Clivedurdle

What about Joshua and entering the promised land? Is the Jesus story an extension of the role of Joshua?

NOGO

Yes it is.

But Paul tells us that Jesus did not become Son of God until his re-entry into Heaven after the resurrection. So how can God sent forth his Son?

You can't expect Paul to be totally consistant and logical.

ok, born of a wonan and under the law...
If we hold back and not jump to any conclusions about what that means all you have is that God sent forth his Son After Moses and before Paul wrote.
We still do not know what form that took.

On the other hand if you believe that "born of a woman" clinches the argument then this thread does not add much.

"under the law"
Interesting when you think that in the Gospels Jesus practically says that he is above the law.

checkmate

Clivedurdle
Yes sir, this is the concept of God with us. As an evangelical Christian, I am sure you know that I believe this did actually happen. According to Romans 9, God allowed evil into the world because He wanted to reveal His entire character. I know you all disagree but I am just commenting on Romans 9 and I Peter 1:20 from a Christian (fundy) perspective. Unless God had allowed evil, much of His character (attributes) would have never been exercised e.g. mercy, longsuffering, forgiveness etc. So God allowed evil because He wanted to. The plan of redemption, through Christ, was set up before creation thus the quotation of I Peter 1:20 that Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world to pay the penalty of sin but this was carried out in time.

I am very aware that this is a secular forum and what I have stated is not believed. I was just responding to your post. Also, thank you for you welcome.

Clivedurdle

Thank you for your response. I was brought up Pentecostal - Assemblies of God (Dake's Concordance) and I am rusty about this - your comments are very valuable here. Please do not be harsh on yourself 'is not believed." Are you not meant to be able to justify your faith?

Do you have any comments about what I have asked about Hebrews and blood (of the lamb) and if the eucharist or communion and the cross are related?

Clive

GakuseiDon

Well, Paul does refer to this. I'm more interested in the "when" than the "where" at the moment, but we may as well throw this into the mix. From Philippians 2:

5 For, let this mind be in you that [is] also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God,
7 but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made,
8 and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death -- death even of a cross,
9 wherefore, also, God did highly exalt him, and gave to him a name that [is] above every name,
10 that in the name of Jesus every knee may bow -- of heavenlies, and earthlies, and what are under the earth --
11 and every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Next, 1 Cor 15:

3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,
5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve.
6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep.

I'm assuming that this isn't a non-Pauline interpolation.

Also, Gal 2:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory,
8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Summarizing the previous points found in Paul, and adding the new ones:

1. Christ was born/made from a woman, at some time after Moses established the Law
2. Christ came in the likeness of a man (from Phil 2)
3. Christ died before the time that Paul wrote his epistles
4. Christ was crucified, buried and then resurrected 3 days later (still before Paul wrote his epistles)
5. Christ was crucified by 'the rulers of this age'
6. Christ appeared to various people within the generation of Paul at some point after he died (from 1 Cor 15:6)

checkmate

Yes, the Book says I should know enough to give an answer. You are correct. I really do appreciate your spirit. I love good discussions as long as they don't turn into name calling and putting each other down in hateful ways. Nothing is learned this way and it just makes everyone dig in harder to defend their position. I am the "B" word Baptist. As was Charles Spurgeon of London in the 1800's. I will look over your previous posts and share some thoughts. I have many good Pentecostal friends.

Best
checkmate

NOGO

We discussed this at length in the past.

I can come up with my list as well.

[1] Paul preaches throughout his letters, yet he has so little to say about what Jesus himself taught.

[2] Paul says three time "love one another" but never gives Jesus credit.

[3] Paul preaches from the OT and not what Jesus may have said or done.

[4] Paul claims to have seen Jesus yet all that he saw was a light and heard a voice. No man!

[5] Paul says that God will raise us just like he raised Jesus. But the Gospels claim that Jesus was raised bodily with all his wounds. Paul, on the other hand, claims that the resurrected body is not the same as the body that died. The new body is incorruptible. Thomas poked his finger in Jesus' wounds.

[6] Paul says he gets information directly from God and has not been told about Jesus from any man. Jesus was kept secret from creation and is only now revealed to him through scriptures. Not from Jesus himself.

[7] Paul claims that Jesus became Son of God after his resurrection (reward for a job well done) while the Gospels have him already Son of God at birth or at his baptism.

This is just off the top of my head.
It seems to be that you have as much to explain as I do.

I have a question?

Do you agree that Paul knows next to nothing about the Gospel Jesus or the HJ (if there was one) ?

GakuseiDon

My list is looking at the "when", rather than the "where". I'm working on hints in Paul to see when he thought Christ died.

I don't think we can say that Paul knows next to nothing, just that he doesn't give many details. This appears to be the style of the early Christian writers, even those making HJ statements, like Ignatius and 'Barnabas'.

Clivedurdle

Please give examples! I see loads of theological statements that have odd insertions to make them feel historic (like a historic novel)!

GakuseiDon

Yes, that is the style of the early Christian writers, even the HJ ones. But I think that it is a tangent to this thread.