A
aidanbradypop
Guest
How is that a contradiction? Christ conquered death for us. By Him rising, we can also rise in Him. I do not see it as a contradiction.
- Status
K
Kliska
Guest
And further, a sacrifice is something that is “turned over” to God, what He does with it is His choice and it is fully within His power to do as He wills, as He is not constrained by something other than His own character. Even death obeys God, as it has no power on its own. Christ being God-Man can fulfill all necessary sacrifices, yet not be ultimately defeated by death because He is God.
Jesus fulfills His role as both priest and sacrifice, and the Father is recipient. That is why the Trinity is the only answer to all of this, as well as Jesus’ incarnation as truly man. Again, none of this is an either/or proposition.
Jesus fulfills His role as both priest and sacrifice, and the Father is recipient. That is why the Trinity is the only answer to all of this, as well as Jesus’ incarnation as truly man. Again, none of this is an either/or proposition.
K
KjetilK
Guest
If you are saying that Christ took our punishment, yet didn’t take our punishment, that is a flat out self-contradiction.
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
IMO, he did take our punishment as far as death in sin goes.
K
KjetilK
Guest
And that punishment was/is eternal death, not three days.
The contradiction is saying that Christ underwent a three day long eternal death.
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
He conquered death and was resurrected so that we may have life. No contradiction.
P
Per_Crucem
Guest
It is the punishment aspect that I disagree with. Christ did take on death, sin and the curse of the Law as our substitute; but not as a punishment. As the hymn says, He trampled down death by death and on those in the tombs bestowing life.
K
KjetilK
Guest
But then he didn’t take our punishment.
And that is the point. Christ didn’t take our punishment. Christ was not punished in our place. Christ atoned for our punishment by giving God satisfaction. And, as St. Anselm points out, punishment and satisfaction is not the same thing.
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
“Jesus paid it all, all to him I owe…” is a great one also
The punishment aspect can be a stumbling block for some. For me, Jesus taking on our punish for sin, dying on the cross and rising again to conquer death for my sake shows me no greater love.
The substitutionary atonement refers to Jesus Christ dying as a substitute for sinners. The Scriptures teach that all men are sinners (Romans 3:9-18, 23). The penalty for our sinfulness is death. Romans 6:23 reads, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
That verse teaches us several things. Without Christ, we are going to die and spend an eternity in hell as payment for our sins. Death in the Scriptures refers to a “separation.” Everyone will die, but some will live in heaven with the Lord for eternity, while others will live a life in hell for eternity. The death spoken of here refers to the life in hell. However, the second thing this verse teaches us is that eternal life is available through Jesus Christ. This is His substitutionary atonement.
Jesus Christ died in our place when He was crucified on the cross. We deserved to be the ones placed on that cross to die because we are the ones who live sinful lives. But Christ took the penalty or punishment on Himself in our place—He substituted Himself for us and took what we rightly deserved. “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Does this help any or no? Lol
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
Of course they are not the same. Punishment may be the confusing factor here. I was always taught that Jesus paid the penalty of our sins for our behalf. Left to ourselves, we could never be made as clean without the blood of Christ to wash us. Our punishment for sin is spiritual death ans seperation from God. That is the penalty we pay if we have no faith in the Lord. Christ lovingly paid our penalty for us.
P
Per_Crucem
Guest
This assumes firstly that God is the primary antagonist when it comes to the situation that requires us to be saved, and secondly, that salvation is primarily an extrinsic process. To be fair, these really aren’t two separate issues because the latter proceeds directly from the former.
This soteriology assumes that God is the one with the sticking problem, not us. We are sinful, and therefore God must punish us. God is bound to punish us, otherwise his perfect holiness and justice are violated. The problem is not that we as sinful and fallen human beings will experience the unfiltered presence of God as torment due to our internal conditions in the same way that those who possess diseased eyes writhe when exposed to the light of the sun, but that God by His very nature is bloodthirsty and needs to punish in order to be satisfied. Salvation, therefore, is not freedom from the bondage of sin and death, but rather it is deliverance from the hands of God Himself. As much as those who hold to PSA may protest otherwise with their rhetoric, they do not believe that we are saved from sin – they believe that we are saved from God.
P
Per_Crucem
Guest
Here, also, is a good refutation of PSA from a Protestant perspective www.therebelgod.com/…/my-article-in-evangelical-quarterly.html?m…
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
How can future sins be forgiven without confessing them?Don’t put words in my statement please. He took on all sins which include the future. If His sacrifice does not cover the sins of the future then we are in trouble.
Yes we have to repent of such sins we commit today and tomorrow.
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
Link didn’t work. Would like to see it if you can fix it.
Christ paved the way so that we can seek forgiveness of such sins that will come about in the future
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
You still are not explaining how it works.
For example, St John wrote:
1 John 1:9 **If **we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
That’s a big if. What do you think happens when we don’t confess our sins?
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
Can I have not forgiven for $500 please.
Jose I never stated we can be forgiven without asking for such forgiveness
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
But it is implied when you say that future sins are forgiven without adding any qualifier, like 1 John 1:9.Can I have not forgiven for $500 please.
Jose I never stated we can be forgiven without asking for such forgiveness
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
I am confused as to where you are getting that from.
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
Because of what I initially responded to your Post #35:
Since I used to be evangelical as well. In some circles this was understood as OSAS or universal salvation.
Since you did not qualify the statement, I was left with no other option than to dig in further.
We will die a physical death for sure. And on the Final judgement, not everyone who says to Him “Lord, Lord” will be saved.
If there is an actual substitution, then there is no need for confession. Otherwise we re-crucify Christ over and over again (In a similar fashion of Heb 6:4-8).
Like St. John said, there is still sin in us (if we say otherwise we make Christ a liar). He also said the is sin that leads unto death (And he is speaking spiritual death). Therefore, the condition of confession is made available (1 John 1). Which must be done repeatedly, in order for our sins to be forgiven ---- there is no substitution — unconfessed sin will lead unto spiritual death.
**IF **we confess our sins, He is faithful. Like previously said. That is a gigantic: if.
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
I am not OSAS. Thought you knew that. That is why I was confused
- Status