God, logic and His attributes

I'm guessing that Skypair's idea that God can sin is in line with his understanding of free will. He thinks that free will means that God can do anything, including those things which are not in keeping with His nature. He thinks the same thing of man. i.e. God can sin even though it is against His nature, and man can believe even though it is against his nature.

 

Tucked away in my expression "human logic" is the implication of faulty logic. Of course, I believe in sound logic, or I would not be able to engage in any sort of meaningful dialogue.

 

I like to see Skypair clarify his statement.

 

I was pretty sure that's what you were implying, but I just wanted to make sure it was clear for those that might not see the difference.

 

You're a glutton for punishment. :laugh:

 

I hope he will come to understand these things.

I can agree if someone said "God can do anything He wants to do". But then the question is "what does He want to do?" The answer is that He wants to do the things which are in keeping with His nature.

Also, if somebody said "you can be saved if you want to be saved", that would be a true statement, if understood properly. The necessary understanding is what "saved" means. One must "believe" to be saved. But no one can just "believe" nilly-willy, contrary to what decisional evangelists think. Oh, they can make a profession of belief, say the prayer, go to the front, and even be baptized, but they can not truly believe without a change in their nature. They must be born again. One that has been born again, having received a new heart, WANTS to be saved - not just from the penalty of sin, but from the power and presence of sin also. And this is God's work in us! Glory to Him!

 

And this is something I would say myself. :thumbs:

 

Could Jesus have given into satan's temptation in the wilderness, or couldn't he? Is temptation really temptation if the ability to not do what you are tempted to do does not really exist?

 

Now, we taking off into the very nature of Jesus: Was His nature peccable or impeccable?

 

Can we really separate Jesus' nature, though?

 

Many have tried and have been condemned as heretics in church history. I really don't think Scripture has given us that option.

 

Yes you do follow my point, rather precisely it appears. I would only moderate the statement that God is separate from His foreknowledge. The rest is precise.

 

Regarding the OP, God is logical, and always logical. The only other alternative would be that He is sometimes illogical, which He is not. I used to say that he was beyond logic or alogical, but upon closer examination, these last things must make sense somehow, and are therefore logical. So God is always logical. This does not mean that we always understand Him...........because we don't. Nor does it mean that we can begin with mere human mind and reason our way to the point that we understand all of God's nature, because we can't. Some things God must reveal to us. But once these things are revealed, then we can reason about them, since God is reasonable.

The question then arises "Is God subject to logic that is outside of Himself, or what?" The answer is that logic comes from inside God, not outside. And God is consistent with His own nature.


The question about the logic of God usually brings up the questions about whether we can understand Him, but that is a separate question from "is he logical?"

 

I agree that it's difficult for us humans to know where that fine line is between temptation and sin. But Jesus knew exactly where it was and he never crossed it, even though he actually felt the pangs of hunger, it was impossible for him to cross that line into sin.

 

Hi JD,

If it was impossible then how can it be called temptation. If Satan said to breathe oil would you be tempted? I don't think you would because you know it's unbreathable and you have no desire to. You say in short that it was impossible for Christ to sin. However since Christ is God undoubtably He would have known He couldn't sin. I see no temptation If He couldn't sin. This is why in order for Him to be tempted, something He did desire was offered. What does Christ desire here? wasn't it the kingdom or rule over all He was shown. Isn't that what His return and our ressurection is all about. Isn't His goal the kingdom of God on earth.

MB

 

IMO, it was entirely possible for Jesus to turn stones into bread. It was not possible for Him to give in to the temptation to do so.

 

Okay, Greek scholars, I quoted Paul in his letter to Titus (1:2) as saying that God cannot lie. Is this a faithful translation into English?

MB now says there isn't anything that God can't do. Can these two statements be resolved in any way?

 

I heard a good sermon some 40years ago.
The evangelical (plan of salvation) outline was four
things that God couldn't know/couldn't do.

God does not have a better way to be
saved than thru Jesus.

etc.

To bad I didn't keep the notes???