How can Jesus have born future sins?

[Sabertooth]

Well, it means that those who were involved in killing Christ, were predetermined to do so.

...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

 

[Root of Jesse]

Yes it is - because it is a timeless event anchored in History.

His Blood covers believers sins, past present and future, including those who believed under the Old Covenant.

Exactly! And this is why you can't say (those that believe it) that Catholics re-sacrifice Christ every Mass. We re-present the same sacrifice, the one that is timeless.

 

[fhansen]

I think that Bibilically, "This is my body, This is my blood" is more about the sacrificial system that it is about a "real presence."

Yes, there are various opinions or ways to look at it going by Scripture. The ancient churches simply looked at it the way I described, and this is why those churches today along with ECFs, for example, hold the Eucharist as so central to the celebration of the mass or service and hold it in such high reverence in general. Many Protestant denominations continued to hold to some version of the real presence, and to some of the other sacraments as being valid, etc. as well. Scripture apparently also takes it quite seriously,
"So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves." 1 Cor 11:27-28

IMO we should also consider that for most of the centuries since the time of Christ the majority of believers have largely been simpler and less educated, illiterate folk. The sacraments sort of set basic theology in stone, giving us a simple way of living out basic truths and responsibilities of our faith. The gift of regularly and freely partaking of Christ physically via the Lord's Supper while knowing that we must examine ourselves beforehand to see if we're in right stead with Him in order to take seriously our communion with Him, of our remaining in Him and He is us, serves as a quite practical and wise means to help us in maintaining the moral integrity that only He can provide as we remain in Him and He in us.

 

[Clare73]

Once for all means once for all who have ever lived or will live.

This means that for them, in every moment of time, the Cross is continually working, effecting, covering, redeeming...

It is a timeless event as it's benefactors totally span time.

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.

 

[zoidar]

Well, it means that those who were involved in killing Christ, were predetermined to do so.

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

 

[friend of]

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?

Its covered because His sacrifice is eternal.

 

[Clare73]

That is why there is a strong tradition of 'coming to the Cross' in faith to appropriate what was and is happening for you.

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

 

[Clare73]

Exactly! And this is why you can't say (those that believe it) that Catholics re-sacrifice Christ every Mass.
We re-present the same sacrifice, the one that is timeless.

If only Scripture agreed with that in Hebrews 7:27.

 

[zoidar]

What I get out of Romans 5 is this: By the sin of one, death came to all men therefore it is equitable, fair, and just that by the righteousness of one and His gift of righteousness that many are made alive. It satisfies God`s righteous judgment.

Jesus is the vine that gives life to all the branches. They all originate with Him by His gift of righteousness.

As a side note: This is why salvation can never be earned. We are unable to earn the righteousness that Jesus has and freely gives us.

Romans 3

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

All the branches originate with the vine.

Romans 8

28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

He AKA the Vine does it all.

I'm sure Jesus death on the cross is valid for future sins, that's not a question, but how can it be so? Could he have been punished for sins not yet committed? Maybe we should rethink our doctrine of the atonement? Of course I'm not sure what view of atonement you have.

 

[zoidar]

His sacrifice covers all the sins of humanity, forever. That doesn’t mean we don’t need to repent of those sins, whether committed before or after we first come to Him.

Yes, Jesus' sacrifice covers all sins, that is for sure, but how? Were Jesus punished for sins not yet committed?

 

[zoidar]

It’s ever-occurring. That’s why historically the Eucharist or Lords Supper is considered to be a re-presentation of the sacrifice on Calvary, where the effects are continuously experienced, applied, and benefitted from.

Historically? Since when? Can you show the Early Church had this view, I will consider it.

 

[Clare73]

Yes, there are various opinions or ways to look at it going by Scripture. The ancient churches simply looked at it the way I described, and this is why those churches today along with ECFs, for example, hold the Eucharist as so central to the celebration of the mass or service and hold it in such high reverence in general. Many Protestant denominations continued to hold to some version of the real presence, and to some of the other sacraments as being valid, etc. as well. Scripture apparently also takes it quite seriously,
"So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves." 1 Cor 11:27-28

IMO we should also consider that for most of the centuries since the time of Christ the majority of believers have largely been simpler and less educated, illiterate folk. The sacraments sort of set basic theology in stone, giving us a simple way of living out basic truths and responsibilities of our faith. The gift of regularly and freely partaking of Christ physically via the Lord's Supper while knowing that we must examine ourselves beforehand to see if we're in right stead with Him in order to take seriously our communion with Him, of our remaining in Him and He is us, serves as a quite practical and wise means to help us in maintaining the moral integrity that only He can provide as we remain in Him and He in us.

All of above being better accomplished in focusing it more Biblically, as the sacrificial meal on the actual body and blood of the sacrifice,
thereby participating (1 Corinthians 10:16) in its benefits, and away from focusig on it as a magical "real presence."

 

[fhansen]

Yes, Jesus' sacrifice covers all sins, that is for sure, but how? Were Jesus punished for sins not yet committed?

Yes, all sins for all time.

 

[zoidar]

God can see the future better than we can see the past.

He says to Abraham "A father of many nations HAVE I made you"

Of course God sees the future, but can He punish someone or reward someone for what hasn't yet been done?

I'm sure Jesus death on the cross is valid for future sins, that's not a question, but how can it be so? Maybe we should rethink our doctrine of the atonement? Of course I'm not sure what view of atonement you have.

 

[pescador]

Yes, Jesus' sacrifice covers all sins, that is for sure, but how? Were Jesus punished for sins not yet committed?

Jesus exists and has always existed outside of what we consider time and space. He exists and has always existed in the realm of eternity. John 1:1-5, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. The Word was with God in the beginning. All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind."

His sacrifice dealt with all sin, irrespective of when it was committed, past, present, and future.

 

[zoidar]

Because He is God, whose existence is outside of time. Sin is in the world, has been since the Garden of Eden, and will continue until this present world disappears. Sin is disobedience to God's will; time is not a factor.

BTW, I walk daily, or as often as is possible, and it is my private time for prayer, reflection on Scripture, and rejoicing in God's creation. Romans 1:20, "For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made."

I try to get a long walk every night, it's good for mood, sleep, health and weight. Like you say a good time to reflect, walking clears the head.

 

[pescador]

Of course God sees the future, but can He punish someone or reward someone for what hasn't yet been done?

I'm sure Jesus death on the cross is valid for future sins, that's not a question, but how can it be so? Maybe we should rethink our doctrine of the atonement? Of course I'm not sure what view of atonement you have.

a) God is God, and can do whatever He wants.
b) God is not limited by time and/or space.
c) The sacrifice of Jesus for all sin means just that: all sin, regardless of when it is committed.

 

[fhansen]

All of above being better accomplished in focusing it more Biblically, as the sacrificial meal on the actual body and blood of the sacrifice,
thereby participating (1 Corinthians 10:16) in its benefits, and away from focusig on it as a magical "real presence."

Well, if Jesus can't really be here without it being "magical" so be it. The 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. Anyway, why not quit thinking you understand everything the bible means to say-or that it was meant to serve as some kind of clear and systematic catechism, and let the ancient churches that received the faith from the beginning contribute their input. The RP certainly doesn't conflict with the bible-and the ECFs support it as well. So, just because Clare may have some private understanding with objections to the historic Christian faith doesn't mean she's right about it by any means.

 

[zoidar]

He is High Priest over all and through His sacrifice is in the position to forgive all sin, past present and future. We do need to ask for forgiveness and when one does we are covered by His shed blood.

Final judgement for all humans (past, present & future) will not be completed fully until Jesus returns.

Revelation 22:12
Berean Study Bible
“Behold, I am coming soon, and My reward is with Me, to give to each one according to what he has done.

Agree the sacrifice covers all sins, past, present, future. But was Jesus punished for future sins not yet committed? In what way are they covered?

 

[RickReads]

I'm sure Jesus death on the cross is valid for future sins, that's not a question, but how can it be so? Could he have been punished for sins not yet committed? Maybe we should rethink our doctrine of the atonement? Of course I'm not sure what view of atonement you have.

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.