A Justified Acquitted World !

Thatgirloncfforums · Oct 19, 2021

Why would God blame himself for our sin? Is it because he is our creator?

Doug Brents said:
Impute is a legal term. It means “to lay the responsibility or blame for (something) often falsely or unjustly”.

Impart means “to make known”, ie: to impart wisdom or learning. Very different from impute.

Doug Brents · Oct 19, 2021

Thatgirloncfforums said:
Why would God blame himself for our sin? Is it because he is our creator?

He didn’t “blame Himself for our sin”. The Father laid the responsibility (punishment) for our sin on Jesus, making Him our redeemer.

Remember that God is 100% just, so all sin must be paid for. But He is also 100% loving, so He wants to forgive sin as well, but because He is just, He can’t just “sweep it under the rug”.

So, His love caused Him to offer His Som to pay the price, so that He could swap our places at Judgement (Jesus takes our place of punishment and we take His place of purity).

BNR32FAN · Oct 19, 2021

Brightfame52 said:
John 1:29

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

This is also the World John writes of in his Epistle when writing of the propitiation of Christ taking away our Sins 1 Jn 2:2

2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Jn 3:5

And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

1 Jn 4:10

Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Now being the propitiation for our sins, and taking them away are one and the same. His Death was that satisfaction to Gods Law and Justice to take away our sins, and that could not be the case if were not absolved of, acquitted from, justified from them all before God. Doesn't the resurrection of Christ testify the same Rom 4:25

Who [The Lamb of God] was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for[because of] our justification.

So that World in Jn 1:29 is a Justified world with no sin charged to it 2 Cor 5:19 because they've been taken away, so it cant apply to all without exception ! Some will yet die in their sins Jn 8:21,24

Jesus is our mediator, He paid for the sins which is why He will be the one to judge us and either acknowledge us or deny us before The Father. We are only justified with The Father if Jesus acknowledges us.

Thatgirloncfforums · Oct 19, 2021

Doug Brents said:
He didn’t “blame Himself for our sin”. The Father laid the responsibility (punishment) for our sin on Jesus, making Him our redeemer.

Remember that God is 100% just, so all sin must be paid for. But He is also 100% loving, so He wants to forgive sin as well, but because He is just, He can’t just “sweep it under the rug”.

So, His love caused Him to offer His Som to pay the price, so that He could swap our places at Judgement (Jesus takes our place of punishment and we take His place of purity).

Athanasius, On The Incarnation:
Now, if there were merely a misdemeanour in question, and not a consequent corruption, repentance were well enough. But if, when transgression had once gained a start, men became involved in that corruption which was their nature, and were deprived of the grace which they had, being in the image of God, what further step was needed? Or what was required for such grace and such recall, but the Word of God, which had also at the beginning made everything out of nought? 5. For His it was once more both to bring the corruptible to incorruption, and to maintain intact the just claim of the Father upon all. For being Word of the Father, and above all, He alone of natural fitness was both able to recreate everything, and worthy to suffer on behalf of all and to be ambassador for all with the Father.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2802.htm

Thatgirloncfforums · Oct 19, 2021

In the OT, God walked through the 2 halves of the sacrifice. I was told that this was a symbolic way of saying, 'If I break this covenant, may what has happened to this sacrifice, happen to me'.
Maybe, Christ as man become sin took on our punishment in this way, somehow?

More apparent to me is the idea that Christ's body was split in half and the Father walked through, like the Angel of death at Passover.

I'm not sure what I mean by all this, it was just an image that came to mind.

Edit:
I'm just trying to understand why Jesus would be punished. He didn't do anything wrong or how it would be just to punish someone in place of another.

Doug Brents said:
He didn’t “blame Himself for our sin”. The Father laid the responsibility (punishment) for our sin on Jesus, making Him our redeemer.

Remember that God is 100% just, so all sin must be paid for. But He is also 100% loving, so He wants to forgive sin as well, but because He is just, He can’t just “sweep it under the rug”.

So, His love caused Him to offer His Som to pay the price, so that He could swap our places at Judgement (Jesus takes our place of punishment and we take His place of purity).

bling · Oct 19, 2021

Thatgirloncfforums said:
What is the Hebraic understanding of imputation?

I do not feel they even had imputing anything. Yes, children could suffer because of their parent's behavior but they were not imputed with their parent's sin.

bling · Oct 19, 2021

Thatgirloncfforums said:
Edit:
I'm just trying to understand why Jesus would be punished. He didn't do anything wrong or how it would be just to punish someone in place of another.

Great! You see the problem! God would not “punish” the innocent Christ, that is never just, fair or righteous. We learn from the Old Testament, Christ’s life and the New Testament what is Deity’s definition of just and unjust and it would be unjust to hurt even an innocent person and unjust to allow the wicked to go unpunished or undisciplined.

God will allow at great cost to God, a willing Christ to be tortured, humiliated and murdered by wicked people to help undeserving sinful people (some being wicked). The bigger question is how Christ going to the cross helps you personally in fulfilling your earthly objective. This is the huge misunderstood topic of atonement; I could write a book on.

Just as a teaser one small part of atonement to think about:

There is this unbelievable huge “ransom payment” being made: Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and the author of Hebrews all describe it as an actual ransom scenario and not just “like a ransom scenario”. And we can all agree on: the payment being Christ’s torture, humiliation and murder, the Payer being God/Christ, the child being set free (sinners going to God), but have a problem with: “Who is the kidnapper”? If there is no kidnapper than the ransom scenario does not fit, so who is the kidnapper?

Some people try to make God the receiver of the payment, which calls God the kidnapper of His own children which is crazy.

Some people say satan is the kidnapper (this is what the Ransom Theory of atonement has), but that would mean God is paying satan when God has the power to safely take anything from satan and it would be wrong for God to pay satan.

Some say it is an intangible like death, evil, sin, or nothing, but you would not pay a huge payment to an intangible?

There is one very likely kidnapper and that is the person holding a child back from entering the Kingdom to be with God. When we go to the nonbeliever, we are not trying to convince them of an idea, a book, a doctrine or theology, but to accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified (which is described as the ransom payment). If the nonbeliever accepts the ransom payment (Jesus Christ) there is a child released to go to the Father, but if the nonbeliever refuses to accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified a child is kept out of the Kingdom. Does this all sounds very much like a kidnapping scenario?

Yes, Christ is the ransom payment for all, but the kidnapper can accept or reject the payment. If the kidnapper rejects this unbelievable huge payment, the payers of the ransom are going to be upset with that kidnapper.

There is a lot more to say about this, but this is an introduction.

Doug Brents · Oct 19, 2021

bling said:
Great! You see the problem! God would not “punish” the innocent Christ, that is never just, fair or righteous. We learn from the Old Testament, Christ’s life and the New Testament what is Deity’s definition of just and unjust and it would be unjust to hurt even an innocent person and unjust to allow the wicked to go unpunished or undisciplined.

God will allow at great cost to God, a willing Christ to be tortured, humiliated and murdered by wicked people to help undeserving sinful people (some being wicked). The bigger question is how Christ going to the cross helps you personally in fulfilling your earthly objective. This is the huge misunderstood topic of atonement; I could write a book on.

Just as a teaser one small part of atonement to think about:

There is this unbelievable huge “ransom payment” being made: Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and the author of Hebrews all describe it as an actual ransom scenario and not just “like a ransom scenario”. And we can all agree on: the payment being Christ’s torture, humiliation and murder, the Payer being God/Christ, the child being set free (sinners going to God), but have a problem with: “Who is the kidnapper”? If there is no kidnapper than the ransom scenario does not fit, so who is the kidnapper?

Some people try to make God the receiver of the payment, which calls God the kidnapper of His own children which is crazy.

Some people say satan is the kidnapper (this is what the Ransom Theory of atonement has), but that would mean God is paying satan when God has the power to safely take anything from satan and it would be wrong for God to pay satan.

Some say it is an intangible like death, evil, sin, or nothing, but you would not pay a huge payment to an intangible?

There is one very likely kidnapper and that is the person holding a child back from entering the Kingdom to be with God. When we go to the nonbeliever, we are not trying to convince them of an idea, a book, a doctrine or theology, but to accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified (which is described as the ransom payment). If the nonbeliever accepts the ransom payment (Jesus Christ) there is a child released to go to the Father, but if the nonbeliever refuses to accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified a child is kept out of the Kingdom. Does this all sounds very much like a kidnapping scenario?

Yes, Christ is the ransom payment for all, but the kidnapper can accept or reject the payment. If the kidnapper rejects this unbelievable huge payment, the payers of the ransom are going to be upset with that kidnapper.

There is a lot more to say about this, but this is an introduction.

So you are saying that each individual is his own kidnapper?

I think Scripture is quite explicit that Satan is the kidnapper. But he doesn’t get the ransom. He goes to jail (Hell). Satan stole man from God by causing man to sin. God’s just nature forbids Him from just shrugging off our sin, so someone had to pay the price for it. No human (being finite) is capable of paying for any more than their own righteousness, but only if they lived a perfectly perfect life. So an infinite being (God Himself) is the only one capable of paying for the entire world.

Thatgirloncfforums · Oct 19, 2021

Can you show us where this is in the Church Fathers please?

Doug Brents said:
So you are saying that each individual is his own kidnapper?

I think Scripture is quite explicit that Satan is the kidnapper. But he doesn’t get the ransom. He goes to jail (Hell). Satan stole man from God by causing man to sin. God’s just nature forbids Him from just shrugging off our sin, so someone had to pay the price for it. No human (being finite) is capable of paying for any more than their own righteousness, but only if they lived a perfectly perfect life. So an infinite being (God Himself) is the only one capable of paying for the entire world.

Doug Brents · Oct 19, 2021

Thatgirloncfforums said:
Can you show us where this is in the Church Fathers please?

You mean the Apostles?
As is said in Acts 1, to be counted among the 12 a man had to have been with Jesus from His baptism to His ascension. Only 14 men met that qualification: the 11, Judas, Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. Matthias was chosen to replace Judas. And later Saul spent 3 years in the desert being trained by Christ in spirit and was called an Apostle of Christ. These men, and the elders they appointed over the various congregations they established in their travels, were the origins of the Church (Christ having already ascended by Pentecost when the Church was established). That makes them the first “Fathers” of the Church. Other elders were appointed or ordained from then until now (who fit the qualifications set in Timothy and Titus), and they are the men who guide the Church today.

Bible Highlighter · Oct 19, 2021

Brightfame52 said:
John 1:29

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

This is also the World John writes of in his Epistle when writing of the propitiation of Christ taking away our Sins 1 Jn 2:2

2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Jn 3:5

And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

1 Jn 4:10

Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Now being the propitiation for our sins, and taking them away are one and the same. His Death was that satisfaction to Gods Law and Justice to take away our sins, and that could not be the case if were not absolved of, acquitted from, justified from them all before God. Doesn't the resurrection of Christ testify the same Rom 4:25

Who [The Lamb of God] was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for[because of] our justification.

So that World in Jn 1:29 is a Justified world with no sin charged to it 2 Cor 5:19 because they've been taken away, so it cant apply to all without exception ! Some will yet die in their sins Jn 8:21,24

1 John 2:2 talks about how Jesus is the propitiation (atoning sacrifice) for not only our sins (i.e. believers), but for the sins of the WHOLE world.

1 Peter 2:1 says, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.”

You cannot deny the Lord and be saved and yet these individuals denied the Lord and they were bought by the Lord Jesus.

This is why Provisional Atonement is true, and John Calvin’s Limited Atonement is false.

The best way to describe the Provisional Atonement is like a man who paid the price to pay off your debts by his handing you a check to be debt free; But it is up to you to receive the check, deposit it into your checking account, and pay off those you are in debt to; It's a gift, but like all good gifts in life, you have to receive the gift and use it properly to be of any benefit). Jesus provided an atonement, but it is up to us to receive it to personally apply to our lives by having a proper faith. Men will remain as sinners if they reject the Provisional Atonement of Jesus Christ. Jesus provided a provisional atonement (salvation) in dealing with sin as a way of escape for mankind to be saved through accepting Him (Who is the gift).

For Provisional Atonement verses, see: John 1:29, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:19, Romans 5:6-8.

The Provisional Atonement is a 100% Work of God alone that can only be applied personally to an individual's life via by being saved by God's grace by faith in Christ as one’s Savior, and then by entering the Sanctification Process by the Holy Spirit (in order to live a holy life).

The Provisional Atonement is not applied personally yet to a person’s life until they accept the Lord’s love gift and they remain faithful to taking care of that gift (Who is Jesus Christ). In a manner of speaking, all of mankind’s sins have been paid for, the debt has been paid like a person writing a check to cancel out your debt, but you have to cash the check and pay off those you are in debt to. So there is no confusion in understanding the Bible’s teaching on the Provisional Atonement. It breathes in perfect harmony with the whole of Scripture. But most want the easy way out and not the narrow way that Jesus taught.

Brightfame52 · Oct 20, 2021

doug brents

“For” in Rom 4:25 does not mean “because of”. It means “in order to”.

Rom 4:25

25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

The word for is the prep dia and means:

the ground or reason by which something is or is not done

by reason of
on account of
because of for this reason
therefore
on this account

So you are absolutely wrong.

Christ was delivered for/because of our offences, and likewise he raised again for/because of our Justification.

AMP
who was betrayed and crucified because of our sins, and was raised [from the dead] because of our justification [our acquittal—absolving us of all sin before God].

Brightfame52 · Oct 20, 2021

A Justified Acquitted World ! 2

The word Justification is Rom 4:25, He was raised again for our Justification, its the greek word dikaiosis and means:

acquittal, a process of absolution.

This results of all sins being taken away Jn 1:29 and Christ's resurrection is an testification of that fact.

bling · Oct 20, 2021

Doug Brents said:
So you are saying that each individual is his own kidnapper?

I think Scripture is quite explicit that Satan is the kidnapper. But he doesn’t get the ransom. He goes to jail (Hell). Satan stole man from God by causing man to sin. God’s just nature forbids Him from just shrugging off our sin, so someone had to pay the price for it. No human (being finite) is capable of paying for any more than their own righteousness, but only if they lived a perfectly perfect life. So an infinite being (God Himself) is the only one capable of paying for the entire world.

The idea of satan being the kidnapper goes back to the 3rd century and perhaps even the 2nd century, but at that time many Christians seemed to believe there was a war going on in the Spiritual realm, fighting going back and forth even though God was to be victorious in the end. There were lots of kidnappings going on (people did not have cash in banks [there were no banks] nor was it lying around). Kidnapper took children and demanded ransoms allowing people time to sell their possessions and get gold, it was common back then.

The idea of satan being the kidnapper has fallen out of favor since it elevates satan to be almost equal to God, makes it sound like God “owes” satan a ransom (while God owes satan nothing).

We might like to blame satan for our sinful state (“satan caused man to sin”, as you said), but it is our free will choice to follow satan and not satan carrying us away.

If God did pay satan off, then everyone has been rescued (saved), yet we know some are still following satan/children of satan.

Peter gets up and gives a wonderful Christ crucified sermon (Acts 2) and does not talk about satan being paid off or anything like that.

What scriptures are you referring to which says satan was paid off with Christ going to the cross or satan kidnapped us?

It is never “just” to have the innocent “pay” the penalty for the guilty. The innocent should never be punished and the guilty should always be disciplined or punished.

If you fulfill your earthly objective without sinning you are not “paying” anything, since nothing is owed, you have done no wrong, so you have created no debt.

If Christ “paid” 100% for our sins then there is nothing left to forgive and if God forgave our sins 100% then there is nothing to be paid. That is the way it works by any standard.

Doug Brents · Oct 20, 2021

bling said:
The idea of satan being the kidnapper goes back to the 3rd century and perhaps even the 2nd century, but at that time many Christians seemed to believe there was a war going on in the Spiritual realm, fighting going back and forth even though God was to be victorious in the end. There were lots of kidnappings going on (people did not have cash in banks [there were no banks] nor was it lying around). Kidnapper took children and demanded ransoms allowing people time to sell their possessions and get gold, it was common back then.

The idea of satan being the kidnapper has fallen out of favor since it elevates satan to be almost equal to God, makes it sound like God “owes” satan a ransom (while God owes satan nothing).

We might like to blame satan for our sinful state (“satan caused man to sin”, as you said), but it is our free will choice to follow satan and not satan carrying us away.

If God did pay satan off, then everyone has been rescued (saved), yet we know some are still following satan/children of satan.

Peter gets up and gives a wonderful Christ crucified sermon (Acts 2) and does not talk about satan being paid off or anything like that.

What scriptures are you referring to which says satan was paid off with Christ going to the cross or satan kidnapped us?

It is never “just” to have the innocent “pay” the penalty for the guilty. The innocent should never be punished and the guilty should always be disciplined or punished.

If you fulfill your earthly objective without sinning you are not “paying” anything, since nothing is owed, you have done no wrong, so you have created no debt.

If Christ “paid” 100% for our sins then there is nothing left to forgive and if God forgave our sins 100% then there is nothing to be paid. That is the way it works by any standard.

There is a spiritual war being waged. In Daniel, he began praying at one point and God dispatched an angel with the answer in the instant that Daniel began praying. Daniel prayed for several days before the angel got there. When he did, Daniel asked, “What took you so long?” The angel replied that he had left Heaven immediately, but the Prince of Persia resisted me. Then Michael came to help the angel, and he was able to get through to Daniel (Dan 10:1-14). The Prince of Persia, and Michael (one of the chief Princes) are, I believe, Archangels, one fallen and the other faithful. That being the case, I believe they each are like generals with armies of angels following them, making war against each other to prevent the other from doing what their masters, God and Satan, command. Yes, God could have swept aside the Prince of Persia, and delivered His message immediately, but He allowed the angels to take 21 days to do so.

I don’t think this is an isolated incident. It may be one of the only times we get this kind of insight into the spiritual world, but I think this kind of battle is going in all the time.
(Just an aside, let me propose a few ideas. If all this is correct, then consider spiritual war. Angels, being spirits, cannot die. But they can feel pain. And they have weapons that may resemble flaming swords, like that held by the angel that defended the Garden in Eden. So, now consider that the two sides cannot destroy each other, but they can cause each other considerable pain, and their fight goes on, and on, and on.)

As for our sin, Christ paid a price great enough to cover every sin of every person who has or will ever live even if the world lasted another 100 billion years (I believe we are currently in the year 5924 (I have a study based on Gen 5 & 11, with a timeline all the way to today that I will share with anyone who is interested.)
But that payment is not applied to anyone who does not believe in Christ and obey Him. So you can either pay for your sins yourself, in Hell for eternity. Or you can have Christ pay for them, but to accept His payment, you have to accept Him as your Lord and Master.

bling · Oct 20, 2021

Doug Brents said:
There is a spiritual war being waged. In Daniel, he began praying at one point and God dispatched an angel with the answer in the instant that Daniel began praying. Daniel prayed for several days before the angel got there. When he did, Daniel asked, “What took you so long?” The angel replied that he had left Heaven immediately, but the Prince of Persia resisted me. Then Michael came to help the angel, and he was able to get through to Daniel (Dan 10:1-14). The Prince of Persia, and Michael (one of the chief Princes) are, I believe, Archangels, one fallen and the other faithful. That being the case, I believe they each are like generals with armies of angels following them, making war against each other to prevent the other from doing what their masters, God and Satan, command. Yes, God could have swept aside the Prince of Persia, and delivered His message immediately, but He allowed the angels to take 21 days to do so.

I don’t think this is an isolated incident. It may be one of the only times we get this kind of insight into the spiritual world, but I think this kind of battle is going in all the time.
(Just an aside, let me propose a few ideas. If all this is correct, then consider spiritual war. Angels, being spirits, cannot die. But they can feel pain. And they have weapons that may resemble flaming swords, like that held by the angel that defended the Garden in Eden. So, now consider that the two sides cannot destroy each other, but they can cause each other considerable pain, and their fight goes on, and on, and on.)

As for our sin, Christ paid a price great enough to cover every sin of every person who has or will ever live even if the world lasted another 100 billion years (I believe we are currently in the year 5924 (I have a study based on Gen 5 & 11, with a timeline all the way to today that I will share with anyone who is interested.)
But that payment is not applied to anyone who does not believe in Christ and obey Him. So you can either pay for your sins yourself, in Hell for eternity. Or you can have Christ pay for them, but to accept His payment, you have to accept Him as your Lord and Master.

First off Daniel is written in very figurative language and not easily understood and yes, you do need more than one passage from a poetic book to build your doctrine.

You say: “God and Satan, command”, which elevates satan to being almost equal with God, when it only takes another angel to defeat satan. When Christ encounters a demon He tells them what to do and they do it. To take control of one of satan’s possessions you first have to be able to bind satan (as Jesus taught us).

Who did Christ pay for us to get out of the debt our sins created?

You believe the ransom was paid to satan, so how is that paying God?

What scripture are and logic are you using to say: “payment is not applied to anyone who does not believe in Christ”?

People do like to take the blame off themselves and put it on satan, but who is the one holding a child out of the Kingdom where they can be with their Father?

fhansen · Oct 21, 2021

Thatgirloncfforums said:
In the OT, God walked through the 2 halves of the sacrifice. I was told that this was a symbolic way of saying, 'If I break this covenant, may what has happened to this sacrifice, happen to me'.
Maybe, Christ as man become sin took on our punishment in this way, somehow?

More apparent to me is the idea that Christ's body was split in half and the Father walked through, like the Angel of death at Passover.

I'm not sure what I mean by all this, it was just an image that came to mind.

Edit:
I'm just trying to understand why Jesus would be punished. He didn't do anything wrong or how it would be just to punish someone in place of another.

God wants us to come to value love, to love as He does, to recognize its incomparable worth. So He demonstrated what He was willing to endure in order to prove that love: an excruciatingly humiliating and painful suffering and death in human flesh at the hands of His own creation because of their preference for darkness, and in spite of that sin that opposes love. That was God on the cross, amazingly, the God who could squash us all like a bug. The cross, without force, beckons us towards it, towards the light and away from darkness, towards Himself and away from ourselves, from the pride that separates us from Him.

fhansen · Oct 21, 2021

Thatgirloncfforums said:
Ok. So does impute have the same definition as impart then?

Edit: I'm also curious to know, did the Church Fathers teach imputation?

Some spoke of it, there were several theories regarding the atonement. But even then not with the rather obsessive focus of many modern theologians. The same with faith, which they nonetheless considered essential of course.

Virtually to a man, in any case, ECFs taught that we’ll be judged based on what we did or failed to do, right or wrong, while in this body, in this life, knowing that we cannot do right apart from the God whom Jesus came to reconcile us with as He reveals the true God, so by knowing Him we may come to believe in, hope in, and, ultimately and most importantly, to love Him. That’s what defines our own justice or righteousness. That’s what makes us a child of His. That’s how we’re freed from the slavery of sin.

Doug Brents · Oct 21, 2021

bling said:
First off Daniel is written in very figurative language and not easily understood and yes, you do need more than one passage from a poetic book to build your doctrine.

Yes, parts of Daniel are figurative, but parts are quite literal. I believe that this part of Daniel was literal. He really did talk with an angel, and that angel did tell him of the fight he had with the Prince of Persia. Is that a name? Or a title? I think a title, since Michael is given a similar title. Michael is obviously one of God’s chief angels, and this is not the only place he is mentioned as doing battle for God. In Jude 9, Michael did battle with Satan.

bling said:
You say: “God and Satan, command”, which elevates satan to being almost equal with God, when it only takes another angel to defeat satan.

Not so fast. Them both being the strongest on their respective sides doesn’t make them equal. The strongest 5 year old on a team of 100 5 year olds is not the equal of the strongest Senior in a university. But Satan is the strongest, wisest, most beautiful of God’s angels. And even Michael would not contend with him on his own power, but invoked God’s name to rebuke him in Jude. No, Satan cannot even come close to God’s power, but he does command respect among the other angels, and he leads a large and powerful army of other angels and demons.

bling said:
When Christ encounters a demon He tells them what to do and they do it. To take control of one of satan’s possessions you first have to be able to bind satan (as Jesus taught us).

Indeed, and Christ is God (although He did nothing of His own power while He was a man, but did everything through the Spirit’s power). So Christ, or the Spirit, are each capable of commanding Satan. But the angels are not able to do so with impunity.

bling said:
Who did Christ pay for us to get out of the debt our sins created?

Realistically, i have not thought about it much in terms of ransom, and to whom the ransom was paid. But thinking mor on it I think He paid Himself. No, He did not kidnap us, but He is the one who’s very nature exiled us from His presence when we sinned. Is Satan responsible for the fact we sin? Yes, but ultimately we are responsible for our own sin (as you said). But it is God’s nature that prevents our reconciliation with Him unless the penalty for our sin is paid, and applied to us individually.

bling said:
What scripture and logic are you using to say: “payment is not applied to anyone who does not believe in Christ”?

Only those who believe in Jesus will be saved. And since Jesus’ death paid the price for all sin of ever you who has or will ever live, that sacrifice, while sufficient to pay for all sin, does not cover the sin of those who do not believe in (and obey) Christ.

bling said:
People do like to take the blame off themselves and put it on satan, but who is the one holding a child out of the Kingdom where they can be with their Father?

2 Tim 2:25-26 - “so that they may know the truth, 26 and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.”
It is Satan who takes us captive, and coerces us to do his will, and obey his desires.

Brightfame52 · Oct 21, 2021

The World of 2 Cor 5:19 is the same World John writes of Jn 1:29. Now the citizens of the World of 2 Cor 5:19, God does not charge them with any of their sins ! Therefore its an acquitted / Justified World !

A Justified Acquitted World !

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

He’s a Way of life

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Oldbie

Oldbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads