Did Christ really pay the sin debt?

[Stryder06]

Eternal punishment is the result of wickedness not the debt. Christ paid the debt for those that are saved.

That doesn't make sense. The wicked are lost because their debt remains unpaid. When we accpet Christ His righteousness becomes our own, and out debt is forgiven because of His sacrifice.

The wicked have no Mediator. Their debt remains unsatisfied. That is why they are lost.

 

[Stryder06]

Lev. 4
35 Then he shall remove all its fat, just as the fat of the lamb is removed from the sacrifice of the peace offerings, and the priest shall offer them up in smoke on the altar, on the offerings by fire to the Lord. Thus the priest shall make atonement for him in regard to his sin which he has [ab]committed, and he will be forgiven.

It wasn't the blood of the animal in and of itself that brought forgiveness. It was their faith in the blood of the sinless Lamb of God that would be shed for them, that allowed for forgiveness.

 

[Stryder06]

Yes it did. Also on the day of attonement sin was covered for one year. Now we have a one time attonment in Christ.

The sins were cleansed from the sanctuary on the day of atonement. All year long they were transfered there. The day of atonment was the time of year when those sins were removed from the sanctuary, thus "cleansing" it. Hence the word atonement

 

[Keachian]

Nope that makes absolute sense to me, does the disconnect lie in the SDA belief that Christ only entered the holy of holiest in the last 200 years maybe?

 

[Habakk]

That doesn't make sense. The wicked are lost because their debt remains unpaid. When we accpet Christ His righteousness becomes our own, and out debt is forgiven because of His sacrifice.

The wicked have no Mediator. Their debt remains unsatisfied. That is why they are lost.

The wicked are lost because they are wicked. Sin incurs a debt to a holy God because it is falling below God's holy standard.

 

[Keachian]

God made him who knew no sin become sin for us, such that we might through him become the very righteousness of God.

Imputation makes perfect sense. It is the joy and hope of a Christian to declare I AM SAVED!

 

[Stryder06]

The wicked are lost because they are wicked. Sin incurs a debt to a holy God because it is falling below God's holy standard.

Yes, and how is that debt paid?

The wicked are lost because they remain wicked. That's all that separates a saint from a sinner. One truns fromt their wickedness and leans of Christ. The other embraces their wickedness and spurns the sacrifice made on their behalf. For the second of the two, a debt remains. What is that debt?

 

[Stryder06]

God made him who knew no sin become sin for us, such that we might through him become the very righteousness of God.

Imputation makes perfect sense. It is the joy and hope of a Christian to declare I AM SAVED!

The purpose of this thread isn't to question if one is saved. It's an examination of the debt owed by the sinner.

 

[Habakk]

The sins were cleansed from the sanctuary on the day of atonement. All year long they were transfered there. The day of atonment was the time of year when those sins were removed from the sanctuary, thus "cleansing" it. Hence the word atonement

At the last supper Jesus used the words “…this is my body… this is my blood…” taking away the emphasis from the Passover lamb to himself. He was the prophetic fulfilment of the true Lamb. How could he fulfil something that previously never worked?

It is true that the blood of animals can’t take away sin but God was still able to forgive transgression. Why? Because under that OC sin was transgression of the Law (Mosaic). Now God no longer winks but calls all men to repent.

 

[Keachian]

The purpose of this thread isn't to question if one is saved. It's an examination of the debt owed by the sinner.

The debt is unpayable bar the self-sacrifice of the sinless Godman and so what the debt is is of no consequence, there is no way for those whom the self-sacrifice does not cover personally to pay for the debt.


This is the problem with unlimited atonement, you are asking for the debt to be paid for yet still owing and that makes no lick of sense.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Are you saying that the idea of humans having a "sin debt" doesn't exist? Just want to make sure I don't misunderstand you.

You may be wondering why we are discussing the origin of men when
we set out to talk about the Word's becoming Man. The former subject is
relevant to the latter for this reason: it was our sorry case that
caused the Word to come down, our transgression that called out His
love for us, so that He made haste to help us and to appear among us.

It is we who were the cause of His taking human form, and for our
salvation that in His great love He was both born and manifested in a
human body. For God had made man thus (that is, as an embodied spirit),
and had willed that he should remain in incorruption. But men, having
turned from the contemplation of God to evil of their own devising, had
come inevitably under the law of death. Instead of remaining in the
state in which God had created them, they were in process of becoming
corrupted entirely, and death had them completely under its dominion.

For the transgression of the commandment was making them turn back
again according to their nature; and as they had at the beginning come
into being out of non-existence, so were they now on the way to
returning, through corruption, to non-existence again. The presence and
love of the Word had called them into being; inevitably, therefore when
they lost the knowledge of God, they lost existence with it; for it is
God alone Who exists, evil is non-being, the negation and antithesis of
good. By nature, of course, man is mortal, since he was made from
nothing; but he bears also the Likeness of Him Who is, and if he
preserves that Likeness through constant contemplation, then his nature
is deprived of its power and he remains incorrupt. So is it affirmed in
Wisdom: "The keeping of His laws is the assurance of incorruption."
And being incorrupt, he would be henceforth as God, as Holy Scripture
says, "I have said, Ye are gods and sons of the Highest all of you: but
ye die as men and fall as one of the princes."

God be gracious to me a sinner.

 

[Hentenza]

It wasn't the blood of the animal in and of itself that brought forgiveness. It was their faith in the blood of the sinless Lamb of God that would be shed for them, that allowed for forgiveness.

I don't disagree with that since faith is the qualifier for salvation, but how does that help your case?

It is imperative to understand why Jesus was sent by the Father to die for our sins. Matthew tells us in chapter 20 that " 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His [n]life a ransom for many.” Notice two important words, ransom and for. Both words are explicit that Jesus died FOR us to pay our ransom. This is done and was effective. The debt has been paid.

Now, this tells us the how, eternal torment tells us the result to those that rejected the ransom.

 

[Stryder06]

I don't disagree with that since faith is the qualifier for salvation, but how does that help your case?

I wasn't making a case with that statement. I was just trying to clarify that it wasn't the lamb that brought forgiveness, but the Lamb.

It is imperative to understand why Jesus was sent by the Father to die for our sins. Matthew tells us in chapter 20 that " 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His [n]life a ransom for many.” Notice two important words, ransom and for. Both words are explicit that Jesus died FOR us to pay our ransom. This is done and was effective. The debt has been paid.

I couldn't agree more.

Now, this tells us the how, eternal torment tells us the result to those that rejected the ransom.

See this is where I have a bit of trouble following the logic. If the debt has been paid, then we need to understand what that debt is, because the sinner who rejects Christ is responsible for paying that debt.

 

[Stryder06]

The debt is unpayable bar the self-sacrifice of the sinless Godman and so what the debt is is of no consequence, there is no way for those whom the self-sacrifice does not cover personally to pay for the debt.


This is the problem with unlimited atonement, you are asking for the debt to be paid for yet still owing and that makes no lick of sense.

The problem is that you're saying something that scripture doesn't say. The bible says that the wages of sin is death. That's the debt owed. If the debt was "unpayable" then Christ wouldn't have been able to satisfy it. He couldn't ransom us if there wasn't a price that could be paid.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

So according to most, the penalty for sin is not actually death, but is eternal torment in hell fire.
If this then is the case, how is it that Christ paid our sin debt?

By later having the Romans destroy Jerusalem and the Temple/Den of robbers in ad 70

Matt 21:13 And He is saying to them "it has been written 'My House a House of prayer shall be being called,
ye yet it are making a den/cave/ of robbers'". [Jeremiah 7:11]
Matt 23:33 "Serpents! produce of vipers!
how? ye may be fleeing from the judging of the geennhV <1067>"

http://www.bible.ca/pre-destruction70AD-george-holford-1805AD.htm

Revelation 14:11 And the Smoke of the tormenting of them is ascending into Ages to-Ages..........
[Luke 16:24,26/Revelation 19:3]
Reve 19:3 And a second-time they have declared "allelouia and the Smoke of Her is ascending into the Ages of the Ages".

This parable denotes a man/people in torments:

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:23 "And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."

In non-biblical Gk. [basanos] is a commercial expression, or is used in relation to government. It then acquires the meaning of the checking of calculations, which develops naturally out of the basic sense of [basanos, basanizein] . . . In the spiritual sphere it has the figur[ative] sense, which is closely related to the original concrete meaning, of a means of testing . . .

The word then undergoes a change in meaning. The original sense fades into the background. [Basanos] now comes to denote "torture" or "the rack," espec[ially] used with slaves . . . [Basanos] occurs in the sense of "torment" . . .

The change in meaning is best explained if we begin with the object of treatment. If we put men instead of metal or a coin, the stone of testing become torture or the rack. The metal which has survived the testing stone is subjected to harsher treatment. Man is in the same position when severely tested by torture. In the testing of metal an essential role was played by the thought of testing and proving genuineness. The rack is a means of showing the true state of affairs. In its proper sense it is a means of testing and proving, though also of punishment. Finally, even this special meaning was weakened and only the general element of torture remained (pp. 561, 562, vol. I).

 

[Hentenza]

I wasn't making a case with that statement. I was just trying to clarify that it wasn't the lamb that brought forgiveness, but the Lamb.

Ok, so then we are in agreement.

See this is where I have a bit of trouble following the logic. If the debt has been paid, then we need to understand what that debt is, because the sinner who rejects Christ is responsible for paying that debt.

Christ ransomed those who are His. Their debt has been paid by Jesus sacrifice. Those that chose to reject the ransom have chosen to remain in their sins, consequently, their debt remains. They will pay their debt eternally since God is an eternal God.

 

[Hentenza]

The problem is that you're saying something that scripture doesn't say. The bible says that the wages of sin is death. That's the debt owed. If the debt was "unpayable" then Christ wouldn't have been able to satisfy it. He couldn't ransom us if there wasn't a price that could be paid.

Where their is a body there is death. Where there is not a body there can not be death. Spiritual death has already happened in Adam as he immediately experienced spiritual isolation from God. The only way to regain spiritual communion with God is through regeneration which is impossible for those that chose to remain in their sins.

Since a body is needed for death, the resurrection of all is mandated. The second death is the eternal separation from God. As Isaiah correctly points out in Is. 59:2, "your inequities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear." Those who are born only once (physically) will die twice (physically and eternally) while those who are born twice (physically and spiritually) will die only once (physically). This is the efficacy and result of the ransom.

 

[Tangible]

That doesn't make sense. The wicked are lost because their debt remains unpaid. When we accpet Christ His righteousness becomes our own, and out debt is forgiven because of His sacrifice.

The wicked have no Mediator. Their debt remains unsatisfied. That is why they are lost.

This is why Universal Atonement is mportant. Christ atoned for the sins of the whole world, not just those who will be in heaven. The lost are just as forgiven as the saved - they just don't believe they are. They lack faith in Christ's work for them, and this faith is the criterion on which salvation hinges. That's what sola fide is all about.

 

[Knee V]

The problem is that you're saying something that scripture doesn't say. The bible says that the wages of sin is death. That's the debt owed. If the debt was "unpayable" then Christ wouldn't have been able to satisfy it. He couldn't ransom us if there wasn't a price that could be paid.

I most certainly agree that Christ paid the debt owed for our sins when He died. However the large majority believe that the penalty for sin is eternal burning in hell. If this is indeed the punishment, then how was that debt paid?

In all fairness, you're also saying something that the scripture doesn't say. I would agree that "death" is sin's result, but the Scriptures call death neither a "debt" nor a "punishment".

And forgive me for asking, as I may be way off base, but are you sure the actual purpose of this thread isn't to make a case that "hell" is not eternal?

 

[Stryder06]

Christ ransomed those who are His. Their debt has been paid by Jesus sacrifice. Those that chose to reject the ransom have chosen to remain in their sins, consequently, their debt remains. They will pay their debt eternally since God is an eternal God.

And this is where my conundrum is. What was the debt that Christ paid? Everyone is in the same boat, owing the same debt. The price was paid by Christ however, and anyone who accepts Him will be saved because their debt has been satisfied by the sacrifice of Christ. So how is it then that the wicked, who owed the same debt as the righteous will pay theirs for all eternity?