U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-26-2018, 10:28 AM
 
30 posts, read 4,521 times
Reputation: 17

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4 View Post
Adam by deliberately breaking God's Law suffered the death penalty for his crime. Thus, father Adam passed down to us his then acquired adamic sin in that we now lean towards /wrongdoing. Unlike Adam, this is through No fault of our own.
Do you not think Adam had the same "law of sin" in his flesh that Paul said he had (Rom 7:23-25). How did "sin" come into being? Through Adam? I say no! It came into being when God gave His Law because without the Law there is no sin (Rom 4:15; 5:13). Therefore God created sin, lawbreaking or criminality by giving the Law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4 View Post
Since we can Not stop sinning we die. We can Not resurrect oneself or another, so we need someone who can resurrect us. Jesus can and will - Rev. 1:18. In order to balance the Scales of Justice (death for death) then Jesus had to die to balance the Scales of Justice for us.

I find at Ezekiel 18:20 the son does Not bear the sin of the father or vice versa. We do Not bear father Adam's sin, and both Jesus and Jesus' father bears No sin.All are put to death for their own sins as per Deuteronomy 24:16 and 2nd Chronicles 25:4 B.So, we all die for our own sins, and without outside help we can Not stop sinning/dying.Kind of like Adam sold us into the Pawn Shop of Death. In order to get out then we need someone from the outside to pay the asking price for our sins - Romans 6:23.Since a sinless person is the only one who can pay that price tag, this is where sinless Jesus enters into the picture.
If one keeps God's Law is that one a "sinner" since "sin" is the breaking of the Law (1 John 3:4)? If Christ died to pay the penalty of anyone's sin how did John the Baptist's parents walk in God's Law blameless and righteous under the Old Covenant (Luke 1:5-6). How was Abraham reckoned a Law keeper (Gen 26:5)? How was David (1 Kings 9:4; 15:5)? How was Josiah (2 Kings 22:1; 2 Chron 34:1-2)? How was Asa (2 Chron 14:2)? How was John the Baptist baptising people for the remission of sins (Mat 3:11)? Christ had yet to die for any of these people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-26-2018, 01:20 PM
 
20,419 posts, read 9,837,567 times
Reputation: 1678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4 View Post
Jesus had to die to balance the Scales of Justice for us.
That would be retribution or an eye for an eye, not redemption where one is freely forgiven.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2018, 01:26 PM
 
21,884 posts, read 16,707,141 times
Reputation: 8704
Quote:
Originally Posted by brndnms View Post



Of course I know. It means to "buy back."
Jesus redeemed us from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13), from the penalty/wages of sin which is death (Romans 6:23) [spiritual death/separation from God]. The purchase price was His blood which is a metaphor for His spiritual death on the cross. There was a price to be paid. Jesus paid that price by dying on the cross, paying the price for our sins.
Revelation 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
Jesus bore our sins in His own body on the cross. The reason for bearing our sins was to be judged for those sins in our place. Jesus gave His life, meaning that He died for us as our substitute. Mark 10:45 states the following.
Mark 10:45 "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for (ἀντὶ; anti) many."
The Greek word ἀντὶ which is translated into English as 'for' has the primary meaning of 'instead of,' 'in place of.' It denotes substitution. Jesus gave His life in our place, as our substitute. He born our sins in His own body (1 Peter 2:24), tasting death for every man (Hebrews 2:9).
Ephesians 1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace,

1 Peter 1:18 knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, 19] but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ.
Redemption has to do with Jesus paying the price for our sins with His blood. The very thing that you are denying.


Quote:
Why would He have to do that when the Old Covenant (OC) was perfectly capable of rendering forgiveness (Lev 4 & 5)?
The Levitical animal sacrifices could only cover sin, and they were not a permanent solution to the sin problem. Those animal sacrifices were pictures of the future redemptive work that Jesus would do on the cross. The writer of the book of Hebrews states that the animal sacrifices had to be continually offered year after year and that they could not make perfect those under the law, and that it was impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. On the other hand, Jesus died once for all and perfected all who are sanctified. (Hebews 10:1-18).

Quote:
What Isaiah 53 does not say is "Christ died to pay the price" of anyone's sin. As stated above, unless the sin was a sin unto death, the sinner could get forgiveness under the OC. Even under the New Covenant sins unto death existed (1 John 5:16).
The concept in Isaiah 53 of the suffering servant paying the price for our sins is clear in that he is said to offer himself as a guilt offering, be pierced through for our transgressions, bear the sins of many and intercede for the transgressors.

It's a poor argument to say that because the words ''to pay the price'' don't appear that the concept is not there.

Quote:
Why would an animal have to die if the sin is not unto death? And if blood shed was necessary for just any sin, why was a non-blood sacrifice acceptable (Lev 5:11)?
Any sin is deserving of spiritual death, but under the Mosaic Law not all sin called for capital punishment. The animal sacrifices were meant to illustrate the serious of sin. The fact that in some cases, such as in Leviticus 5:11 where a person didn't have the means to provide two turtledoves or two young pigeons, he could offer fine flour doesn't change the fact that animal sacrifices were done under the Mosaic law for sin offerings.

Quote:
If Christ died to pay the price of someone else's sin He would have broken God's Law and would have become a sinner Himself (Deut 24:16).
As has already been shown from the Bible, Jesus did die to pay the price, to redeem us from the curse of the law, from the penalty of sin. And Isaiah 53 clearly shows the suffering servant offering himself and interceding for others and dying.

Deuteronomy 24:16 has to do with the issue of crime and punishment under the Mosaic law. A person was responsible for his own actions under the law. This has nothing to do with God's plan to provide a Savor to come into the world and die for the sins of the world. Scriptural references that Jesus did die for our sins have been given.

Quote:
Lets analyze this supposition of substitutional death. Did Christ not say before He died He had the power to forgive sins (Mar 2:5-10)? Before Christ died, did He not pronounce sins forgiven (Mat 9:5; Mar 2:5; Luke 5:20; 7:48)? Why didn't He have to die for those people to have their sins forgiven?
From the beginning of human history anyone who believed the promise of God regarding the future Messiah was forgiven for their sins. That faith looked forward to the future coming of the Savior. Jesus, knowing that He was going to go to the cross to die for their sins, was able to forgave the sins of those who expressed faith in Him,

At the Last Supper Jesus said that the wine represented His blood which was to be poured out for the forgiveness of sins.
Matthew 26:28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
Quote:
If Christ had to pay the price of His people's sins woudn't that mean they were sinners because they broke the Law of God (1 John 3:4)? Wouldn't Christ's ability to substitute for others be listed in the Law of God? Where is that listed? And wouldn't His death have to be in accordance with that same Law? Yet the Jews, themselves said it wasn't lawful for them to put Him to death even though they said He broke their Law via blasphemy (John 18:31; 19:7). So they conned the Romans into pronouncing the death penalty on Him (John 19). Christ was not tried via the Law of God.
Again, Isaiah 53 answers that question. Both Jesus and the apostle Philip said that Isaiah 53 referred to Jesus. See Luke 22:37 and Acts 8:26:35.

It wasn't lawful for the Jews to put anyone to death because Judea was under Roman rule which forbade them to use capital punishment.


Quote:
There is no Scripture that says Christ died to pay the price for anyone's sin. If Christ had died to pay the price for anyone's, muchless everyone's, sin He would have made the Law of God of none effect, because the Law says a man can only die for His own sins (Deut 24:16). And making the Law of none effect is something He lambasted the Jews for doing (Mat 15:1-6). That would have made Him a hypocrite, which is what He called the Jews (Mat 23:13). The Law was designed to put evil out of Israel (Deut 17:2-7). Yet Christ, who was totally an innocent Lamb, would be dying for the evil person thereby leaving evil in and putting innocence out.
You've already been shown that your statement simply isn't true. I'm not going to repeat what I've posted above.


Quote:
Another thing, most people do not consider is they think that their just desserts are either burning in hell forever or dying forever. But Christ did neither. If He did not die forever nor is in hell forever, how can He pay the price for anyone which is supposedly one of those fates?
It was Jesus' spiritual death on the cross while He was still physically alive that paid the penalty for our sins. Because Jesus is both God and man, his death as a man had infinite value. The separation that Jesus endured while he was bearing our sins on the cross from noon to 3 pm satisfied the justice of the Father and secured eternal salvation for all who simply place their faith in Christ. By the way, it was his humanity that died. Not his deity. He died as a man, not as God.


Quote:
As I understand it most people believe the death a person experiences due to sin is a spiritual death. Surely Christ didn't die spiritually, but physically. Also if His death paid the price for sin then there's nothing for His people to do. They can be as evil as their flesh desires and not have to pay the penalty for their sin because it is supposedly paid.
Jesus died both spiritually and physically on the cross. His spiritual death involved the separation from the Father that he endured while being judged for our sins. That is what paid the penalty for our sins. Once his redemptive work had been accomplished he then died physically.


Quote:
Of course He didn't legally die. His death was a murder and an affront to the Law. His death was "illegal" as per the Law. His death would have to have been legal to be able to die in anyone's stead since the Law required their deaths. How is being wrongly put to death pay the price of sin for anyone?

Of course He didn't legally die. His death was a murder and an affront to the Law. His death was "illegal" as per the Law. His death would have to have been legal to be able to die in anyone's stead since the Law required their deaths. But He died, not to pay the price of anyone's sin, but to redeem His people. He bought them back via His blood (Isa 52:3) by the institution of a new covenant. How could Christ's death pay the price for sins that have never been committed? How could His death pay the price of sins for anyone other than Himself?

Do you really think the kangaroo court that convicted Christ was carrying out the Law of God? If not then the death of Christ was not one of legitimacy. If it wasn't legitimate as per the Law of God then no one's sins are not directly affected by Christ's death. Do you not think your sins need to be forgiven within the framework of God's Law? Or do you think just any old murder of Christ, i.e., Christ being railroaded into death by His enemy suffices for your sins?

Was there a Godly court or otherwise held that placed the blame for your sins circa 2000 years in the future on Christ? And did that court pronounce Christ guilty for your sins? I don't think so!
God used both the Jews and the Romans to put Jesus on the cross where in accordance to the Father's plan he needed to be in order to die for our sins.
Acts 2:23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
Quote:
The Bible is clear as to why Christ had to die:

Acts 5:31 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

In the above verse repentance and forgivness was given to Israel only after He was seated in the power of God. If the blood of Christ was simply the forgiveness of sins, then He did not have to sit down in the power of God and repentance would not have been required."
Jesus died for all men. Not just for Israel. And the only reason God can forgive sin is because all sin was judged at the cross where Jesus bore our sins in His own body. It was on the cross where Jesus paid the penalty for our sins and redeemed us.

And that is all the time I am going to spend on this. I've stated the issue clearly enough. Jesus died for our sins in order to redeem us from the curse of the law by paying the wages of sin; by taking the penalty of our sin on Himself.

Last edited by Mike555; 12-26-2018 at 01:58 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2018, 02:15 PM
 
40,090 posts, read 26,755,929 times
Reputation: 6050
Default Redeem

Why has the second meaning become so ubiquitous?
re·deem
/rəˈdēm/
verb
1.
compensate for the faults or bad aspects of (something).
"a disappointing debate redeemed only by an outstanding speech"
synonyms: save, compensate for the defects of, vindicate
2.
gain or regain possession of (something) in exchange for payment.
"his best suit had been redeemed from the pawnbrokers"
synonyms: retrieve, regain, recover, get back, reclaim, repossess; buy back

It makes far more sense that Jesus fulfilled the first meaning by being our "designated hitter" and compensating for our faults and making them irrelevant. Once Jesus connected us to God there was no more concern about our failures to do so. That is why God is NOT counting our sins (failures, faults) against us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2018, 03:52 PM
 
5,147 posts, read 2,534,491 times
Reputation: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade View Post
That would be retribution or an eye for an eye, not redemption where one is freely forgiven.
Seems to me your definition of ' eye for eye ' is vengeance instead of scripturally equally balancing the Scale of Justice.
Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life,etc. was that the punishment should fit the crime. Not go beyond justice.
Adam tipped or weighed down the balancing scale. We being imperfect can't balance the balancing scale.
Only a sinless person, as Adam started out, could be placed on the opposite side of the scale and balance the scale for us.

Jesus ransom was freely given ( No one forced or made Jesus to what he did ) - 1st John 1:17.
However, Not everyone will accept Jesus' ransom so that is why Matthew 20:28 says Jesus' ransom covers 'MANY' and does Not say everyone. That is Not retribution, but justice for righteous ones - Matthew 25:37,40.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2018, 04:01 PM
 
5,147 posts, read 2,534,491 times
Reputation: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by brndnms View Post
Do you not think Adam had the same "law of sin" in his flesh that Paul said he had (Rom 7:23-25). How did "sin" come into being? Through Adam? I say no! It came into being when God gave His Law because without the Law there is no sin (Rom 4:15; 5:13). Therefore God created sin, lawbreaking or criminality by giving the Law.
If one keeps God's Law is that one a "sinner" since "sin" is the breaking of the Law (1 John 3:4)? If Christ died to pay the penalty of anyone's sin how did John the Baptist's parents walk in God's Law blameless and righteous under the Old Covenant (Luke 1:5-6). How was Abraham reckoned a Law keeper (Gen 26:5)? How was David (1 Kings 9:4; 15:5)? How was Josiah (2 Kings 22:1; 2 Chron 34:1-2)? How was Asa (2 Chron 14:2)? How was John the Baptist baptising people for the remission of sins (Mat 3:11)? Christ had yet to die for any of these people.
Right, I agree that Christ had yet to die for those people. They died before Jesus' died - John 3:13.
Even King David does Not yet have a resurrection - Acts 2:34.
That is why Acts 24:15 uses the ' future tense ' that there ' is going to be ' a resurrection.....'
That future resurrection for those people will take place on Resurrection Day ( meaning Jesus' millennium-long day of governing over Earth for a thousand years ).
Take place Not in the heavens, but right here on Earth when the humble meek will inherit the Earth.
The heavenly resurrection hope was only offered to those who died after Jesus died - Luke 22:28-30.
They are the ones who can have that first or earlier resurrection of Rev. 20:6; 2:10; 5:9-10.
So, even John the Baptist who died before Jesus died will have a happy-and-healthy physical resurrection - Matthew 11:11.

God created the law, but we choose whether we want to keep the law.
We are all free to act responsibly toward God. Adam misused his freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2018, 06:39 PM
 
947 posts, read 145,177 times
Reputation: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4 View Post
Right, I agree that Christ had yet to die for those people. They died before Jesus' died - John 3:13.
Even King David does Not yet have a resurrection - Acts 2:34.
That is why Acts 24:15 uses the ' future tense ' that there ' is going to be ' a resurrection.....'
That future resurrection for those people will take place on Resurrection Day ( meaning Jesus' millennium-long day of governing over Earth for a thousand years ).
Take place Not in the heavens, but right here on Earth when the humble meek will inherit the Earth.
The heavenly resurrection hope was only offered to those who died after Jesus died - Luke 22:28-30.
They are the ones who can have that first or earlier resurrection of Rev. 20:6; 2:10; 5:9-10.
So, even John the Baptist who died before Jesus died will have a happy-and-healthy physical resurrection - Matthew 11:11.

God created the law, but we choose whether we want to keep the law.
We are all free to act responsibly toward God. Adam misused his freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-28-2018, 10:10 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 1,629,291 times
Reputation: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerwade View Post
That would be retribution or an eye for an eye, not redemption where one is freely forgiven.


God is a God of justice. He applies justice to every dealing-Deut 32:4-- One is freely forgiven if they have repented--so repentence comes first which means its not free-The mortal must repent( first) to get forgiveness-Acts 3:19
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-28-2018, 10:12 AM
 
4,255 posts, read 1,629,291 times
Reputation: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerfball View Post
It's not that I see things others don't see. It's that too many others see things that aren't there.


That is the reason behind 34,000 different religions claiming to be Christian---That is sad for this world. Jesus is only with one single religion. 1Corinthians 1:10--unity of thought( all matters of Gods truth) no division.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-28-2018, 01:26 PM
 
40,090 posts, read 26,755,929 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerfball View Post
It's not that I see things others don't see. It's that too many others see things that aren't there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top