A perspective on atonement

[fccool]

In this thread I'd like to discuss the view of atonement as preached worldwide by the fundamentalist evangelicals today. Not that I disagree with the doctrine, but it is how it's presented that makes a difference. I always thought that the way gospel is presented today is primarily based on guilt, pandering to the idea "full of sin from birth humans" who deserve to die, and an idea of Savior who died in their place so that they can live forever.

Thus the message is that God is very angry with you by default, and you deserve to die the moment you are born... but Jesus can be punished in your place if you accept it as fact and recite a "prayer of forgiveness"... and then serve Him out of feeling of thankfulness.

This spin on salvation, although has some truth to it, is very problematic. I perceive it to be a guilt driven evangelism approach rather than transformation of human mind via message of God's love. It puts God in quite a terrible view for people who are unfamiliar with God's love, and who are expected to simply brush away the inconsistencies in the message.

The God is painted as bloodthirsty maniac who needs someone to die to satisfy His urge of revenge (justice)... be it an animal or His son. And Jesus is painted as a naked guy on a cross, who's ministry only consists of suffering and dying to satisfy the father's urge for revenge. I hardly think that this is the message of the Bible.

Killing someone in place of other is injustice by definition. And any agnostic will point this out to you right away. So, I'd like to point a couple things out:

1) God did not kill or punish Jesus, but it was Jews and Romans who were deceived by Satan who tortured and killed Him. The "punishment" on God's side was to turn His back while this was going on... hence "Father, why have you forsaken me?". It was an act of love and sacrifice on both sides of Godhead.

2) Jesus' mission was not to die. Quite the opposite... it was to live. He did not want to die, and it was not His desire to die. But it was the desire of the corrupt people lead by Satan, and He willingly let them kill Him while urging them to change their mind. Disciples died in likewise manner. God was willing to play by Satan's rules to show that He is not a control freak Satan painted Him to be. (i.e. Job)

3) God can not die. It's as simple as that. He can be in flesh, and manifest Himself as flesh... but He can not die, because if He did... He is not God. Perhaps a human shell of God can die, but "death of God" in this case is merely a symbol of His immortal nature and willingness to come to our level to teach us His saving truths.

So, what do I take away from the above (besides accusation of being a heretic)? The at-one-ment is reconciliation that does not merely happens by means of someone dying... be it Christ, or the sacrificial animals. The reconciliation happens at point of our mind-hear change... at the point when we turn back to God and accept his original purpose for our lives, turning back from our ways of self-destruction. I think that the message of salvation is pretty clear. You can talk about being "saved" all you want to, but if you don't follow God's law then it's just blabber without any evidence.

Now, some people will be quick to jump out and scream "Heresy!". After all, we are taught that Christ has to "save us" first before we can change as a magical overnight transformation of mind, which then causes us to follow everything that God said... right? I think that you know that this is not true. You can know from experience. God does not "control" our brain after salvation experience. Every decision that we make after salvation is still ours to make. We don't act based on "control", but based on knowledge... the saving knowledge of God's truth that He died teaching us. The path to salvation is through our MINDS, which are transformed by the Word of God and thus we have the mind of Christ.

The obvious question is then... why did Jesus have to die? Christ did not have to die, if we in fact accepted Him the first time He came and followed Him. He did not come to die, but came to live and to teach the world that rejected God in spirit. Thus it was a grand gesture by God to come down to our level. Ironically, the rejection by his own people lead to His death, which He knowingly was willing to endure in order to demonstrate His love. From God's knowledge of future... His death was unavoidable, and predicted. Thus God pointed this out through symbols in the Bible, again and again and again. The message was not merely... "kill the lamb so that your sins would be forgiven", but "YOUR DISOBEDIENCE CAUSE INNOCENT TO DIE".

The entire sacrificial and passover system points out just that. Not God's thirst for blood and substitutionary death... but that we killed our Savior, who being God, was willing to simply let us do it ... so that few of us later on could look back on it, see it and change our mind touched by this love. And THIS IS the true AT-ONE-MENT... not the act of murder of innocent God-man in order to satisfy God's sense of "revenge" (justice) . Thus it becomes evident that Christ's death does play a major role in atonement, and still consistent with the view of substitutionary death. Yet, it is not what "evangelicals" make it out to be.

After all, without God all of us will die, and we are hopelessly lost without God's Word that Jesus came down to teach us not only in speech, but by example. Yet, I think that many times we go on focusing on death, rather than life of Christ. It's not Christ's death that makes our salvation possible. Yet, the image of Christianity for the world is the suffering and pain on the cross, instead of it being the life and joy that Godliness brings about. So, we end up constantly dwelling on suffering as a way to salvation, while the way to salvation is quite the opposite. It brings joy and peace and love. All of these things should alleviate suffering.

I think that such view of salvation explain the phenomenon of inquisition. Because, after all, we embrace suffering as a way to salvation and human suffering becomes a common theme. While it is important to remember what Christ had endured, I don't think that this should be the focus of our message. The focus should be His doctrine... the mind changing experience that results in better and purposeful life.

I hope that you can see my point, and perhaps even agree with me, in spite of the culture of the guilt driven religion that we are all apart of.

[John317]

Jesus' mission was not to die. Quite the opposite... it was to live. He did not want to die, and it was not His desire to die. But it was the desire of the corrupt people lead by Satan, and He willingly let them kill Him while urging them to change their mind. Disciples died in likewise manner. God was willing to play by Satan's rules to show that He is not a control freak Satan painted Him to be. (i.e. Job)

.....The obvious question is then... why did Jesus have to die? Christ did not have to die, if we in fact accepted Him the first time He came and followed Him. He did not come to die, but came to live and to teach the world that rejected God in spirit....

Could God have forgiven our sins and saved us without the death and shedding of Christ's blood?

Hebrews 9: 22-- Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

Hebrews 9: 26-- "Christ has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."

Acts 2:23 -- this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

Mark 10: 45-- For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

Isaiah 53: 10-- You [God] make his [Christ's] soul an offering for sin... He shall bear their inquities...

Rev. 5: 9-- "You [Christ] have redeemed us to God by your blood..."

[phkrause]

And wasn't that also the reason that the Hebrew nation was taught to sacrifice animals. To point to the Messiah, that he would die for sin for all, since the law required death. If Jesus was not supposed to die than why were there so many prophecy's and signs to that effect. Just thinking out loud.

pk

[fccool]

Psalm 40:6 -- Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.

Jeremiah 7: 21-24 --- Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: Heap your holocausts upon your sacrifices; eat up the flesh! In speaking to your fathers on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I gave them no command concerning holocaust or sacrifice. This rather is what I commanded them: Listen to my voice; then I will be your God and you shall be my people. Walk in all the ways that I command you, so that you may prosper. But they obeyed not, nor did they pay heed. They walked in the hardness of their evil hearts and turned their backs, not their faces, to me.

Isaiah 1:10-17 --- "The multitude of your sacrifices—

what are they to me?" says the LORD.

"I have more than enough of burnt offerings,

of rams and the fat of fattened animals;

I have no pleasure

in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.

When you come to appear before me,

who has asked this of you,

this trampling of my courts?

Stop bringing meaningless offerings!

Your incense is detestable to me.

New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—

I cannot bear your evil assemblies.

Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts

my soul hates.

They have become a burden to me;

I am weary of bearing them.

When you spread out your hands in prayer,

I will hide my eyes from you;

even if you offer many prayers,

I will not listen.

Your hands are full of blood;

wash and make yourselves clean.

Take your evil deeds

out of my sight!

Stop doing wrong,

learn to do right!

Seek justice,

encourage the oppressed.

Defend the cause of the fatherless,

plead the case of the widow.

I can go on. The writer of Hebrews (could be Paul, but unlikely) was writing to Jews. They understood the rituals of sacrificial system, so the writer was explaining the salvation in term of these rituals. Taken too far, the salvation becomes about shedding innocent blood alone. Such view has nothing to do with justice and fulfilling of God's wrath, and God does not want that to happen as shown above.

I'm not trying to make false of the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement. There's enough evidence in scripture for its bases. I simply trying to show that the focus is not the death and blood. We view God as someone absolutely requires blood in order to forgive us. So, there's this obsession with blood in Christian circles. "The blood that gives me strength... the blood that covers sin... the fountain of blood". The imagery is kind of disgusting. I think God makes it perfectly clear that it is not something to be joyous about. It's tragic that Christ was killed. We should rejoice in resurrection, which is but a mention in passe when doctrine of atonement is presented.

[fccool]

Above all, I think it's clear that the sacrificial system was instituted to deal with disobedient man(and women). It was not to be the "get out of jail free" card that we have to partake every so often... or a better analogy... a cologne that somehow covers the stench of our sin so that God can have a dinner date with us.

The love of God is demonstrated with parable of the prodigal son. He went away, he realized that he would be better off with the father. He prepared a little speech, that he did not even got to say, because the father was there waiting for him with open arms. Neither there was a "confession", because the act of coming back on part of the son constitutes the repentance ... not the speech he prepared. The idea of the atonement is somehow missing from the story. The father did not require the bull to be slain instead of the son. Neither he required the other son to suffer. He rejoiced that his lost son came back after the experiencing life without father's guidance that nearly killed him.

God does not desire the offering for sin (which is to teach us a lesson)... quite the opposite... he desires US not to sin:

Jeremiah 33:11 The voice of joy, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride, the voice of them that shall say, Praise the LORD of hosts: for the LORD is good; for his mercy endureth for ever: and of them that shall bring the sacrifice of praise into the house of the LORD.

[John317]

Psalm 40:6 -- Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.

Compare Hebrews 10: 5-9. Jesus is saying that God wants people who will do His will, not simply offer sacrifices. The Jews got to the point where they thought that God was primarily interested in the sacrifices. God wanted and wants true spiritual worship.

Quote:

Jeremiah 7: 21-24 --- Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: Heap your holocausts upon your sacrifices; eat up the flesh! In speaking to your fathers on the day I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I gave them no command concerning holocaust or sacrifice. This rather is what I commanded them: Listen to my voice; then I will be your God and you shall be my people. Walk in all the ways that I command you, so that you may prosper. But they obeyed not, nor did they pay heed. They walked in the hardness of their evil hearts and turned their backs, not their faces, to me.

Compare Hosea 6: 6-- "God desires mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."

God is not saying they should stop all sacrifices. He is saying they should understand what they mean and obey Him.

When God brought the people up out of Egypt, His main emphasis at Mt. Sinai was that they were to be His special, covenant people and obey His commandments. God's primary focus was not on the animal sacrifices. The Jews of Jeremiah's day did not understand this.

Quote:

Isaiah 1:10-17 --- "The multitude of your sacrifices—

what are they to me?" says the LORD.

"I have more than enough of burnt offerings,

of rams and the fat of fattened animals;

I have no pleasure

in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.

When you come to appear before me,

who has asked this of you,

this trampling of my courts?

Stop bringing meaningless offerings!

Your incense is detestable to me.

New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—

I cannot bear your evil assemblies.

Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts

my soul hates.

They have become a burden to me;

I am weary of bearing them.

When you spread out your hands in prayer,

I will hide my eyes from you;

even if you offer many prayers,

I will not listen.

Your hands are full of blood;

wash and make yourselves clean.

Take your evil deeds

out of my sight!

Stop doing wrong,

learn to do right!

Seek justice,

encourage the oppressed.

Defend the cause of the fatherless,

plead the case of the widow.

Again, the context of those verses show that they are saying God is not primarily interested in the sacrifices for themselves. God's whole purpose in the sacrificial system-- and his purpose in the death and resurrection of Christ-- is that He have a people who willingly, intelligently, and lovingly obey His law.

You are right, then, that the sacrifices were never God's main focus. But I have heard people read these verses and think that the whole sacrificial system was not God's plan. However, that would be to misunderstand what the verses are saying.

None of this should be interpreted to mean that Jesus did not have to die, though.

But I do agree with you that God doesn't want us to merely focus on the physical aspects of Christ's crucifixion. That would be doing the same with Christ's death as the Jews did with the death of the sacrificial animals. Some churches think mostly about the torture and blood, and very little about having Christ and His Spirit in their lives. This should be the center of our attention.

[John317]

Hebrews 2

2:14

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death--that is, the devil--

This says that the purpose of Jesus' coming as a man was in order to die and thus destroy the devil.

[fccool]

John, I think it's clear ministry of Jesus was not to die. Since God knows the future, He knows what will transpire. It's the same thing as saying that humans were made to sin, because they eventually sinned.

The writer of Hebrews writes to mostly Jews, in fact... the extreme Judaizers who believed that people had to convert to Judaism in order to practice Christian faith. So, you will expect the writer to explain it in a language that is understandable to such audience... In terms of sacrificial rituals, and the true Sabbath (as he is not literally talks about the 7th day, but rest in Christ)... and etc.

He emphasized the new Covenant in terms of a different type of sacrifice. A sacrifice to end all of the sacrifices.

Here's a thought for you. Did blood of the lamb really cover sin? Or was it the act of obedience to God that did? It was the act of obedience that initiated the rituals, not the rituals that initiated obedience.

A good example would be Abraham asked to sacrifice his son. God did not want the sacrifice, he wanted obedience. Likewise, from God's perspective... he already knows who will repent, and who will obey. There's no reason to investigate anything. Whatever rituals were instituted, and whichever sacrifices were made... are reminder FOR US... not for Him.

The biggest problem with atonement doctrine as it is taught today is that God accepts human sacrifices. I don't think that this is the God that Bible describes. Sacrificing human being ... no matter how much good it does, is still evil. You can't pave your way to "goodness" by means of evil. I don't think that God operates in such manner.

So, when you say that God sent his son to die... it's far from truth. God sent His Son to LIVE, KNOWING THAT HE WILL DIE. It's a quite different view of atonement. So, the sacrifice was the act of SENDING, not the act of "killing him for us".

Remember?...

Quote:

16for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

[John317]

John, I think it's clear ministry of Jesus was not to die.

Jesus' first coming had several objectives.

1) John 1: 18 says that He came to explain the Father to us. He could do that only because He knew the Father intimately and because He Himself was God equal with the Father. So Jesus came to disprove the accusations and lies of Satan against God.

2) The second reason He came was to "redeem us" and "to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." Romans 3: 26.

Hebrews 9: 22 says that God could not forgive our sins apart from the shedding of the blood of Christ; that is, without His having given his life up for us.

By His death, Christ "took away the sins of the world." The sins of the world wouldn't have been take away apart from Christ's death.

This purpose is mentioned in the following verses:

Hebrews 9: 26-- "Christ has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."

Acts 2:23 -- this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

Rev. 5: 9-- "You [Christ] have redeemed us to God by your blood..."

3) The third reason He came was to prove that God's law can be obeyed and that God did not give mankind a law which humans connected to God cannot obey.

Quote:

Here's a thought for you. Did blood of the lamb really cover sin?

Offering the sacrifices was showing faith in the Messiah who was to come. That was their way of showing faith in the death of the Messiah, the same way that we have faith when we look back. We don't need to offer sacrifices because Christ already died for us. Now we put faith in what Christ did for us in the past. The people before 31 AD were looking to the future fulfillment; we look to the fulfillment itself, which occurred on the cross.

Quote:

Or was it the act of obedience to God that did? It was the act of obedience that initiated the rituals, not the rituals that initiated obedience.

It was the faith that was demonstrated by the obedience. For instance, Abel obeyed. Cain did not.

Quote:

A good example would be Abraham asked to sacrifice his son. God did not want the sacrifice, he wanted obedience. Likewise, from God's perspective... he already knows who will repent, and who will obey. There's no reason to investigate anything.

The investigation does not teach God anything. The Investigative Judgment is not for God but for the whole on-looking universe. God wants the whole intelligent universe to see what sin does and how He has dealt with it.

Quote:

when you say that God sent his son to die... it's far from truth.

God sent His Son to LIVE, KNOWING THAT HE WILL DIE. It's a quite different view of atonement.

Acts 2:23 -- this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

That verse-- and others show clearly also-- says that Christ's death was "the predetermined plan" of God. It was God's "set purpose" (NIV).

Jesus was the Lamb of God slain from the creation of the world. Rev. 13:8.

Quote:

So, the sacrifice was the act of SENDING, not the act of "killing him for us".

Remember?...

Quote:

16for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

It is true that sending the Son was a sacrifice on God's part. God did not kill Jesus. Men were inspired by Satan to kill Jesus Christ.

The Righteousness of God Through Faith

Romans 3: 21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

[John317]

So, when you say that God sent his son to die... it's far from truth. God sent His Son to LIVE, KNOWING THAT HE WILL DIE. It's a quite different view of atonement. So, the sacrifice was the act of SENDING, not the act of "killing him for us".

Remember?...

Quote:

16for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

Check out Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 63-65:

(It is supported by many Bible texts, including

Acts 2:23 -- this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.)

Quote:

The Son of God, heaven's glorious Commander, was touched with pity for the fallen race. His heart was moved with infinite compassion as the woes of the lost world rose up before Him. But divine love had conceived a plan whereby man might be redeemed. The broken law of God demanded the life of the sinner. In all the universe there was but one who could, in behalf of man, satisfy its claims. Since the divine law is as sacred as God Himself, only one equal with God could make atonement for its transgression. None but Christ could redeem fallen man from the curse of the law and bring him again into harmony with Heaven. Christ would take upon Himself the guilt and shame of sin--sin so offensive to a holy God that it must separate the Father and His Son. Christ would reach to the depths of misery to rescue the ruined race.

Before the Father He pleaded in the sinner's behalf, while the host of heaven awaited the result with an intensity of interest that words cannot express. Long continued was that mysterious communing--"the counsel of peace" (Zechariah 6:13) for the fallen sons of men. The plan of salvation had been laid before the creation of the earth; for Christ is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8); yet it was a struggle, even with the King of the universe, to yield up His Son to die for the guilty race. But "God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16. Oh, the mystery of redemption! the love of God for a world that did not love Him! Who can know the depths of that love which "passeth knowledge"? Through endless ages immortal minds, seeking to comprehend the mystery of that incomprehensible love, will wonder and adore.

God was to be manifest in Christ, "reconciling the world unto Himself." 2 Corinthians 5:19. Man had become so degraded by sin that it was impossible for him, in himself, to come into harmony with Him whose nature is purity and goodness. But Christ, after having redeemed man from the condemnation of the law, could impart divine power to unite with human effort. Thus by repentance toward God and faith in Christ the fallen children of Adam might once more become "sons of God." 1 John 3:2.

The plan by which alone man's salvation could be secured, involved all heaven in its infinite sacrifice. The angels could not rejoice as Christ opened before them the plan of redemption, for they saw that man's salvation must cost their loved Commander unutterable woe. In grief and wonder they listened to His words as He told them how He must descend from heaven's purity and peace, its joy and glory and immortal life, and come in contact with the degradation of earth, to endure its sorrow, shame, and death. He was to stand between the sinner and the penalty of sin; yet few would receive Him as the Son of God. He would leave His high position as the Majesty of heaven, appear upon earth and humble Himself as a man, and by His own experience become acquainted with the sorrows and temptations which man would have to endure. All this would be necessary in order that He might be able to succor them that should be tempted. Hebrews 2:18. When His mission as a teacher should be ended, He must be delivered into the hands of wicked men and be subjected to every insult and torture that Satan could inspire them to inflict. He must die the cruelest of deaths, lifted up between the heavens and the earth as a guilty sinner. He must pass long hours of agony so terrible that angels could not look upon it, but would veil their faces from the sight. He must endure anguish of soul, the hiding of His Father's face, while the guilt of transgression --the weight of the sins of the whole world--should be upon Him.

The angels prostrated themselves at the feet of their Commander and offered to become a sacrifice for man. But an angel's life could not pay the debt; only He who created man had power to redeem him. Yet the angels were to have a part to act in the plan of redemption. Christ was to be made "a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death." Hebrews 2:9. As He should take human nature upon Him, His strength would not be equal to theirs, and they were to minister to Him, to strengthen and soothe Him under His sufferings. They were also to be ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who should be heirs of salvation. Hebrews 1:14. They would guard the subjects of grace from the power of evil angels and from the darkness constantly thrown around them by Satan.

When the angels should witness the agony and humiliation of their Lord, they would be filled with grief and indignation and would wish to deliver Him from His murderers; but they were not to interpose in order to prevent anything which they should behold. It was a part of the plan of redemption that Christ should suffer the scorn and abuse of wicked men, and He consented to all this when He became the Redeemer of man.

Christ assured the angels that by His death He would ransom many, and would destroy him who had the power of death. He would recover the kingdom which man had lost by transgression, and the redeemed were to inherit it with Him, and dwell therein forever. Sin and sinners would be blotted out, nevermore to disturb the peace of heaven or earth. He bade the angelic host to be in accord with the plan that His Father had accepted, and rejoice that, through His death, fallen man could be reconciled to God.

The question is whether we can know about these things apart from revelation. Do we go by human reasoning or by what God has revealed to us about Jesus' mission and death?

[fccool]

It's only through human reason that you can perceive God. For example, the restarted people can not... animals likewise can not. Without reason we are not human. Likewise it's by our human reasoning that we read, understand and interpret the Bible.

Concerning the above. Again, I don't argue against the Biblical doctrine of atonement. I simply argue that it is not the focus of the message, neither it was the service of Jesus to simply die for us.

You did not address my question about God accepting human sacrifices likewise.... He prohibits human sacrifices. Thus the death of Jesus was not the mere act of God sacrificing his son to cover for our sins... yet this is how the doctrine is presented. That angry father is ok with the death of His son for the sake of cooling his anger with fallen humans. If you follow up the history of the doctrine, you'd understand my objections to the REASONING behind it.

I don't dispute that Jesus died both because of our sins, and for our sins. Yet, as you probably know I dispute the "spin" that church puts on it and makes it the central part of the salvation message... above the message of sanctification. Thus you hear the same story repeated over and over and over again... and people get stuck on the message of the Cross and can't get pass it. Message of the cross is only part of Christ's ministry.

Yet, lately (i.e. "the Passion" mentality)... it seems like it's the central message in Christendom today. Ironically, you don't find the crosses in the early churches, because Christ's death was not the focus for the early church. It was Christ's life and teachings that were focused on.

[LifeHiscost]

The imagery is kind of disgusting. I think God makes it perfectly clear that it is not something to be joyous about. It's tragic that Christ was killed. We should rejoice in resurrection, which is but a mention in passe when doctrine of atonement is presented.

"But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ." Ephesians 2:13 NASB

"Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body... "Hebrews 10:19,20 NIV

"Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate." Hebrews 13:12 NASB

"...and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin;"1 John 1:7 YLT

"But God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world."

Gal 6:14 NKJV

Regards!

[John317]

It's only through human reason that you can perceive God. For example, the restarted people can not... animals likewise can not. Without reason we are not human. Likewise it's by our human reasoning that we read, understand and interpret the Bible.

Concerning the above. Again, I don't argue against the Biblical doctrine of atonement. I simply argue that it is not the focus of the message, neither it was the service of Jesus to simply die for us.

I agree with you on many points.

First, we're in agreement that human reasoning is important and that we use it to understand the Bible. But human reasoning cannot take the place of special revelation. For instance, God reveals the plan of salvation through Jesus Christ. Human reasoning could never teach us this. Human reasoning can't tell us what happened in heaven before the creation of this world. Nor could human reasoning alone teach us that the Sabbath is on the seventh day. We only know about those things on the basis of special revelation. When we accept human reasoning IN PLACE of the testimony of Scripture, we won't know the truth as it is in Jesus; we only know human opinion, which often opposes what God has revealed to us.

Quote:

You did not address my question about God accepting human sacrifices likewise.... He prohibits human sacrifices. Thus the death of Jesus was not the mere act of God sacrificing his son to cover for our sins...

There is no true parallel between human sacrifices and the sacrifice of the Son of God. Human sacrifices are the offering of sinners in order to placate an angry god who wants blood. The Bible reverses this and teaches that Jesus died for us because God loves us, not because he is angry with us.

God prohibits human sacrifices because he loves people and doesn't want to see them die for nothing. Human sacrifices do absolutely no good whatever. They inculcate false teachings about the character of God.

Quote:

yet this is how the doctrine is presented. That angry father is ok with the death of His son for the sake of cooling his anger with fallen humans.

I agree with you that the death of Christ has been often explained in a way that does great harm to people's view and understanding of God.

Quote:

If you follow up the history of the doctrine, you'd understand my objections to the REASONING behind it.

Yes, I do understand the objections to the false teachings about why Christ had to die. Absolutely.

Quote:

I don't dispute that Jesus died both because of our sins, and for our sins.

Was Jesus' death necessary?

Why did God not only allow it to happen but designed it to happen long before? See Acts 2: 23. It says that these things happened by the specific counsel of God which had decided Christ's destiny [tou theou horismene te boule]. It could be translated as "by the predetermined plan of God." God definitely planned it. He did not merely know it would happen but it happened according to God's settled purpose.

Quote:

Yet, as you probably know I dispute the "spin" that church puts on it and makes it the central part of the salvation message... above the message of sanctification. Thus you hear the same story repeated over and over and over again... and people get stuck on the message of the Cross and can't get pass it. Message of the cross is only part of Christ's ministry.

Yes, I agree with you on this. But that is not the same as denying that Christ had to die. Both the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy teach clearly that Christ had to die and that it was according to the plan of God that He die. The important question is why did He have to die?

I don't believe the Bible answer is that Christ did not have to die.

Suppose that Christ had come down off the cross and returned to heaven without dying. What would have been the consequences of that?

Quote:

Yet, lately (i.e. "the Passion" mentality)... it seems like it's the central message in Christendom today. Ironically, you don't find the crosses in the early churches, because Christ's death was not the focus for the early church. It was Christ's life and teachings that were focused on.

I agree with you up to a point. I think your point is well taken that His death was only part of the story, and that it has been terribly perverted and often badly explained. It is also true, as you say, that our focus needs to be on Christ's life and teachings. I couldn't agree with you more on this point.

I would only say that His life and teachings would not have done us any good if Christ had not died, been resurrected, and ascended to the Father where He serves as our High Priest. Without His death and resurrection, Christ's life and teachings would not have saved anyone. We're put right with God by placing our faith in the death and resurrection of Christ, and in His merits, not by believing that He lived a good life. If all Christ had done was live a perfect life, but had stopped short of giving His life on the cross, we would have been utterly lost. If Christ had not died, the entire world would certainly have gone off into oblivion and been without hope.

[Robert]

1 Cor 1:30 But of Him [God the Father] you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God--that is, our righteousness and sanctification and glorification-- 31 that, as it is written, "He who glories, let him glory in the Lord."

Now, I get on the SDA church for their subtle legalism, but many of the other denominations give God a bad name. The bottom line is all 3 members of the Trinity are on our side. They love us unconditionally. In fact it was God who put you into Christ and saved you.

The problem is most folks misunderstand the "wrath of God". God's wrath is passive. Turn to Romans 1:20

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. 24 Therefore God also gave them over to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions.

Note that men reject God and because He cannot force the will God gives them up. In other words God retreats and then bad things happen.

Rob

[John317]

[size:14pt]

Note that men reject God and because He cannot force the will God gives them up. In other words God retreats and then bad things happen.

I agree with you. However, this is not the whole story when it comes to the death of Jesus Christ.

Why did God not only allow it to happen but designed it to happen long before? See Acts 2: 23. It says that these things happened by the specific counsel of God which had decided Christ's destiny [tou theou horismene te boule]. It could be translated as "by the predetermined plan of God." God definitely planned it. He did not merely know it would happen but it happened according to God's settled purpose.

Would we have been saved if Christ had come down off the cross and refused to die?

[John317]

So, when you say that God sent his son to die... it's far from truth.

As someone familiar with Islam, you know that the Qur'an teaches us that Allah does not require the shedding of blood in order to forgive sins.

It directly and clearly contradicts the testimony of the Bible, which says that "without shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness."

The Qur'an says that Jesus did not die for our sins on the cross but He only appeared to die. It's easy to understand why it would say that, since in its view forgiveness of sin doesn't necessitate the death of Christ. Christian theology, based on the Bible, disagrees.

[fccool]

What would have happened is a meaningless question that deserves a meaningless answer simply because you don't know what would have happened. The mere point is that Jesus did not have to die for us anymore than God had to create the Universe.

The death of Christ had to happen in a sense of men's rebellion. The likewise "what if" is - what would have happen if in fact the Jews did not reject Jesus and followed Him instead of killing Him... just like Nineveh did repent and God did spear them in spite of saying that he will destroy them? Would we have no chance at salvation? I certainly don't think that our salvation depended on Jews and Romans killing Christ.

There is a reason why God prepared the Hebrew nation for the birth of the Messiah. He prepared them through prophecies, the ritualistic observances and "ethnic purity". He prepared them to obey, and recognize the Messiah when He comes. The fact is that many did recognize Him as such. This is the reason why disciples followed, although they did not understand what would transpire in the future and thought that Christ came to rule them.

[fccool]

John, "without shedding of blood there's no forgiveness of sins" is the Hebrews object lesson. I can take "love covers multitude of sins" and apply it likewise. But both of us know that it's God's love (not ours) that covers sin... not God's/men's blood.

The "evangelicals" percieve Christ to be to the likeness of the soldier... that "fought and died for his country". That fact is that Christ fought and lived for us and is still living and fighting on our behalf.

The problem with "ransom" mentality is the question of whom was the ransom paid to? To God? Was God holding us hostage? To sin? Sin is not a personality... it's an act. So who was the ransom paid to?

[John317]

Deal directly with the text of the Bible, in this case, Acts 2: 23--

(Amplified Bible)

23 This Jesus, when delivered up according to the definite and fixed purpose and settled plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and put out of the way [killing Him] by the hands of lawless and wicked men.

(New American Standard Bible)

23this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.

Why did God not only allow it to happen but designed it to happen long before? Acts 2: 23 says that these things happened by the specific counsel of God which had decided Christ's destiny [tou theou horismene te boule]. It could be translated as "by the predetermined plan of God." God definitely planned it. He did not merely know it would happen but it happened according to God's settled purpose.

See: Luke 22:22; Acts 3:18; 4:28; 1 Pet 1: 18-20.

Luke 22: 22--

22 For the Son of Man is going as it has been determined and appointed, but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed and delivered up!

Acts 3:18--

18Thus has God fulfilled what He foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ (the Messiah) should undergo ill treatment and be afflicted and suffer.

Acts 4: 28--

28To carry out all that Your hand and Your will and purpose had predestined (predetermined) should occur.

[fccool]

John, predetermination is not inconsistent with any of my points. The way you interpreting the above verses is in a way saying that God meant for people to sin. After all he "predetermined" Christ to die for sin.

When you plan to build a house, and you expect an earthquake to come, you take measures to build a house in such a manner that would account for the earthquake. Likewise, God expected Satan to sin, and He expected him to take humanity with him. Likewise, He expected Satan to point to pander to the idea of God being a tyrant and forcing others to do so. So, the plan was to come and teach people in spite of knowing that they will kill you, and not exercise your power to smite them right there right then. Such was the plan to demonstrate love.

If atonement (by blood) was the purpose... why do you think Satan would desire to kill Christ? If without Christ's death our sins would not be forgiven... would it make sense that it is in Satan's best interest to keep Christ alive?

The reason Christ was killed by Satan is because if He would live and people would follow that would in fact prove Satan wrong. That people in fact would follow God, even though He does not exercise his power to smite or punish anyone... but because He loves us. Satan knows the message and the prophesies I would think.

So, don't misunderstand the meaning of the pre-destination message.

[John317]

John, "without shedding of blood there's no forgiveness of sins" is the Hebrews object lesson.

God gave Adam and Eve the promise of the coming Messiah, whose death was foreshadowed by the sacrificial system. This promise was first given to mankind immediately after the Fall, and is recorded in Genesis 3: 15. The idea of the necessity of the shed blood has nothing to do with the Hebrews, for it predates the Hebrews by several thousand years.

Quote:

I can take "love covers multitude of sins" and apply it likewise. But both of us know that it's God's love (not ours) that covers sin... not God's/men's blood.

It is true that it was God's love that gave Jesus' blood to cover our sins. But the Bible says very clearly that without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins.

This was the whole purpose of the sacrificial system instituted by God Himself. It was what the sanctuary system was designed to teach. It was designed to teach two primary lessons: 1) That the Messiah would come and die for their sins (Luke 24: 44-47; Phil. 2: 8; Hebrews 2: 14; 1 Peter 1: 18-20; Rev. 1: 5; 5: 5,9, 12; 13: 8) and 2) The holiness of God, as in, "You must be holy for I am holy," a statement repeated several times in the book of Leviticus (Lev. 19: 2; 11;44; 20;7, 26).

Quote:

The "evangelicals" percieve Christ to be to the likeness of the soldier... that "fought and died for his country". That fact is that Christ fought and lived for us and is still living and fighting on our behalf.

I agree with you.

Quote:

The problem with "ransom" mentality is the question of whom was the ransom paid to? To God? Was God holding us hostage? To sin? Sin is not a personality... it's an act. So who was the ransom paid to?

Do you agree with Rev. 5: 9 and many other Bible verses?--

9 And [now] they sing a new song, saying, You are worthy to take the scroll and to break the seals that are on it, for You were slain (sacrificed), and with Your blood You purchased men unto God from every tribe and language and people and nation. (Amplified Bible)

What we need to be settled on first is that the Bible clearly states that it was Jesus' blood (the giving up of His life) that saved (redeemed, purchased) us.

Romans 3: 25, 26 tells us that it was God who set forth Christ to be "a propitiation," or mercy seat, by His blood, through faith, in order "that God might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." God did not pay the redemption price-- this propitiation, or ransom-- to Himself, nor was it paid to Satan, the "god of this world."

The purpose of the "ransom" is explained in the following verse:

25 Whom God put forward [before the eyes of all] as a mercy seat and propitiation by His blood [the cleansing and life-giving sacrifice of atonement and reconciliation, to be received] through faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in His divine forbearance He had passed over and ignored former sins without punishment.

26 It was to demonstrate and prove at the present time (in the now season) that He Himself is righteous and that He justifies and accepts as righteous him who has [true] faith in Jesus. Amplified Bible.

[John317]

John, predetermination is not inconsistent with any of my points. The way you interpreting the above verses is in a way saying that God meant for people to sin. After all he "predetermined" Christ to die for sin.

To say that it was God's "predeterminate plan" that Christ die means that God planned it, and that it was not merely something that He knew would happen. It means that God took an active part in its happening. In fact, the Bible says that God "fulfilled" it-- that is, that God brought the plan to completion. Acts 3: 18. This is also the testimony of the Spirit in Prophecy as manifested in the writings of Ellen G. White.

God did not predetermine sin. It was predetermined that Christ would die (voluntarily) if sin arose.

Quote:

If atonement (by blood) was the purpose... why do you think Satan would desire to kill Christ? If without Christ's death our sins would not be forgiven... would it make sense that it is in Satan's best interest to keep Christ alive?

DA 784--

When Jesus was laid in the grave, Satan triumphed. He dared to hope that the Saviour would not take up His life again. He claimed the Lord's body, and set his guard about the tomb, seeking to hold Christ a prisoner. He was bitterly angry when his angels fled at the approach of the heavenly messenger. When he saw Christ come forth in triumph, he knew that his kingdom would have an end, and that he must finally die.

Quote:

So, don't misunderstand the meaning of the pre-destination message.

The meaning of "predestination" when it comes to Christ's death is simply that it was God's plan that it occur if mankind should rebel.

What are your thoughts about pp. 63, 64 of Patriarchs and Prophets--

Quote:

The Son of God, heaven's glorious Commander, was touched with pity for the fallen race. His heart was moved with infinite compassion as the woes of the lost world rose up before Him. But divine love had conceived a plan whereby man might be redeemed. The broken law of God demanded the life of the sinner. In all the universe there was but one who could, in behalf of man, satisfy its claims. Since the divine law is as sacred as God Himself, only one equal with God could make atonement for its transgression. None but Christ could redeem fallen man from the curse of the law and bring him again into harmony with Heaven. Christ would take upon Himself the guilt and shame of sin--sin so offensive to a holy God that it must separate the Father and His Son. Christ would reach to the depths of misery to rescue the ruined race.

Before the Father He pleaded in the sinner's behalf, while the host of heaven awaited the result with an intensity of interest that words cannot express. Long continued was that mysterious communing--"the counsel of peace" (Zechariah 6:13) for the fallen sons of men. The plan of salvation had been laid before the creation of the earth; for Christ is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8); yet it was a struggle, even with the King of the universe, to yield up His Son to die for the guilty race. But "God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16. Oh, the mystery of redemption! the love of God for a world that did not love Him! Who can know the depths of that love which "passeth knowledge"? Through endless ages immortal minds, seeking to comprehend the mystery of that incomprehensible love, will wonder and adore.

God was to be manifest in Christ, "reconciling the world unto Himself." 2 Corinthians 5:19. Man had become so degraded by sin that it was impossible for him, in himself, to come into harmony with Him whose nature is purity and goodness. But Christ, after having redeemed man from the condemnation of the law, could impart divine power to unite with human effort. Thus by repentance toward God and faith in Christ the fallen children of Adam might once more become "sons of God." 1 John 3:2.

The plan by which alone man's salvation could be secured, involved all heaven in its infinite sacrifice. The angels could not rejoice as Christ opened before them the plan of redemption, for they saw that man's salvation must cost their loved Commander unutterable woe. In grief and wonder they listened to His words as He told them how He must descend from heaven's purity and peace, its joy and glory and immortal life, and come in contact with the degradation of earth, to endure its sorrow, shame, and death. He was to stand between the sinner and the penalty of sin; yet few would receive Him as the Son of God.

[fccool]

John, from the above... Satan is not an idiot to think that eternal God who created him in a first place would not resurrect. He knew the plan from the beginning and he understands what God is doing. He is deceiver, and I think he understood what the message of the atonement lamb was about. You can't miss it if you are Devil. In fact, he was the one to pervert it for Jews.

So I don't think you answered my point concerning Devil desiring Christ's death, instead of keeping Him alive to "prevent the atonement".

I don't disagree with the doctrine of atonement ... i.e. that Christ died to "pay" for our sins. And I agree with you that payment is ultimately to us and for us. Bible is clear on that. What I disagree with is how this doctrine is used for presentation of the Gospel and it is elevated to the point of "cross and blood worshiping" in many churches. Instead "the blood" is elevated as object of salvation and worship. So, many churches get stuck on blood sacrifice and mix a bit of hell message to get the believers by means of guilt/fear.

I hardly think that this is God's gospel message.

[John317]

John, from the above... Satan is not an idiot to think that eternal God who created him in a first place would not resurrect. He knew the plan from the beginning and he understands what God is doing. He is deceiver, and I think he understood what the message of the atonement lamb was about. You can't miss it if you are Devil. In fact, he was the one to pervert it for Jews.

So I don't think you answered my point concerning Devil desiring Christ's death, instead of keeping Him alive to "prevent the atonement".

Christ Himself was not sure that the Father would resurrect Him. When on the cross, He couldn't see the other side of the tomb, because of the sin that He felt was separating Him from the Father.

I gave you a quote from the Spirit of Prophecy.

Quote:

Desire of Ages, p. 784--

When Jesus was laid in the grave, Satan triumphed. He dared to hope that the Saviour would not take up His life again. He claimed the Lord's body, and set his guard about the tomb, seeking to hold Christ a prisoner. He was bitterly angry when his angels fled at the approach of the heavenly messenger. When he saw Christ come forth in triumph, he knew that his kingdom would have an end, and that he must finally die.

Ellen White is not saying Satan is an idiot.

Was Satan's war against Christ foolish? Didn't he realize how vain it was for him to think he could win a war against Christ and God? Yet he fought a war against Christ.

Satan is intelligent of course, but he makes a lot of mistakes, and one of them was inspiring people to kill Christ. When Christ was killed, Satan virtually signed his own death warrant. If Satan was doing the intelligent thing, He would have known God knew what he was thinking and planning, and he would have stopped his rebellious ways. He should have known it would lead finally to his destruction.

Satan knows the prophecies but so do some people who ignore them or don't allow the prophecies to change their ways. Satan's problem is that he lacks faith in God. It causes him to do many stupid and foolish things. His intelligence is not in question. What's in question is his judgment and his foolish plan to defeat Christ.

[John317]

I don't disagree with the doctrine of atonement ... i.e. that Christ died to "pay" for our sins. And I agree with you that payment is ultimately to us and for us. Bible is clear on that. What I disagree with is how this doctrine is used for presentation of the Gospel and it is elevated to the point of "cross and blood worshiping" in many churches. Instead "the blood" is elevated as object of salvation and worship. So, many churches get stuck on blood sacrifice and mix a bit of hell message to get the believers by means of guilt/fear.

I hardly think that this is God's gospel message.

Yes, I completely agree with you that the doctrine of the atonement has often been misunderstood and misinterpreted throughout history. The church struggled to understand it for centuries. No question about that. Of course the doctrine is still greatly misunderstood and misconstrued.

However, you said that "Christ did not have to die."

Permit me, please, to share with you four additional pieces of Biblical evidence that Christ did indeed have to die:

1) Turn to Matthew 26: 54. Jesus was being arrested. He said that He could call on His Father and immediately be rescued by armies of angels. Then Jesus said, "But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?"

Look carefully at the word translated "must". It is the word dei, meaning something necessary or inevitable. It had to happen. Jesus had to die. This verse says it in plain, unmistakable language.

2) Next, please look at Mark 14: 21-24. These texts tell us how the New Covenant was ratified. The New Covenant could not have been ratified except by the blood of Jesus Christ. "This is my blood, which ratifies the New Covenant, my blood shed on behalf of many people." Without Christ's shed blood, there would have been no New Covenant. (Compare Hebrews 9: 11-28.)

3) Daniel 9: 26, 27 tells us that Jesus died according to God's schedule. He died during Passover, the very hour when the High Priest was to sacrifice the Passover lamb. Jesus was the antitype, the fulfillment of all the sacrifices which had pointed forward to the time the Messiah would come and die. At this time, the Messiah was to be "cut off." It's exactly what happened. This is how Jesus knew when He would die. It had to happen because it was according to the predetermined plan of God. Luke 22: 22.

4) Lastly, please look at Luke 22: 42. Here Jesus prays to the Father, "If you are willing, take this cup away from me; still, let not my will but yours be done."

Jesus' humanity revolted against death, but it was obviously God's will that He die.

If Jesus had not obeyed His Father's will-- if Jesus had said, "I don't care what the will of the Father is; I am not going to die"-- what would have been the consequences?

If Jesus had not died, would mankind still have been saved?

That is an important question because it goes to the heart of the issue. If God could have saved us without Jesus' death, why then did God plan that He die?

The only obvious answer is that there was no other way to save us. He could have left us to go our own way, as God left the rebellious angels to go their own way. But Jesus died for us because it was the only way you and I could be saved and live with Him in eternity. As Jesus Himself said in Matthew 26: 54, it had to happen that way. Jesus had to die.

Heb. 2: 17-- "Therefore He (Jesus) HAD TO BE made like His brethren in order that He might be a merciful High Priest in things pertaining to God, TO MAKE PROPITIATION FOR THE SINS OF THE PEOPLE". Compare Romans 3: 25.

Thanks for the excellent discussion, fccool.

Hey, is there anyway for you to translate a few of those lines into Russian, if you have the Russian alphabet on your key board? I'd love to see it.

By the way, I really, really liked those photographs. Thank you so much!