Question about Jesus sacrifice

[Tammyjean]

I am so confused about a Catholic doctrine and I don’t know why i can’t find an answer so i am probably asking some thing you have answered many times and I am truly sorry!

What does it mean that Jesus died for our sins exactly? I understand the arguments for temporal punishment…pretty much but doesn’t Isaiah in the suffering servant chapter declare He took on our punishment? The wrath of God? So if He took on our punishment why are we still punished? Wasn’t that the whole point of His coming and dying?

I understand purgatory as burning off the rest of our attachments and purifying us for Heaven but the punishment part baffles me.

And what did it mean when God forgave sin in the old testament? Why did they need a perfect sacrifice if they could be forgiven? Couldn’t they be purified in in purgatory?

I am honestly not arguing or trying to be combative my husband and I are in RCIA but this baffles me. I read Today on Matthew 8 :17 that Jesus healing and driving out the demons was a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:4 but how does this ‘bore our diseases’?

Thank you so much for your time!

 

[Kei]

Purgatory is about those who are bound for Heaven but still have penance to pay and I have heard those who have Venial sins but not mortal.
Let’s think of a window. Say you’re playing ball and you ignore your mum’s words of being careful, and you end up smashing a baseball through the neighbor’s window.
It’s all smashed.
Now, the one who you smashed could go take you to court for breaking his property, but instead he doesn’t. He forgives you. You have no punishment for breaking his property.
However, there’s still a window that needs to be replaced, and you do this.

Judaism is full of types of Jesus, including sacrifice.

 

[MT1926]

What does it mean that Jesus died for our sins exactly?

Jesus died for the eternal punishment of our sins. Which would be eternal separation from God.

I understand the arguments for temporal punishment…pretty much but doesn’t Isaiah in the suffering servant chapter declare He took on our punishment?

Yes but this is talking just about the eternal punishment, not temporal punishment. The story of the suffering servant is more about the agony the servant will endure. Jesus quoted the psalm to show that he is fulfilling the prophecy and he to will have a triumphant ending just like the suffering servant. Some like to hone in on the “wrath of God”, but that is not the central idea of that psalm.

So if He took on our punishment why are we still punished?

Because He saved us from the eternal punishment, not the temporal punishment. If Jesus death on the cross saved us from temporal punishment now, then we would not suffer at all in this life.

I understand purgatory as burning off the rest of our attachments and purifying us for Heaven but the punishment part baffles me.

Don’t think of it as punishment. Think of it as the justice we deserve. Think about this…If you were to clean up every single mess your kid makes throughout their life and you never once yelled at them or punished them…First, how well do you think your child would turn out? Do you think your actions would prepare them for heaven? Second, are you being a just and loving parent?

And what did it mean when God forgave sin in the old testament?

I might not be 100% correct here, but I believe the OT sacrifices forgave the temporal punishment of the sin, not the eternal punishment. We needed a perfect sacrifice (Jesus) for this to occur.

Keep in mind that we can be forgiven of temporal punishments in this life. Not everyone has to go to purgatory.

I am honestly not arguing or trying to be combative my husband and I are in THIS but this baffles me. I read Today on Matthew 8 :17 that Jesus healing and driving out the demons was a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:4 but how does this ‘bore our diseases’?

Took our infirmities would be forgiving sins.

Bore our disease would be healing people.

Hope this helps,

God Bless

 

[De_Maria]

I am so confused about a Catholic doctrine

No. Actually, since you used the term, “wrath of God”, you’ve somehow absorbed Protestant doctrine without realizing it.

and I don’t know why i can’t find an answer so i am probably asking some thing you have answered many times and I am truly sorry!

No probs.

What does it mean that Jesus died for our sins exactly?

You’ve heard of a Last Will and Testament, right? In human terms, a man writes a “will” and specifies what he wants to happen after he dies. The will remains inactive until the day of his death. Then when he dies, someone pulls out the will and does what the man specified.

In Hebrews 9:15-17, God reveals that somehow, the Old Covenant, was His will. And in order to bring about the promises which He had made to the Hebrews, He took on a human body and died upon the Cross. His death activated the graces which released the souls of the righteous from Limbo.

At the same time, His Crucifixion established a new will and testament for us.

Matthew 26:28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.

I understand the arguments for temporal punishment…pretty much but doesn’t Isaiah in the suffering servant chapter declare He took on our punishment? The wrath of God?

This is the Protestant understanding. The key, in Isaiah, is this:

Isaiah 53:We thought of him as stricken,
struck down by God and afflicted,

In other words, to the human way of seeing, Jesus seemed stricken by God. But that isn’t so. Jesus, Himself said,

John 10:17 This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again.

Far from pouring His wrath upon Jesus, the Father poured out His love upon His Son:

Matthew 3:17 And a voice came from the heavens, saying, “This is my beloved Son,[a] with whom I am well pleased.”

So if He took on our punishment why are we still punished? Wasn’t that the whole point of His coming and dying?

No. But one of the aspects of His Death, the Protestants have not accepted at all:

1 Peter 2:21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example that you should follow in his footsteps.

They think He suffered so they don’t have to. But it is the opposite. Only those who suffer will share in His glory:

Romans 8:17 and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if only we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

I understand purgatory as burning off the rest of our attachments and purifying us for Heaven but the punishment part baffles me.

1 Corinthians 11:32 but since we are judged by [the] Lord, we are being disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

And what did it mean when God forgave sin in the old testament? Why did they need a perfect sacrifice if they could be forgiven? Couldn’t they be purified in in purgatory?

They were. We simply call it Limbo when making reference to the Fathers. Limbo of the Fathers is the same thing as Purgatory.

I am honestly not arguing or trying to be combative my husband and I are in THIS but this baffles me. I read Today on Matthew 8 :17 that Jesus healing and driving out the demons was a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:4 but how does this ‘bore our diseases’?

You’ve got the wrong verse. It’s fulfillment of Isaiah 35:2 They will see the glory of the Lord,
the splendor of our God.
3 Strengthen hands that are feeble,
make firm knees that are weak,
4 Say to the fearful of heart:
Be strong, do not fear!
Here is your God,
he comes with vindication;
With divine recompense
he comes to save you.
5 Then the eyes of the blind shall see,
and the ears of the deaf be opened;
6 Then the lame shall leap like a stag,
and the mute tongue sing for joy.

Thank you so much for your time!

[/QUOTE]
I hope that helps.

 

[Tammyjean]

Yes it did! That is the correct
Verse though it’s in my st Joseph NAB Catholic study bible

I am realizing my confusion of Protestant thinking. I have always believed that Jesus took on our sin to save us because we all deserve damnation and that was also taking on our punishment.

I know there are more scriptures on this topic that bother me. I have my Thanksgiving this weekend due to crazy schedules of my adult children. Do you mind if I come back this week to this? I am getting part of what you are saying and it does make sense but I feel like there’s some pieces missing and I can’t articulate it yet. All of the answers have been really helpful!!! I am going to re read Isaiah 53 with your points in mind. i am exiting the protestant faith and I have many many protestant friends; I am going to have to explain this well at some point and I can’t right now. I know it’s EXTREMELY important i understand this correctly for my relationship with God!!!

Thank you so so so much!

 

[Tammyjean]

I also realized this auto corrected THIS was supposed to read RCIA

 

[De_Maria]

Do you mind if I come back this week to this?

Not at all…I love talking about this stuff.

 

[Tammyjean]

https://carm.org/substitutionary-atonement-jesus-christ

Forget the first part of the article but the part that talks about CARMS views of proprepiation. How are the verses and line of reasoning explained. I know CARM isn’t the most reliable site but more article does a good job at bringing together what i am confused about…I understand what everyone is saying here and our makes sense but how does that harmonize with these scriptures and points? Please walk me thru…

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

In His suffering, Christ has shown us the way of salvation:
Romans 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

1 Peter 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

Now, you’ll ask, “But why didn’t God, the Father, prevent that?” It might be easier to answer if we change that to, “Why didn’t GOD prevent that?” Well, because Jesus is God and He became man precisely to suffer and die upon the Cross and thus to bring about the end of the Old Testament and establish the New.

• 1 John 2:2, “and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.”
• 1 John 4:10, “In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”

The same answer applies to these as well.

The word propitiation "properly signifies the removal of wrath by the offering of a gift."1

Correct.

Propitiation properly deals with the wrath of God. The wrath of God is due to the legal requirements of punishing the sinner. Remember, the sinner is someone who has broken the law of God, hence, the legality of punishment; and since Jesus is our propitiation and turns away the lawful wrath of God, we have further evidence that Christ’s sacrifice was to avert God’s righteous wrath against us, the sinners. Since the law of God must be met and cannot be ignored, it is proper that the law be fulfilled. Jesus is the one who fulfilled the law and never sinned (1 Pet. 2:22).

All true.

But, he bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24)

True.

and became sin on our behalf (2 Cor. 5:21)

That just means that He came in the likeness of man.

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

thereby suffering the penalty of sin, which is death.

True. Notice that torture and crucifixion had nothing to do with it. That anger and rage was poured upon Jesus by Satan and his minions. Not by the Father. His anger was appeased. If Jesus had not been crucified, He would have still offered His life to the Father in some other way.

CCC#603 Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned. …

(Reprobation means penalty or punishment).

Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience

CCC#615 "For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous."443 By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who “makes himself an offering for sin”, when “he bore the sin of many”, and who “shall make many to be accounted righteous”, for “he shall bear their iniquities”.444 Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.445

 

[De_Maria]

For some reason, the first part of my response didn’t show.

Here it is again.

Forget the first part of the article but the part that talks about CARMS views of proprepiation. How are the verses and line of reasoning explained. I know CARM isn’t the most reliable site but more article does a good job at bringing together what i am confused about…I understand what everyone is saying here and our makes sense but how does that harmonize with these scriptures and points? Please walk me thru…

Sure. I assume you mean this:

Jesus did what we could not. He took our place and bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24) and made propitiation for our sins.
• Rom. 3:25, “whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed.”

Correct. Propitiation is defined correctly, below, "The word propitiation “properly signifies the removal of wrath by the offering of a gift.”

Think of a husband who brings his wife some roses to appease her anger. Jesus Christ is the Bouquet of Roses which appeases the Father’s anger.

• 1 John 2:2, “and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.”
• 1 John 4:10, “In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”

The same answer applies to these. Jesus Christ is the Bouquet that appeases the Father’s anger. He willingly offered His life for our sins.

The word propitiation "properly signifies the removal of wrath by the offering of a gift."1 Propitiation properly deals with the wrath of God. The wrath of God is due to the legal requirements of punishing the sinner. Remember, the sinner is someone who has broken the law of God, hence, the legality of punishment; and since Jesus is our propitiation and turns away the lawful wrath of God, we have further evidence that Christ’s sacrifice was to avert God’s righteous wrath against us, the sinners. Since the law of God must be met and cannot be ignored, it is proper that the law be fulfilled.

True.

Jesus is the one who fulfilled the law and never sinned (1 Pet. 2:22).

True.

But, he bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24)

That simply means that He came in the likeness of man

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

and became sin on our behalf (2 Cor. 5:21) thereby suffering the penalty of sin, which is death.

True. Notice that death is the penalty of sin. Not suffering on the Cross. Jesus Christ died to be a propitiation for the Father’s wrath. That succeeded.

He SUFFERED in order to give us an example to follow in His steps:

1 Peter 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

Cont’d

 

[Tammyjean]

Thank you so much! I loved the bouquet of flowers analogy! I have been studying this subject really having a hard time wrapping my head around it as I had my Baptist background playing in my ear. With a lot of help from the coming home network it finally got through

Jesus did not die in our place as we could not have died and paid for our sins that way so how could it be in our place? But He suffered and died as a sacrifice for us to atone for us which He did not need to do. To turn the wrath of God not take on the wrath instead of us. Just like the sacrifices in the old testament were an atonement, an appeasing or as you put it a bouquet of flowers. If the wrath is appeased or atoned for that is NOT saying He had to pour out His wrath on someone (penal substitution) because that is not how they works in the OT. God did not pour out his wrath on the sacrifices…they (imperfectly) atoned and saved them from His wrath.

I’m sorry I wasn’t back on here sooner I was just having so much difficulty with this then BAM all the pieces fit together!

Thank you so much for caring enough to get back to me!!!

 

[fhansen]

Everything Jesus said and did pointed to specific truths: God definitively exists, God is infinitely trustworthy, true, and good, God loves us so much that He’d hang on a cross, suffering an excruciatingly humiliating and painful death at the hands of His own creation, if that’s what it takes to prove that love, in spite of our sin. So we’re left with two truths that exist side by side: 1) God loves us, and 2) we still live in a messed up world; the corrupted world that Adam fell into. But according to our faith, this world was always intended for a purpose, to bring a greater good out of it. And that greater good involves gaining wisdom, just as the prodigal Son gained wisdom, by experience, the wisdom that comes as appreciation for what we had, for what is missing, is realized. The greater the struggle, the greater the appreciation, and the greater our desire to run and fully embrace the ultimate Good, our God. This willingness is what He desires, and this world is geared to help produce it along with the aids of revelation and grace. The knowledge of God’s goodness and love, contrasted with a world where the Master is effectively gone, where evil has resulted due to a human preference for ourselves and our wills over and against God and His will. And that struggle just happens to continue in us, lest we blame Adam for it all. Anyway it’s a good struggle, one that can produce greater and greater justice in us, greater and greater love, as we struggle with and come to triumph over the sin that attracts us. From the Catechism:
409 This dramatic situation of “the whole world [which] is in the power of the evil one” makes man’s life a battle:

The whole of man’s history has been the story of dour combat with the powers of evil, stretching, so our Lord tells us, from the very dawn of history until the last day. Finding himself in the midst of the battlefield man has to struggle to do what is right, and it is at great cost to himself, and aided by God’s grace, that he succeeds in achieving his own inner integrity.

The Church teaches that God created His universe in a “state of journeying to perfection”. Man’s perfection lies in his choosing God, as opposed to rejecting Him as Adam did for all practical purposes:
I. FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY

1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.

1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.

1733 The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes. There is no true freedom except in the service of what is good and just. The choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom and leads to "the slavery of sin."28

 

[fhansen]

So that’s what we’re here to do, to make the right choice. And to confirm and strengthen and grow in that choice.

 

[De_Maria]

Thank you so much! I loved the bouquet of flowers analogy! I have been studying this subject really having a hard time wrapping my head around it as I had my Baptist background playing in my ear. With a lot of help from the coming home network it finally got through

Jesus did not die in our place as we could not have died and paid for our sins that way so how could it be in our place? But He suffered and died as a sacrifice for us to atone for us which He did not need to do. To turn the wrath of God not take on the wrath instead of us.

Exactly!

Not to confuse matters, but it is was made crystal clear to me in these words concerning the cup of God’s wrath. I was speaking to someone, about a year ago, who mentioned that Jesus drank from the cup of God’s wrath. He said that Jesus drank from that cup so that those who believed in Him, would not have to.

But, that triggered a thought in me. Jesus said that the Apostles would drink of His cup!

Matthew 20:21 And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.
22 But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able.
23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.

If it was the cup of God’s wrath, then Jesus and the Apostles would be counted amongst God’s enemies. But that doesn’t make sense.

However, both Jesus and the Apostles suffered for the sake of God’s Kingdom. Scripture says:
Hebrews 2:10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

And:

Colossians 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church:

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

Just like the sacrifices in the old testament were an atonement,

Exactly! Remember that the Eucharist replaces all those sacrifices. It is by the Eucharist that we now atone for our sins. And the sins of the world. That is why Scripture says:

Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all…26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

In other words, there is only one sacrifice which remains for our sins.

an appeasing or as you put it a bouquet of flowers. If the wrath is appeased or atoned for that is NOT saying He had to pour out His wrath on someone (penal substitution) because that is not how they works in the OT. God did not pour out his wrath on the sacrifices…they (imperfectly) atoned and saved them from His wrath.

Yep!

I’m sorry I wasn’t back on here sooner I was just having so much difficulty with this then BAM all the pieces fit together!

Thank you so much for caring enough to get back to me!!!

You’re welcome. I’m glad I could help.

 

[De_Maria]

Sorry I was so long to get back.

https://carm.org/substitutionary-atonement-jesus-christ

Forget the first part of the article but the part that talks about CARMS views of proprepiation. How are the verses and line of reasoning explained.

Ok. I assume you mean this part.

Jesus did what we could not. He took our place and bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24) and made propitiation for our sins…

I know CARM isn’t the most reliable site but more article does a good job at bringing together what i am confused about…I understand what everyone is saying here and our makes sense but how does that harmonize with these scriptures and points? Please walk me thru…

Sure.

Jesus did what we could not.

This is correct. Jesus is God. Therefore, since He is God,

a. Jesus could, by His death, bring about the fulfillment of the promises of the Old Testament (See Heb 9:15-17).

b. Jesus could also bring about the establishment of the New Testament in His blood (See Matt 26:28, Heb 9:22)

c. Jesus could also set an example that we are to follow. To lay down our lives for those we love.

He took our place and bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24) and made propitiation for our sins.

True. But we look at it differently.

CARM describes PENAL substitution. Whereas the Catholic Church Teaches simple “Substitution”. With no PENAL element.

In other words, Jesus Christ offered Himself for our sins. But He was not punished by God. He simply paid for the sins of mankind.

• Rom. 3:25, “whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed.”

Correct. Propitiation was properly defined below. The word propitiation “properly signifies the removal of wrath by the offering of a gift.” Think of a husband offering his wife some roses to appease her anger. If the wife is not appeased, she’ll stomp the roses on the ground. But if she is appeased, there will be great joy.

Jesus Christ is the Bouquet of Roses which has appeased the Father’s anger. God does not stomp on the offering. He greatly loves the offering.

So, that seems to be the difference between the Protestant understanding and the Catholic.

Protestants see Christ’s suffering as God pouring His wrath upon Jesus. They confuse Christ’s suffering with Christ’s death.

Catholics see Christ’s suffering as being poured out by Satan’s minions. But know that Christ has offered His life in order to take back the lives of those who have been faithful and will be faithful to God. The suffering and the death, are separate.

cont’d

 

[Catholic_Dude]

What does it mean that Jesus died for our sins exactly?

The Greek term “for” when it says Jesus “died for us” means “on behalf of,” it does not mean “in place of”. See THIS article for more on “for”. Lots more on that blog for the Biblical Catholic understanding of Atonement.

I understand the arguments for temporal punishment…pretty much but doesn’t Isaiah in the suffering servant chapter declare He took on our punishment? The wrath of God?

DeMaria has done a good job on this already. In short, nowhere does the Bible say Jesus endured “wrath” from God. That’s totally a Protestant invention, going back even to Luther and Calvin.

Isaiah 53 is often misunderstood by Protestant advocates of the mistaken Atonement view called "Penal Substitutionary Atonement. In reality, Isaiah 53 is the furthest from PSA. Consider verse 53:10LXX says “the Lord’s will to purify him from his wounds”. Contextually, the overall tone of Isaiah 53 is of sinful men hurting the Servant, not God’s wrath. Consider all these references to ‘we’ the evil people causing the harm: “he was despised [by us], and we esteemed him not” (53:3); “we [wrongly] esteemed him stricken by God” (53:4); “he was pierced [by Roman nails]” (53:5); “upon him was the chastisement [of Roman oppression]” (53:5); “with his [fleshy scourge] wounds we are healed” (53:5); “we [sinners] like sheep have gone astray” (53:6); “he opened not his mouth [before Pilate]” (53:7); “they [the Romans] made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man [Joseph Arimathea] in his death” (53:9); “I [God] will divide him a portion with the many [as a reward for faithfulness]” (53:12); “he was [falsely] numbered with the transgressors” [crucified between two theives]; “he makes intercession for the transgressors” [Father forgive them for they know not what they do]. This doesn’t so much sound like God’s wrath justly placed upon a substitute as it does a flat out persecution. In fact, the most conclusive text on this is 1 Peter 2:18-24, which comments upon Isaiah 53 more than any other text. In 2:18-21, Peter sets up the context that this is a lesson on “unjust suffering” and how Jesus “suffered unjustly,” which is the exact opposite of what PSA teaches.

 

[Edward_H]

Justice for our sins had to be satisfied…God is all just, all truth, all merciful, all loving.

But He doesn’t “bend” truth…ignoring our sins would go against truth, justice, mercy, etc.

So some way to satisfy justice was needed.

An infinite offense against God was committed…an infinite victim was needed.

 

[Tammyjean]

OK help me out here… What baptism are the talking about? Jesus did not have a baptism to wash away original sin?