Posted on 02/06/2015 5:05:04 PM PST by RnMomof7
Wow. what a succinct way of putting it.
That needs to be repeated over and over........
Jesus became the primary “co-signer” for our sins and accepted the debt as His own. It has been my belief that He actually experienced the bite of sin in that it is sin that separates us from God - hence the “Father, why have you forsaken me” comment. Imagine the agony of being separated from God the Father for the first time in His existence - probably much worse than the human agony of being flailed and crucified.
EGGSakly like!!!!
OOOOH!
This is a good analogy as well!
My purse WAS empty and it has remained empty!
I can NEVER pay back what I owe!
....”I believe that is the ‘cup’ Jesus was referring to...He couldn’t stand the thought of becoming sin”....
well if you were going to be taking ‘the punishment’ for all the sin of the world , from time past, present, and future, and for every man throughout time... the I would suspect Jesus would ask that cup be removed.
“His visage was so marred more than any man,
And his form more than the sons of men”...Isaiah 52 14,15
He bore our sin but he was not sin.....
...”He actually experienced the bite of sin in that it is sin that separates us from God”....
That’s pretty vague..the ‘bite’ of sin...
Sin brings forth death and so he “died” for us the death we deserve.....He bleed for us the punishment we deserve FOR ‘our’ sin...what we committed.
I can see he bore our sin...carried it so to speak...but if he was not sinless when he died...... then how can he be my savior or anyone elses???
Ask God - I believe He took upon Himself all our sins and they ended up crucified with Him. He arose pure and whole again. Good enough for me.
RCs struggle with this text (2Cor. 5:21) because they dismiss imputation as legal fiction, as they teach that God justifies the unGodly by faith by actually making him Godly, fit for Heaven, via the “infused” holiness which their sprinkling sacrament effects, even if one is incapable of faith.
In conversion one is washed and regenerated, but if the effects of regeneration justifies one, then Abraham would have becoming born again in Gn. 15:6, or otherwise suddenly become actually good at that point. Likewise the justified penitent publican in Lk. 18.
Yet for a RC one needs to be morally perfect to enter Heaven, thus since one began his salvation journey by actually becoming good enough to be with God via a sacrament, then this typically must culminate in once again actually becoming good enough to be with God via postmortem suffering in purgatory.
But it is hardly reasonable to hold that the contrite criminal became morally perfect in his short time on the cross.
RCs allow that Christ bore our sins, and suffered for them, but unless he literally became sin, which they deny with us, then you have the Lord laying upon Christ the iniquity of us all, (Is. 53:6) without this meaning imputation.
But to take responsibility for sins means that our guilt is imposed upon the sacrificial entity, as was done with the scapegoat in Lv. 16, over whom the high priest confessed all the sins of Israel upon.
Oh how I wish more would understand that one truth.
Thus the peace that is in Christ Jesus!!
And hence, His full identification with fallen humanity which makes Him our merciful high priest. He KNOWS where we are and what we struggle with.
....”Ask God”....
I did...(again)...just as a refresher course, in the scriptures, that I might not just believe but know.
My conclusion as He taught... that Jesus was the “sinless lamb of God”....Sin was never found in Him....he took ‘the punishment’ for our sin we deserve....that does not mean he ‘became’ in any way at all sin itself.... He didn’t....
and so...our redemption comes “through the blood of the cross” nothing else.
Lev. 17:11 .....for ...the life of the flesh is in the blood...it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul.”
1 Peter 1:18–19.....“You were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers,... but with precious blood, as of ‘a lamb unblemished and spotless’, the blood of Christ.”
Luke 23:47... “Now when the centurion saw what had happened, he began praising God, saying, ‘Certainly this man was innocent.’”
Col. 1:14: “In whom we have redemption through ‘His blood,’ the forgiveness of sins.”
Eph. 1:7: “In Him we have redemption through ‘His blood’, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace.”
Heb. 10:19-20 “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by’ the blood of Jesus’, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh.”
Revelation 1:5“...To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in ‘His own blood.’”
THANK!
I look at it more like you are in court because of breaking a law, the judge, being just, sentences you to pay an amount you cannot, then takes off his robe, gets down, and pays your fine for you.
I’ve heard of traffic judges doing that.
Anyhow the result was a moment of estrangement between God the Father and God the Son.
Be very careful lest delicacy cause you in any way to underestimate Christ's work.
He took on the liability of sin and stood in sin's place, while not doing anything wrong. But it required Him to be treated as though He were sin.
A modern way to put it would be that Christ encapsulated our sin. Modern electrical engineering furnishes an example. If you take an electrically charged object and put it in a conductive Faraday cage, in contact with the inside of the cage, the Faraday cage will assume the electric charge, which migrates to the outside. Then the Faraday cage can be discharged and the electrical charge is gone from both it and its contents.
I wouldn’t be TOO hard on Benny Hinn about this.
Nope..can’t go with your explanation...it doesn’t fit the Christ I know. This is why....
First of all the cross was a place of ‘victory’... not of defeat!...at the cross He was made to be sin for us ‘judicially’.......Not guilty..... Ponder that a spell....
How could Jesus have literally become sin when Hebrews 9:14 tells us that He offered Himself “without blemish to God”....’the lamb of God that ‘taketh away’ the sin of the world”
Which should remind us of the Old Covenant, shadows of what would come... Peter’s statement, that the Savior “bore our sins” (1 Pet. 2:24)...is very much like the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament, which those animals did not become sin nor were they “imputed” in some mystical way....they were a sin-OFFERING....they took the punishment, death, though God was never satisfied as these were but ‘a shadow’ of Jesus’s sacrifice for us to come later....
Also....In the Old Testament, only a spotless lamb could be offered as an acceptable sacrifice. ... Leviticus 22:20 gave instruction.... “Whatever has a defect, you shall not offer, for ‘it will not be accepted’ for you.” ........ that Jesus remained spotless even in His sacrificial death must be so.
Additionally....Heb. 10:19-20 Tells us it was His FLESH....not sin which bleed for us..... “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by’ the blood of Jesus’, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is,... “His flesh.”
When we take communion the bread represents his sinless body ...’unleavened’ bread...leavened represents sin otherwise Therefore it would change the whole communion service of what we do in rememberance of Him..as we don’t remember sin...we remember the price he gave for us....he “took the punishment” for our sin....and that punishment brought death, which he also did for us, ..and then he arose...also for us.
and further...Isaiah 53:6 say’s.... the Lord ‘laid’ our iniquity “on” him, not “in” him;..he bore our sin... there was no change in His nature. He never stopped being sinless... there is an huge difference between Jesus having the guilt of our iniquities charged to him as if he sinned, and having any guilt of his own for becoming our sin....he didn’t do that.
Sorry if this seems somewhat scattered...am tired tonight....hope you can follow this ok.
...”I wouldn’t be TOO hard on Benny Hinn about this”...
I don’t follow or relate to Benny Hinn’s teachings at all...he’s a charlaton/fake and one doesn’t have to hear him to know that.
This sounds like a big quibble on your part. That is probably why it is scattered.
“Defeat” — well He died. It didn’t need to be permanent to be real.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.