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.
The dominant interpretation is that God required it to appease His wrath by a blood sacrifice so He could forgive us for "whatever" and save us from Hell or damnation.
Then I agree with you regarding the crucifixion. I never heard of such a thing. As part of the trinity the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one. If this belief were true then God would be putting His wrath on Himself in the form of His son.
Then I agree with you regarding the crucifixion. I never heard of such a thing. As part of the trinity the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one. If this belief were true then God would be putting His wrath on Himself in the form of His son.
It makes no sense whatsoever but it's all too widely accepted.
I never heard of any "wrathful God" interpretation of the crucifixion. Is this some evangelical interpretation? I don't know much about protestantism. The crucifixion was Christ's victory over sin and death. No "wrath of God" involved.
The wrath of God upon Jesus for our sake is Christianity’s most basic belief. Hence why there is a cross displayed in every church, Protestant or Catholic.
Romans 5
9Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son.
Isaiah 53
4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
The wrath of God upon Jesus for our sake is Christianity’s most basic belief. Hence why there is a cross displayed in every church, Protestant or Catholic.
Romans 5
9Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son.
Isaiah 53
4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
There is no justification in punishing the innocent for the guilty. Your penal substitution theory is fallacious.
Not interested in playing games with you. If you have a comment on that passage or 5-all’s post, let’s hear it.
So, you consider him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted?
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.
It is an unbelievably evil concept for a loving God.
