Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think an even more complex situation is that, "Jesus already died for our sins yet every child is born with a sin".
And then to make matter even more complex, if a child dies within a few hours of his death, he doesn't stand chance to go paradise since he was born with a sin and never had a chance to even know who Jesus was?
Dear ll0,
Children are not born in sin. That is a tradition of men and their churches. Elijah was born of woman and he never sinned, nor was he born in sin, and he did not die. The same applied to Enoch.
No ... it's another "I won't answer someone who has no intentions to hear the truth but be antagonistic"
But are there answers ... sure there are plenty.
What lie do you want to hear from God that I can repeat ... ? since that will be the end result you're going to conclude anything quoted from God's Word the Bible.
These "I'm going to play hard to get" games work fine for 14-year-olds, twin. From adults they get tiresome real fast.
If you have an answer give it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ll0OoO0ll
I think an even more complex situation is that, "Jesus already died for our sins yet every child is born with a sin".
And then to make matter even more complex, if a child dies within a few hours of his death, he doesn't stand chance to go paradise since he was born with a sin and never had a chance to even know who Jesus was?
On the first you're absolutely right, ll0OoO0ll. original sin has always been a b. to come to terms with theologically. And it doesn't make the slightest bit of sense to me.
On the second, though it's pretty well established that babies go straight to heaven. Even kids who haven't reached that fiction we call "the age of reason" get a free pass. Go figure.
I have contemplated this question in one form or another at times and it was partly this question (and other things) that caused me to brand the penal atonement theology as being completely ridiculous. Yet I comprehend that the Church structure has needed to firmly grasped this dogma ever since the Council of Nicaea because it was part and parcel of the stranglehold they were determined to exert over people.
But the question still remains: Jesus was freely and completely able to forgive sins before His death without telling the person(s) to go to the temple and shed an animal's blood to make it complete. I don't read that Jesus ever said, "I forgive you, but you'll have to wait until I die before the forgiveness can really take effect. Technically, you're still in your sins, but you're first in line for forgiveness once My death is complete."
No, Jesus, being One with His Father; being the Father personified on earth in the form of His Son, freely forgave sinners their sins without any conditions attached. So theoretically God possessed the capacity to forgive sin without requiring a blood offering to accomplish it and doing so didn't seem to compromise His sense of honor or justice.
So why does God require Jesus' blood to right the scales of sin now?
You lack understanding of basic Christian doctrine. How do you suppose the saints in the OT were reckoned "righteous" by an altogether Holy God? Do you suppose for a minute that any were justified by their works and the keeping of the "Law" perfectly. The perfect atonement of Jesus is in no manner or way constrained by time. It's is completely sufficient to save "The children of God" from the beginning of time till the end. Right in the beginning of the bible God promises that he will make a way that will defeat Satan. Believing and trusting in the Promises of God is what is required to have one's sins forgiven. Jesus is eternal and His salvation is eternal. It's applied to His people through His sovereign choice.
You lack understanding of basic Christian doctrine. How do you suppose the saints in the OT were reckoned "righteous" by an altogether Holy God? Do you suppose for a minute that any were justified by their works and the keeping of the "Law" perfectly. The perfect atonement of Jesus is in no manner or way constrained by time. It's is completely sufficient to save "The children of God" from the beginning of time till the end. Right in the beginning of the bible God promises that he will make a way that will defeat Satan. Believing and trusting in the Promises of God is what is required to have one's sins forgiven. Jesus is eternal and His salvation is eternal. It's applied to His people through His sovereign choice.
You sound like a Calvinist to me, lucknow. If you are I cannot begin to explain my dilemma to you.
Penal substitutionary atonement or that Christ died on the cross for sinners is actually a product of the 16th Century Reformers. The early church adhered to the Christus Victor or Ransom theory of atonement in which God is found victoriously defeating the powers that hold mankind in bondage of sin. If two theories aren't enough there is also the Satisfaction theory of atonement.
Elementally contrasted the Penal Substitutionary atonement theory is that Christ bore the penalty for sin, in place of those sinners united to him by faith. Calvin would say Christ was punished where we should have been punished.
The Satisfaction theory of atonement is Christ satisfying God with the ultimate act of obedience, his life, which in turn honors God's holiness. Anselm would say Christ obeyed where he should have obeyed.
Christus Victor or Ransom Theory of atonement defined above was predominant in the early church and held by Irenaeus, Origen, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, and John Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, Leo the Great, and Gregory the Great. This view is still held by the Orthodox church. Iranaeus would say "Jesus became what we are so that we could become what he is".
Each theory is Scripturally sound and Scripturally weak.
Penal substitutionary atonement or that Christ died on the cross for sinners is actually a product of the 16th Century Reformers. The early church adhered to the Christus Victor or Ransom theory of atonement in which God is found victoriously defeating the powers that hold mankind in bondage of sin. If two theories aren't enough there is also the Satisfaction theory of atonement.
Elementally contrasted the Penal Substitutionary atonement theory is that Christ bore the penalty for sin, in place of those sinners united to him by faith. Calvin would say Christ was punished where we should have been punished.
The Satisfaction theory of atonement is Christ satisfying God with the ultimate act of obedience, his life, which in turn honors God's holiness. Anselm would say Christ obeyed where he should have obeyed.
Christus Victor or Ransom Theory of atonement defined above was predominant in the early church and held by Irenaeus, Origen, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, and John Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, Leo the Great, and Gregory the Great. This view is still held by the Orthodox church. Iranaeus would say "Jesus became what we are so that we could become what he is".
Each theory is Scripturally sound and Scripturally weak.
The pinnacles of man's religion consists of sin and death, or sacrifices.
He is too overly concerned or fearful about an afterlife to enjoy this one?
The pinnacles of man's religion consists of sin and death, or sacrifices. He is too overly concerned or fearful about an afterlife to enjoy this one?
Ah, well, it is a matter of what you believe you were saved from. Some of us at least think that it is a far greater thing to be saved from a futile life of selfishness (sin) than some punishment after death. Going "from victory to victory" sounds pretty attractive to me.
I'm not a Calvinist but a follower of what is written clearly in the bible. A "Pauline" I suppose if a label is required.
I detest Paul. More than one theologian of repute will tell you that Paul wrote his own gospel quite different from Jesus' and that he is primarily responsible for the mess Christianity find itself in today. Just research "Did Paul hijack Christianity?"
I detest Paul. More than one theologian of repute will tell you that Paul wrote his own gospel quite different from Jesus' and that he is primarily responsible for the mess Christianity find itself in today. Just research "Did Paul hijack Christianity?"
thrillobyte, if you detest Paul, then you detest the Lord Jesus Christ, the Almighty. here's why. Luke 10:16 "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me”. Paul is an apostle of Jesus Christ. he was commission by Christ unto the Gentiles. he did not write his own gospel. he just carried the Gospel of God, which is Jesus Christ, that Christ gave unto him. scripture, Galatians 1:11 "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ". see, Paul did write his "own" gospel it was reveal unto him by God.
now the reason for his Gospel in Christ. Galatians 2:7 "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter”. 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision”. see thrillobyte, when Paul said “his”, gospel, not that he came, or thought up something of his own, no, but that which was committed unto him to preach. do you see the difference?. Paul had the gospel, or the good news of Christ to the gentiles.
be blessed, my prayer is that you understand this. amen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
