#1, Jesus is not divine, had no life that was His own, could not rasie Himself nor was He at all times (as someone who recieves life by necessity must come after the one who gives it). It follows that Jesus and God Father are two different beings. It further follows that in the sense as the cross was necessary for the defeat of sin (there are many views on this on this here forum but I think all could fit in what I write here) God Father sent someone else to take the beating. God sacraficed someone lesser than Himself (either directly by being the one requiring the death or indirectly by accepting that death was necessary and volunteering Jesus).
#2 Jesus is divine and could take His life back at the right moment. He has life in Himself and is therefore equal with God Father in this. God Father and Jesus both being divine causes questions on how God is one, the main answer to help us understand being trinity. God therefore did not send someone else to deal with the sin chrisis but took personal responcibility for it, thus showing everyone who care to see the importance He places on His fallen creation. It not being enough to send some servant, but being something He puts Himself on the line to solve.
The real trick with this issue - so thank you very much, Green, for raising it! - is what would have happened to the Godhead had Jesus sinned? Essentially, the trinity doctrine would have had a lack of numbers to make up its definition. The Godhead would have survived in the Father, so God himself would not have ceased to exist had God's Son sinned as man, but the trinity God would theoretically have ceased to exist, not so? This is indeed a critical question for the meaning and make up of the Godhead in their plan of salvation...
Is this point supposed to have been made in the imediately preceeding post by Greenie or does it come from some older post? Because I fail to find the conclusions drawn in the passage I quoted in the mentioned post by Greenie.
