Christ atonement sacrifice has been described over a dozen ways and is a huge topic I could write a book on.You really don't know what happened on that hill do you? If you did you would not only preach it, but defend it. If the work of His cross could be undone the offense of the cross would be abolished. Why do you think Paul told the church in Corinth all He wanted from them is Jesus Christ and Him Crucified?
1 Corinthians 2:2
For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.
Do you scratch your head when you read this verse? Is this what you have been giving me, or what I have been giving you? If you don't believe me, just go back and read my posts. This is the message I have been preaching and defending the whole time. Why? Because this my only hope I have for my sins!!! If this were your only hope YOU WOULD DO THE SAME!!!
You have to keep the objective in mind all the time, because the objective drives everything and it is not God’s objective, but man’s objective, since God’s objective is doing or allowing everything that does happen to help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective.
Christ going to the cross is not to help God out with some problem God is having (like unable to forgive without seeing blood first or a problem with satan), but Christ did it to help willing humans in fulfilling their objective.
Peter gives the first and very best, for his audience, “Christ Crucified” sermon in Acts 2 so please read Acts 2:14-41 which is very short and to the point.
Listen, not only, to what Peter said, but what Peter did not say. Peter did not say: Christ went in your place to the cross, Christ defeated satan, sin or death on the cross, do you (the audience) feel the Love or Christ did this to satisfy God’s wrath. What Peter emphasized was the fact: “You cruelly tortured and murdered the Messiah Jesus”, it was not to be a feel-good sermon, but a really hard sermon for the crowd to listen to. The sermon was to get them so far down they had no where to turn and desperately said: “What can we do?!” The crowd should have been expecting lighting to come down from heaven to destroy them, but instead heard the good news gift Acts 2:38.
When those first century people realized what they did they had a death blow to their heart (the worst feeling they could have and live), so should we not experience the same feeling when we come to realize what we cause Christ to go through.
God making and allowing this unbelievable huge tragedy the product of my sin, makes my sin debt unbelievably huge, but that helps in my fulfilling my objective, the greater the tragedy I initially caused the better for me. (I am not saying sin all the more, but my sins put Christ on the cross).
Man’s objective is found in the God given Mission statement of: Loving God (and secondly Loving others) with all your heart, soul, mind and energy. In order to fulfill that mission man must first obtain Godly type Love which will make man like God Himself in that man will Love like God Loves. Would becoming like God Himself not be the greatest gift we could get?
The objective is not to never ever sin, but to obtain this Godly type Love is the first of man’s objective.
There are just something even an all-powerful Creator cannot do (there are things impossible to do), the big inability for us is to be created with instinctive (programmed) Godly type Love, since Godly type Love is not instinctive. Godly type love has to be the result of a free will decision by the being, to make it the person’s Love apart from God. In other words: If the Love was in a human from the human’s creation it would be a robotic type love and not a Godly type Love. Also if God “forces” this Love on a person (Kind a like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun) it would not be “loving” on God’s part and the love forced on the person would not be Godly type love. This Love has to be the result of a free will moral choice with real likely alternatives (for humans those alternatives include the perceived pleasures of sin for a season.)
This Love is way beyond anything humans could develop, obtain, learn, earn, pay back or ever deserve, so it must be the result of a gift that is accepted or rejected (a free will choice).
This “Love” is much more than just an emotional feeling; it is God Himself (God is Love). If you see this Love you see God.
All mature adults do stuff that hurts others (this is called sin) these transgressions weigh on them burden them to the point the individual seeks relief (at least early on before they allow their hearts to be hardened). Lots of “alternatives” can be tried for relief, but the only true relief comes from God with forgiveness (this forgiveness is pure charity [grace/mercy/Love]). The correct humble acceptance of this Forgiveness (Charity) automatically will result in Love (we are taught by Jesus (Luke 7: 36-50) and our own experience “…he that is forgiven much will Love much…”). Sin is thus made hugely significant, so there will be an unbelievable huge debt to be forgiven of and thus result in an unbelievable huge “Love” (Godly type Love).
In order to be forgiven of sin you must first sin, so sin is necessary but not desired.
This messed up world is actually the very best place for willing mature adult individuals to see, receive, give, experience, accept and know Godly type Love. All these tragedies provide opportunities for Love, but that does not mean we go around causing opportunities, since we are to be ceasing these opportunities (there are plenty of opportunities) to show/experience Love.
OK we can work from there, if you want to go deeper.
Paul in Ro. 3:25 giving the extreme contrast between the way sins where handle prior to the cross and after the cross, so if they were actually handled the same way “by the cross” there would be no contrast, only a time factor, but Paul seems to say: (forgiven) sins prior to the cross where left “unpunished” (NIV), but that also would mean the forgiven “sinner” after the cross were punished.
From Romans 3: 25 Paul tells us: God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. …
Another way of saying this would be “God offers the ransom payment (Christ Crucified and the blood that flowed from Him) to those that have the faith to receive that ransom. A lack of faith results in the refusal of the ransom payment (Christ crucified).
Paul goes on to explain:
Ro. 3: 25 …He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished
I do not like the word “unpunished” but would use “undisciplined”.
So prior to the cross repentant forgiven people (saved individuals) could not be fairly and justly disciplined for the rebellious disobedience, but after the cross if we repent (come to our senses and turn to God) we can be fairly and justly disciplined and yet survive.
God and Christ would have personally preferred Christ’s blood to remain flowing through his veins, but it is I that need to have that blood outside of Christ flowing over me and in me cleansing my heart. I need to feel that blood and know it is cleansing me.
Some might try to put the need for blood on God making Him blood thirsty, but Christ says: John 6: 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
It is not God needing that blood, but I am blood thirsty for eternal life and God/Christ have provided that blood. I personally need to physically feel Christ’s blood in the symbolic wine flow down my throat and over my heart to experience and know cleansing.
A lot is made of the word “for” being used in “Christ died for us” suggesting it must mean “instead of”, but any good word study of all the Greek words translated “for” would yield more likely interpretations of “for”. If the writers wanted to convey the idea of “instead of” they should have used the Greek word “anti” which can mean “instead of”. The Greek word translate “for” are translated mostly mean “because of” or “to the benefit of” and even anti has that meaning sometimes, so “Christ died for us” would mean “Christ died as a benefit to us” and “Christ died for our sins” would translate “Christ died because of our sins”.
Atonement is one of those religious concepts which is best understood through experiencing it, then trying to explain it. Unfortunately, the new Christian is filled with ideas about atonement prior to experiencing it, so they are brain washed into trying to feel something that does not happen and quenching what should happen.
One of the advantages the Jews before Christ’s sacrifice had with atonement was personally going through the atonement process for very minor sins (unintentional sins). Lev. 5 explains why, what sinner goes through in the atonement process and might be a good place to start, since Lev. 4-5 is where atonement begins. There is also the advantage of the Lev. 5 atonement being for the individuals personal and actual sins.
We might be able to take the atonement process for very minor sins and extrapolate up to what it could be like for rebellious disobedience directly towards God requiring death for the sinner with no atonement possible under the Old Law.
It would be best to imagen yourself as a first century (BC) Jewish man who just accidently touched a dead unclean animal. If you are real poor you are going to have to work an extra job help someone else for money to buy a sack of flour. If you live in the city and have money you are going to have to go out and buy a lamb and some grain to feed it. You are not a shepherd, so you will have to drag or carry a balling, thirsty and hungry lamb to the altar. You get up early to hike into Jerusalem wait in line for hours to hand the flour or lamb to the priest and watch them go through their part of the atonement process which if you all did everything right will result in God forgiving you and you feeling forgiven.
There is more to what and why this happens which we can find in Lev. 5:
5…they must confess in what way they have sinned. (which we need to do in the atonement process)
6 As a penalty for the sin they have committed… Here the reason for atonement is given “as a penalty” (punishment but better translated disciplining).
If the sacrifice was made as a “payment” for a sin: these sins are all the same and God considers all people the same, so the sacrifice would need to be the same (a lamb for all or doves for all or flour for all) but they are not the same. The different values of the sacrifices, is an attempt to equalize the hardship/penalty (disciplining) on the sinners and does not suggest a payment being made to God especially a payment to forgive a sin. God does not need a bag of flour to forgive sins.
The intention of the sinner going through all this, would be, all the benefits that come from being Lovingly disciplined.
We really need to go through every verse relating to atonement and sacrifice to gleam a true understanding, but you asked for other word used to describe Jesus’ sacrifice:
Jesus, Paul, Peter, John and the writer of Hebrews all describe Christ torturous, humiliating murder as a ransom payment.
When we talk to nonbelievers, we are not trying to get them to believe some book, words, doctrine or philosophy, but we want them to accept through faith Jesus Christ and Him crucified. If that nonbeliever trust (has faith) in Christ and Him crucified a child is released and allowed to enter the kingdom where God the Father is, but if the nonbeliever refuses for lack of faith in Jesus Christ and Him crucified, a child is not set free to go to the Father.
Does this not sound very much like a kidnapping scenario with a ransom being offered?
“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is described in scripture as the ransom payment?
Would the sinner holding a child of God out of the Kingdom of God describe a kidnapper?
“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is a huge sacrificial payment, like you find with children being ransomed?
God is not a criminal undeserving kidnapper holding His own children and satan is not changeable nor has he the power to hold God’s child back from God, so the unbeliever is the only excellent fit for the kidnapper in the atonement process. Are at least some of the unbelieving sinner the same person who goes to be with God or do some unbelieving sinners experience a new birth to become a new person which can now enter the Kingdom?
Upvote
0