God and Sin

[Clizby WampusCat]

You repeat the same question in different forms. My answer, and I think I said this before, is to listen / read everybody and choose whom to believe and pray that God lead you. If you don't believe anyone now then be it. Just wait and see. When you choose to believe in Christ you will be saved.

I cannot choose to believe in Christ. No one can, we are convinced by the evidence or we are not. Can you choose to believe that Allah is the true God?

I believe my theology is mostly Greek Orthodox as modified or explained by Melanchthon and Wesley. NT Wright expresses the same beliefs I have, except much more eloquently. If you're willing to spend the energy, start with Orthodox books.

SVS Press Books


When God takes on a the body and soul of a human being, this is a sacrifice. And when He is abused by people, this is a sacrifice. And when He is crucified and suffers, this is a sacrifice.

He was God before and after the crucifixion. What did he sacrifice? Humans sacrifice much more for each other than God did. Jesus did not give his life for us he had a bad coupe of days. People die for each other to protect them that is a sacrifice, giving something up. If I could stop the starvation in the world by dying like Jesus did I would and I would not need to be resurrected. I bet you would as well.

If you willingly live in poverty and suffer for a mistake or a character failure of a family member or a spouse or a friend, this is a sacrifice.

Sure, because you would be giving up something. Jesus never lost anything in the process.

 

[eleos1954]

ok ... so perhaps I was being assumptive ... sorry about that

however ... before continuing and responding to your questions .... I need to know something .... this is to avoid being assumptive

Being a self-described atheist ... What is your intent in participating in a christian forum?

Christians claim to know truth. I want to know what is true. I want to study the claims and see if they convince me.[/QUOTE]

I want to know what is true.

In regard to what? What truth(s) are you searching for?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Yes it does...look at Moses and how his face was transformed and how he had to wear a veil in the presence of the people lest they stare full on at the GLORY of the PRESENCE of GOD...and look at the HOLY of HOLIES and its construct that in between the HOLY of HOLIES and men, was a veil...

Can you explain how this is an answer to my post? How does this relate to god being in the presence of sin? Do you believe god can be in the presence of sin?

And then look at Haggai 2 and remember that I have been telling you all along that the word of GOD is a prophecy and testimony of JESUS....

I believed the entire bible testified to Jesus when I was a christian. What about Haggai 2 do you want me to read? Can you explain why you brought this text up?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

In regard to what? What truth(s) are you searching for?

I simply want to know what is true and what is false as best as I can determine no matter the subject. Christians claim we have eternal life. I want to know if that is true.

 

[ChetSinger]

If you believe as you said above that babies will eventually bear guilt of sin, how do you know at what point they will bear the guilt of their sin?

I can't imagine how I could know that. That's up to God, as it remains for the entire duration of our lives.

 

[Andrewn]

He was God before and after the crucifixion. What did he sacrifice? Humans sacrifice much more for each other than God did. Jesus did not give his life for us he had a bad coupe of days. People die for each other to protect them that is a sacrifice, giving something up. If I could stop the starvation in the world by dying like Jesus did I would and I would not need to be resurrected. I bet you would as well.

Jesus never lost anything in the process.

I admire your thoughtfulness and consider it a gift from God.

God came down from heaven and was embodied in Jesus Christ. Jesus is one person. If Jesus suffered then God suffered. Charles Wesley wrote:

And can it be that I should gain
An int’rest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! how can it be
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! how can it be
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

How can one deny that Jesus suffered? Is it because He was resurrected? The Divinity obviously cannot die and the humanity had to be resurrected with it because it had become a part of God.

We will all be resurrected and our sacrifices will become public. Of course, we are not resurrected immediately, but the righteous will be comforted. Eternal life is something that all Christians agree about .

 

[eleos1954]

I simply want to know what is true and what is false as best as I can determine no matter the subject. Christians claim we have eternal life. I want to know if that is true.

ok ... so eternal life is basically what you are seeking to know.

The theory of evolution claims no ...

The theology found in the bible and what christians believe say yes ....

So we consider the mind (consciousness - not the physical brain)

Evolution theory considers the physical/material only

Christians believe there is more to us than the physical ... and there is ... our mind and it is not physical/tangible

Science can not explain
consciousness (intangible) ... many many theories about this.

Energy - Science says

As we know through thermodynamics, energy cannot be created nor destroyed. It simply changes states.

Energy is defined as the capacity to perform work. According to the First Law of Thermodynamics, the total amount of energy in the universe is constant — incapable of being created or destroyed — and can only change from one form to another.

According to the theories associated with the universal energy field. all matter and psychological processes — thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and attitudes — are composed of energy.

God says He has always been and that He was not created ... nor can He be destroyed and that He is the universal creator. so in that regard ... that claim is not out of "tune" with the First Law of Thermodynamics.

I'm not here to debate specifics regarding science ... and won't do that. People can search out scientific "details" on their own ... as they are numerous.

Just a few things to consider.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I admire your thoughtfulness and consider it a gift from God.

God came down from heaven and was embodied in Jesus Christ. Jesus is one person. If Jesus suffered then God suffered. Charles Wesley wrote:

And can it be that I should gain
An int’rest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! how can it be
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! how can it be
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

How can one deny that Jesus suffered? Is it because He was resurrected? The Divinity obviously cannot die and the humanity had to be resurrected with it because it had become a part of God.

We will all be resurrected and our sacrifices will become public. Of course, we are not resurrected immediately, but the righteous will be comforted. Eternal life is something that all Christians agree about .

I agree he suffered. I disagree that it was a sacrifice on his part. A sacrifice means to give something up that is valuable. Jesus did not do that.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

ok ... so eternal life is basically what you are seeking to know.

I am not seeking to know that but if it is true I would like to know. I have examined the evidence and I am not convinced. If there is different evidence I have not seen then I will evaluate that.

The theory of evolution claims no ...

Nothing in the theory of evolution claims eternal life does not exist.

The theology found in the bible and what christians believe say yes ....

I agree.

So we consider the mind (consciousness - not the physical brain)

They are one in the same. You cannot have consciousness without a brain. At least that has not been demonstrated.

Evolution theory considers the physical/material only

Christians believe there is more to us than the physical ... and there is ... our mind and it is not physical/tangible

I know they believe this, but why do they believe this?

Science can not explain
consciousness (intangible) ... many many theories about this.

There are hypothesis about consciousness but there is no consensus theory about it. This is not evidence toward a supernatural explanation.

Energy - Science says

As we know through thermodynamics, energy cannot be created nor destroyed. It simply changes states.

Energy is defined as the capacity to perform work. According to the First Law of Thermodynamics, the total amount of energy in the universe is constant — incapable of being created or destroyed — and can only change from one form to another.

According to the theories associated with the universal energy field. all matter and psychological processes — thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and attitudes — are composed of energy.

God says He has always been and that He was not created ... nor can He be destroyed and that He is the universal creator. so in that regard ... that claim is not out of "tune" with the First Law of Thermodynamics.

So are you just substitution the word "energy" for the word "God"? As you said this is a claim not evidence.

I'm not here to debate specifics regarding science ... and won't do that. People can search out scientific "details" on their own ... as they are numerous.

Just a few things to consider.

You just provided what you believe, you gave no reasons or evidence that supports these assertions.

 

[eleos1954]

I am not seeking to know that but if it is true I would like to know. I have examined the evidence and I am not convinced. If there is different evidence I have not seen then I will evaluate that.

Nothing in the theory of evolution claims eternal life does not exist.

I agree.

They are one in the same. You cannot have consciousness without a brain. At least that has not been demonstrated.

I know they believe this, but why do they believe this?

There are hypothesis about consciousness but there is no consensus theory about it. This is not evidence toward a supernatural explanation.

So are you just substitution the word "energy" for the word "God"? As you said this is a claim not evidence.

You just provided what you believe, you gave no reasons or evidence that supports these assertions.

If one completely dismisses the possibility of creation .... then bringing forth scripture is futile. If one considers creation is a possibility ... then what they read from the bible must be kept in that context. Otherwise .... it's futile arguing.

The bible is not a science book .... and largely addresses ...

thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and attitudes

It is about mans relationship with God (the creator), and relationships within mankind

It's creation verses evolution .... and they are mutually exclusive.

Evidence .... what evidence would you require to believe God exists and He is the creator?

 

[ChetSinger]

That is not what the words say. But thanks for your interpretation.

I've re-read the passage in the NET bible and David does say he was guilty from birth:

Look, I was guilty of sin from birth, a sinner the moment my mother conceived me.​

Yet Jesus says that the kingdom of God belongs to little children, and that their angels always behold the face of the Father. So if they're guilty of anything God isn't holding it against them.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

If one completely dismisses the possibility of creation .... then bringing forth scripture is futile. If one considers creation is a possibility ... then what they read from the bible must be kept in that context. Otherwise .... it's futile arguing.

I have not dismissed creation as a possibility. I do not believe it is the case because there is insufficient evidence to believe it is true.

The bible is not a science book .... and largely addresses ...

thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and attitudes

It is about mans relationship with God (the creator), and relationships within mankind

I agree but why should I open the book? Why should I open the bible instead of other religious writings?

It's creation verses evolution .... and they are mutually exclusive.

Evolution does not account for the beginnings of life. God could have supernaturally started life and let evolution take charge after that. Many Christians believe creation and evolution.

Evidence .... what evidence would you require to believe God exists and He is the creator?

I don't know. It would be a mistake for me to lay out beforehand what evidence I would believe because I don't know all the evidence that could be out there, I could miss evidence that would convince me. I will look at any evidence provided and see if it convinces me.

Do you think God knows what would convince me?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I've re-read the passage in the NET bible and David does say he was guilty from birth:

Look, I was guilty of sin from birth, a sinner the moment my mother conceived me.​

Yet Jesus says that the kingdom of God belongs to little children, and that their angels always behold the face of the Father. So if they're guilty of anything God isn't holding it against them.

Why can't he then do the same for all people?

 

[eleos1954]

I have not dismissed creation as a possibility. I do not believe it is the case because there is insufficient evidence to believe it is true.

I agree but why should I open the book? Why should I open the bible instead of other religious writings?

Evolution does not account for the beginnings of life. God could have supernaturally started life and let evolution take charge after that. Many Christians believe creation and evolution.

I don't know. It would be a mistake for me to lay out beforehand what evidence I would believe because I don't know all the evidence that could be out there, I could miss evidence that would convince me. I will look at any evidence provided and see if it convinces me.

Do you think God knows what would convince me?

I don't know. It would be a mistake for me to lay out beforehand what evidence I would believe because I don't know all the evidence that could be out there, I could miss evidence that would convince me. I will look at any evidence provided and see if it convinces me.

I don't know all the evidence that could be out there,

regarding creation or evolution ... you (no one) not one person can know everything there is to be known ... it is an impossibilty.

Facts are indisputable. Truth is acceptable.

unable to be challenged or denied

so it is this ....

truth -
a fact or belief that is accepted as true.

In regard to the beginning of life (creation/evolution)

both are disputable and always will be while mankind is on this earth

God could have supernaturally started life and let evolution take charge after that. Many Christians believe creation and evolution.

That's not what the bible teaches .... the bible teaches ... he created mankind fully formed. He created animals fully formed ..... what he created .... he created fully formed beings/living things gave them the ability to reproduce .... after their kind.

Those who believe otherwise are in biblical error.

God could have supernaturally started life and let evolution take charge after that.

We ... christians ... are not supposed to go by "could be's" ... we are suppose to go by what is written in His word.

Just as in science there are many many theories ... collected data (information) and various interpretations of data (information) ... so it is with the bible ... referred to as theology.

Theology is the systematic study of the nature of the divine and, more broadly, of religious beliefs in general ... and there are many of them.

What is different about christianity ... is Jesus .... being the divine son of God ... that is .... being both fully God and fully man.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

regarding creation or evolution ... you (no one) not one person can know everything there is to be known ... it is an impossibilty.

I agree, but this does not preclude us from "knowing" things.

Facts are indisputable. Truth is acceptable.

unable to be challenged or denied

so it is this ....

truth -
a fact or belief that is accepted as true.

In regard to the beginning of life (creation/evolution)

both are disputable and always will be while mankind is on this earth

Evolution does not say anything about how life began. Creation and evolution are not talking about the same things.

That's not what the bible teaches .... the bible teaches ... he created mankind fully formed. He created animals fully formed ..... what he created .... he created fully formed beings/living things gave them the ability to reproduce .... after their kind.

Those who believe otherwise are in biblical error.

There are Christians who do not believe the bible is all literally true.

We ... christians ... are not supposed to go by "could be's" ... we are suppose to go by what is written in His word.

How do you know the bible is the word of god?

Just as in science there are many many theories ... collected data (information) and various interpretations of data (information) ... so it is with the bible ... referred to as theology.

Not the same thing. A scientific theory is the most supported idea in science and considered a fact based on repeatable experimentation, predictability and supported by facts. Theology is not based on these things. They are based on a collection of ancient books believed to be true.

Theology is the systematic study of the nature of the divine and, more broadly, of religious beliefs in general ... and there are many of them.

When you say systematic study what do you mean? How is it studied?

What is different about christianity ... is Jesus .... being the divine son of God ... that is .... being both fully God and fully man.

Why do you believe this?

 

[ChetSinger]

Why can't he then do the same for all people?

He's willing to. He has offered us this good deal called the gospel, which sinners like me can sign onto and be forgiven. And you too.

 

[hedrick]

How are we "in" Christ? Can god forgive us without the death and resurrection of Jesus?

He can forgive us the same way anyone forgives anyone. Forgiveness doesn't require death.

Why is your interpretation correct and other Christians using the same bible incorrect?

I'm telling you what Paul says.

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin. But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him."

If terms like "in Christ" and "united with him" don't make sense to you, you need to think more carefully about the basic assumptions behind Paul's world. Paul assumes a spiritual connection. I understand that in today's individualistic world, the idea that people are actually connected is a foreign one, but that's what Paul's ideas are based on. Also when both Jesus and Paul talk about things like sharing burdens.

Nowhere does Jesus or Paul say that death is needed for God to forgive sin. Paul does, however, say that Jesus' death and resurrection are needed to fully deal with it.

Indeed Paul says "in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed;" The point of Jesus' death isn't to allow God to forgive us. He did that before Jesus. The point of Jesus is to bring us into new life.

You're letting tradition blind you to what Jesus and Paul actually say.

 

[eleos1954]

I agree, but this does not preclude us from "knowing" things.

Evolution does not say anything about how life began. Creation and evolution are not talking about the same things.

There are Christians who do not believe the bible is all literally true.

How do you know the bible is the word of god?

Not the same thing. A scientific theory is the most supported idea in science and considered a fact based on repeatable experimentation, predictability and supported by facts. Theology is not based on these things. They are based on a collection of ancient books believed to be true.

When you say systematic study what do you mean? How is it studied?

Why do you believe this?

Evolution does not say anything about how life began. Creation and evolution are not talking about the same things.

Most certainly does .... ie "Big Bang" .... without the "Big Bang" theory how planets, including ours came to be .... had to be a planet for life to evolve on.

There are Christians who do not believe the bible is all literally true.

yes ... christians vary in their beliefs .... just as scientists vary in their beliefs.

you can't lump all christians together .... nor can you lump all scientists together.

the same thing. A scientific theory is the most supported idea in science and considered a fact based on repeatable experimentation

Is repeatable experimentation possible in regard to the universe? No it is not.

When you say systematic study what do you mean? How is it studied?

If I were to post all the various methods of studying the bible in here ... the post would be huge ... If I just post a few .... then it appears too simplistic.

The main consideration is study ... His word has great depth and one should study it as one would study (in depth) anything.

I'll use an analogy ... like math

you have basic addition/subtraction
you have multiplication/division
you have fractions
Algebra
Calculus
Geometry

Not the same thing. A scientific theory is the most supported idea in science and considered a fact based on repeatable experimentation, predictability and supported by facts. Theology is not based on these things. They are based on a collection of ancient books believed to be true.

ancient writings of men believed to be inspired by God ....

Science (regarding how life began) evolution writings of men believed to be true

both writings of men .... collections of "writings" ....

again ... the bible is not a science book ... God's concern's is with relationships.

If ... you believe the theory of evolution to be true ... have you personally read and studied every single scientific theory that has been put forth? Of course not ... nor could you.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

He can forgive us the same way anyone forgives anyone. Forgiveness doesn't require death.

The why does Jesus say this is Matthew 26?

26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

and Hebrews 9 says this:

16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

It seems god needs the shedding of blood to forgive sins. Jesus was sacrificed to take away sins. Do you need shedding of blood to forgive others?

I'm telling you what Paul says.

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin. But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him."

If terms like "in Christ" and "united with him" don't make sense to you, you need to think more carefully about the basic assumptions behind Paul's world. Paul assumes a spiritual connection. I understand that in today's individualistic world, the idea that people are actually connected is a foreign one, but that's what Paul's ideas are based on. Also when both Jesus and Paul talk about things like sharing burdens.

We are connected but a spiritual connection needs to be shown.

Nowhere does Jesus or Paul say that death is needed for God to forgive sin. Paul does, however, say that Jesus' death and resurrection are needed to fully deal with it.

So Jesus did not need to die to forgive sins but he needed to be resurrected? How can you have resurrection without death?

Indeed Paul says "in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed;" The point of Jesus' death isn't to allow God to forgive us. He did that before Jesus. The point of Jesus is to bring us into new life.

You're letting tradition blind you to what Jesus and Paul actually say.

No, I am actually reading the words in the bible.

 

[hedrick]

Please look at what the passages mean.

Jesus’ words of institution “blood of the covenant.” This is most directly quoting Ex 24:8, as Heb 9 notes. Ex 24:8 was part of making a covenant with God. The sacrifice was a covenant sacrifice, not a sacrifice for sin.

Why might it make sense to think of Jesus’ death as establishing a covenant? Because it was understood as a reference to the new covenant of Jer 31:31. Note that Jesus says it’s blood of a new covenant. The purpose of the new covenant is to write the law into our hearts. That is, its goal is to change us, not to enable God to be able to forgive us. Every commentary I’ve checked makes the connect with Ex 24:8 and Jer 31:31

How could Jesus’ death do this? Paul explains it. Because dying and rising with him changes our hearts, so it does what the new covenant of Jer 31:31 explains

If you look at Heb 9 you’ll see that punishment is not mentioned. There’s not even mention of sacrifices for sin. The cleansing referred to came from various purification ceremonies. It neither says nor implies that he was punished for us, though it does say he died for us. It says he is the mediator of a new covenant. In vs 18 it reters to the covenant sacrifice of Ex 24:8, quoting it explicitly in vs 20. It says that Jesus bears our sins and takes then away. But blood is not understood as a sign of punishment. Rather, OT thinking is used, in which blood is seen as cleansing. The author notes the various contexts in which blood cleanses, and then says “without the shedding of blood there is no remission” [of sins is implied]. I’m using KJV here intentionally.

The term translated remission is a broad one that originally means taking away, but came to mean also forgiveness. It’s used both ways in the NT. NRSV translates forgiveness. I believe they’re wrong. The whole context is about blood cleansing. The author here is saying without blood there is no taking away of sins via cleansing.

This is consistent with Paul. Without Christ’s death and resurrection (which Heb refers to as “blood”), we are left in our sins. That doesn’t prevent God from forgiving us, but it does prevent us from taking part in the new life that both Jesus and Paul want for us.

Heb 10:2 speaks of OT worshippers being cleansed, not being vicariously punished or God being enabled to forgive them. It then says sin sacrifices don’t remove sin, they remind us of them. What works is Christ’s offering of his body. How does that work? See 10:14: “For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.” Note, perfected and sanctified. As in Paul (and Chap 9) the emphasis is on cleansing us, not allowing God to forgive us. 10:15 ff then quotes Jer 31:31, making it clear that he’s talking about renewing us. Forgiveness is finally mentioned in 10::17-18, but it’s clear that the forgiveness is because of our renewal. In Pauline terms, it is justification because of faith. (That may require some examination of what Paul means by faith.)