Kirk Cameron and annihilationism

[Wick Stick]

I don't know if I would call it a mess. I believe it started out in complete disorder. The order of the universe has increased continuously ever since. Some Hebrew theologians intimate that is the real meaning of the repeating phrase, "there was evening and there was morning", with evening suggesting a state of an opaqueness or haziness and morning suggesting a state of an increasing clarity and definition.

Genesis 1 appears to have been originally written in the Amorite language. The repetition and progression over a 7-day period is a poetic element in other Amorite epics, where it expresses ardor in an undertaking, and the passage of time - a persistent effort. I think the take-away in Genesis 1 should be the same - that God put forth great effort in the Creation.

I guess I'm saying I disagree with the Hebrew theologians because I already have an understanding that is different from theirs.

That sounds good, but what does corporal mean other than earthly physiological substance composed of atoms?

Corporal and corporeal mean 'relating to a body.' The word doesn't try to specify the composition. A 'spiritual body' is still a body, so...

Do we really think the heavenly, the spiritual, the supernatural existence in God's realm is composed of sub-atomic particles, atoms, chemicals, materials, held together by the basic forces of this world?

I think of it in terms of thoughts and intelligence.

I don't. I know your thoughts about using such passages as Ecclesiastes 12:7 as theological truth, but I think it is significant when there it is simply stated that the body as such ceases to exist and it is the spirit which returns to God to receive what God promises.

I think that same notion is expressed by 1 Corinthians 15:

47 The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.

God is Spirit. The heavenly is Spirit.

Right, but the Resurrection happens on the earth.

 

[FreeInChrist]

That speaks of how we will change. Not how Christ supposedly "changed".

I don't have all the answers either but I am willing to recognize facts that are uncomfortable to recognize. Facts that are essential to our understanding.

In the Incarnation, He was like us but we were not exactly like Him. This is the basic misunderstanding that Unitarians use to deny the Divinity of Christ. 'Like" never means "IDENTICAL". It just means "similar". Just like synonyms are similar but very seldom identical in meaning. Which is part of the reason why other words exist at all.

Unitarians insist that Christ must be exactly like us. He was never exactly like us. He was similar. Never exactly like us. There are many reason why I say this and make distinctions that must be recognized. Examples

1. Christ did not know what it was to sin personally. I know what it is to sin personally and to be personally responsible for my sin. Christ experiencing the results of my sin is enough. He didn't have to personally sin to experience my own guilt.
2. Christ did not see corruption when He died like I will see corruption when I die. The change you reference in 1 John 3:2 is a reference to how I need to change. Not how Christ needed to change.

As much as Unitarians want Christ to be just like them, He wasn't. I refuse to bring Christ fully down to my rank/level when He was so much better than I am. God Incarnate is such a meaningful aspect of my theology.

I believe I have a mature understanding of these topics. I'm not a novice or unlearned in this.

There is no context wherein the Person of Jesus Christ isn't superior to us in all ways. Even in the Incarnation.

Mat 23:10 Neither be you called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

There is no lack of a context of merit when it comes to the work of Jesus Christ. He in all ways merited His position. Such requires Divinity in all things.

One reply. He could never have been just like us for if he was he could never have been God. If there was proof that he was just like us, they would argue that proved he could not be God because we can't..

 

[praise_yeshua]

One reply. He could never have been just like us for if he was he could never have been God. If there was proof that he was just like us, they would argue that proved he could not be God because we can't..

This is a paradox that as Trinitarians, we never deny. We say 100 percent God and 100 percent man.

Man has devolved since the origins of Adam. We classify the context of fully man in the context of Adam. The second Adam.

Adam physically was the very best of us.