Down the Wormhole as to Why Jesus Freely Died on the Cross

[Mark Quayle]

How does having money or not having money change the same sin by the rich or poor person?

I said what I did, in case you thought that one person's sin by the same name is the same as another's sin. No one deed is quite the same as another.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

According to ability, authority and causation, I think it pretty is pretty obviously regeneration that came before any other gospel virtue we possess.

 

[timothyu]

According to ability, authority and causation, I think it pretty is pretty obviously regeneration that came before any other gospel virtue we possess.

"being born again, or not"... Two things give choice

 

[Clare73]

It both being born again and choice or you wouldn't be warned to obey his voice on the day you hear it.
while it is said: “Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.” Hebrews 3:15

Only the regenerate can do so (Ro 8:7-8; 1Co 2:14; Jn 3:3-5)

 

[Clare73]

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Depends on which one represents regeneration. . .that one comes first.

 

[bling]

Have it your way. I don't personally subscribe to the Ransom Theory as explicative of Salvation —even if the supposed payee is God— but it seems rather obviously true that there was a ransom paid for the release of many and therefore a payee, in the simple meaning of "...give his life as a [ransom] for many". The size of the offense and the payment, and the total inability of the offender to free himself are obvious (and very important) in Scripture, but they are irrelevant as to the meaning of the verse.

To me, the verse is just another part of the overwhelming witness of scripture in showing what has been termed, Substitutionary Atonement. If it helps to understand where I am coming from with this. I have yet to hear an adequate description of the size of the facts in what God has done for us —the horror of sin, and the infinite mercy of God— in any structure that has been given a name. I think the task is impossible in this temporal realm, and, curiously, it seems to me that God does not hold us responsible to have a full understanding of it during this life, since he knows we are but dust.

What I think he does hold us responsible for is the notion that we "have it down", in any of these things. Phrases like, "That's what it's all about", and "That was when I understood what it really means" I have to say are pretty presumptuous, as is the notion that I can do anything spiritually valid apart from him.

Neither do I subscribe to the “Ransom Theory of Atonement” which has the ransom payment being paid to satan. And I do not have the ransom payment being made to God either.

All scripture must be taken into consideration when interpreting any verse. The scenario of a ransom describing the ransom payment of Christ’s torture, humiliation and murder, is used by Christ, Paul, John, Peter and the author of Hebrews, so does that not make it significant?

How does the ransom scenario support the “Substitution Atonement Theory”? Who is the person (kidnapper) being paid in this theory?

The more we come to Love Christ more, the more we can empathize with Him on the cross.

 

[bling]

I said what I did, in case you thought that one person's sin by the same name is the same as another's sin. No one deed is quite the same as another.

I am not trying to judge one sin against another sin and there is nothing in Lev. 5 even suggesting the same sin as listed in scripture is always worse when done by a rich person. The greater cost of the atonement sacrifice for the rich person is obviously done to try and equalize the penalty (punishment/discipline.

 

[Clare73]

Neither do I subscribe to the “Ransom Theory of Atonement” which has the ransom payment being paid to satan.

Sez who?

And I do not have the ransom payment being made to God either.

The ransom payment is made to the same entity that the payment of a prison sentence is made to in our legal system. . .to justice.

All scripture must be taken into consideration when interpreting any verse. The scenario of a ransom describing the ransom payment of Christ’s torture, humiliation and murder, is used by Christ, Paul, John, Peter and the author of Hebrews, so does that not make it significant?
How does the ransom scenario support the “Substitution Atonement Theory”?

Dying in our place (substitution) is the ransom payment which purchased us back/redeemed us from eternal damnation.

Who is the person (kidnapper) being paid in this theory?

Ransoms are not limited to kidnappers.
But the metaphor works. . .we were bought back (redeemed) from, the price was paid (ransom) to remove the condition of eternal condemnation.

The more we come to Love Christ more, the more we can empathize with Him on the cross.

Christ didn't die that me might "empathize" with him

 

[timothyu]

Depends on which one represents regeneration. . .that one comes first.

It boils down to which thief you are on the cross in life, the selfish one or the repentant one.

 

[bling]

Sez who?

The “Ransom Theory of Atonement” has been around a long time and every description of it I have read has the ransom paid to Satan, but if you have read something different, I would like to know.

The ransom payment is made to the same entity that the payment of a prison sentence is made to in our legal system. . .to justice.

No it is not! Ransoms are normally payments made to an undeserving criminal kidnapper when talking about huge sacrificial payments made by a parent or family and friends and when a child is being held. Ransoms can refer to a tax being paid by the person being taxed and a ransom can refer to a payment given to buy the freedom for a slave, but these are not huge sacrificial payment and the person being paid is not necessarily “undeserving”.

Payments made by a criminal for a crime he/she committed is not referred to as a ransom payment. The fair just payment is made to society, if the crime is against society. This payment can also be seen as discipline.

Offending the Creator of the Universe has no fair just payment a person could pay Him off with, but the Creator of the Universe can forgive him/her.

Dying in our place (substitution) is the ransom payment which purchased us back/redeemed us from eternal damnation.

You have no one being paid and are suggesting “justice” is paid, but a criminal does not pay “justice” for his/her crimes against someone(s) like society or God. You hear of crimes, against society or God, but not crimes against “justice”.

I am talking about a huge sacrificial ransom payment being made to set a child of God free to return to be with God in His Kingdom, that ransom payment is made to an undeserving criminal kidnapper (just like you have with a kidnapping/ransom scenario), but it is not satan.

Ransoms are not limited to kidnappers.
But the metaphor works. . .we were bought back (redeemed) from, the price was paid (ransom) to remove the condition of eternal condemnation.

Accepting God’s charitable gift of unconditional selfless forgiveness removes the unbelievable huge debt of sin.

Again, you have no one being paid “off”, especially a kidnapper (neither God nor justice is a kidnapper).

My scenario fits the huge payment, the sacrificial payment, the parent paying, our being held back and our being children set free.

You also are not addressing how the payment is for just a few people and not all people. How does God choose who he wants to pay for. In my scenario the kidnapper chooses to accept or reject the huge undeserved payment.

Christ didn't die that me might "empathize" with him

Sez who?

Christ was tortured, humiliated and cruelly murdered, to help me and because of me, there is nothing in the Greek words translated “for” to suggest He took my place.

Do you personally feel grievous empathy, when you remember Christ being tortured, humiliated and murdered on the cross because of your personal sins and to help you personally?

 

[YahuahSaves]

Hi,
Give thought to this passage, please.

Simon Peter, servant and Apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have been allotted an equal faith with us in the justice of our God and in our Savior Jesus Christ. Grace to you. And may peace be fulfilled according to the plan of God and of Christ Jesus our Lord, in the same manner that all things which are for life and piety have been given to us by his Divine virtue, through the plan of him who has called us to our own glory and virtue. Through Christ, he has given us the greatest and most precious promises, so that by these things you may become sharers in the Divine Nature, fleeing from the corruption of that desire which is in the world.​

2 Peter 1:1-4

Your point?

It's exactly what I said..we share..but we are not God himself.

We don't become God being conformed to Christ's likeness, we become like him (his image, his reflection, like it was meant to be from the beginning).

'divine nature', what could that be? Gods divine nature is Love.

 

[timothyu]

We don't become God being conformed to Christ's likeness, we become like him (his image, his reflection, like it was meant to be from the beginning).

If we don't keep getting in the road and allow Him, we can become extensions of Himself. That is why we were told to care for each other. Those who are more into themselves are not connected. Again both examples model the two thieves on the cross.

 

[YahuahSaves]

God did not create evil. He created human beings and angels with the ability to choose obedience or disobedience, each choice carrying its own consequences.

If God is good, what is the opposite of good? You can call it consequence, but the alternative had to exist for there to be a positive or negative result after making a choice.

No more unfair than a skunk or rattlesnake suffering the consequences of being born of a skunk or rattelsnake.

What's your point with that? In the beginning, God created everything, and it was good.

That reasoning has no Biblical basis.
It's not about choice, it's about regeneration--being born again, or not.

Actually it is a choice between spiritual life and death. To choose God is to choose life, because he is the giver and sustainer of life.

God himself provided the sacrifice (his only Son) to satisfy his own justice

 Yes, the wages of sin is death.
God himself also provided the sacrifice to reconcile the world to himself. Love is his very nature.

I'm not arguing scripture here. If you search them you'll know my general statements to the O.P. are true... or maybe you won't.

Either way, have a nice day.

 

[Clare73]

It boils down to which thief you are on the cross in life, the selfish one or the repentant one.

So which thief on the cross was the chicken , and which thief was the egg?

 

[timothyu]

So which thief on the cross was the chicken , and which was the egg?

Neither

 

[Clare73]

The “Ransom Theory of Atonement” has been around a long time and every description of it I have read has the ransom paid to Satan, but if you have read something different, I would like to know.

Showing only the limitations of your understanding. . .

No it is not! Ransoms are normally payments made to an undeserving criminal kidnapper when talking about huge sacrificial payments made by a parent or family and friends and when a child is being held. Ransoms can refer to a tax being paid by the person being taxed and a ransom can refer to a payment given to buy the freedom for a slave, but these are not huge sacrificial payment and the person being paid is not necessarily “undeserving”.
Payments made by a criminal for a crime he/she committed is not referred to as a ransom payment. The fair just payment is made to society, if the crime is against society. This payment can also be seen as discipline.

Somewhat inadequate understanding of justice. . .no one is personally recompensed (made whole) by someone else's prison sentence.

 

[Clare73]

If God is good, what is the opposite of good? You can call it consequence, but the alternative had to exist for there to be a positive or negative result after making a choice.

Darkness is the absence of light.
Evil is the absence of good.

Darkness didn't exist until it occurred in creation.
Evil didn't exist until it occurred in disobedience.

 

[Clare73]

Neither

But you were talking about the chicken and the egg. . .

 

[timothyu]

Evil didn't exist until it occurred in disobedience.

And yet te tree of the knowledge of good and evil existed as God has said we had come to know it like they already did.,

 

[timothyu]

But you were talking about the chicken and the egg. . .

In reference to a statement of yours, not mine.