What If The World Didn't Need A Messiah?

[Mercy me]

[quote name='kafka' post='1738294' date='Dec 29 2008, 10:16 PM']I thought about this a bit today and I have come to a conclusion that yes if Adam had not sinned the Son of God would still have become a man.

Now I think the interesting question is why? Or for what purpose? I think the answer is simple. In fact so simple it is seemingly elusive (and different or perhaps more than Christ being King). Does anyone have any idea?

I do, yet I need a little time to formulate my own answer. . .

Til then what are your ideas?[/quote]

If not for the fall man where man separated himself from God, man would not need a messiah.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1738878' date='Dec 30 2008, 11:46 AM']If not for the fall man where man separated himself from God, man would not need a messiah.[/quote]

But, Jesus would still exist anyway because he is eternal.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1738883' date='Dec 30 2008, 11:11 AM']But, Jesus would still exist anyway because he is eternal.[/quote]

With this in mind, I think Jesus - as well as the Holy Spirit - would be made known to mankind at some point [b]even if[/b] sin did not exist.

Also to throw this out there, if Adam and Eve did not sin, then we can ponder not only (a) they were victorious in the face of temptation but (b) they were never tempted ; therefore perhaps Lucifer never rebelled.

[KnightofChrist]

I believe it is undeniable that Christ, and The Holy Spirit would at some point reveal themselves, since they are both eternal and exist. It would have likely been much sooner. That is if Christ and the Holy Spirit did not already reveal themselves to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, then later forgotten. After all it was heaven on earth.

Edited December 30, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[frenchfry]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1738645' date='Dec 30 2008, 05:43 AM']Well, we know some things for sure: Jesus is eternal, so there's no question about his existence. Therefore, it stands to reason he probably would come to earth, so the more pertinent question may be the nature of his mission on earth.

A few thoughts I have: Marriage as an institution would be unnecessary as husbands and wives would by naturally inclined to permanent, open, monogamous, life-giving relationships. If Jesus was born of Mary, the Immaculate Conception is unnecessary, and obviously the world would fully accept and embrace Jesus and everything he taught. While the Church would be unnecessary since there would be no sinners, would we still receive the Eucharist? That's an interesting question.

Regardless, this world would still pass away eventually and Christ would return to establish the new heavens and new earth as prophesied in Revelation. That's when marital relations and child bearing would cease, just as Jesus has revealed to us.[/quote]

Jesus as divine is eternal, but Jesus as man is not - meaning that his body did not exist from before the beginning of time. It makes no sense logically - his body changed while he was on Earth, and anything eternal has to be unchanging. And just because his divine nature is eternal, that does not mean that he would come to Earth - God the Father is eternal, and He never came to Earth.

And I'm not sure that marriage exists only as a solution to a problem. Anyway, how is an open, life-giving, lasting, monogamous relationship different from a "marriage"? This is an actual question, not an argument. It's not the blessing of the Church, because Israelites and even pagans could be married before She existed.

And why would the Earth necessarily pass away if no one had ever sinned? I think people may have existed in the Eden state forever.

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1738981' date='Dec 30 2008, 02:54 PM']With this in mind, I think Jesus - as well as the Holy Spirit - would be made known to mankind at some point [b]even if[/b] sin did not exist.[/quote]

Being "made known" does not imply an incarnation. Adam and Eve knew God, as did the Israelites, but He was not incarnated. The Holy Spirit did not depend on the incarnation to be made known. People could have been baptized and received Him without this, or even received Him at birth, if God willed it.


This is such an interesting topic!

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='frenchfry' post='1739005' date='Dec 30 2008, 03:51 PM']Jesus as divine is eternal, but Jesus as man is not - meaning that his body did not exist from before the beginning of time. It makes no sense logically - his body changed while he was on Earth, and anything eternal has to be unchanging. And just because his divine nature is eternal, that does not mean that he would come to Earth - God the Father is eternal, and He never came to Earth.[/quote]

Jesus always had two natures: divine and human. That's the unchanging part. His body on earth, being human in nature, could change just as wine can change into Christ's Body and Blood and change back to water if it's diluted beyond the appearance of wine.

[quote name='frenchfry' post='1739005' date='Dec 30 2008, 03:51 PM']And I'm not sure that marriage exists only as a solution to a problem. Anyway, how is an open, life-giving, lasting, monogamous relationship different from a "marriage"? This is an actual question, not an argument. It's not the blessing of the Church, because Israelites and even pagans could be married before She existed.[/quote]

Well, I say that because the institution of marriage seems to have been established to enforce by law how God intended for husbands and wives to live in relationship with each other.

[quote name='frenchfry' post='1739005' date='Dec 30 2008, 03:51 PM']And why would the Earth necessarily pass away if no one had ever sinned? I think people may have existed in the Eden state forever.[/quote]

I'm not certain on either of these, but my main reason for suggesting this possibility is the earth can only hold so many people, and in fulfilling God's commandment to "be fruitful and multiply," Adam and Eve's descendents would eventually run out of space. Therefore, I reckon God always had planned a "new heavens and new earth" a superior creation.

Of course, perhaps people would be assumed into heaven like Mary, but that only seems to strengthen the case for a second creation.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='frenchfry' post='1739005' date='Dec 30 2008, 02:51 PM']Being "made known" does not imply an incarnation. Adam and Eve knew God, as did the Israelites, but He was not incarnated. The Holy Spirit did not depend on the incarnation to be made known. People could have been baptized and received Him without this, or even received Him at birth, if God willed it.[/quote]

I was not implying an incarnation.

[kafka]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1738878' date='Dec 30 2008, 10:46 AM']If not for the fall man where man separated himself from God, man would not need a messiah.[/quote]
true. Yet God is not contingent. He is not dependant. It is not as if man does something therefore God does something in reaction. God is One Divine Eternal Act. Everything He is and does is One. In God being is doing and doing is being. He creates since He is creative, He loves since He is love. It would be impossible for Him not to create since it is against His very Nature. And in my opinion it is impossible that the Son of God would not have become Man since for Him not to become Man would in a way contradict His Nature, namely Love, Mercy, Justice, etc. The only reason or purpose God does is God. He is His own reason, His own purpose. I dont think this hypothetical could be completely explained by faith aided reason since Jesus Christ will always be dark (mysterious) even to the greatest of Saints.

I want to work on formulating this point to a greater degree of clarity.


[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1738883' date='Dec 30 2008, 11:11 AM']But, Jesus would still exist anyway because he is eternal.[/quote]
As Frenchfry pointed out His Divine Nature is eternal, his human nature had a beginning. Still you sort of make a point. The Divine and Human Natures are mystically united, therefore Jesus Christ is in a way beyond time and place:

:all that Christ is—all that he did and suffered for all men—participates in the divine eternity, and so transcends all times."
-JPII from Ecclesia de Eucharistia

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1738990' date='Dec 30 2008, 02:15 PM']I believe it is undeniable that Christ, and The Holy Spirit would at some point reveal themselves, since they are both eternal and exist. It would have likely been much sooner. That is if Christ and the Holy Spirit did not already reveal themselves to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, then later forgotten. After all it was heaven on earth.[/quote]
But why?

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kafka' post='1739046' date='Dec 30 2008, 04:50 PM']But why?

[/quote]

Because without sin man could have been in full communion with all of God, and Christ is God.

[kafka]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1739048' date='Dec 30 2008, 03:53 PM']Because without sin man could have been in full communion with all of God, and Christ is God.[/quote]
I would like to correct this point you make. There is a mystic union between the Divine and Human natures of Christ, yet it is not a full communion. Nothing created can be in full/complete union with the Uncreated. Nothing created can contain God. Even the indwelling of the Holy Spirit the spiritual writers like to write about is figurative.

Edited December 30, 2008 by kafka

[Apotheoun]

Theosis (divinization) is not figurative; rather, it involves a real ontological participation of man in God. Thus, when a man participates in the uncreated energy of God he truly becomes divine and uncreated, i.e., he becomes by grace what God is by nature.

As St. Gregory Palamas explained:

"According to the divine Maximos, the Logos of well-being, by grace is present unto the worthy, bearing God, Who is by nature above all beginning and end, Who makes those who by nature have a beginning and an end become by grace without beginning and without end, because the Great Paul also, no longer living the life in time, but the divine and eternal life of the indwelling Logos, became by grace without beginning and without end; and Melchisedek had neither beginning of days, nor end of life, not because of his created nature, according to which he began and ceased to exist, but because of the divine and uncreated and eternal grace which is above all nature and time, being from the eternal God. Paul, therefore, was created only as long as he lived the life created from non-being by the command of God. But when he no longer lived this life, but that which is present by the indwelling of God, he became uncreated by grace, as did also Melchisedek and everyone who comes to possess the Logos of God, alone living and acting within himself." [St. Gregory Palamas, [i]Third Letter to Akindynos[/i]]

[kafka]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1739068' date='Dec 30 2008, 04:38 PM']Theosis (divinization) is not figurative; rather, it involves a real ontological participation of man in God. Thus, when a man participates in the uncreated energy of God he truly becomes divine and uncreated, i.e., he becomes by grace what God is by nature.

As St. Gregory Palamas explained:

"According to the divine Maximos, the Logos of well-being, by grace is present unto the worthy, bearing God, Who is by nature above all beginning and end, Who makes those who by nature have a beginning and an end become by grace without beginning and without end, because the Great Paul also, no longer living the life in time, but the divine and eternal life of the indwelling Logos, became by grace without beginning and without end; and Melchisedek had neither beginning of days, nor end of life, not because of his created nature, according to which he began and ceased to exist, but because of the divine and uncreated and eternal grace which is above all nature and time, being from the eternal God. Paul, therefore, was created only as long as he lived the life created from non-being by the command of God. But when he no longer lived this life, but that which is present by the indwelling of God, he became uncreated by grace, as did also Melchisedek and everyone who comes to possess the Logos of God, alone living and acting within himself." [St. Gregory Palamas, [i]Third Letter to Akindynos[/i]][/quote]
St. Gregory Palamas was wrong on this particular point.

It is illogical, I even dare say phantasmal to think that which had a beginning and an end could be made to have no no beginning and no end. No beginning and no end is Eternity who is God. Grace has an effect on the soul-body-spirit of a human to make him like God or like Jesus Christ, it does not turn us into God or Christ which is the only sober (albeit erroneous) conclusion one could come to in St Gregory's quoted passage above.

In Heaven we will be with God who is Eternity, and we will participate in a transcendent of Time and Place in for a lack of better word "container" of Heaven, yet our human nature will not transcend Time and Place. Our nature will never be completely beyond Time and Place, since God alone is Eternal in the true and complete sense of the word.

There is no ontological participation in the Divine Nature. It is both impossible and illogical, and I dare say arrogant (perhaps pantheistic) to think this way.

Edited December 30, 2008 by kafka

[Mercy me]

[quote name='kafka' date='Dec 30 2008, 04:50 PM' post='1739046']
And in my opinion it is impossible that the Son of God would not have become Man since for Him not to become Man would in a way contradict His Nature, namely Love, Mercy, Justice, etc. The only reason or purpose God does is God. He is His own reason, His own purpose. I dont think this hypothetical could be completely explained by faith aided reason since Jesus Christ will always be dark (mysterious) even to the greatest of Saints.
/quote]

I am sorry if my response was unclear.

I meant that a messiah was not needed as Adam and Eve were in full communion with God. I agree that would in no way preclude the Son of God becoming man. However, if not for the fall His role would not have been as messiah since man did not need saving.

I agree that there is a likelihood that Adam and Eve knew Jesus as they knew the Father.

[kafka]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1739079' date='Dec 30 2008, 05:00 PM']I am sorry if my response was unclear.

I meant that a messiah was not needed as Adam and Eve were in full communion with God. I agree that would in no way preclude the Son of God becoming man. However, if not for the fall His role would not have been as messiah since man did not need saving.

I agree that there is a likelihood that Adam and Eve knew Jesus as they knew the Father.[/quote]
no problem. I am trying to be as exact as possible since there are many errors in the Church during these times we live in. Again I disagree with the wording "full communion with God" which I've explained in my above posts.

I'm not sure what the role of Christ would be in this hypothetical

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1739076' date='Dec 30 2008, 02:56 PM']St. Gregory Palamas was wrong on this particular point.[/quote]
I hold that you are wrong and St. Gregory (along with all the Eastern Fathers who teach the same thing) is right.