Biblical Reference Needed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Benadam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Benadam

Guest
I’m in a discussion with someone who denies that the human soul is immortal. I pointed to Enoch because he didn’t experience death.

The rebuttle was if Enoch didn’t experience death then he was perfect, sinless and capable of dying for our sins in place of Jesus.

my response was, no, a perfect, sinless human would be incapable of redeeming man because a perfect human isn’t the source of life.
Jesus is human and divine, therefore only in His Name are we saved.

Thought I clinched it there, but the rebuttle to that was: ‘nowhere in the bible does it say that’.

So, I’m looking for a biblical reference stating that only God is the source of life, or that even if a man were sinless and perfect only Jesus could redeem, something to that effect.

If anyone knows a passage that would prove this point I would appreciate it.

Peace,

Benadam
 
“For if while we were enemies we were** reconciled** to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are** reconciled**, shall we be saved by his life.” Rom 5:10

The death of Christ merits atonement for sins, reconciling us to God, but it is the life of Christ lived in us by which we are ultimately saved. Were Enoch perfectly sinless, it is I suppose conceivable that he could have died as a substitute for a sinner. But as a mere man, Enoch was incapable of resurrecting himself and bestowing eternal life upon us, hence he could not be our savior.

" 17] For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
18] No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father." John 10
 
Hi SteveT:

Scripture does not limit the salvific mission of Christ to time and space. In Revelations 13:8, we read that the “lamb was slain from the foundation of the world.” Although we don’t read about the Crucifixion in the first few chapters of Genesis, this does not mean that the salvific work of Our Lord was not already a reality. Elijah was taken to heaven in a Chariot, yet we know from the Letter to the Hebrews that nothing in the Old Covenant saves man. Clearly, Elijah’s salvation came from the shed blood of Christ on the cross, even though the Crucifixion doesn’t occur for centuries later.

I hope this helps.

In faith,
Fiat
 
Thank you Steve, that makes a whole lot of sense to me.

SteveT said:
“For if while we were enemies we were** reconciled** to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are** reconciled**, shall we be saved by his life.” Rom 5:10

The death of Christ merits atonement for sins, reconciling us to God, but it is the life of Christ lived in us by which we are ultimately saved. Were Enoch perfectly sinless, it is I suppose conceivable that he could have died as a substitute for a sinner. But as a mere man, Enoch was incapable of resurrecting himself and bestowing eternal life upon us, hence he could not be our savior.

" 17] For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
18] No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father." John 10
Click to expand...
 
Thank you Steve, that makes a whole lot of sense to me.
It points out the sinlessness required in addition to the particular quality that Jesus life had in relation to the Father that no other human shared sinless or not.

I hope my friend will see it too.

Peace,

SteveT said:
“For if while we were enemies we were** reconciled** to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are** reconciled**, shall we be saved by his life.” Rom 5:10

The death of Christ merits atonement for sins, reconciling us to God, but it is the life of Christ lived in us by which we are ultimately saved. Were Enoch perfectly sinless, it is I suppose conceivable that he could have died as a substitute for a sinner. But as a mere man, Enoch was incapable of resurrecting himself and bestowing eternal life upon us, hence he could not be our savior.

" 17] For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
18] No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father." John 10
Click to expand...
 
Fiat:

I totally agree that the merits of Christ extend both forwards and backwards in time. My point is that His substitutionary death is not ultimately what saves us. His death reconciles us, but it is His life that saves us. If by a special grace of God Enoch and Elijah were preserved from sin by the application of the merits of Christ backwards in time, such that they never had to taste death, even if they had died as a voluntary substitute for the sins of another, that atonement wouldn’t merit heaven for the person so atoned for. Because it wouldn’t confer eternal life - the life of the Trinity itself - on the person for whom they died. Only God the Son could do that, by sending God the Spirit to dwell within us.

3] His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence,
4] by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, that through these you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion, and become partakers of the divine nature. 2 Pt 1

No mere human dying for us, even a sinless one, would make us to “become partakers of the divine nature”.
 
Hello Fiat,
I did use that reference in my dialogue in support of the idea that Enoch didn’t suffer death.

It’s a reasonable conclusion that since the passage points to the eternal character of Christ’s redemption hence an act requiring a divine source, that it would prove no other human could do it. The person I’m discussing this with isn’t disposed to accept the reasoning.

It’s amazing how much power to blind is an unconscious agenda.

This one like many fallen away Catholics stems from a rejection of parental authority that unconsciously seeks resolution in extending to the percieved source of the parental authority.

Thanks for the reference and your view in regards of it’s application.
40.png
Fiat:
Hi SteveT:

Scripture does not limit the salvific mission of Christ to time and space. In Revelations 13:8, we read that the “lamb was slain from the foundation of the world.” Although we don’t read about the Crucifixion in the first few chapters of Genesis, this does not mean that the salvific work of Our Lord was not already a reality. Elijah was taken to heaven in a Chariot, yet we know from the Letter to the Hebrews that nothing in the Old Covenant saves man. Clearly, Elijah’s salvation came from the shed blood of Christ on the cross, even though the Crucifixion doesn’t occur for centuries later.

I hope this helps.

In faith,
Fiat
Click to expand...
 
Fiat said:
Although we don’t read about the Crucifixion in the first few chapters of Genesis
Click to expand...
Actually in the shadows:
Christ is the alpha and omega, hence he is the Beginning.
The word ‘E -Lo-Him’ by pronouncing the H slightly different is a pun meaning “the not dark”.
‘Created’ is the word bara also meaning cut off. bar means son, purified, potash for smelting

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
So Adam represents the earthly and Christ the heavenly. However since Adam is a type of Christ, the first man represents the earthly nature of Christ. And Christ is the earthly and the heavenly.

So Gen 1.1 says :
In Christ, the not dark cut off (and smelted), the dual natured Christ.

This is the first mention of the cross.
 
Back to the OP:

In the shadows:

Cain and Abel together are the shadow of Christ.
Cain represents Christ in the flesh. He offered “some” fruits and vegetables, which is just an ordinary sacrifice.

Christ offered an ‘ordinary sacrifice’ by his perfect obedience. Perfect obedience is what we all were created to do, and as such is ordinary.

Even though Christ himself had a perfect life. It was insufficient to pay the penalty for sin. He still had to die, and he chose to do so represented by Cain:Christ killing Abel:Christ.

If you chart works against time our life graph should be a straight line at the 100% level. Just as Christ’s was. This was not special. It is what is expected. Simply doing what is expected cannot pay the debt for someone else or you would then be short.

If Enoch had given up his ‘perfect life’ for another man, he would have remained in hell himself having given up his works to replace those of another… But since Christ could conquer death, he could essentially conquer death repeatedly, once for each of us. Instead he did it in one fell swoop.

So the perfect life is just an ordinary sacrifice, as was Cain’s. Now here God speak to Christ in the words he spoke to Cain:

“If you do right, won’t you be lifted up?”
 
Benadam said:
I’m in a discussion with someone who denies that the human soul is immortal. I pointed to Enoch because he didn’t experience death.

The rebuttle was if Enoch didn’t experience death then he was perfect, sinless and capable of dying for our sins in place of Jesus.

my response was, no, a perfect, sinless human would be incapable of redeeming man because a perfect human isn’t the source of life.
Jesus is human and divine, therefore only in His Name are we saved.

Thought I clinched it there, but the rebuttle to that was: ‘nowhere in the bible does it say that’.

So, I’m looking for a biblical reference stating that only God is the source of life, or that even if a man were sinless and perfect only Jesus could redeem, something to that effect.

If anyone knows a passage that would prove this point I would appreciate it.

Peace,

Benadam
Click to expand...
Your sparring partner wouldn’t happen to be CalRed, aka, Old Scholar, aka, Cal, would it?
 
You do well…

The same story is told with Isaac and the Ram.
Isaac is the perfect life, the Ram is the blood.

Isaac was not accepted as the sacrifice.
 
It follows from logic that a perfect, sinless human would only be able to save another human. He cannot save many humans, simply because he is only one human. The Savior had to be God because God is unlimited, therefore His blood can redeem an unlimited number of people.

As for a verse that states Christ is the source of life:

Acts 3:15 states: " and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top