2nd Person of the Trinity
(part 2)
Created spirit entities:
Now we know "God is Spirit…" (John 4:24) and the FATHER, SON and SPIRIT had no material association until creation came into being.
Yet created spirit entities too, must possess some form of "material" existence. (They can't "materialize" from an omnipresent state because they are not omnipresent.) It's just what "substance" spirit entities are "made out of"; we don't have the material capacity to discover. Of which we probably never will; this side of the new heavens and new earth, because "material" and "spirit" are different realms of this temporal cosmos; of which passage for the material creatures, only goes in one direction.
Yet according to some scientists (which I can't verify if they are being truthful about their findings or not) say human souls actually do have "weight". It's nano particle "weight", but they claim there is a difference in the weight of a living person as opposed to the weight of a corpse at the time the soul leaves the body. There are scientists who claim they've measured this.
So assuming if a human spirit has "weight" an angel / demon would have "weight" also; because human souls and angels / demons are temporal spirit entities within themselves. Granted they aren't the same type of spirit entities, but they are both temporal entities.
Now here's an interesting (yet pointless) question: If one could measure the weights of comparable angels; one fallen and one not. Would the demon weigh more than the angel on account of the "weight of sin"? (Obviously I don't know the answer to that; but it would be pretty wild if that's true!) Does the cosmos actually now "weigh more" than it did before the fall? And could this be the reason why matter can't travel the speed of light? LOL (How many angels can one fit on the head of a pin?)
There are Scriptures that warn of useless speculation! LOL - so anyways; back the former topic of discussion:
We know spirit entities (human souls and angels) do have the capacity to appear in the presence of God's (omnipresent) realm of the 3rd heaven. They can also appear to living people on earth. (Human souls can appear in visions; as seen with Saul, the ghost of Samuel and the witch of Endor account.) There are no accounts in Scripture that I'm aware of, that a deceased human soul ever appeared to a living human.
We also have in Luke 16, the story of the rich man in hell. He believed that the (assumed) ghost of Lazarus could be sent by Abraham from Abraham's bosom to the rich man's living relatives. Abraham rebuked the rich man saying they have Moses and the law that if they don't believe Scripture they won't believe one who rises from the dead. Which is true seeing how there are several examples in both the OT and NT of people who rose from the dead. And obviously the most pertinent resurrection to the question (Christ) they didn't believe either.
Which I think this story tells us some important truth. Human souls can not appear to living humans. For a deceased relative to communicate with a living one; would require them to be raised from the dead! I.E. there is no such thing as "seeing ghosts" or at least as per them being deceased human souls. Thus true "seen events" that would legitimately fall into the spirit category; at our point in history, would only be the presence of demonic entities.
Now not everything that people think is "seeing spirit entities" is demonic (or angelic for that matter). There's natural phenomena people think are "sprit entities" and there's psychological factors such as people with psychiatric disorders. (Some people claim all schizophrenics are "demon possessed" (some may be); but schizophrenia is not an automatic qualifier for demon possession.) And people do have "dreams and visions"; both of which are "real" phenomena, although they are not revelation from God, since the Scripture canon is closed.
So obviously God the Son, being omnipotent can materialize from the omnipresent state if He chooses. (We do see cases where the SON had done this prior to the incarnation.) Although Jesus Christ prior to the ascension could not (and did not) "materialize"; because the incarnation was a Self imposed limitation on the SON's existence. Which for the entity that God is; I can only imagine not "feeling" omnipresent must have… "felt weird".
Obviously too the incarnation limited the SON's ability to be omniscient, omnipresent and immortal. Although it didn't limit His capacity to be eternal, nor does it appear that it limited His capacity to be omnipotent. It's interesting that Jesus Christ possessed the power to do what ever he wanted; but was still required of his humanity to pray for wisdom and the revelation of the will of the Father.
Now were there actions where Jesus exercised that omnipotence because he perceived it to be the right thing to do? Theoretically, that's possible; but the wisdom of the SON comes into the equation in the understanding that the flesh is weak. The SON's omniscience knew in the Son's (human nature) that lack of omniscience, despite the fact that all intent and motivations of the Son were without sin. Which this must have made an interesting interplay between humanity and Divinity because Jesus's human nature still had an independent will. Of which I'm sure the SON was well aware that the Son could (technically) still sin; and without the presence of the SON, he would have. Thus one of the necessities that the Son be God incarnate.
The other necessity had to do with the ability to atone for sin; not just possessing the human qualification to atone for sin. (That human qualification being not having committed sin himself.)
Ye are gods:
Now what does this mean? In our realm of created capacity, though we are "gods"; we are "gods" because we are on the top of the "theological food chain" of God's ENTIRE creation. Humanity; (specifically redeemed humans) outrank everything else in this this cosmos. This includes angels, demons, Satan and any other materially (or angelic) based extraterrestrial life that may exist.
Unless of course that extraterrestrial life is some offshoot of Adam in what ever capacity being "created in the image of God" may constitute. (If some how in some way, humans ever attained the ability to inhabit another planet; (or planets).) As far as we know from Scripture though; that has never happened. Of our current understanding of the universe, we could say that is theoretically possible; but we have no evidence that has ever happened.
So if material extraterrestrial life exists; (which it could because we know "non-material extraterrestrial life" does exist = we call them "angels") they would not be created in God's image. Despite that they may actually even be intellectually comparable to humans. (Thus in a certain sense they'd be "advanced beasts".) And thus it is not likely they'd have the capacity to even contemplate how to transverse space.
Could other materially created beings be that advanced and not be self aware and thus accountable if they sin? That seems unlikely to me, seeing how "through one man sin entered". Material extraterrestrial life (just as non-material angels) are subject to the same capacity for corruption that we are.
Could there be material life of comparable (or even more advanced) abilities as humans; but who are not created in God's image? Sure that's possible. Although like angels; if they posses that level of intelligence; they would be accountable to God for their actions and likewise; ones who sin would be outside of the redemption plan.
Angels and the foundation of the cosmos?
Which this raises an interesting question. We know Lucifer fell before Adam did; though from the point of consciousness Adam possessed the capacity to contemplate the consequence of disobedience. Lucifer did too (and apparently so do the other angels that fell); but I'm curious, if "by one man sin entered" if the rest of the angels who disobeyed didn't fall until after Adam did; or even if they fell when Eve did?
I'd gone over in the Theory on Angels, Ghosts and Extraterrestrial Life study that Lucifer was apparently a very different type of angel than any other angel. He was likely the very first entity created by God and all the other angels; being created subsequently witnessed the laying of the foundations of the earth. (Job 38:5-7)
Now was the angelic host completed before the material elements were created? Assuming the answer to that is "no" because they by needs of being created entities themselves, would require being made of some manner of element. Are we talking about atomic material elements or some other elemental construct? (Assuming the answer would be "B".)
We know there's some "format" of what the material cosmos is constructed upon. Do some manner of "angel" make up that format? Is that what the "angels of the four winds" at the destruction of the material cosmos do? They "let go" of the elemental world and upon it collapsing into some format of "black hole" it burns up? It does seem logical that destruction of the cosmos would be "reverse order" of its creation. Of some point of singularity that "In the beginning God…" and something comes from nothing; all would collapse back into nothing should there not have been a reception plan to recreate.
The beginning of Job 38 seems to elude to a similar concept. God poses the question of "the line of measure" (Assuming this means size of the cosmos.) And "where upon are the foundations fastened?" Meaning the material elements of the cosmos are formatted on something. (Is that something, some form of "angel"?) The question "who has laid the cornerstone?" is pretty simple; as we know from other parts of Scripture that Christ is the cornerstone! This actually means that the structure of the cosmos itself is founded on the redemption plan!
I just did a quick look at those verses and "line" is likely a reference to "laws that govern". It comes from a phrase "to watch" or "wait upon". "Fastened" means to "rule of strength". And of additions tacked onto the word; we get the word "lord" or "lordship" including "Lord" in some contexts; connected to LORD. The concept is of the rulership of God over the cosmos in strength. Obviously the answer to the questions raised in Job is that God is the One who did all these things. But how? (Interestingly isn't the question raised to Job.) Which by implication does this mean humanity will never know? (Or at least not on this side of eternity!)
Adam and Eve: "little gods":
Back to Adam and Eve though; and the ability to be able to conceptualize consequence before the fall. We know Adam had that capacity. (I'd also mentioned Lucifer and angels did too.) And so did Eve (at least intellectually); but to what other extent did she possess that capacity? I don't know the "nuts and bolts" of the answer to that question.
We do know Eve was "deceivable" in some capacity that Adam was not. The Scripture tells us this much. What made her "nature of woman" to be "deceivable" though; I don't know. Scripture says she "wanted to be wise as unto God". It doesn't say she wanted to be wise like unto Adam. (Interesting.) Which in that, is certainly the recognition that God the Creator is superior to Adam in His capacity for wisdom. For what ever "wisdom" meant to Eve? (I don't know the answer to that either; because I don't know what more of wisdom one who's not encumbered by sin would desire?)
Was buried in that "quest for wisdom" some motivation to supplant Adam as "the first creation of God's image"? That's possible, seeing how post fall she was assigned "subordinate" to Adam. Any underlying devious motivation that may have been latent in Eve's decision making processes isn't explicitly explained to us.
The reality was (still is) that positionally; there was no "1st" and "2nd" creations of God's image as "male" and "female" humans are basically "one entity" in God's perspective of human moral accountability; despite each individual human is individually accountable. Male and female were created intentionally upon God's omniscience, that the coming knowledge of good and evil would bring death. That was the purpose for the "dividing" of "man" into male and female.
So obviously of what in God's omniscience He decided to create both male and female in His image; on account of the coming of death. He would have also known the weakness in Eve, which ironically was also the same weakness in Adam. (This was fundamentally on account of them being temporal created beings.) It's just the reason for the fall of Adam was different than the reason for the fall of Eve. And the differentiation of these reasons appears to be sex based; at least from the psychological standpoint of the differences between how male and female brains process information and how that affects the outcomes of motivations.
Believers as "little gods":
We "are gods" "in Christ" who is the 2nd Person of the Godhead incarnated in human flesh. (Note that Jesus never says that those whom the Word of God didn't come to are "gods". John 10:35) Which slants the angle away from those of the modern pentecostal movement who wish to attach themselves to this concept that's been coined "the little gods doctrine". No one who is not regenerated by the Spirit of God is a "little god".
Now what does being a "little god" mean? (Besides the qualifier being redemption.) That I'm not 100% sure of. Does it have to do with authority over Satan and the demons that operate in the kingdom of Satan; seeing how believers are translated out of that kingdom?
Now even if this is part of it; it doesn't mean that evil human agents can't martyr a true believer, because even the unregenerate still retain a will that's independent of the wills of other entities. Of which if God doesn't want a particular saint to be martyred at this particular point; He will intervene.
I remember one story where a robber ran into a convince store and stuck a gun in the clerks face demanding money. The clerk's response was something along the lines of: "Well Lord, looks like today's the day I go home." The burglar started trembling, dropped the gun on the counter and ran out of the convince store. (Apparently; No, it wasn't that clerks day to go home.) One could ask: Was that clerk a genuine believer? I don't know for sure; but the evidence seems to point in that direction, as clearly he wasn't afraid to die. Yet there is an example of how the exercise of God's authority operates among the world anyways.
In the context that Jesus brings up the phrase "ye are gods" it's not in the context of the kingdom of Satan. The "tag line" is "whom the Word of God came to". So does "little gods" have something to do rather with the authority to understand Scripture and the redemption plan than it has anything to do with rebuking Satan?
Although the power to rebuke evil and understand what that actually means; springs out of proper understanding of Scripture; the "ye are gods to whom the word of God came", is stated in direct context of Scripture. And since we know "rebuking evil" doesn't necessarily mean evil men won't kill you (after all they killed Jesus). We do retain the ability to prevent evil from inhabiting us. Satan can't steal the soul of a believer. Believers can't be possessed by devils. Which would mean that if there are certain constructs of practiced behavior that are indicative of demonic possession; one would be able to tell that someone is not a believer who engages in these.
A perfect example here is what's listed in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Now this doesn't mean people can't be redeemed out of obviously criminal and degenerate behavior; but it does mean that those still trapped in it are not believers. Are there people who exhibit a level of "reprobate" that's evidence that they will never be redeemed?
Reprobates?
Now the answer to that question may be more found in what psychology would call pathologies involving clinical narcissism. Where there will never be repentance because there is no remorse and there is no remorse because there is no empathy. Currently, it's believed that sociopaths are "made" (by environment) and psychopaths are "born" psychopathic. There are arguments "for" and "against" the psychopathic theory; as even if someone is "born without empathy"; none of us are born without conscience.
There is the theoretical possibility of a "moral sociopath". Law enforcement who go under cover, spies, military and police snipers, people involved in covert military ops. Yes these people are capable of doing what criminals do; yet they distinctly choose to do these things to criminals. (It's part of their job.) Is that really lack of empathy though; or just a pragmatic line in the sand of who is innocent of criminality and who isn't?
And here I think is the delineation between what is "conscience lead sociopathic" as opposed to the Scriptural definition of reprobate.
The flip side of this though too, is that not all who'd be classified as Scriptural reprobates are criminally sociopathic. There are pharisaic type people who never break civil laws; yet are reprobate in their pride because they "feel" no need for redemption because they tell themselves they are superior anyways.
Now I don't believe in the conscience of humanity God allows people to genuinely not know they are deceiving themselves in the midst of their narcissistic behavior. To commit an act that is not accountable because one is either out of their mind or they lack the intellectual capacity to understand why their behavior is wrong; is the proper legal definition of insanity.
(For example; a non-verbal seriously intellectually disabled person who hits staff either out of their own frustration, or shifting perceptions of reality due to mental illness or behavior driven by something like temporal lobe epilepsy.)
That would be an example of actions that are not held to the account of that individual. Generally though; people acting out of moments of insanity (sometimes drug induced) are genuinely remorseful when they do come back to their senses. How many alcoholics who've killed someone in a drunk driving accident; this becomes their "wake up call" to (and they do) get sober.
That's an example of a "sorrow that leads to repentance". Now is that "Godly sorrow"? That would depend on how they come to see themselves in relation to the justification of God's wrath; in relation to the outcome of their life subsequent to that incident.
Plus God's sovereignty in election and redemption; as well as His control of His cosmos, play a role in all of the actions of us living in this creation.
As pertains to the subject of this chapter: I think I will end this chapter here. There's more that could be said in regards to these ideas. Consequently though, it is easier for us to intellectually grasp the incarnation than it is for us to intellectually grasp the Trinity.
The reason for this, I think is because at least the incarnation is subject to the same laws of creation as we are. Whereas the Trinity is only subject to God's own standards based on the Entity that God is. The Creator's nature is unlike anything He's created. He's is His own "wheelhouse" so to speak. And there's limitations we have of our own capacity to understand that "Wheelhouse".
Will there be a following chapter of this subject? If so, I haven't written it yet.
