How can Jesus have born future sins?

[klutedavid]

I was out walking today, thinking about the sacrifice of Christ. Then this question arose, how Jesus could have born all sins that hadn't even been committed yet. How do you reason around this?

Because Jesus was the PERFECT sacrifice for sin. Jesus does not have to offer Himself up multiple times, to cover those sins committed later.

Hebrews 10:14
For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.

We have been perfected FOR ALL TIME by His PERFECT sacrifice.

 

[zoidar]

.

 

[fhansen]

I have an idea. I don't know how good it is, but it goes like this: What is the essence of sin? Darkness, evil. So Jesus took the punishment for the essence of sin upon himself, died, was resurrected and thereby conquered sin. So everywhere we see sin it's conquered through the sacrifice. In that way Jesus bore past, future, and present sins, without having to look into the future to see which sins that will be committed, for him to carry.

IDK. But I think the answers given so far, that God exists outside of time and that all events in this world including, for us, the future, are known to Him "immediately" as it's been stated, means that the purpose of Jesus's death was to pay the price for all sin before and after His advent here on earth.

 

[martymonster]

Ok, but how does that explain that Jesus borne future sins?

Well if those people were predestined to commit the worst crime of all time (murdering God's son) then it stands to reason that our sins are predestined too.

 

[martymonster]

...Or, He knew who would do so, given the opportunity, and He didn't stop them.

I believe that Jesus' prayer [in Luke 23:34],
“Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.”

was fulfilled in Acts 2,
“Men of Israel, hear these words:
Jesus of Nazareth,

a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders,
and signs which God did through Him in your midst,
as you yourselves also know—​

Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God,

you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;​

whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death,

because it was not possible that He should be held by it..." vv. 22-24
​

"Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles,

'Men and brethren, what shall we do?'​

Then Peter said to them,

'Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ
for the remission of sins;
and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For the promise is to you and to your children,
and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.'​

And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying,

'Be saved from this perverse generation.'​

Then those who gladly received his word were baptized;
and that day about three thousand souls were added to them." vv. 37-41

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

 

[jeffweedaman]

I was out walking today, thinking about the sacrifice of Christ. Then this question arose, how Jesus could have born all sins that hadn't even been committed yet. How do you reason around this?

Jesus bore the sins of the whole world, and can forgive and cleanse any repentant sinner from any generation.
Hasnt he forgiven you?.

 

[zoidar]

IDK. But I think the answers given so far, that God exists outside of time and that all events in this world including, for us, the future, are known to Him "immediately" as it's been stated, means that the purpose of Jesus's death was to pay the price for all sin before and after His advent here on earth.

"Essence of sin", I know how that sounds. This is a better way to put it:

Maybe Jesus took the punishment for sin, not for particular sins, but the punishment that all sins deserve. The idea is that Jesus didn't "bear" our sins, but bore the punishment for sins.

 

[zoidar]

I just believe what the Bible tells us, my friend. I can offer you no more than that.

Hebrews 10
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

What do you think of this? Maybe Jesus took the punishment for sin, not for particular sins, but the punishment that all sins deserve. The idea is that Jesus didn't "bear" our sins, but bore the punishment for sins: "one sacrifice for sins for ever".

 

[Sabertooth]

...Or, He knew who would do so, given the opportunity, and He didn't stop them.

I believe that Jesus' prayer [in Luke 23:34],
“Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.”

was fulfilled in Acts 2,
“Men of Israel, hear these words:
Jesus of Nazareth,

a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders,
and signs which God did through Him in your midst,
as you yourselves also know—​

Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God,

you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;​

whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death,

because it was not possible that He should be held by it..." vv. 22-24
​

"Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles,

'Men and brethren, what shall we do?'​

Then Peter said to them,

'Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ
for the remission of sins;
and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For the promise is to you and to your children,
and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.'​

And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying,

'Be saved from this perverse generation.'​

Then those who gladly received his word were baptized;
and that day about three thousand souls were added to them." vv. 37-41

What is meta about this is that Jesus took the punishment for the sin of killing... Himself!

 

[Clare73]

Well, if Jesus can't really be here without it being "magical" so be it.

He is in us (Colossians 1:27). . .why do you need the magic?

mundane and the material aren't what our faith is about anyway. Nor is it about hyper-rationalism. I think even Mr Calvin had a variation of the RP.

No, Mr. Calvin asserted that "This is my body and this is my blood" were more than just figurative.
He offered no explanation.
I realize that resistance to Scripture having more authority than men is long held, but it was Jesus' position regarding Scripture as well.

The RP certainly doesn't conflict with the bible-and the ECFs support it as well.

All additions to Scripture are subtractions from Scripture.

God does not respond well to what he has not authorized. See Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:1-7).

Nowhere is the notion of "real presence" presented, advocated or shown to be a matter of belief in the NT word of God written, which covers up to 50+ years of the early church.

You didn't answer my question if you were lay, religious or cleric.

 

[fhansen]

No, Mr. Calvin asserted that "This is my body and this is my blood" were more than just figurative.
He offered no explanation.

Well, ok, I doubt he meant it was just symbolic then. A rose is a rose...

I realize that resistance to Scripture having more authority than men is long held, but it was Jesus' position regarding Scripture as well.

Agreed, that's why you should be careful. On top of that Scripture tells us that not everything was written-and why should it be?- but to hang onto the unwritten teachings as well.

All additions to Scripture are subtractions from Scripture.

Well, nothing was added, and, as I said, Scripture supports the literal, RP meaning anyway even if a somewhat plausible interpretation might oppose it-such is the nature of Scriptural interpretation. And Tradition-the experience of the Church -along with the ECFs support it as well. So why should I believe your best-guess theology on the matter?

 

[Carl Emerson]

But the event doesn't need to be timeless to be applied to each born-again.

Scripture does not present it as timeless, but as once-for-all (Hebrews 7:27).
That doesn't need improving upon.

For all includes old covenant believers before the cross...

 

[RickReads]

What do you think of this? Maybe Jesus took the punishment for sin, not for particular sins, but the punishment that all sins deserve. The idea is that Jesus didn't "bear" our sins, but bore the punishment for sins: "one sacrifice for sins for ever".

I don't see a problem with thinking of it that way. Certainly, His remedy for sin must be sought after for sin to be removed.

 

[friend of]

What is meta about this is that Jesus took the punishment for the sin of killing... Himself!

He didn't kill Himself. He allowed Himself to be killed by His creation.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Or for what has happened for you, to be applied to you, as Scripture presents it (Hebrews 7:27).

I don't want to enter into a 'verse contest' but you might ponder on this one...

Col 1:24
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church...

Here, Paul is experiencing with Jesus His sufferings for the body, in real time, for brothers and sisters, as if the event of the cross was happening now.

So eventually the sufferings of Christ on the Cross will all have been experienced by His servants for the healing of the body of Christ - this is sharing in His sufferrings. This is at the heart of the ministry of intercession.

 

[zoidar]

Jesus bore the sins of the whole world, and can forgive and cleanse any repentant sinner from any generation.
Hasnt he forgiven you?.

I don't disagree with you. What I wonder is, did Jesus bear particular sins, or the punishment for sin? If he bore the punishment that sin deserves it explains how he covered future sins.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I don't disagree with you. What I wonder is, did Jesus bear our particular sins, or the punishment for sin? If he bore the punishment that sin deserves it explains how he covered future sins.

Why... if He dwells in timeless eternity and the event of the Cross was detailed in Isaiah 53 for folks of that day then time is out of the equation all together.

 

[Sabertooth]

He didn't kill Himself. He allowed Himself to be killed by His creation.

I understand that.

1. Jesus died for the sins of (at least) those who would come to believe on Him.
2. The crowd that chose Barabbas over Him, at Calvary, were guilty of His murder.
3. Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.”
4. Peter confronts the #2 crowd at Pentecost [Acts of the Apostles 2].
5. They repent to the tune of nearly 3,000. Jesus takes their deserved punishment, too, for murdering... Jesus!

That is the meta part.

 

[zoidar]

Why... if He dwells in timeless eternity and the event of the Cross was detailed in Isaiah 53 for folks of that day then time is out of the equation all together.

But I believe Jesus bore our sins in time, not in eternity, even its effect reaches eternity backward and forward.

 

[Clare73]

Well, ok, I doubt he meant it was just symbolic then. A rose is a rose...

Agreed, that's why you should be careful. On top of that Scripture tells us that not everything was written-and why should it be?- but to hang onto the unwritten teachings as well.

It doesn't have to be written to know that the "unwritten teachings" will not disagree with the written teachings, or with the figurative patterns, types, shadows of the OT, for God does not contradict himself in his word.

That being the case, we have what we need in what is written.
And we don't get to replace it in the name of what is not written.

Well, nothing was added,

But it is. . .life is added to the actual flesh and blood sacrifice of Christ which purpose of that sacrifice was death.

and, as I said, Scripture supports the literal, RP meaning anyway

Actually, it does not.

First of all, Paul states that "whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes,"
(1 Corinthians 11:26) not his "real presence."
We are proclaiming the atoning death of Christ for sin, not some "real presence."
You have altered Paul's teaching.

Secondly, there was no "real presence" in the flesh of the sacrificed animal consumed in the OT sacrificial meals.
To be the actual flesh and blood of the sacrifice does not give it the "real presence" of the life sacrificed.
The whole point of the sacrificial system was death, in payment of the penalty for sin.

So we do not have the "real presence" of Christ in the Lord's Supper, we have his atoning death for our sin, his actual sacrificed body and blood
that paid for our sin, receiving into ourselves its atoning benefits, as was its pattern in the OT sacrificial system.

The living Christ is already in us. . .so why are we clinging to a false magic regarding his "real presence" in the Lord's Supper.

Are we not slighting his actual living presence in us. . preferring/needing/wanting a magical presence more than his actual presence in us?

And you haven't answered my question if you are lay, religious or cleric?