UNABLE to choose evil anymore.  Is this not what the state of being glorified in the resurrection is all about?  To be forever released from the possibility of sinning and being separated from fellowship with our Creator. 

From what I read of scripture, the love of mankind for the Father must be implanted within a person, or it will never emerge on its own naturally.  "We love Him because He FIRST loved us."  I would no more think of claiming credit for my spiritual birth than I would consider taking credit for my own natural birth as a baby.

: 3 Resurrections  Wed May 08, 2019 - 23:29:27
Hi soterion,

I fail to see how extolling God's unchangeable nature and recognizing mankind's weakness for making evil choices can possibly be construed as being "shallow-minded".  That appears to be upside-down thinking at work.

True it is that free will was set up at creation for Adam and Eve.  God set before them life and death, and stated the consequences for their choosing either option.  That left the blame for choosing to disobey on the original couple alone - not God. 

He knew that their option to choose either good or evil would eventually result in a rebellious choice, and He allowed this chance, knowing that His grace and mercy to fallen creatures would be magnified in the end. 

In a fallen state, mankind's exercise of choice is blighted by their proclivity to sin.  It is not a wonderful thing to be able to choose evil.  What WOULD be wonderful would be the condition of being UNABLE to choose evil anymore.  Is this not what the state of being glorified in the resurrection is all about?  To be forever released from the possibility of sinning and being separated from fellowship with our Creator. 

From what I read of scripture, the love of mankind for the Father must be implanted within a person, or it will never emerge on its own naturally.  "We love Him because He FIRST loved us."  I would no more think of claiming credit for my spiritual birth than I would consider taking credit for my own natural birth as a baby.

+1   I DID NOT give you manna to rub your few words into soterion's face, he's a good man and seems to be a man of integrity~but to ENCOURAGE you to speak up more on this important doctrine. I'll post later.

: 3 Resurrections  Wed May 08, 2019 - 23:29:27
Hi soterion,

I fail to see how extolling God's unchangeable nature and recognizing mankind's weakness for making evil choices can possibly be construed as being "shallow-minded".  That appears to be upside-down thinking at work.

Soterion is absolutely correct here.  Your view is indeed "shallow" thinking.  God didn't create the universe to prove a point.  That point had already been proven with Satan's rebellion against God, along with all those who followed Satan in his rebellion.  God was/is not looking for people who will choose evil; quite the opposite.  He is looking for people who will choose Him.  That is the primary message of the Scriptures, from start to finish.  Choose God and live; otherwise die.

: 3 ResTrue it is that free will was set up at creation for Adam and Eve.  God set before them life and death, and stated the consequences for their choosing either option.  That left the blame for choosing to disobey on the original couple alone - not God. 

It is not clear exactly what you intend here; but it sounds as if it was only Adam and Eve that were given free will.  That is not true.  We are all given free will. The blame for your choosing to disobey is on you, not on Adam and Eve.  That God would condemn you for the poor choice made by Adam and Eve is simply ludicrous; it assigns to God the most despicable character trait.

: 3 ResHe knew that their option to choose either good or evil would eventually result in a rebellious choice, and He allowed this chance, knowing that His grace and mercy to fallen creatures would be magnified in the end. 

How is His grace and mercy to fallen creatures magnified in the apparent fact that the preponderance of those "fallen creatures" will not see His grace and mercy?

: 3 ResIn a fallen state, mankind's exercise of choice is blighted by their proclivity to sin. 

And here you have erred just as I suspected from your above statement.  Mankind's exercise of choice is not blighted by their proclivity to sin; Rather mankind's proclivity to sin is in the exercise of poor choice. Mankind is in a "fallen state", not because of anything Adam and Eve chose and did, but because of what each and every person individually chooses and does.

: 3 ResIt is not a wonderful thing to be able to choose evil.  What WOULD be wonderful would be the condition of being UNABLE to choose evil anymore.  Is this not what the state of being glorified in the resurrection is all about?  To be forever released from the possibility of sinning and being separated from fellowship with our Creator. 

God could have done that at the very outset.  And in fact for the whole of animate creation He did just that.  It is only for man that God created a living being in His own image with the ability to choose.  You are correct in the sense that it is not a wonderful thing to be able to choose evil.  But it is a wonderful thing to be able to choose.  It is precisely that that divides those who will be condemned from those who will be given life with Him in heaven.  What a glorious thing it is to be able to choose.

: 3 ResFrom what I read of scripture, the love of mankind for the Father must be implanted within a person, or it will never emerge on its own naturally.  "We love Him because He FIRST loved us."  I would no more think of claiming credit for my spiritual birth than I would consider taking credit for my own natural birth as a baby.

Obviously what you read of scripture is patently false.  Of course, "we love Him because He FIRST loved us".  But there are none for which it can be said that He did not first love them.  They are not condemned because God doesn't love them.  They are condemned because they choose not to believe.

Now it is true that you cannot claim credit for your spiritual birth.  That was God's doing when you were born.  You can however claim credit for your spiritual REbirth.  That was the result of your believing in God.  You were reborn when you received the forgiveness of your sins and received the gift of the Holy Spirit.  What God did in saving you was the direct result of your believing in Him; that was/is a choice.  To believe otherwise, as I stated above, is to ascribe to God the most onerous of attribute and character.

: Larry H  Wed May 08, 2019 - 22:16:54I'm surprised of your comment with the world the way it is, how can we suggest this is all under a predestinated state. Child molester, murder rape etc. What can man do with the power of free will go beyond that. However what I believe is predestine is God's unchanging  purpose, and humans have a free will to be part of it.

To believe that this is all under a predestinated state is the direct result of the heresy of original sin or even the worse heresy of total depravity.  It is an assault upon the very character and nature of God.

Why would we be questioning God's motives for creating the Universe and why would we question why God gave mankind freewill?

I have believed for a long time that the original creation of the universe was truly something that God did for the splendor of His heavens and the purpose of the  creation of mankind, it seems to me is, far beyond any musings that men can reason in this mortal life.

I have often thought that it is something between God and Satan. The reason for that is , if we believe what has been indicated in the bible, Satan was created by God the same as all other angels, and was given freewill. We know Lucifer became so impressed with his own beauty, intelligence, power, and position that he began to desire for himself the honor and glory that belonged to God alone. So God kicked him out of heaven, along with those angels who desired to follow Satan .

Why would God not simply have destroyed him? Could it be as simple as being a spirit he could not be destroyed? I do not think so. We know that God had some communications with Satan after his fall by two specific biblical mentions: Through Job and through Satan's tempting Jesus.

Go and read the book of Job, in the Old Testament, and you will see how God permitted Satan to attack and tempt Job away from Job's worship of God and living the right way. Seems to me Job's life story that we are told was a pure battle of the wits between God and Satan and in the end God won.

While I cannot prove my theory I do believe that mankind was created and is constantly being tested as to who he will follow before the end of the age.

To believe that this is all under a predestinated state is the direct result of the heresy of original sin or even the worse heresy of total depravity.  It is an assault upon the very character and nature of God.

I agree, however if there is anything that assaults the character of God it would be that He created the oven of hell to burn the unbeliever in their immortal existence.  ::preachit::

: Larry H  Thu May 09, 2019 - 08:09:09I agree, however if there is anything that assaults the character of God it would be that He created the oven of hell to burn the unbeliever in their immortal existence.  ::preachit::

I agree.  But I also think that the "oven of hell" is a gross misunderstanding of what hell is; and that is a subject for another discussion.

Logically, God can only create beings that are less than Him...hence in that creation must be a seemingly imperfection.
That imperfection is displayed in both humans and angels because both have the ability and propensity to sin.
Yet that seemingly imperfection is a necessity to bring about the greatest expression of perfection: love.

When you know that an infinitely perfect God has created this universe, then there are only 4 ways God could have created:

1) God could have created nothing.
2) God could have created a world in which neither good nor evil exists, a world void of any morality.
3) God could have created a world in which people would only choose good.
4) God could have created this world in which both good and evil exists and which contains the freedom to choose either.

Now there is only one world in which love is possible and in which God can display His ultimate attribute of love.
If love is the supreme ethic, and if love is the ultimate goal then there is only one world in which that is possible...the 4th option.
That world would also be the only possible world in which a personal relationship based on love can exist between the Creator and His creation.

Our flawed human nature is an absolute necessity to bring about God's all compassing attribute: love.

AVZ, I really do hope that you have a job that does not depend upon you thinking logically; otherwise you are in a whole world of hurt.

Hi again soterion,

You guys are lucky that my ability to post is limited to texting on my cell phone one tap at a time. My posts are lengthy enough as it is, but if I could post freely on my computer at my former 95 words a minute, I'm afraid I would end up smothering you with an encyclopedia on this topic.

But none of that would make any difference for those who are predisposed to elevate mankind's spiritual capabilities above his fallen condition, and to put an artificial limit on God's power over everything He created.  Sort of like the fish dictating the dimensions of their aquarium.

Truly, God's thoughts are not our thoughts.  His ways are higher than man's as the heavens are higher than the earth.  Neither you nor I should trust our own thoughts about our spiritual abilities as members of the fallen human race beyond what scripture reveals to us. 

God says He already looked down on earth to see if there were any that sought Him, and He declared that we were "ALL gone out of the way", and that there were none that understood, or that sought after Him, or that did good; no, not one (Rom. 3:10-12). We are not supposed to think of ourselves more highly than we ought to think (Rom. 12:3). 

Whatever capabilities that man exercises to perform actions pleasing to God are abilities that are handed to us on a silver platter by God Himself.  "Every good gift and every perfect gift is FROM ABOVE, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."

If I wasn't clear about mankind's still having free will after the Fall, I agree with you that yes, we do.  But this is a wretched state of affairs for us.  For mankind to have this free will power to choose evil while IN A FALLEN CONDITION is the equivalent of my teen autistic grandson having a loaded Glock in his hands while he is in one of his melt-down episodes.  According to 4WD, this would be an example of "a wonderful thing to be able to choose" - even "a GLORIOUS thing" for him to be able to choose shooting someone in that moment. ???!!!! ::eek::

I would also object to the presupposition that, as you think, there is "an apparent fact that the preponderance of those 'fallen creatures' will not see His grace and mercy."  Not so.  The so-called "narrow gate" leading to life that "few" would find was describing THAT generation of Jewish tribes who were rejecting their Messiah's message.  THEY were  the generation that would only produce "a remnant" who would believe their Messiah's message, as Isaiah's prediction was quoted in Rom. 9:27-29, and 11:5. 

We can hardly turn that generational prediction into an all-encompassing case for all of humanity.  Far from being just a tiny fraction of humanity that will become children of God, He will bring "MANY SONS unto glory".  As Larry H emphasized above, Christ was the "Firstborn of MANY BRETHREN" - not just a few.  After all, that's a multitide that can't  be numbered before the throne in Revelation 7:9. 

When God talks about comparing the souls of men to a harvest, usually we don't associate this harvest imagery with resulting in a harvest of weeds.  No, it's a harvest composed mainly of good grain, with a bit of weeds that are found mixed among the grain.  The symbolism would seem to show that the deck is stacked in favor of the MAJORITY of mankind receiving grace and mercy to become children of God.

We have to remember that there is a vast number of children throughout history that never saw the light of day, or who made it past the devastating illnesses of very young childhood.  All of these require the mercy of a Savior as well as adults, even if they never grew up to demonstrate sinful activity.

And it wasn't GOD who condemned these young ones to inherit a fallen nature from their conception.  It was Adam and Eve exercising their original choice to sin who corrupted the reproductive process - in Adam's case with full knowledge and intent to disobey.  "Adam was not deceived." 

Everything in creation produces "AFTER ITS KIND".  Like begets like.  Fallen Adam could ONLY generate fallen children, just like himself.  To say otherwise is to ignore the simple rules of genetics.  That means every time God gives the perfect gift of a new, innocent spirit and soul for a child at conception, it becomes corrupted in the moment it becomes joined with what Adam passed down to all mankind. 

If you put something clean into an unclean vessel, the entire contents of the vessel have to be considered unclean by association.  This theme was constantly being driven home by every bit of Mosaic law related to clean /unclean categories.  To ignore this truth is to throw out the meaning behind every lesson given to the Israelites under the law. 

And though you may wish to hand me credit for my own REbirth, scripture doesn't entitle me to any such credit. "But *GOD* HATH CHOSEN the foolish things of the world to confound the wise...the weak things...the base things...things which are despised, yea, and THINGS WHICH ARE NOT" (God chooses those who aren't even in existence yet) "...that no flesh should glory in His presence.  But *OF HIM* are ye in Christ Jesus...that according as it is written; He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord" (I Cor. 1:27-31).

Soterion, if you really want to cast yourself in the main role as the hero in your own play called "Redemption", feel free.  Just don't expect God to be your co-author for such a production.  "He will not give His glory to another."

3 Resurrections,

All I was really responding to is your contention that the purpose behind the whole creation is to, "To illustrate that any created being, whether human or angelic, if given the freedom of choice (free will), will inevitably sooner or later decide to make a disobedient choice, thus ruining themselves and causing separation between themselves and their Creator, resulting in death."

It just seems to me that God's creation would serve a much grander purpose than to just prove to man how fallible we are. In fact, the crucifixion of Christ can be said to teach that lesson, among many others, but even the crucifixion serves a much more important purpose than to just display to us our weaknesses.

I agree.  But I also think that the "oven of hell" is a gross misunderstanding of what hell is; and that is a subject for another discussion.

Yes it is a gross dogma, and perhaps intentionally added to replace the correct wording to incite fear. So I will open a new topic and see where it goes.::eatingpopcorn:

: 3 Resurrections  Thu May 09, 2019 - 13:38:20Everything in creation produces "AFTER ITS KIND".  Like begets like.  Fallen Adam could ONLY generate fallen children, just like himself.  To say otherwise is to ignore the simple rules of genetics.  That means every time God gives the perfect gift of a new, innocent spirit and soul for a child at conception, it becomes corrupted in the moment it becomes joined with what Adam passed down to all mankind.

You like so many of those who cling to the false doctrine of original sin or the even worse doctrine of total depravity refuse to accept the fact that the spirit of the child comes from God not from the parents.  Jesus was emphatic in His discussion with Nicodemus (John 3:1-21). "That which is born of flesh is flesh; that which is born of Spirit is spirit" (v.6). That is a direct statement from Jesus' own mouth that original sin is a false teaching, if you bother to take the time to actually understand what Jesus is saying. Flesh begets flesh and Spirit begets spirit; never does spirit come from flesh.

The spirit of man, comes from God, not from Adam; not from parents; not from any except God Himself.  And as such, no spirit given to any person at (or before) birth is in any way whatsoever tainted or corrupted or impaired or impure.  It becomes so only once that person sins; only once that person makes the choice to disobey God.  We become dead in our trespasses and sins; not in anyone else's:  "And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which YOU once walked...."(Eph 2:1-2). 

Hi 4WD,

Apparently you didn't even read what you quoted from me.  I AGREED with you that the spirit of every child comes from God - not man.  We know this from the phrase describing death, when "the SPIRIT returns unto GOD WHO GAVE IT". 

So, God is the originator for every innocent soul and spirit of a new human child which is joined to that one fertilized cell at conception.  BUT, that innocent spirit and soul can't possibly remain innocent, because as soon as it is joined to the unclean elements that came from a fallen descendent of a fallen Adam, it is instantly corrupted in that moment of conception. 

You are getting rid of the whole concept of REPRESENTATION in scripture when you toss out what scripture teaches about the  transfer of the unclean human element onto what originated as a clean spirit and soul from God.  A fallen Adam became the "federal head" representing all fallen humanity who are "IN ADAM".  By genetically descending from Adam, all become vicariously sinners at conception by being "IN ADAM". 

This is tightly linked to the SAME concept of the righteous Christ being the "federal head" representing those who are "IN CHRIST", who then become vicariously righteous by association with Him.  It's impossible to get rid of the "federal headship" of Adam without also getting rid of the "federal headship" of Christ.  I Cor. 15:22 and Romans 5:17-18 unites the two concepts.

You can't have salvation without the doctrine of representation.  The entire body of OT sacrificial laws was meant to portray this concept of representation.  The priesthood represented the people before God, because sinful, fallen man cannot approach God without a perfect mediator making them vicariously perfect. 

When you toss out Adam's federal headship, you also get rid of the whole necessity for having the VIRGIN birth of Christ.  Christ HAD to come by "the seed of the WOMAN" and not the man, because the transfer of seed through a human representative FATHER would have corrupted the whole process, and Christ would have been born as just another sinful member of the human race.

Hi soterion,

Just realized I mixed up a response you gave with one from 4WD. Sorry about that.  I fixed it above in my reply to you from yesterday.

A much grander purpose?  Yes, you're probably right that I could phrase my point in much grander terms.  How about the tried-and-true question and response from the catechism about what the chief end of man is?  "To glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever" is the recited answer.  That is essentially the crux of Larry H's original question for the purpose of the universe's creation.

And within that ultimate purpose of our glorifying God and enjoying Him forever, how would that be possible, if we were forever at continued risk of falling into sin again while in our resurrected state, if a free will choice to sin was still a possibility for us, even in our glorified condition in God's presence?  How would we ever enjoy complete rest in God's presence, knowing we might be able to fall again?  That is the reason behind my stated conclusions about free will in the future state.

: 3 Resurrections  Fri May 10, 2019 - 09:22:16
Hi 4WD,

Apparently you didn't even read what you quoted from me.  I AGREED with you that the spirit of every child comes from God - not man.  We know this from the phrase describing death, when "the SPIRIT returns unto GOD WHO GAVE IT". 

So, God is the originator for every innocent soul and spirit of a new human child which is joined to that one fertilized cell at conception.  BUT, that innocent spirit and soul can't possibly remain innocent, because as soon as it is joined to the unclean elements that came from a fallen descendent of a fallen Adam, it is instantly corrupted in that moment of conception. 

Well, Mary was a fallen descendant of a fallen Adam, and yet Jesus' Spirit and soul did not become guilty and corrupted.

In an earlier post you said:

Fallen Adam could ONLY generate fallen children, just like himself.  To say otherwise is to ignore the simple rules of genetics.  That means every time God gives the perfect gift of a new, innocent spirit and soul for a child at conception, it becomes corrupted in the moment it becomes joined with what Adam passed down to all mankind.

So, it reads to me that you are saying that the corruption that was passed down from Adam is in the flesh. Therefore, going by both of the above quotes, when the innocent and clean spirit provided by God meets the corrupted zygote, the corruption in the zygote corrupts the spirit.

There is zero support in any shape and form in scripture for this totally flawed concept. No corruption passed down from Adam to any of his descendants that automatically manifests in our being conceived or born guilty and corrupted at all. Any corruption that takes place in us is due to our own personal sin.

: 3 Resurrections  Fri May 10, 2019 - 09:55:53
Hi soterion,

Just realized I mixed up a response you gave with one from 4WD. Sorry about that.  I fixed it above in my reply to you from yesterday.

No prob. It's all good. ::smile::

A much grander purpose?  Yes, you're probably right that I could phrase my point in much grander terms.  How about the tried-and-true question and response from the catechism about what the chief end of man is?  "To glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever" is the recited answer.  That is essentially the crux of Larry H's original question for the purpose of the universe's creation.

And within that ultimate purpose of our glorifying God and enjoying Him forever, how would that be possible, if we were forever at continued risk of falling into sin again while in our resurrected state, if a free will choice to sin was still a possibility for us, even in our glorified condition in God's presence?  How would we ever enjoy complete rest in God's presence, knowing we might be able to fall again?  That is the reason behind my stated conclusions about free will in the future state.

I am not worried about our future state with God.

I don't know that we have enough of an idea what the future state is going to be like to postulate such specifics as temptations, possibilities of sin, etc.  ::shrug::

: 3 Resurrections  Fri May 10, 2019 - 09:22:16
So, God is the originator for every innocent soul and spirit of a new human child which is joined to that one fertilized cell at conception.  BUT, that innocent spirit and soul can't possibly remain innocent, because as soon as it is joined to the unclean elements that came from a fallen descendent of a fallen Adam, it is instantly corrupted in that moment of conception. 

Where in the world do you read that in the Bible?  Truth is, you don't because it is not there.

: 3 ResYou are getting rid of the whole concept of REPRESENTATION in scripture when you toss out what scripture teaches about the  transfer of the unclean human element onto what originated as a clean spirit and soul from God.  A fallen Adam became the "federal head" representing all fallen humanity who are "IN ADAM".  By genetically descending from Adam, all become vicariously sinners at conception by being "IN ADAM". 

You guys and your FEDERAL HEAD ! !  Where do your read about the FEDERAL HEAD in the Bible?  Truth is you don't because that is not there either.

: 3 Res I Cor. 15:22 and Romans 5:17-18 unites the two concepts.

That couldn't be further from the truth. 

1 Corinthians 15:22 is talking about death and resurrection.  Romans 5:17-18 is talking about the negating of the effect of Adam's disobedience by Jesus' obedience. the effect of Adam's disobedience, had it not been for Jesus' obedience, would have been universal. But because of Jesus' obedience any and all effect which Adam's disobedience might have had is negated.

Rom 5:19  For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.

Clearly you "the many" of the first clause in that verse is one and the same as "the many" in the second clause of that verse.  To interpret it otherwise is plain and simple rejection of the truth of that verse.

: 3 ResYou can't have salvation without the doctrine of representation.  The entire body of OT sacrificial laws was meant to portray this concept of representation.  The priesthood represented the people before God, because sinful, fallen man cannot approach God without a perfect mediator making them vicariously perfect. 

That has absolutely nothing to do with the spiritual viability of the newborn child.

: 3 ResWhen you toss out Adam's federal headship, you also get rid of the whole necessity for having the VIRGIN birth of Christ.  Christ HAD to come by "the seed of the WOMAN" and not the man, because the transfer of seed through a human representative FATHER would have corrupted the whole process, and Christ would have been born as just another sinful member of the human race.

To argue that a dead spirit is passed from father to child but not from mother to child is, quite frankly, nothing short of shear stupidity.  It was after all Eve who fell first and was the  instigator in Adam's fall.

John 3:6 establishes the plain truth that the spirit of man does not come from flesh, neither the flesh of the father nor of the mother; rather it comes from God and only from God.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

This theme has traveled off down a different thoroughfare I anticipated, it is concerning a family arrangement.

it has nothing to do with the predestination or free will debate. However the purpose of God is predestine, and is in operation now.

In my estimation God created the corporeal cosmos to expand an existing family prior to creation. The intimate Royal Family of God, the Father and His only Begotten Son Jesus. Angel's not included. To substantiate this there is literally born again children now brother and sisters of Christ.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be CONFORMED TO THE LIKENESS OF HIS SON, that he might be the FIRSTBORN AMONG MANY BROTHERS  And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; THOSE HE JUSTIFIED, HE ALSO GLORIFIED. . Romans 8:28-30

So Jesus as a Son was in the immediate household of God as a prince speaking out for His Father to fulfill the prospect of bringing many sons to glory.

In BRINGING MANY SONS TO GLORY, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. Hebrews 2:10

And in the end Jesus says

Hebrews 2:13 "Here am I and the children whom God has given Me."

Hi Larry,

Sorry, didn't mean to kidnap your post's theme...scripture is all so interrelated that it seems to happen inevitably on everyone's post. 

Got a question for your stance about whether Jesus really existed as a "begotten Son" before the creation of the world.  The way you are expressing yourself about God expanding His "family" from creation forward, it seems that you believe Jesus was actually begotten as a Son before all creation began.  I recently discussed this theme at length on another forum with a gentleman who believes that Jesus the Son was created as God's first creative act before He made the world.

Personally, I believe the second person of the Trinity was designated only as "The Word" until becoming "The Son" at incarnation.  Psalms  2:7 compared with Acts 13:33-34 tells us that Jesus as the incarnate Son was "begotten" by the Father on the morning after His resurrection when He ascended to the Father.  A new thing was "born" in heaven that very day that had never before existed - i.e., a bodily-resurrected man in a glorified human form standing in God's presence for the first time ever.  At that time, Jesus could justifiably be called the "ONLY-begotten of the Father". 

However, He is not the "only-begotten" one anymore, though.  Not since AD70 and the bodily-resurrection of all the saints taken to heaven at that time.  That occasion brought "many sons to glory", and expanded God's "begotten" family exponentially, as God desired and had intended before the world began.

While on earth, we have inside us  the "spirit of adoption" as children of God, but we are strangers and pilgrims on this earth until the "redemption of the purchased possession", when our resurrected, glorified bodies can actually be directly face-to-face in God's presence forevermore.  "Begotten" in heaven, just like Christ was after His resurrection.

: 3 Resurrections  Fri May 10, 2019 - 12:53:20Hi Larry,

Sorry, didn't mean to kidnap your post's theme...scripture is all so interrelated that it seems to happen inevitably on everyone's post. 

Got a question for your stance about whether Jesus really existed as a "begotten Son" before the creation of the world.  The way you are expressing yourself about God expanding His "family" from creation forward, it seems that you believe Jesus was actually begotten as a Son before all creation began.  I recently discussed this theme at length on another forum with a gentleman who believes that Jesus the Son was created as God's first creative act before He made the world.

Personally, I believe the second person of the Trinity was designated only as "The Word" until becoming "The Son" at incarnation.  Psalms  2:7 compared with Acts 13:33-34 tells us that Jesus as the incarnate Son was "begotten" by the Father on the morning after His resurrection when He ascended to the Father.  A new thing was "born" in heaven that very day that had never before existed - i.e., a bodily-resurrected man in a glorified human form standing in God's presence for the first time ever.  At that time, Jesus could justifiably be called the "ONLY-begotten of the Father". 

However, He is not the "only-begotten" one anymore, though.  Not since AD70 and the bodily-resurrection of all the saints taken to heaven at that time.  That occasion brought "many sons to glory", and expanded God's "begotten" family exponentially, as God desired and had intended before the world began.

While on earth, we have inside us  the "spirit of adoption" as children of God, but we are strangers and pilgrims on this earth until the "redemption of the purchased possession", when our resurrected, glorified bodies can actually be directly face-to-face in God's presence forevermore.  "Begotten" in heaven, just like Christ was after His resurrection.

Excellent! +1  I'm going to fill your belly with manna if you keep posting like that. I did overlook one of your teachings that I disagree with, yet I did not want to reject all you said with a point here and there that I would disagree with. But, then again I ALWAYS leave the door open that I myself could be missing a truth that I have not seen before, so I show mercy and move on to the next post. One hand closed tight holding fast to what I have learned, the other hand opens WIDE to receive the truth that I have not yet seen.

Hi Res and RB        No problem I completely understand, it happens to all of us.

Jesus has a God, and we are inherent children of God with the anticipation of entering the Royal Heavenly Family of God. If this is true, I can see nothing to compare to it. Having God as Father and Jesus as our elder brother literally. Taking it all outside the realm of religion to a family arrangement. just as in "Eden, the bible account shows, God dealt with Adam as a Father to a son, a family arrangement". 

Does Jesus have a God


Jesus said, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to MY GOD AND YOUR GOD. 'John 20:17

Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of MY GOD. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of MY GOD and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from MY GOD; and I will also write on him my new name. Revelation 3:12

Firstly I do not believe Jesus was created, and was born of the Father before creation. I transcribed this from a tape I received from a friend, many years ago. See if  it make sense, seeing  is it out of the realm of systematic Christianity. There is much more to be said on the matter but will wait for your response..

Please keep this verse in mind when reading the following.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.  For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out,"ABBA, FATHER." Romans 8:14-15

I transcribed the subsequent reading from a tape I received from a companion. several year ago. This is part of it.

Jesus never said that he was the same as the Father, he acknowledged many times he was sent by the Father, and he always did the will of the Father. Jesus also said the Father was greater then he was. This does show that when he was in heaven before he came to earth he was equal in a certain sense to the Father. He was equal to the Father in the sense that he was not like an angel except that he was of course a spirit. He was in the form of God.

The word morphe, Greek, for form is different from pattern of fashion. Of this word Barns expository dictionary says, "Morphe is therefore properly the nature or essence, not in the abstract, but as subsisting in an individual." In this passage in Philippians, morphe, or the form of God is the divine nature and inseparably subsisting in the person of Christ.

For the interpretation of the statement, it is sufficient to say first it includes the whole nature, and essences of deity, and is inseparable from them since they could have no actual existence without it.

Second it does not include anything accidental or separable, such as particular modes of manifestation, or conditions of glory or majesty. Which maybe at one time attached to the form, and at another time separated from it". Gods form would be more than mere spirit form, for the angels are in God's image, and likeness, and they are in spirit form. They are not in God's form. God and Christ are of a higher nature than the angels."

I'm leaving to head south to visit over Mother's day weekend with my one of my daughters and her family in Atlanta, Ga. so time is limited. I'm posting an article on the "Solitariness of God" that I read many years ago that would go great with this thread, read it consider it in light of THE PURPOSE OF GOD FOR CREATING THE UNIVERSE.

PERHAPS THE TITLE of the chapter is not sufficiently explicit to indicate its theme. This is partly because so few are accustomed to meditate upon the personal perfections of God. Comparatively few who occasionally read the Bible are aware of the awe-inspiring and worship-provoking grandeur of the divine character. That God is great in wisdom, wondrous in power, yet full of mercy is assumed by many as common knowledge. But to entertain anything approaching an adequate conception of His being, nature, and attributes, as revealed in the Scripture, is something which very few people in these degenerate times have done. God is solitary in His excellency. "Who is like unto Thee, O LORD, among the gods? who is like Thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?" (Ex 15:11).

"In the beginning, God" (Gen 1:1). There was a time, if "time" it could be called, when God, in the unity of His nature (though subsisting equally in three persons), dwelt all alone. "In the beginning, God." There was no heaven, where His glory is now particularly manifested. There was no earth to engage His attention. There were no angels to sing His praises. There was no universe to be upheld by the word of His power. There was nothing, no one, but God; and that not for a day, a year, or an age, but "from everlasting." During a past eternity God was alone — self-contained, self-sufficient, in need of nothing. Had a universe, or angels, or humans been necessary to Him in any way, they also would have been called into existence from all eternity. Creating them when He did added nothing to God essentially. He changes not (Mal 3:6), therefore His essential glory can be neither augmented nor diminished.

God was under no constraint, no obligation, no necessity to create. That He chose to do so was purely a sovereign act on His part, caused by nothing outside Himself, determined by nothing but His own good pleasure; for He "worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph 1:11). That He did create was simply for His manifestative glory. Do some of our readers imagine that we have gone beyond what Scripture warrants? Then we appeal to the Law and the testimony: "Stand up and bless the LORD, your God, for ever and ever; and blessed be thy glorious name, which is exalted above all blessing and praise" (Neh 9:5). God is no gainer even from our worship. He was in no need of that external glory of His grace which arises from His redeemed, for He is glorious enough in Himself without that. What was it that moved Him to predestinate His elect to the praise of the glory of His grace? It was "according to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph 1:5).

We are well aware that the high ground we tread here is new and strange to almost all of our readers, so it is well to move slowly. Let us appeal again to the Scriptures. As the apostle brings to a close along argument on salvation by sovereign grace, he asks, "For who hath known the mind of the LORD? Or who hath been His counselor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?" (Rom 11:34-35). The force of this is that it is impossible to bring the Almighty under obligation to the creature. God gains nothing from us. "If thou be righteous, what givest thou him? Or what receiveth He of thine hand? Thy wickedness may hurt a man as thou art; and thy righteousness may profit the son of man" (Job 35:7-8). But it certainly cannot affect God, who is all-blessed in himself. "When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants" (Lk 17: 10) — our obedience has profited nothing.

We go farther: our Lord Jesus Christ added nothing to God in His essential being and glory, either by what He did or suffered. True, gloriously true, He manifested that glory of God to us, but He added nothing to God. He Himself expressly declares so, and there is no appeal from His words, "My goodness extendeth not to thee" (Ps 16:2). The whole of that psalm is a psalm of Christ. Christ's goodness or righteousness reached unto His saints in the earth (Ps 16:3), but God was high above and beyond it all.

It is true that God is both honored and dishonored by men, not in His essential being, but in His official character. It is equally true that God has been glorified by creation, by providence, and by redemption. We do not dare dispute this for a moment. But all of this has to do with His manifestative glory and the recognition of it by us. Yet, had God so pleased, He might have continued alone for all eternity, without making known His glory unto creatures. Whether He should do so or not He determined solely by His own will. He was perfectly blessed in Himself before the first creature was called into being. And what are all the creatures of His hands unto Him even now? The Scripture again answers:

Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance; behold, He taketh up the isles as a very little thing. And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt offering. All nations before Him are as nothing; and they are counted to Him less than nothing, and vanity. To whom, then, will ye liken God? Or what likeness will ye compare unto him? (Is 40:15-18).

That is the God of Scripture; but, He is still "the unknown God" (Acts 17:23) to heedless multitudes. "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are like grasshoppers; that stretch out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: Who bringeth the princes to nothing; he maketh the judges of the earth as vanity" (Is 40:22-23). How vastly different is the God of Scripture from the god of the average pulpit!

Nor is the testimony of the New Testament any different from that of the Old. How could it be since both have one and the same Author? There too we read, "Which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see; to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen" (1 Tim 6:15-16). Such a One is to be revered, worshipped, adored. He is solitary in His majesty, unique in His excellency, peerless in His perfections. He sustains all, but is Himself independent of all. He gives to all and is enriched by none.

Such a God cannot be found out by searching. He can be known only as He is revealed to the heart by the Holy Spirit through the Word. It is true that Creation demonstrates a Creator, and so plainly that men are "without excuse." Yet we still have to say with Job, "Lo, these are parts of His ways; but how little a portion is heard of him? But the thunder of His power, who can understand?" (26:14). The so-called argument from design by well-meaning apologists has, we believe, done much more harm than good. It has attempted to bring the great God down to the level of finite comprehension, and thereby has lost sight of His solitary excellence.

Analogy has been drawn between a savage who finds a watch upon the sands, and from a close examination of it infers a watchmaker. So far so good. But attempt to go farther. Suppose the savage sits on the sand and endeavors to form a conception of this watchmaker, his personal affections and manners, his disposition, acquirements, and moral character, all that goes to make up a personality. Could he ever think or reason out a real man, the man who made the watch, so he could say, "I am acquainted with him"? It seems trifling to ask, but is the eternal and infinite God so much more within the grasp of human reason? No, indeed. The God of Scripture can be known only by those to whom He makes Himself known.

Nor is God known by the intellect. "God is a Spirit" (Jn 4:24), and therefore can only be known spiritually. But fallen man is not spiritual, he is carnal. He is dead to all that is spiritual. Unless he is born again, supernaturally brought from death unto life, miraculously translated out of darkness into light, he cannot even see the things of God (in 3:3), still less apprehend them (1 Cor 2:14). The Holy Spirit has to shine in our hearts (not intellects) to give us "the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor 4:6). But even that spiritual knowledge is fragmentary. The regenerated soul has to grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus (2 Pet 3:18).

The principal prayer and aim of Christians should be to "walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God" (Col 1:10).  By A.W. Pink

God was under no constraint, no obligation, no necessity to create. That He chose to do so was purely a sovereign act on His part, caused by nothing outside Himself, determined by nothing but His own good pleasure; for He "worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph 1:11). That He did create was simply for His manifestative glory.

The above quote is all that Pink said, in that article, that says anything about why God created. God created so as to to manifest His glory.

The rest of the article is basically saying that God did not have to create and God gains nothing from the creation, including from man. The rest is just Calvinism, from fallen man being unable and unwilling to understand and know God, to the necessity of being born again prior to being able and willing to come to know Him.

Most of the time, when the basic reason stated by others for why God created is, "For His glory," or, "To be glorified," and such, it makes God out to be egotistical. It has always grated at me when people talk about God wanting our worship so that He can be glorified. I do not believe that His being glorified is the end reason for the creation, or for our worship of Him, meaning that these acts are not for His sake.

The reason He wants us to give Him the worship and glory is so that we may keep our focus on Him unto our ultimate salvation. In addition, such worship and praise will be seen by others that they may see and hear about God. As to the creation, it all manifests the glory of God, but not for Him, rather it is for us, that we may again keep our eyes and hearts on Him. Psalm 19:1 says, "The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament showeth his handiwork." This declaration and showing is toward us, so that we may see and believe and give our hearts to Him in praise. Everything that God does that is made known to us in the word or in the creation is all for our sake, that we may be saved.

As to God "needing" the creation or us, it would have to be a matter of perspective. God exists separate from the creation and is not lacking without it. Nevertheless, here we are. God did it for some reason(s). That the saints will ultimately spend eternity with Him is the end result. To me, this points to some fulfillment in God's plan. It could also point to some desire, pleasure, whatever we might call it, that is being fulfilled by this plan. Most will have some hesitancy calling it a need on His part, but I don't. If our existence fulfills something toward God, then some need is being filled, even if the need is simply to express His love toward sentient creatures made in His image who have the capacity to love Him in return in fellowship.

Hi 3 Res

Got a question for your stance about whether Jesus really existed as a "begotten Son" before the creation of the world.  The way you are expressing yourself about God expanding His "family" from creation forward, it seems that you believe Jesus was actually begotten as a Son before all creation began.

Well said

I recently discussed this theme at length on another forum with a gentleman who believes that Jesus the Son was created as God's first creative act before He made the world.

I beg to differ with that fine gentleman by proposing the existence of Christ previous to creation the Divine Son of God in the form of God like no other.  The big question is why create a physical universe to extend a spiritual family. To adopt from one family, Adam and Eve, into another Family in Heaven. There is one things all humans share, and that is the blood of Adam, the same blood Jesus gave for the human race. Since not too much comes by chance I see a connection.

While on earth, we have inside us  the "spirit of adoption" as children of God, but we are strangers and pilgrims on this earth until the "redemption of the purchased possession", when our resurrected, glorified bodies can actually be directly face-to-face in God's presence forevermore.  "Begotten" in heaven, just like Christ was after His resurrection.

Interesting with God's original purpose and the channel He used to accomplish it  ::pondering::

: 3 Resurrections  Fri May 10, 2019 - 12:53:20
However, He is not the "only-begotten" one anymore, though.  Not since AD70 and the bodily-resurrection of all the saints taken to heaven at that time.  That occasion brought "many sons to glory", and expanded God's "begotten" family exponentially, as God desired and had intended before the world began.

: RB  Fri May 10, 2019 - 13:51:37
Excellent! +1 

You gave 3 Res a manna for that nonsense? ? ?

Awww, c'mon 4WD, play fair now.  You know very well that the "point or two" that RB disagrees with is the one you brought up with Preterist views in it. 

Actually, I really do sympathize with RB's aversion to Preterism.  RB was not treated very well by the crazy philandering pastor we once sat under as fellow church members with young families. I left that church after 16 years before I heard that pastor teach anything at all out of Revelation.  So nothing of what I post online except maybe a few Preterist points from Daniel is a reflection of what I heard him teach while I was there.

I think RB tried to reason with him against some of the basic Preterist teaching that he must have begun preaching after I left, which was not appreciated or received well by that power-hungry individual.

So in spite of our differences on Preterism, RB and I can still maintain some respect for each other's position, since we both escaped the clutches of that cult-like environment, by God's mercy.

The psalmist said that the universe shows forth the Glory of God. If it had not been created, the expression of God's power and glory would have remained only potential. Imagine someone with the genius to become the greatest artist that the world has ever seen, but who in fact never picked up a brush. His artistic ability would remain only as a potential. It would never become reality and the person (though able to be a great artist) would never in actual fact be an artist: his genius would never be manifested.
In any talk of the universe, the question of whether there are other human-like beings elsewhere is often raised. Most people assume that there are such beings, but not all agree. Two books taking an opposite view are "Privileged Planet" by G. Gonzalez and J. Richards and "Destiny and Chance Revisited" (An update on the earlier "Destiny and Chance") by S. R. Taylor. The authors of the first are Christians, although the force of their argument is scientific, while Taylor seems to be an atheist. Nevertheless, both reach similar conclusions - that intelligent life might be confined to Earth. Our planet is very unusual in many ways and all of these seem to be important to life. Furthermore, the Sun orbits the center of our galaxy in a very unusual place. Our galaxy belongs to a type known as "spiral" and consists of several spiral arms filled with stars but with sparse regions in between. As violent events take place in these arms, they are thought to be unsuitable for life. Even whilst passing through them, life on any planet would be in danger. Also the central region of the galaxy is similarly dangerous. The Sun (together with Earth of course) orbits between two spiral arms but, unlike most stars, remains at a special region where its speed matches that of the arms themselves. Because of this, it moves in sync with the arms and never crosses them, thereby avoiding exposure to the violent events within the arms! About half of the galaxies are spirals of the same type as our own (around 70% are actually spirals, but some of these have weak spiral arms and the regions between them are not so sparse, making them more dangerous for life. These are known as "flocullent  spirals because they look fluffy or woolly in photographs taken with large telescopes). But most are smaller than ours and many are not so life-friendly.
Some Christians object to the idea that God may not have filled the universe beings like us, but the universe is a wonderful expression of his power whether there are "aliens" or not and his love is equally displayed in his dealings with just one race as many. 

: 3 Resurrections  Sat May 11, 2019 - 15:39:27
Awww, c'mon 4WD, play fair now.  You know very well that the "point or two" that RB disagrees with is the one you brought up with Preterist views in it. 

Actually, I really do sympathize with RB's aversion to Preterism.  RB was not treated very well by the crazy philandering pastor we once sat under as fellow church members with young families. I left that church after 16 years before I heard that pastor teach anything at all out of Revelation.  So nothing of what I post online except maybe a few Preterist points from Daniel is a reflection of what I heard him teach while I was there.

I think RB tried to reason with him against some of the basic Preterist teaching that he must have begun preaching after I left, which was not appreciated or received well by that power-hungry individual.

So in spite of our differences on Preterism, RB and I can still maintain some respect for each other's position, since we both escaped the clutches of that cult-like environment, by God's mercy.

Hey, I respect RB's positions.  I just think he is wrong on some of them.