The truth is not simply that the sun is fixed and that the earth moves around the sun. Both the sun and the earth are moving. The sun is moving through the space. It all depends on your point of reference. From where I stand the sun truly moves across the sky. Were I to stand on the moon the earth would be seen to move. I say that I sit still and yet that statement is not true since even when sitting still I am moving with a large velocity. It’s all relative!
For the trinitarians it's simply that Jesus had two nature's, a human nature and a divine nature. In His human nature He lacked knowledge but in His Divine nature He has no false beliefs.
Scripture is inerrant in all it intends to teach. Does scripture intend to teach that the mustard seed is the smallest seed in the world? Obviously no, why would God care about teaching that? What purpose would he have had?
Maybe that's why his teens and twenties aren't in the Gospels, he was off being a young person which would have involved (being fully human) probably some cringe moments of some description.
@@mistressofstones To my knowledge, ancient biographies simply didn't care about childhood. If you look at Plutarch for instance (from thos I've read anyway), childhood is mostly ignored except for one or two comments. Even less than what Luke gave us.
@@WhatYourPastorDidntTellYou Scripture is not inerrant, it is infallible. There are errors in Scripture but never with regard to its theological/spiritual message. Even John Calvin admitted in one of his commentaries that Hebrews 11:21 had an autographical mistake. What God says will come true and He instructs us abundantly and satisfactorily, so even if you believe that the Bible contains errors in the case of geographical, political, historical or other facets, that changes none of its authority.
@@willhaynes3505 Let's assume that the tribulation referred to in Matthew 24 is talking about the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Matthew 24:29-30 says the Son of Man would come immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days. So the coming of the Son of Man must be something other than the roman destruction of Jerusalem. If the coming of the Son of Man doesn't refer to the second coming of Jesus, and it doesn't refer to God's judgement against Jerusalem carried out through Rome, what does it refer to? _______ How was this fulfilled in AD 70? Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. (Matthew 24:40-41) _______ Did the Angels come down in AD 70, and was each person rewarded according to what they had done? For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. (Matthew 16:27)
This video doesn't answer why Christians should accept that Jesus had false beliefs, given that none of these false beliefs were actually stated (only speculated at) we can't know why any Christian ought to accept this, accept it so that what can happen?
Randals very clear argument was that by necessity, if Jesus was a fully human baby who had to grow into an adult man, he must have had false beliefs at some point. I don't see how thats a difficult argument to comprehend? The lack of specific examples means nothing to the validity of the argument itself. Once we accept that Jesus had false beliefs, the question then becomes "well, what ones?".
@@youngyvidz716 The argument is being made so that what can happen? Why should any Christian accept this argument? Thats what I'm asking and your response didn't address that.
I take very seriously that the Son of God is fully human and fully God. I was hoping you would give a biblical example of something he got wrong so I could tell you how it is right since anyone can choose to see error or truth from the bible due to spiritual reality being based on states of being. let us not forget that he had a divine mind, not only a human one. if he was in error about fundamental things then that could be a problem. the logic plays itself out though, he is the criteria for what a "fully human" is. fallen humanity is not the fullness of the truth. animal humanity is not all we are. Christians don't like to make Jesus too human because that is a little bit too close to home and has startling implications.
@@AlexADalton I think this sort of stuff falls in line with thinking about how God hardened pharaohs heart. some think God forced pharaoh to be a way that God is not pleased with, others claim that God by being God (goodness and truth) and pharaoh being pharaoh equated to making pharaohs heart hard. just because Jesus claims the temples destruction does not at all mean that God willed it but rather saw what evil spirits would do with it without God. and let us not forget that the temple Jesus speaks of is us and that destruction is like crucifixion.
so Gods providence works while keeping other beings free, this is how for instance evil spirits can serve him. it is not they themselves that do Gods will but rather it is God trying to make use of the evil ones best as he can. in this way even the devil who is opposed to God is used by God as part of Gods judgment. Gods providence simply puts like beings with like and always orders things in a manner that draws all to himself.
@@AlexADalton it is possible that you have your heart hardened by God due to him saying things and you not being able to understand them deeply enough. though you (and I too) have many things in you, some good and some evil, which is why you also speak truly some things. by assuming that the evil people are folks outside of you, you have missed the main point of salvation which is that goodness overcomes evil. if you had the understanding of a child you would know that broken shards of pottery are called terra preta and by burying them in the garden they serve a very great purpose for Gods garden... just like when you burn things into ash, you also benefit your garden. I think things like the destruction of the temple are not ideal to God but he sees how it will help people so he allows them to occur. it is not that God punishes people out of drives that prideful kings have. God does what he does out of goodness, love and wisdom because that is true justice. goodness and wisdom are the trunk of the divine. justice and wrath are branches which are supported by the main intentions of God. what I want clarified is the inner intentions of God and the deep spiritual currents of why we see God as we see him. but it is true that since we are mortal and God acts for our more fundamental parts that things like death are a means to an end for God. one reason Jesus came to our world was because it was very darkened and their eyes being darkened means that they did not have a good enough understanding of God, though some people did have a great understanding since God sent various prophets who were powerful angels before they were born as humans. it is impossible to understand the bible deeply without God. to assume a literal understand of the bible will give you a clear enough view is to eat of the knowledge of good and evil. God told us that he sets before us good and evil, but most don't want to see that the bible can become a serpent to us just like Christ can be a stumbling stone.
"I was hoping you would give a biblical example of something he got wrong so I could tell you how it is right since anyone can choose to see error or truth from the bible due to spiritual reality being based on states of being." If he gave you a biblical example, wouldn't you just reinterpret Jesus' words so that his statement is no longer false?
The more I watch and hear Randal the more I see the same stance like Brandan Robertson the Progressive Christian saying similar things that Jesus was a lier that ISA 53 was not talking about Jesus , and when Jesus called Lazarus out of the tomb and said you can be who you are a reference to being Gay to coin a phrase like Graig Boyd twisted scripture that what the Progressives are doing twisting scripture.
@@TheCaroluss I think he is going off the view that John isn't as accurate as the synoptic gospels in regards to what Jesus said about himself. Of course, this is a view non-believers and more liberal Christians are likely to take. If you believe everything the gospels have to say about Jesus are true, then yes, Jesus did indeed claim to be God.
@@choicemeatrandy6572 One would have to be seriously blind to logic to think that Jesus didn’t claim to be God. Sure, he wasn’t identical but that’s never been an orthodox claim of the faith.
What were these false beliefs? If you can't state what they are/were specifically then it's best to simply just hold your tongue. Jesus probably had to learn how to make a chair as a carpenter's son, that's fascinating to think about, but what bearing/impact does that have on anything?
hahaha....I totally get it - Halp! I think the main thing I'm tripping over is this phrase "false beliefs". The word "belief" in a Christian context makes it seem like he's saying Jesus had "non-Christian beliefs", but he takes the time to clarify in the video that that's not what he's saying. I think it's sufficient to say Jesus grew in wisdom and knowledge and stature like we all understand how a human does from birth. To phrase it as "false beliefs" is the weird thing, even though with Randal's explanation, I understand what he means.
Your reasoning is fallacious in two ways: 1. You make a false assumption that if someone grows in knowledge that that necessarily entails having been wrong about previous knowledge. That does not follow. Jesus Christ could have arrived at true beliefs and grew in those true beliefs without any of his previous conclusions being wrong. Indeed, we can see in the Gospels that at a young age he had an authority and correctness in his thinking that astounded those at the synagogue. 2. The second fallacy you make is you argue from silence. There is no evidence or any verse that would imply that Christ objectively held to a former false belief. Now I would argue that the danger of what you are promoting is we would end up with a Jesus who actually wasn’t perfectly human. You assume that to be fully human is to make errors. This just isn’t true. Errors are due to the fall. For Jesus to be a spotless lamb he had to be flawless in every way.
If Jesus was resurrected and has a human brain he is in time and space.He has leaned more about the ecil god of the OT ( See The Evil Creator by David Litwa) ,that hell was invented by men in history ,that Moses never existed etc On hell see Bart Ehrman ang Robert M Price videos
You seem to care about orthodoxy, BUT if you accept even Jesus could have false beliefs, it must follow christians who have built orthodoxy(first creeds) can also have false beliefs. Than why are you referring to orthodoxy?
@sometheology7330 Mark 4:31 is not false...a mustard seed was the smallest seed known at the time. It was the smallest they knew. As for the other, not false either, you have to go into a bit more depth but we always have to remember context and the culture...
The truth is not simply that the sun is fixed and that the earth moves around the sun. Both the sun and the earth are moving. The sun is moving through the space. It all depends on your point of reference. From where I stand the sun truly moves across the sky. Were I to stand on the moon the earth would be seen to move. I say that I sit still and yet that statement is not true since even when sitting still I am moving with a large velocity. It’s all relative!
Wouldn't we fall in the same problem if we say Jesus was fully God and yet held false beliefs. That means he wouldn't be fully God, no?
For the trinitarians it's simply that Jesus had two nature's, a human nature and a divine nature. In His human nature He lacked knowledge but in His Divine nature He has no false beliefs.
@arnold9236 When Jesus said "I AM" that was a declaration of deity.
But god the father had false knowledge the world isn't flat
@@JewandGreek it couldn't have been. Paul himself says "I am what I am" and no one thinks that's a declaration of Paul's deity.
It is interesting. In what way could Jesus have shared our humanity without flaws, the ability to make mistakes?
Simple: Jesus has no false beliefs in his divine intelligence and he does in his human intelligence.
An unbiblical categorization.
What is the implication of this for believing what he said in scripture?
It would seem to me that one could say Jesus had false beliefs but all that He said in scripture was true.
Scripture is inerrant in all it intends to teach. Does scripture intend to teach that the mustard seed is the smallest seed in the world? Obviously no, why would God care about teaching that? What purpose would he have had?
Maybe that's why his teens and twenties aren't in the Gospels, he was off being a young person which would have involved (being fully human) probably some cringe moments of some description.
@@mistressofstones To my knowledge, ancient biographies simply didn't care about childhood.
If you look at Plutarch for instance (from thos I've read anyway), childhood is mostly ignored except for one or two comments. Even less than what Luke gave us.
@@WhatYourPastorDidntTellYou Scripture is not inerrant, it is infallible. There are errors in Scripture but never with regard to its theological/spiritual message. Even John Calvin admitted in one of his commentaries that Hebrews 11:21 had an autographical mistake. What God says will come true and He instructs us abundantly and satisfactorily, so even if you believe that the Bible contains errors in the case of geographical, political, historical or other facets, that changes none of its authority.
Well he did think an apocalypse was going to occur very soon. Needless to say, that didn't happen.
AD 70
@@willhaynes3505 Let's assume that the tribulation referred to in Matthew 24 is talking about the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Matthew 24:29-30 says the Son of Man would come immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days. So the coming of the Son of Man must be something other than the roman destruction of Jerusalem. If the coming of the Son of Man doesn't refer to the second coming of Jesus, and it doesn't refer to God's judgement against Jerusalem carried out through Rome, what does it refer to?
_______
How was this fulfilled in AD 70?
Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. (Matthew 24:40-41)
_______
Did the Angels come down in AD 70, and was each person rewarded according to what they had done?
For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. (Matthew 16:27)
@@chad969 2 Peter 3 + amillenialism/postmillenialism
To God it is very soon. Peter talks about it in his epistle 2 Peter 3
I don't necessarily disagree with what Randal has said here; I'm just not sure what to do with it. Not sure what it affects exactly.
This video doesn't answer why Christians should accept that Jesus had false beliefs, given that none of these false beliefs were actually stated (only speculated at) we can't know why any Christian ought to accept this, accept it so that what can happen?
Randals very clear argument was that by necessity, if Jesus was a fully human baby who had to grow into an adult man, he must have had false beliefs at some point. I don't see how thats a difficult argument to comprehend? The lack of specific examples means nothing to the validity of the argument itself. Once we accept that Jesus had false beliefs, the question then becomes "well, what ones?".
@@youngyvidz716 The argument is being made so that what can happen? Why should any Christian accept this argument? Thats what I'm asking and your response didn't address that.
I take very seriously that the Son of God is fully human and fully God. I was hoping you would give a biblical example of something he got wrong so I could tell you how it is right since anyone can choose to see error or truth from the bible due to spiritual reality being based on states of being. let us not forget that he had a divine mind, not only a human one. if he was in error about fundamental things then that could be a problem. the logic plays itself out though, he is the criteria for what a "fully human" is. fallen humanity is not the fullness of the truth. animal humanity is not all we are. Christians don't like to make Jesus too human because that is a little bit too close to home and has startling implications.
@@AlexADalton I think this sort of stuff falls in line with thinking about how God hardened pharaohs heart. some think God forced pharaoh to be a way that God is not pleased with, others claim that God by being God (goodness and truth) and pharaoh being pharaoh equated to making pharaohs heart hard. just because Jesus claims the temples destruction does not at all mean that God willed it but rather saw what evil spirits would do with it without God. and let us not forget that the temple Jesus speaks of is us and that destruction is like crucifixion.
so Gods providence works while keeping other beings free, this is how for instance evil spirits can serve him. it is not they themselves that do Gods will but rather it is God trying to make use of the evil ones best as he can. in this way even the devil who is opposed to God is used by God as part of Gods judgment. Gods providence simply puts like beings with like and always orders things in a manner that draws all to himself.
@@AlexADalton it is possible that you have your heart hardened by God due to him saying things and you not being able to understand them deeply enough. though you (and I too) have many things in you, some good and some evil, which is why you also speak truly some things. by assuming that the evil people are folks outside of you, you have missed the main point of salvation which is that goodness overcomes evil. if you had the understanding of a child you would know that broken shards of pottery are called terra preta and by burying them in the garden they serve a very great purpose for Gods garden... just like when you burn things into ash, you also benefit your garden.
I think things like the destruction of the temple are not ideal to God but he sees how it will help people so he allows them to occur. it is not that God punishes people out of drives that prideful kings have. God does what he does out of goodness, love and wisdom because that is true justice. goodness and wisdom are the trunk of the divine. justice and wrath are branches which are supported by the main intentions of God. what I want clarified is the inner intentions of God and the deep spiritual currents of why we see God as we see him.
but it is true that since we are mortal and God acts for our more fundamental parts that things like death are a means to an end for God. one reason Jesus came to our world was because it was very darkened and their eyes being darkened means that they did not have a good enough understanding of God, though some people did have a great understanding since God sent various prophets who were powerful angels before they were born as humans. it is impossible to understand the bible deeply without God. to assume a literal understand of the bible will give you a clear enough view is to eat of the knowledge of good and evil. God told us that he sets before us good and evil, but most don't want to see that the bible can become a serpent to us just like Christ can be a stumbling stone.
Can you say you are open-minded to finding truth if your goal in watching this video was to disprove his biblical examples?
"I was hoping you would give a biblical example of something he got wrong so I could tell you how it is right since anyone can choose to see error or truth from the bible due to spiritual reality being based on states of being."
If he gave you a biblical example, wouldn't you just reinterpret Jesus' words so that his statement is no longer false?
Whey draw the line emplyoing God's Omnipotence when it concerns salvation. Why not go all the way..?
The more I watch and hear Randal the more I see the same stance like Brandan Robertson the Progressive Christian saying similar things that Jesus was a lier that ISA 53 was not talking about Jesus , and when Jesus called Lazarus out of the tomb and said you can be who you are a reference to being Gay to coin a phrase like Graig Boyd twisted scripture that what the Progressives are doing twisting scripture.
maybe Jesus had a false belief that he is God
Well the historical Jesus almost certainly didn't go around teaching that he was in fact identical with Yahweh.
@@zhugh9556 if that's true, then Christians have a big problem to solve
@@TheCaroluss I think he is going off the view that John isn't as accurate as the synoptic gospels in regards to what Jesus said about himself. Of course, this is a view non-believers and more liberal Christians are likely to take. If you believe everything the gospels have to say about Jesus are true, then yes, Jesus did indeed claim to be God.
@GodsWillBeDone _Nowhere in the Bible does it say Jesus is God_
John 1:1
@@choicemeatrandy6572 One would have to be seriously blind to logic to think that Jesus didn’t claim to be God. Sure, he wasn’t identical but that’s never been an orthodox claim of the faith.
"Jesus had a human mind"
This is orthodox, I am fine
"Hence logically, Jesus held some false beliefs at times"
Halp, I am scared
What were these false beliefs? If you can't state what they are/were specifically then it's best to simply just hold your tongue. Jesus probably had to learn how to make a chair as a carpenter's son, that's fascinating to think about, but what bearing/impact does that have on anything?
@@choicemeatrandy6572 I think you mean your reply for the channel host, rather than to me?
hahaha....I totally get it - Halp! I think the main thing I'm tripping over is this phrase "false beliefs". The word "belief" in a Christian context makes it seem like he's saying Jesus had "non-Christian beliefs", but he takes the time to clarify in the video that that's not what he's saying. I think it's sufficient to say Jesus grew in wisdom and knowledge and stature like we all understand how a human does from birth. To phrase it as "false beliefs" is the weird thing, even though with Randal's explanation, I understand what he means.
Your reasoning is fallacious in two ways: 1. You make a false assumption that if someone grows in knowledge that that necessarily entails having been wrong about previous knowledge. That does not follow. Jesus Christ could have arrived at true beliefs and grew in those true beliefs without any of his previous conclusions being wrong. Indeed, we can see in the Gospels that at a young age he had an authority and correctness in his thinking that astounded those at the synagogue.
2. The second fallacy you make is you argue from silence. There is no evidence or any verse that would imply that Christ objectively held to a former false belief.
Now I would argue that the danger of what you are promoting is we would end up with a Jesus who actually wasn’t perfectly human. You assume that to be fully human is to make errors. This just isn’t true. Errors are due to the fall. For Jesus to be a spotless lamb he had to be flawless in every way.
this is actually pretty interesting. It would explain some things in the NT better, especially relating to the OT
Read The Bad Jesus by Hector Avalos.
Randal. Your Sunday school teacher is banging his head against the wall.
Do YOU have false beliefs Mr Rauser?
If Jesus was resurrected and has a human brain he is in time and space.He has leaned more about the ecil god of the OT ( See The Evil Creator by David Litwa) ,that hell was invented by men in history ,that Moses never existed etc On hell see Bart Ehrman ang Robert M Price videos
You seem to care about orthodoxy, BUT if you accept even Jesus could have false beliefs, it must follow christians who have built orthodoxy(first creeds) can also have false beliefs. Than why are you referring to orthodoxy?
A Jesus that had false beliefs is not the Jesus of Scripture.
The Jesus of Scripture had false beliefs, such as in Mark 2:26 and 4:31.
@sometheology7330 Mark 4:31 is not false...a mustard seed was the smallest seed known at the time. It was the smallest they knew.
As for the other, not false either, you have to go into a bit more depth but we always have to remember context and the culture...
Jesus Christ is the only King, savior, and judge. His word is a sharp double-edged sword. Who dares rouse Him?
So Jesus wasn't 100% God