R
RedFan
Guest
But the Father could have just avoided BOTH outcomes. No crucifixion! No eternity in hell for mankind! So, why didn’t He? What’s your position on that?
- Status
G
Gorgias
Guest
I’ve already stated it. A world without rewards or consequences is a world in which we are unable to make a choice for God. We believe, based on the Deposit of the Faith, that what God wants is precisely that – he wishes us to choose Him.
You’re right – God could have avoided both outcomes! But in doing so, He would have avoided His plan – which is to give us free will and the opportunity to use it to choose Him in love.
R
RedFan
Guest
You’ve kicked the can down the road. If, as you concede,
So, why didn’t He opt for the third option?
then, He chose not to because it
And when we freely chose sin, He had a choice: punish us, or crucify His Son. OR NEITHER ONE!!!
So, why didn’t He opt for the third option?
G
Gorgias
Guest
Actually… that’s exactly what He did!
Look at it! We weren’t punished. He didn’t crucify Jesus (after all, Jesus freely chose that course of action). Therefore… God did exactly what you’re asking for!
R
RedFan
Guest
Not what I am asking for. I was suggesting forgiveness without bloodshed or suffering of any ind. I wanted the Son’s offer of going to the cross to be met by “What for, Son? I am the all-loving, all-merciful Forgiver, and I choose to forgive mankind. There,” He declares as He snaps His almighty fingers, “they’re forgiven. Debt cancelled! No need for any suffering Son.”
G
Gorgias
Guest
And how is that different from “no consequences for actions”? It isn’t.
Christian faith doesn’t assert “everyone gets a participation trophy and goes to heaven”… which is what you’re suggesting here, when it gets right down to it.
M
meltzerboy2
Guest
This is Judaism! Forgiveness WITHOUT sacrifice (for intentional sins) but with one important qualification. We must sincerely ask for forgiveness by atoning for our sins. How do we do that? By repenting (turning away) from them, or at least making the effort to do so: both the sins directly against G-d and His commandments and the sins indirectly against G-d directed toward our fellow man and His other creations (for example, animals).
U
Usagi
Guest
Remember also that, in orthodox Christian theology, Jesus is God. (Not the Father, but God nonetheless.)
So God didn’t punish some other innocent being (even a volunteer); He gave His own life to show His love for us.
And that, BTW, seems to be the way Catholics usually explain it. The pain and blood and death weren’t strictly necessary, but they were what God chose to show us both the awfulness of sin (so He didn’t just forgive with a handwave) and the depth of His love (“no greater love,” as someone else said). Remember that “how to fix it when the angels and humans screw it up” wasn’t something God came up with on the spur of the moment; it was built into the universe from the beginning.
So God didn’t punish some other innocent being (even a volunteer); He gave His own life to show His love for us.
And that, BTW, seems to be the way Catholics usually explain it. The pain and blood and death weren’t strictly necessary, but they were what God chose to show us both the awfulness of sin (so He didn’t just forgive with a handwave) and the depth of His love (“no greater love,” as someone else said). Remember that “how to fix it when the angels and humans screw it up” wasn’t something God came up with on the spur of the moment; it was built into the universe from the beginning.
M
mkoopman
Guest
As a western boy in a dead end town I will remain with the eastern girls on this one. Most of what I read on this thread seems like so much “flubber” to me. Indeed, we need to satisfy our rational curiosity on things of God, proper exegesis and formal theology are good things. But Jesus is the true, high priest and the one sacrifice. The Lamb of God should not be marked for kosher and non-kosher cuts. Consider He offers Himself, au jus, eh?
The passion that opens the way to eternal life comes from the infinite mercy and reveals the agape love of The Father for every sinner, that is, all of us. Anticipating a way to define the rational definition of this is quite impossible, by definition. It is great mystery and that is my final answer, lock it in. Some things can never be known by the finite mind. God bless your attempts to understand a process philosophy of atonement. For me, God loves us beyond our capacity for understanding is sufficient.
The passion that opens the way to eternal life comes from the infinite mercy and reveals the agape love of The Father for every sinner, that is, all of us. Anticipating a way to define the rational definition of this is quite impossible, by definition. It is great mystery and that is my final answer, lock it in. Some things can never be known by the finite mind. God bless your attempts to understand a process philosophy of atonement. For me, God loves us beyond our capacity for understanding is sufficient.
R
Roadrunner
Guest
It seems to me that atonement is a word that encompasses two main concepts ‘expiation’ and ‘reconciliation’; Luke6_37 touched upon it in his post above. (I’m open to any alterations to this).
The question is: what theory best covers those concepts?
The question is: what theory best covers those concepts?
B
Benadam
Guest
Not sure if I’m getting it.
So, God used our sin to reveal Himself more fully to us. So we can know…God is love?
That’s why He didn’t just let everything slide?
So, God used our sin to reveal Himself more fully to us. So we can know…God is love?
That’s why He didn’t just let everything slide?
G
Gorgias
Guest
So that we can know it fully in eternity.
IMHO, yeah… 'cause letting this slide would be tantamount to saying, “your entire life on earth is without meaning.”
In that case, all of life – with its aches and pains, not to mention physical death – would be “cruel and unusual punishment,” since it amounts to torturing us here for no reason.
D
DaveBj
Guest
This is an interesting discussion, and I am tagging it so I can read over again in more detail when I have time to read slowly and think.
D
D
R
Roadrunner
Guest
In reading over this thread I should point out that Jesus didn’t die in order to get the Father to forgive us. Rather, it’s because the Father had already forgiven us that He gave His Son to die for us – to conquer death, not to exact payment of a debt.
R
RedFan
Guest
That theory does not square with the “ransom” passages of 1 Tim. 2:6, Matt. 28:20 and Mark 10:45, nor with the “Christ died for our sins” reference in 1 Cor. 15:3.
R
Roadrunner
Guest
Ransom’s are paid to captors; God did not hold us captive. There is no payment made to the Father for forgiveness, in fact forgiveness would not be forgiveness if it was paid for.
R
RedFan
Guest
To whom was the “ransom” paid – and for what?
R
Roadrunner
Guest
Scripture does not say to whom the ransom was paid nor is it necessary to identify a payee. We can say that a ransom was paid, but not paid to anybody or anything. What we cannot say is that the ransom was paid to God.
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
A metaphor for our bondage, slavery or ransom to “sin”.
B
Benadam
Guest
Eve did make a judgement and ‘took’ the fruit and ate. Maybe the giver has rights over the ‘property’.
- Status