"The law of Jehovah, the foundation of His government in heaven and upon earth, was as sacred as God Himself; and for this reason the life of an angel could not be accepted of God as a sacrifice for its transgression." (Ibid)

For what reason? Because angels are not as sacred as the law, right? Why aren't they? Is it because they are created? because they are not as eternal as the Father? If Jesus is "begotten" (created or procreated), not as eternal as the Father, can He be as sacred as the law?

"The law of Jehovah, the foundation of His government in heaven and upon earth, was as sacred as God Himself; and for this reason the life of an angel could not be accepted of God as a sacrifice for its transgression."

Just a little curve ball that is related to how this thread got started.

The life of an angel was not good enough. So, whose life is sacred enough? Obviously, Christ's.

What life did He give up? Divine or human?

If divine, what do we make of the statement that divinity did not die?

If human, was Christ's humanity more sacred than an angel's? If so, how does that affect the fallen/unfallen humanity debate?

Or is the "sacrifice for its transgression" that God requires not really Christ's death?

I don't want to take this thread off course; just some stuff to ponder.

Arnold, the reason why Jesus' life was acceptable as a sacrifice is due to the fact Jesus is as sacred as the law. Why is He as sacred as the law? Why aren't angels as sacred as the law?

Excellent points, Arthur.

If the problem were one of a payment being necessary in order for God to forgive, your points would be right on. If the problem has to do with a revelation of God's character being necessary, then everything fits together.

The reason the life of an angel was not sufficient is because an angel cannot fully reveal God's character.

The reason the law is more sacred than an angel is because the law is a transcript of God's character.

The reason Jesus Christ is as sacred as the law is because just as the law is a transcript of God's character, so is Jesus Christ (only better, because in Christ we see God's character in human flesh, so we get a portrayal we can understand).

The sacrifice that was required was the sacrifice of Christ's life. This includes his death, but is not limited to it. Christ was "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." The apex of Christ's obedience was His death, but His whole life was one of obedience, one of sacrifice.

Romans 12:1 talks about our presenting ourselves a living sacrifice, which is our "reasonable service." This is just what Christ did. His whole life was one of service, of self-sacrifice, of obedience.

Tom, this post was in response to a post you made on the previous page of this thread:


For convenience sake here is your post:

TE: The reason Jesus Christ is as sacred as the law is because just as the law is a transcript of God's character, so is Jesus Christ (only better, because in Christ we see God's character in human flesh, so we get a portrayal we can understand).

MM: If Jesus is "begotten" (created or procreated) how can He, and not an angel, be as sacred as the law, a transcript of the Father's character?

Regarding angels not being as sacred as the law, I understand this to mean that the angels were not a full revelation of God's character, as the law is, or as Jesus Christ is.

I don't see why you think Jesus' being begotten would cause Him to not be sacred enough.

"The law of Jehovah, the foundation of His government in heaven and upon earth, was as sacred as God Himself; and for this reason the life of an angel could not be accepted of God as a sacrifice for its transgression." (Ibid)

TE: I don't see why you think Jesus' being begotten would cause Him to not be sacred enough.

MM: What makes Jesus more sacred, more like the law, more like the Father in character, than the holy angels? If Jesus is no more eternal than the angels why, then, is He more like the law than the angels? If Jesus is "begotten", rather than eternal, how can His status be more sacred than the angels?

If Jesus were begotten rather than eternal (although you have an implicit assumption here which I disagree with, that Jesus can't be both), then He could be more sacred than the angels by having a character which completely reveals the character of God, whereas the angels don't.

1. When was Jesus begotten? Before or after His incarnation? Or, both?

2. How is begotten different than procreated?

3. Is Jesus as eternal as the Father? Is He eternal in the same way the Father is eternal? Was there a time when Jesus did not exist as an eternal being?

4. What does it mean Jesus was "made a little lower than the angels"? (Heb 2:9)