How does salvation work, precisely?

[Fish14]

The idea that Jesus suffered our penalty is only one of several models of the atonement, and not the oldest. Many of them see the atonement as the way God transforms us, rather than something God requires before he can save us.

In Rom 6, Paul says that through our union with Christ we die to sin and rise to new life. I think it's a mistake to focus the atonement on Jesus' death. It's his resurrection that is the victory. I think he died because in order to help us he had to suffer the worst we suffer, and come through it to eternal life.

In the penal substitution Jesus takes my sin and the penalty and saves me from it, making me clean to enter God's family.

If it's the resurrection that makes us Christians, how do we "connect to Jesus"? The resurrection of Jesus and our salvation are two completely unrelated events unless they are connected with some kind of transfer of sin (as in penal substitution).

Do you have any biblical proof that Jesus allowed himself to be tortured and killed only to "suffer the worst we suffer"?

 

[Fish14]

No one knows how salvation works "precisely",

Which is why Jesus told us,

“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’ “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’” Matthew 13:28-30

"...there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you..." 1 Corinthians 11:19

No doubt there are many who will say to Him on that day - "Lord, Lord, did I not.........?....... and He will say to them I never knew you."

That could explain why no one seems to know how salvation works, that they really don't!

How can we be saved, if no one knows that?

 

[fhansen]

That could explain why no one seems to know how salvation works, that they really don't!

How can we be saved, if no one knows that?

Being saved is simply to be translated from the state of being lost to being found, because we've come to know God-and then to love Him. This is the essence and purpose of faith.
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3

 

[hedrick]

If it's the resurrection that makes us Christians, how do we "connect to Jesus"? The resurrection of Jesus and our salvation are two completely unrelated events unless they are connected with some kind of transfer of sin (as in penal substitution).

Paul's normal answer is through the Holy Spirit and faith. For the Spirit, see e.g. Rom 8. If you look for occurrences of "Spirit" in Paul, you'll see that he quite consistently associates being in Christ with the Spirit. In Rom 6 our victory comes from dying and rising with Christ. The only specific mechanism he mentions there is baptism.

What connects Jesus' resurrection and us is our participation in Christ though the Holy Spirit and faith.

Paul's model in Rom 6 is close to a transfer for sin, but isn't exactly. Our old self is crucified with him, and we rise with him. He never quite says that our sin is transferred, though it's clear that Christ died for us. Rather, we participate in Christ's death and resurrection.

The idea that sin has to be punished is one that you're reading into Scripture. It's contrary to Jesus' message about God's forgiveness. Yes, people who repented often sacrificed, as a kind of sacrament to demonstrate their repentance and forgiveness. But it's not the sacrifice that made forgiveness possible. What the prophets and Jesus say is punished is unrepentant people, not all people who sin.

"For you have no delight in sacrifice;
if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased.
The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise."

 

[hedrick]

I gave an answer to the question "why did Christ die" that wasn't complete. If you ask Paul why Christ had to die, he does give an answer in Rom 6.

If you follow the logic of Rom 6, the central statement of why it works is 6:7 "For whoever has died is freed from sin." This is an unexpected explanation, at least for me. His thought seems to be that the only way out of sin is death, and that through participation in Christ's death and resurrection we leave the realm of sin and enter the realm of life.

Remember his analogy between Adam and Christ. For Paul, Adam's sin brought death. I'm inclined to think he's speaking of more than physical death, though physical death may be included. Christ brings justification and new life. Just as we die because we are in Adam, we enter new life because we're in Christ.

 

[fhansen]

Being saved is simply to be translated from the state of being lost to being found, because we've come to know God-and then to love Him. This is the essence and purpose of faith.
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3

And everything Jesus said and did was aimed at that very goal, to reveal the Father, to give us the knowledge of God. And the ultimate revelation is that God's love for man is so huge, so wide and vast and deep, that He'd even hang upon a cross Himself, suffering an excruciatingly humiliating and painful death at the hands of His own sinful creation, in order to prove that love. But not without rising again; love triumphs over not only sin but death as well, our final enemy. Love is eternal, and promises eternal life.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Marvin Knox said earlier: ↑
No one knows how salvation works "precisely",

That could explain why no one seems to know how salvation works, that they really don't!
How can we be saved, if no one knows that?

The word "precisely" in the OP and in my response is the key word.

Simply asking the question "How can we be saved", on the other hand, is easy as pie to answer and easy as pie to achieve - if your heart has been prepared beforehand.

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved."

To believe on Jesus is to trust in His sacrifice on your behalf as your hope of salvation.

"Faith is the assurance of things hoped for." Simply hoping that you will be saved if you do certain things will never get to that faith or "assurance". Resting in His sufficiency to deliver you from the coming judgment is the only way to assurance of our mutual hope of salvation or true faith.

Without faith it is impossible to please God and it is faith which will count us as righteous with our lives hidden in Christ when we stand before Him.

There is repentance involved in coming to that assurance. No one would say that repentance has to be of a certain level to count as true repentance. Every person is different and their response in this regard varies. But, if it truly is the Holy Spirit working in you, there will be repentance to some degree and the works which follow your confession will be evident to God as a result, even if they are a little hazy to judgmental Christians who compare you to themselves in self righteousness.

True saving faith includes of necessity an identification as being a sinner just as the rest of mankind is. True saving faith includes a belief in a judgment to come in which you would fail without being found in Christ through faith.

Accepting Christ as "Savior" obviously means you believe there is something to be saved from. That seems obvious to me. Duhhh - IMO. Having said that - there are some within Christendom who are a little hazy on this point as well.

Although doctrine (or correct belief concerning the "nuts and bolts" of Christianity) is very important - having your doctrine absolutely lined up is not required for saving faith. Knowing precisely how salvation works is not necessary to be saved - although having a good handle on it can and will keep you from lapsing into error and the sin of false teaching which results from that error (here in the forum if nowhere else).

What is required, as I read things, is that any incorrect doctrine does not include doctrine which denies the basic premise of salvation by grace through faith alone.

A proper understanding and identification with the fallen nature of mankind can go a long way toward preventing that error IMO.

It is likely possible that a person could be a little hazy on this point as well I suppose. But it is one of the few sins which God placed a curse on in the Book of Galatians.

Post number 5 earlier is a prime example of the kind of doctrine which may well make faith of no accord and be considered by God to be really no gospel (or good news) at all.

how does salvation work? - you have to work at it -
the bill has been paid but you have to show that you are worthy of it - showing appreciation for what has been done for you is a good start

There are a great many who post in this forum who seem to be of the same mindset as that post illustrates. We can't be absolutely sure when a person has crossed the line with regards to teaching another gospel. We'll just have to let them all grow together until the Lord separates those with saving faith in Him for their salvation from the many others who preach another gospel.

Those found wanting in their conception and practice of "faith" will be speechless on that day of judgment.

My heart grieves for them. They are so close and yet so far.

 

[DreamerOfTheHeart]

I have lots of rarely asked questions about soteriology. Answers are hard to find and when I find one, it is not a complete answer.

1. Why is the wages of sin death?
"Death is such a big penalty that it scares people from sinning" There must be a better reason.

2. Why can't we pay for our sins?
"Because we have to die for Adam's sin" It would be unjust for us to inherit the original sin.

3. Even Christians die because they live in a fallen world. Why was Jesus immune to death from natural causes?
"His father was God so He didn't inherit a sinful nature" Sinful nature is not inherited, right? (sinful nature, not sin as in #2)

4. Why is a sinless animal/person's death required?
"Sinners have to die for their own sin" This is circular reasoning, a sinner can't die for his own sin if he isn't sinless!!

5. Why does Jesus' righteousness need to be credited to us?
"Because we need to be righteous to be saved" If Jesus pays the penalty for our sins, doesn't that allow us to enter Heaven as innocents?

Thank you

If you were God incarnate, and could do such things as turn water into wine, walk on water, and raise the dead... why would you ever need to age or die?

If you can fix leprosy in someone else, you certainly can fix old age in your own self.

At least, when you are talking about doing so through spiritual power and faith.


We are new creatures, born again, with the Spirit of Christ.

Right now, we have finite, temporary bodies. But we also have the Spirit of Christ. Which is our spirit. An odd verse to consider for this, but remember, the Spirit of Christ is the very Spirit of Prophecy, and Paul noted when talking about prophets speaking in order in church, that this very Spirit they spoke through was their very own Spirit of Christ.

One fly may ruin a bottle of perfume or a plate of food, but how much more can even a small piece or slice of the Spirit of Christ have power unto immortality and all good things?

If Jesus did not die here, we would not have had that Spirit conformed specifically to fit our form.

But, He did, and so we are.


We do not yet see clearly... are we cocooned? Or still but worms before the cocoon?

 

[kw5kw]

Rom 6:23

For the wages of sin - The word translated here “wages”



ὀψώνια opsōnia (Strongs G3800) (Thayer) properly denotes what is purchased to be eaten with bread, as fish, flesh, vegetables, etc. and therefore, it means the pay of the Roman soldier, because formerly it was the custom to pay the soldier in these things.



Death is as due to a sinner when he hath sinned as wages are to a servant when he hath done his work. This is true of every sin. There is no sin in its own nature venial.



It means hence, it is what a person earns for himself or what they deserve. It is their proper pay. It is what they merit. As applied to sin: it means that death is what sin deserves. Death is consequently called the wages of sin, not because it is an arbitrary, undeserved appointment, but

1. Because it is its proper desert. Not a pain will be inflicted on the sinner which he does not deserve. Sinners even in hell will be treated just as they deserve to be treated; and there is not to man a more fearful and terrible consideration than this. No one can conceive a more dreadful doom than for himself to be treated forever just as they deserve to be. But,
   
   
   
2. This is the wages of sin, because, like the pay of the soldier, it is just what was threatened, Eze_18:4, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.”
   
   
   Is death - God will not inflict anything more than was threatened, and then it is just. Death of one’s soul is a sufficiently ample reward to the wicked.
   
   

Death stands opposed here to eternal life, and proves that one is just as enduring as the other. It means the separation of our soul from God for eternity.




But the gift of God - Not the wages of man; not what is due to him; but the mere gift and mercy of God. The apostle is careful to distinguish, and to specify that this is not what man deserves, but what is gratuitously conferred on him; Note, Rom_6:15-21.







Eternal life - The same words which in Rom_6:22 are rendered “everlasting life.”



You notice that Paul did not write that the wages of righteousness is eternal life because we cannot purchase our way into God’s presence by works or money. It is given to us freely by God: God’s Grace.



Everlasting life is opposed to death; and proves incontestably that that means eternal death. We may remark, therefore,

(1) That the one (everlasting life or eternal death) will be as long as the other. Oh our bodies will die, It’s our soul that is the great concern. Our earthly bodies will be resurrected once Jesus returns for us.

(2) as there is no doubt about the duration of death, so there can be none about the duration of eternal life. The one will be rich, blessed, everlasting; the other sad, gloomy, lingering, awful. Both are, however, eternal.



(3) if the sinner is lost, he will deserve to die. He will have his reward. He will suffer only what shall be the just due of sin. He will not be a martyr in the cause of injured innocence. He will not have the compassion of the universe in his favor. He will have no one to take his part against God. He will suffer just as much, and just as long, as he ought to suffer. He will suffer as the common criminal wastes away in prison, or as the murderer dies in the death chamber, because this is the proper reward of sin.

(4) they who are saved will be raised to heaven, not because they merit it, but by the rich and sovereign grace of God. All their salvation will be ascribed to him; and they will celebrate his mercy and grace forever.

(5) it becomes us, therefore, to flee from the wrath to come. No man is so foolish and so wicked as he who is willing to reap the proper wages of sin. None so blessed as he who has part in the mercy of God, and who lays hold on eternal life.



Our sin is washed away by the shed blood of Jesus, washed away and we are made clean by the perfect Lamb of God. If God can accept the Blood of Christ as payment for our sins then it becomes the price of our redemption. We can therefore rest assured that our debt has been paid in full.



“Neither skill or [prior] knowledge was needed to go to God but only a heart determined to devote itself to Him, for Him, and to love Him only.” Brother Lawrence of the Resurrection: “The Practice of the Presence of God.





With further acknowledgements from St. Augustine, Albert Barnes, Matthew Henry, John Calvin, James Strong, Joseph Thayer, Charles Spurgeon, Watchman Nee, and The Word of God: The Holy Bible.

 

[Fish14]

Paul's normal answer is through the Holy Spirit and faith. For the Spirit, see e.g. Rom 8. If you look for occurrences of "Spirit" in Paul, you'll see that he quite consistently associates being in Christ with the Spirit. In Rom 6 our victory comes from dying and rising with Christ. The only specific mechanism he mentions there is baptism.

What connects Jesus' resurrection and us is our participation in Christ though the Holy Spirit and faith.

Paul's model in Rom 6 is close to a transfer for sin, but isn't exactly. Our old self is crucified with him, and we rise with him. He never quite says that our sin is transferred, though it's clear that Christ died for us. Rather, we participate in Christ's death and resurrection.

The idea that sin has to be punished is one that you're reading into Scripture. It's contrary to Jesus' message about God's forgiveness. Yes, people who repented often sacrificed, as a kind of sacrament to demonstrate their repentance and forgiveness. But it's not the sacrifice that made forgiveness possible. What the prophets and Jesus say is punished is unrepentant people, not all people who sin.

"For you have no delight in sacrifice;
if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased.
The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise."

I gave an answer to the question "why did Christ die" that wasn't complete. If you ask Paul why Christ had to die, he does give an answer in Rom 6.

If you follow the logic of Rom 6, the central statement of why it works is 6:7 "For whoever has died is freed from sin." This is an unexpected explanation, at least for me. His thought seems to be that the only way out of sin is death, and that through participation in Christ's death and resurrection we leave the realm of sin and enter the realm of life.

Remember his analogy between Adam and Christ. For Paul, Adam's sin brought death. I'm inclined to think he's speaking of more than physical death, though physical death may be included. Christ brings justification and new life. Just as we die because we are in Adam, we enter new life because we're in Christ.

There are over 50 NT passages about Jesus' sacrifice on our behalf such as Matthew 26:27-28 and Romans 5:8. How do you explain those?

 

[hedrick]

There are over 50 NT passages about Jesus' sacrifice on our behalf such as Matthew 26:27-28 and Romans 5:8. How do you explain those?

Of course his death was for us. The question is how it acts. I’m objecting to penal substitution, that God can’t forgive us until someone suffers death because of our sins.

My claim is that for Paul, the reason his death dealt with our sins is because through union with Christ we die and rise with him. Rom 6:7 says that whoever has died is free of sin, so in dying with him we’re free of sin. But that’s only half the story, because it’s in rising with him that we get new life. Looking at the passage you cite, if you continue on, you find Rom 5:10, which says having been reconciled by his death, we’re saved by his life. Salvation isn’t just justification, but also entrance into new life.

The other passage you cite is the Words of Institution. The words appear 4 places (3 Gospels and 1 Cor). Only Matthew says it’s for sin. But all of them say it is the blood of the covenant. That is, it’s a covenant sacrifice, to establish the new covenant of Jer 31:31. The term “blood of the covenant” is a reference to Ex 24:8, the covenant sacrifice that established the first covenant.

Hebrews 9 - 10 talks about this in more detail. It sees his death as a sacrifice, but surprisingly, not a sin sacrifice, but rather a covenant sacrifice. 9 is all about how his death established a new covenant. In 9:18-20 it connects his blood with the blood of Moses’ covenant sacrifice that established the old covenant. In 10 it ends up citing Jer 31:31.

 

[Fish14]

Of course his death was for us. The question is how it acts. I’m objecting to penal substitution, that God can’t forgive us until someone suffers death because of our sins.

My claim is that for Paul, the reason his death dealt with our sins is because through union with Christ we die and rise with him. Rom 6:7 says that whoever has died is free of sin, so in dying with him we’re free of sin. But that’s only half the story, because it’s in rising with him that we get new life. Looking at the passage you cite, if you continue on, you find Rom 5:10, which says having been reconciled by his death, we’re saved by his life. Salvation isn’t just justification, but also entrance into new life.

I agree that penal substitution isn't very logical, but it's the only theory that I understand! Penal substitution is very easy; Jesus' death is required for our sins. If we don't accept it, we will end up in Hell unable to pay for our sins. His rising from the dead proves his deity.

On the other hand, your theory (whatever it is) sounds very complex. What does "union with Christ" mean? How do we practically die with him and rise with him?

The other passage you cite is the Words of Institution. The words appear 4 places (3 Gospels and 1 Cor). Only Matthew says it’s for sin. But all of them say it is the blood of the covenant. That is, it’s a covenant sacrifice, to establish the new covenant of Jer 31:31. The term “blood of the covenant” is a reference to Ex 24:8, the covenant sacrifice that established the first covenant.

Hebrews 9 - 10 talks about this in more detail. It sees his death as a sacrifice, but surprisingly, not a sin sacrifice, but rather a covenant sacrifice. 9 is all about how his death established a new covenant. In 9:18-20 it connects his blood with the blood of Moses’ covenant sacrifice that established the old covenant. In 10 it ends up citing Jer 31:31.

Hebrews 9:16-17 says that the maker of the covenant must die in order to establish the covenant. Is that why Jesus died? To establish a covenant with us?

 

[kw5kw]

On the other hand, your theory (whatever it is) sounds very complex. What does "union with Christ" mean?

Union with Christ is the life of believers; and their relation to him, and to God through him,

 

[hedrick]

For Paul, being in Christ seems to be the equivalent of Jesus’ continual calls to be his follower. It is established by the Holy Spirit, and received by faith.

Jesus says he is dying to establish a covenant. However it’s a peculiar kind of covenant. In the first covenant Israel was obligated to follow the Torah. But the second covenant changes our hearts. Read Jer 31:31-34. This is the passage Jesus was referring to in the Words of Institution, which constitute his clearest explanation of his death.

How does his death establish this covenant? I would suggest that you read Heb 9:17 in accordance with Rom 6:7, though the metaphors being used in the two passages are slightly different. Jesus and Hebrews speak of it as a covenant sacrifice. Paul in Rom 6 gives an explanation: his death writes the law into our hearts because in union with him we die to sin and rise to new life.

Incidentally, I’m Reformed, so I pay attention to Calvin’s theology. In Calvin’s treatment of the atonement he notes that it’s not just Christ’s death that matters. It’s his entire life of obedience. For Calvin the union with Christ happens through faith (which I think is a reasonable reading of Paul), and it makes his obedience ours. My reading of Calvin is that this isn’t just forensic. That is, it’s not just that we’re credited with his obedience but that through the union with Christ we actually begin to die to sin and experience new life. Of course that’s never complete in this life, nor is our acceptance dependent upon our success. I think you have to read Jer 31:31-34 as involving an actual change in us.

I would suggest that this is also what John 3:7 means by being born from above. Like Paul, for John this is an act of the Holy Spirit. (Read the context of John 3:7.) Like Rom 6, John also associates this with baptism (water and Spirit), which demonstrates and makes public our death and rebirth with Christ.

 

[Fish14]

For Paul, being in Christ seems to be the equivalent of Jesus’ continual calls to be his follower. It is established by the Holy Spirit, and received by faith.

Mark 1:15 tells us we are saved by believing in the gospel:
For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures; 1 Cor. 15:3-4
The resurrection can't make me a Christ's follower. What saves must be his death. If it's only to establish a covenant, the gospel is good news that God established a covenant with us. The covenant is that God forgives our trespasses (Jer 31:34). This means we are saved when we believe that God has forgiven our trespasses. In penal substitution you trust God has forgiven your trespasses based on the sacrifice of Jesus. Why do you want to take that out?

There is a death penalty for sin. Can God ignore that?
Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die: the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

 

[fhansen]

It's the relationship that's established by faith that constitutes man's justice. This is the reestablishment of the relationship between man and God that was shattered at the Fall.

 

[Steve Petersen]

.

 

[hedrick]

Mark 1:15 tells us we are saved by believing in the gospel:

(You copied the wrong text.) Mark 1:15 summarizes Jesus' message. It is that he is bringing the Kingdom. We should repent and enter it. Those who do will be saved. He doesn't connect this with his death and resurrection until later in his ministry.

You quote 1 Cor. 15:3-4 and its reference to the resurrection. Of course the resurrection doesn't make you a follower. Neither does his death. What makes you a follower is faith. It's through faith that we die to sin and rise to new life, which is entering the Kingdom.

This means we are saved when we believe that God has forgiven our trespasses. In penal substitution you trust God has forgiven your trespasses based on the sacrifice of Jesus. Why do you want to take that out?

I don't want to take out Jesus' death. I want to give the whole story.

Penal substitution gets some of the pieces right. But it puts them together to answer the wrong question. During the medieval period, Christianity came to focus on "I've sinned and earned hell. How do I propitiate an angry God so I can be saved." Everything in late medieval practice centered on that: sacraments, penance, whatever. That's the background of penal substitution. It looks at what I have to do to reconcile God, and says nothing I can do is enough. Christ has to do it. That's certainly an improvement. It's the best possible answer, but it's answering the wrong question. If you follow the plot of the Bible, in both OT and NT, it's not what do I have to do to make God accept me. It's what has God done to forgive and restore his people.

My problem isn't references to Jesus' death. Obviously he died for us. My objection is to the implication that his death was needed for God to forgive us. God had already decided to forgive us. The whole point of Protestant theology is that we don't need to do anything to be forgiven. Jesus' death and resurrection were to restore people that he had already decided to restore. It's the way he goes about forgiving and restoring us.

There is a death penalty for sin. Can God ignore that?
Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die: the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Certainly he can. It's called forgiveness.

For you have no delight in sacrifice;
if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased.
The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.

You cut off the quotation from Ezekiel. It says that if someone repents they don't die.

Jesus didn't die to enable God to forgive us. He died to bring us into the Kingdom by dying and rising to new life, through faith in him.

The fact that you don't put Jesus' death and resurrection together into a single act of redemption should be a clue that your theology is imbalanced.

 

[Fish14]

You quote 1 Cor. 15:3-4 and its reference to the resurrection. Of course the resurrection doesn't make you a follower. Neither does his death. What makes you a follower is faith. It's through faith that we die to sin and rise to new life, which is entering the Kingdom.

I don't want to take out Jesus' death. I want to give the whole story.

Faith itself is powerless. The object of our faith is what saves. If we must believe the gospel, then Jesus' death and resurrection save us.

Penal substitution gets some of the pieces right. But it puts them together to answer the wrong question. During the medieval period, Christianity came to focus on "I've sinned and earned hell. How do I propitiate an angry God so I can be saved." Everything in late medieval practice centered on that: sacraments, penance, whatever. That's the background of penal substitution. It looks at what I have to do to reconcile God, and says nothing I can do is enough. Christ has to do it. That's certainly an improvement. It's the best possible answer, but it's answering the wrong question. If you follow the plot of the Bible, in both OT and NT, it's not what do I have to do to make God accept me. It's what has God done to forgive and restore his people.

The question you mentioned is exactly what I'm asking. If you believe it's the wrong question to ask, it explains why you haven't answered it directly. What is the right question to ask?
Getting to Heaven is not the biblical definition of salvation, but anyway, how can we enter Heaven?

My problem isn't references to Jesus' death. Obviously he died for us. My objection is to the implication that his death was needed for God to forgive us. God had already decided to forgive us. The whole point of Protestant theology is that we don't need to do anything to be forgiven. Jesus' death and resurrection were to restore people that he had already decided to restore. It's the way he goes about forgiving and restoring us.

Certainly he can. It's called forgiveness.

For you have no delight in sacrifice;
if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased.
The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.

I still doubt this kind of forgiveness is just, especially because such verses as Hebrews 9:22.
"The law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness"
The shedding of blood refers to death. Without death there is no forgiveness!

You cut off the quotation from Ezekiel. It says that if someone repents they don't die.

Jesus didn't die to enable God to forgive us. He died to bring us into the Kingdom by dying and rising to new life, through faith in him.

The fact that you don't put Jesus' death and resurrection together into a single act of redemption should be a clue that your theology is imbalanced.

Are you referring to Ezekiel 18:32 (For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live.)?

Jesus dying and rising to new life is different from us dying to sin and rising to new life, isn't it.

I know my theology is unsatisfying and imbalanced. That's why I am here, learning your theology and seeing if it's better.

 

[kw5kw]

Faith itself is powerless. The object of our faith is what saves. If we must believe the gospel, then Jesus' death and resurrection save us.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: