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 have noticed that 101c and Twin Spin seem to have the same mistaken view of their reading of scripture. As they seem to see it . . . the way they read and understand it is the way God intended us to read and understand it, period! It is a fairly common failing of human nature. I have also noticed that they do not allow questions or reasoning to enter their interpretations. That is why the OP's question will soar right over their heads. They try to draw no parallels and make no conclusions about the reasonableness of what they have been taught to think about God. To the un-indoctrinated . . . it is a reasonable question and reveals the absurdity of the idea that God required such a horrendous scourging and crucifixion before He could forgive us. Sadly such reasoning and rationality is useless against unreasoning credulity.
First of all, Christ died for ALL our sins including the sins of those He pardoned.
He was merely applying to them the effects of His sacrifice of the future. Christ still had to die for our sins.
Christ, through obedience to God in going to the cross had to undo all the first Adam did in his disobedience (see Romans 5:12,18,19).
That's pure conjecture on your part, Eusebius. There's absolutely no evidence that's what happened. The idea that Jesus had to loan sinners "grace" on account against His future death is totally absurd, sorry to say. But there's plenty of man-made theology in there. That's the problem with fundamentalism--90% of it derives from "doctrines of men, making the gospel of no effect".
I have noticed that 101c and Twin Spin seem to have the same mistaken view of their reading of scripture. As they seem to see it . . . the way they read and understand it is the way God intended us to read and understand it, period! It is a fairly common failing of human nature. I have also noticed that they do not allow questions or reasoning to enter their interpretations. That is why the OP's question will soar right over their heads. They try to draw no parallels and make no conclusions about the reasonableness of what they have been taught to think about God. To the un-indoctrinated . . . it is a reasonable question and reveals the absurdity of the idea that God required such a horrendous scourging and crucifixion before He could forgive us. Sadly such reasoning and rationality is useless against unreasoning credulity.
Well observed, Mystic.
This is quite simply a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" issue. Penal-atonementalists have this idea that all 4,000 years of animal sacrifice for atonement derived from Christ's shedding His blood for sinners, when in fact it was just the opposite: the idea of Christ's atonement to appease God's wrath obviously derived from 6,000 years of pagan, then Jewish eye-for-eye, blood-for-blood practices that are found in nearly every world culture commencing from the dawn of man. It was inevitable that this idea would eventually bleed over into Christian theology, just as it was inevitable that Babylonian pagan theologies would filter into Jewish writings during the Babylonian captivity in 600 BC.
It was mentally deranged men like Calvin and Luther and Jonathan Edwards that created this God's wrath being poured out on sinners via Christ. If you read between the lines of their writings you will find such a hatred for mankind so palpable that if they could have opened the floodgates of God's righteous wrath on man instead of Jesus they would gladly have let it pour forth unabated, so deep did their hatred for men run. I'm sure it made them gag that Jesus had to take the brunt of God's wrath, according to their warped dogmas, but deranged mind produce deranged theologies. That's a fact.
I still don't get how Jesus could freely forgive sin with no pre-conditions before His death. Presumably those sinners whom He forgave their sins, had they died before His own death, would have gone to that part of Hades where the righteous were waiting to be admitted to heaven upon Jesus' death. Those that did not receive Jesus' forgiveness would have gone to the other compartment of Hades where the fire is and suffered in torment for all eternity because they had refused to listen to Him when He was preaching.
This has nothing to do with Levites and Book of Hebrews. It's just a simple question:
Jesus, and thus God, had the power and the willingness and the ability to forgive sins without Jesus' sacrifice. If God the Father through Jesus could do it for them He can certainly do it for us today. It's not like God can only stretch His grace just this far for just a certain number of lucky individuals and then He runs out of grace--the rest need Jesus' blood to keep from staining God's honor/and or falling under His wrath. It's an all or nothing proposition. If He can forgive even one white lie without Jesus' blood having to cover it then He can forgive all the sin ever committed without Jesus' blood having to cover it. Jesus clearly demonstrated that His death was not needed for Him to be willing to forgive sin.
- Jesus' blood was not for the forgiveness of sins for the eternal salvation of one's spirit/soul.
- Jesus' blood is for one's fallen Flesh (rapture/resurrection) for physically entering God's presence.
"...Hating Even The Garment Defiled By The Flesh." - Jude 23
"These are the ones who came out of the great tribulation
and Washed Their Robes In The Blood Of The Lamb. Therefore They Are Before The Throne Of God
And Serve Him Day And Night In His Temple." - Rev.7:14,15
"by the deeds of the law no (((FLESH))) will be justified in His sight...but now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed being witnessed by the law and the prophets even the righteousness of God which is Through Faith In Jesus Christ...Who God set forth to be a propitiation by His blood..." - Rom.3:8
"...we ourselves groan within ourselves Eagerly Waiting For The Adoption, The Redemption Of Our ((BODY))." - Rom.8:23
- The Catholics Taught Us Wrong. -
Last edited by RevelationWriter; 05-24-2014 at 04:01 AM..
"The Word Became Flesh" The Word did not become God-Himself.
Only "IN The Beginning" "WAS" God's Word With Him As God.
But once God sent His Word, His Word Became Flesh, His Word Is His Son. Not Himself.
"Equal With God" - John 5:18 - Phil.2:6
"The Only Begotten God" - John 1:18 (Greek)
Jesus said, "I and The Father are one."
That's One + One Equals Two. Not Three.
Jesus said, "I and The Father are one.
Jesus did not say. The Father and I are God.
- Why should we Honor The Son Just AS we Honor The Father (?)
Not because God-Himself is Jesus.
But because "The Father Has Committed All Judgment To The Son THAT All Should Honor The Son JUST AS They Honor The Father." -John 5:23,24
~ The Catholics Teach A False trinity doctrine about The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit.
GINOLJC, to all
2 RevelationWriter, you said that, "God Did Not Come In The Flesh AS Jesus". well please tell us who God came in the flesh as?. name please.
and two, you said, "Only "IN The Beginning" "WAS" God's Word With Him As God". are you saying that there are two separate God's, if his word, (God), was "with" him(God). Yes or No. if yes please explain.
"But once God sent His Word, His Word Became Flesh, His Word Is His Son. Not Himself". so you're saying that the son was sent, right. Ok, please explain to me this scripture, Isaiah 35:4 "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you". now RevelationWriter, who "came", the "Father", or the "Son"/Word. think long and hard before you answer that, because there is no Saviour beside God "himself", see Isa 43:11 and Isa 45:21
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?
John 7 (King James Version)
37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Spirit was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
Last edited by granpa; 05-25-2014 at 07:12 AM..
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.
