The Message

[jerusalem]

Any action that makes amends for past misdeeds and in so doing makes reconciliation possible is an act of ‘atonement’.

In terms of man’s relationship with God, sin has brought separation. Mankind needs to be restored – made ‘at-one’ with Him. However, there is a problem. On our own, we are incapable of offering the atonement required to make our reconciliation with God possible. Why? – Because God is holy, and no matter how much man might seek to make amends for past misdeeds, his sinfulness remains. We need a Saviour. We cannot ‘buy’ atonement with God. We have to respond to the call of Christ and act in union with Him for His offering on our behalf for our atonement to be accounted for us.

In the Middle-Ages, it was believed that by making large ‘indulgences’ to the then Catholic Church, or by enduring some act of self-flagellation, one might gain divine favour. Not so. Such acts are worthless. Simony is condemned by Peter (Acts 8:18-20) and Jesus calls us to repentance, not to self-punishment. Gifts of charity and acts of self-sacrifice, in themselves, make no impression on the Almighty. God looks upon the heart – and values the humble widow’s mite and the quiet witness far above any ostentatious display of piety. Moreover, punishment, if not remedial and corrective of one’s behaviour and attitude can never provide atonement for the offender – even though it might indeed serve justice for past offences. What God requires from us is a change of heart and a new spirit (Ezek.18:30-32). For, if we do not suffer ourselves to be corrected, we cannot have atonement – we cannot partake of the holiness of God:

In the Epistle to the Hebrews, we can read: ‘My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him, for whom the Lord loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives’ (Heb.12:5-6, NKJ). Such punishment is profitable that we might be ‘partakers of His holiness’ (v10).

It is commonly taught that we can atone for our crimes by accepting just punishment. A criminal is said to pay for crimes by suffering a period of imprisonment. Society accepts the offender back into its community at the end of the prisoner’s time behind bars, regardless of whether or not there was rehabilitation or repentance for the crimes committed. However, we should not confuse the atonement accepted by society with the atonement acceptable to God. Even though we confess, repent and seek to make amends for all our offences – complete atonement and our restoration with God is not possible if we are not changed within. We need salvation, and without it we are without hope.

Atonement for past offences alone will not suffice, if we are to enter into God’s fellowship. The Israelites were given a sacrificial system to allow for the ‘atonement’ (or ‘covering’) of past offences once per year, on the Day of Atonement. Symbolically, as we now understand from Scripture, these looked forward to the atonement of Christ, yet served as an annual reminder of Israel’s continual sinfulness. Israel, as a nation, was restored in its relationship with God by correct observance of these sacrificial laws, but it was a relationship that was remote – distant, and involved human intermediaries working as priests, serving between man and God. The sacrifices, of course, foreshadowed the true atonement of Christ – whose one sacrifice alone tore open the curtain of division and opened the way for man to enter into the presence of God in a new and personal way, through the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, received through faith in God’s Son.
Our atonement is only made possible through Christ, or more precisely, in Christ. As Paul wrote: ‘…we shall be saved by His life’ (Rom.5:10, NKJ). For it is His life offered up for us that makes possible our atonement. It was the prayer of Jesus that we might be made ‘one’ in God:
‘I do not pray for these alone, but for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You have given Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me’ (John 17:20-23, NKJ).

How is this possible? From the above, it is clear that we must believe in Him through the word of His apostles and witnesses: the words of the New Testament, especially those of the Gospels. By their word we come to believe. We learn of His life and sacrifice. In some measure, we come to know what He is like as a Person, through all the testimony concerning Him. – We must know this if we are to follow Him. We need to know what He taught, if we are to obey Him. The Gospels record that He was the living testimony of God’s Word. In all respects, He fulfilled all that was written of Him in the Scriptures. However, knowing facts concerning Him is one thing, knowing Him personally is another.

If we do not seek to obey His commands, we cannot claim to know Him: ‘He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him’ (1 John 2:4, NKJ). Knowing Him as Lord in a personal relationship is what matters. For to know God in truth, through His Son, is eternal life, as Jesus said: ‘And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent’ (John 17:3, NKJ). After hearing and believing, we must then repent, as Peter declared on the Day of Pentecost, after the coming of the Holy Spirit: ‘Repent, and let everyone 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’ (Acts 2:38, NKJ).
Jesus had said: ‘Whoever desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it’ (Mark 8:34-35, NKJ). Baptism into Christ symbolizes the crucifying and burying of the old self and the raising up of the new, lived unto God: ‘Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life …knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin’ (Rom.6:4-6, NKJ). The cost to God for our salvation was the cross of Christ. The cost to us is the life of this world which we must ‘crucify’ in our walk with God: ‘…those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires’ (Gal.5:24, NKJ). Jesus said: ‘Count the cost’ (Luke 14:28, NKJ).

The promise for all who believe and repent is the gift of the Holy Spirit. By the Spirit of God we are raised to new life in Christ: ‘…by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father”’ (Rom.5:15, NKJ). John wrote: ‘…as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God’ (John 1:12-13, NKJ). This is what Jesus prayed for. By the Holy Spirit, received through faith in Christ, we have oneness with God. Our desire is to live according to the Spirit: ‘For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God’ (Rom.8:14, NKJ).

Our atonement, therefore, is achieved for us through our being raised up in Christ, who gave Himself for us that we might know God through Him and the power of the resurrection. His one perfect offering is accepted for us, who are forgiven and follow Him in faith. In Christ, His righteousness avails as a covering for sin for all who now walk in the Spirit. Paul declared: ‘There is, therefore, no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit’ (Rom. 8:1, NKJ). His death brought to fulfillment and completion His whole offering to save us from our sins. The cross was the climax of His witness in the flesh for us that we might repent and be crucified in Him to the world, but live unto God. From the witness of His glorious resurrection, we look back to the cross and are drawn near, realizing that in Him is life, where death has no power, nor sin any place. We see that He came despising the shame and in perfect love cast out all fear.

In laying down His life in the flesh for us, He calls for us to be clothed with His righteousness that we also should have no fear of death. By the gift of the Holy Spirit, we have this assurance of faith. We are changed, renewed and appointed to everlasting life and peace in the presence of the Eternal God. Certainly He suffered for us, on our behalf. He endured, suffering wrongfully, leaving us example, but to the One who judges righteously He submitted His life. The glory of the resurrection was the heavenly response.

Now, in Christ, we have atonement with God. He is our peace and salvation. Let all who call Him Lord proclaim the good news!

Blessings!

 

[bling]

Are you just copying someone else or are you, Norman?

Any action that makes amends for past misdeeds and in so doing makes reconciliation possible is an act of ‘atonement’.

“…amends for past misdeeds…” is not the definition the Bible seems to use for atonement. You need to go back to Lev. 5 to see what the atonement sacrifices were like and see if this definition fits or if there is a better definition.

Atonement in Lev. 5 describes the person paying a reasonable (depending on the individual’s wealth) “fine” in the form of providing (giving up) a sacrifice: lamb, doves or bag of flour. This was a small hardship on the person, but these sacrifices were only good for minor unintentional sins (listed in Lev.5). With this sacrifice God would forgive but it came after the sacrifice and was not part of the sacrifice.

Atonement sacrifices were done often, but there were no atonement sacrifices (or amends) for intentional sins. There were severe punishments for intentional sins of fines, banishment and death, without any forgiveness being mentioned.

Atonement seems to include everything involved in the reconciliation between man and God that man does, since God has done everything else and is just waiting to forgive us.

In terms of man’s relationship with God, sin has brought separation. Mankind needs to be restored – made ‘at-one’ with Him. However, there is a problem. On our own, we are incapable of offering the atonement required to make our reconciliation with God possible. Why? – Because God is holy, and no matter how much man might seek to make amends for past misdeeds, his sinfulness remains. We need a Saviour. We cannot ‘buy’ atonement with God. We have to respond to the call of Christ and act in union with Him for His offering on our behalf for our atonement to be accounted for us.

In the Middle-Ages, it was believed that by making large ‘indulgences’ to the then Catholic Church, or by enduring some act of self-flagellation, one might gain divine favour. Not so. Such acts are worthless. Simony is condemned by Peter (Acts 8:18-20) and Jesus calls us to repentance, not to self-punishment. Gifts of charity and acts of self-sacrifice, in themselves, make no impression on the Almighty. God looks upon the heart – and values the humble widow’s mite and the quiet witness far above any ostentatious display of piety. Moreover, punishment, if not remedial and corrective of one’s behaviour and attitude can never provide atonement for the offender – even though it might indeed serve justice for past offences. What God requires from us is a change of heart and a new spirit (Ezek.18:30-32). For, if we do not suffer ourselves to be corrected, we cannot have atonement – we cannot partake of the holiness of God:

In the Epistle to the Hebrews, we can read: ‘My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him, for whom the Lord loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives’ (Heb.12:5-6, NKJ). Such punishment is profitable that we might be ‘partakers of His holiness’ (v10).

It is commonly taught that we can atone for our crimes by accepting just punishment. A criminal is said to pay for crimes by suffering a period of imprisonment. Society accepts the offender back into its community at the end of the prisoner’s time behind bars, regardless of whether or not there was rehabilitation or repentance for the crimes committed. However, we should not confuse the atonement accepted by society with the atonement acceptable to God. Even though we confess, repent and seek to make amends for all our offences – complete atonement and our restoration with God is not possible if we are not changed within. We need salvation, and without it we are without hope.

Yes, “we need salvation”, but as children do we also not need the parent’s fair/just punishment for our rebellious disobedience?

Is just punishment a needed deterrent to the criminal and those around the criminal?

Is just punishment not a way the parent shows concern for the child’s behavior?

Is Just punishment one of the ways we measure the severity of the offence?

Does just punishment help the child put the offence behind them?

Atonement for past offences alone will not suffice, if we are to enter into God’s fellowship. The Israelites were given a sacrificial system to allow for the ‘atonement’ (or ‘covering’) of past offences once per year, on the Day of Atonement. Symbolically, as we now understand from Scripture, these looked forward to the atonement of Christ, yet served as an annual reminder of Israel’s continual sinfulness. Israel, as a nation, was restored in its relationship with God by correct observance of these sacrificial laws, but it was a relationship that was remote – distant, and involved human intermediaries working as priests, serving between man and God. The sacrifices, of course, foreshadowed the true atonement of Christ – whose one sacrifice alone tore open the curtain of division and opened the way for man to enter into the presence of God in a new and personal way, through the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, received through faith in God’s Son.

The atonement sacrificial system in the OT was only for unintentional sins and was much more symbolic than helpful since intentional sins were a huge problem.

Our atonement is only made possible through Christ, or more precisely, in Christ. As Paul wrote: ‘…we shall be saved by His life’ (Rom.5:10, NKJ). For it is His life offered up for us that makes possible our atonement. It was the prayer of Jesus that we might be made ‘one’ in God:

‘I do not pray for these alone, but for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You have given Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me’ (John 17:20-23, NKJ).

How is this possible? From the above, it is clear that we must believe in Him through the word of His apostles and witnesses: the words of the New Testament, especially those of the Gospels. By their word we come to believe. We learn of His life and sacrifice. In some measure, we come to know what He is like as a Person, through all the testimony concerning Him. – We must know this if we are to follow Him. We need to know what He taught, if we are to obey Him. The Gospels record that He was the living testimony of God’s Word. In all respects, He fulfilled all that was written of Him in the Scriptures. However, knowing facts concerning Him is one thing, knowing Him personally is another.

If we do not seek to obey His commands, we cannot claim to know Him: ‘He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him’ (1 John 2:4, NKJ). Knowing Him as Lord in a personal relationship is what matters. For to know God in truth, through His Son, is eternal life, as Jesus said: ‘And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent’ (John 17:3, NKJ). After hearing and believing, we must then repent, as Peter declared on the Day of Pentecost, after the coming of the Holy Spirit: ‘Repent, and let everyone 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’ (Acts 2:38, NKJ).
Jesus had said: ‘Whoever desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it’ (Mark 8:34-35, NKJ). Baptism into Christ symbolizes the crucifying and burying of the old self and the raising up of the new, lived unto God: ‘Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life …knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin’ (Rom.6:4-6, NKJ). The cost to God for our salvation was the cross of Christ. The cost to us is the life of this world which we must ‘crucify’ in our walk with God: ‘…those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires’ (Gal.5:24, NKJ). Jesus said: ‘Count the cost’ (Luke 14:28, NKJ).

The promise for all who believe and repent is the gift of the Holy Spirit. By the Spirit of God we are raised to new life in Christ: ‘…by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father”’ (Rom.5:15, NKJ). John wrote: ‘…as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God’ (John 1:12-13, NKJ). This is what Jesus prayed for. By the Holy Spirit, received through faith in Christ, we have oneness with God. Our desire is to live according to the Spirit: ‘For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God’ (Rom.8:14, NKJ).

Our atonement, therefore, is achieved for us through our being raised up in Christ, who gave Himself for us that we might know God through Him and the power of the resurrection. His one perfect offering is accepted for us, who are forgiven and follow Him in faith. In Christ, His righteousness avails as a covering for sin for all who now walk in the Spirit. Paul declared: ‘There is, therefore, no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit’ (Rom. 8:1, NKJ). His death brought to fulfillment and completion His whole offering to save us from our sins. The cross was the climax of His witness in the flesh for us that we might repent and be crucified in Him to the world, but live unto God. From the witness of His glorious resurrection, we look back to the cross and are drawn near, realizing that in Him is life, where death has no power, nor sin any place. We see that He came despising the shame and in perfect love cast out all fear.

In laying down His life in the flesh for us, He calls for us to be clothed with His righteousness that we also should have no fear of death. By the gift of the Holy Spirit, we have this assurance of faith. We are changed, renewed and appointed to everlasting life and peace in the presence of the Eternal God. Certainly He suffered for us, on our behalf. He endured, suffering wrongfully, leaving us example, but to the One who judges righteously He submitted His life. The glory of the resurrection was the heavenly response.

Now, in Christ, we have atonement with God. He is our peace and salvation.

You or Norman said: “Our atonement, therefore, is achieved for us through our being raised up in Christ,”, but the atonement sacrifice happened with the cross and not with Christ’s rising?

What happened with the cross?

How have you been crucified with Christ?

 

[jerusalem]

Where I am it's now rather late, Bling. So, I will respond tomorrow. - I will just say that I am not a plagiarist. : )

 

[bling]

Where I am it's now rather late, Bling. So, I will respond tomorrow. - I will just say that I am not a plagiarist. : )

Look forward to our discussion.

 

[samcarternx]

heheheheh me too Nice work jerusalem and Hi bling My 2-cents is that within the Holy Spirit in us is the sovereign will of God and if we submit our wills to His and His will becomes our will He does us as though our bodies were His. This is how we fulfill the requirements of walking in the light. We are holy, righteous, and loving now that He is the willer and doer. And this is our "grace through faith" life we now share not only with Him but with all our brothers and sisters who are also ruled by Him in His kingdom. I think Paul implied (Col 1:24) our suffering was to finish up the suffering required. Does this have to do with atonement?

 

[jerusalem]

Hi, Bling. Ok, where were we? …

If we want to know how the O.T. laws ought to have been administered, as God intended, we should look to the example of Christ.

Among His followers were known former adulterers and prostitutes – all legally guilty and required to suffer the penalty of death. What was His reaction? – It was to be merciful: “Go and sin no more.”

He told the Pharisees, “Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance” (Mt.9:13, NKJ).

Without repentance, of course, the sacrifices were meaningless: “Bring no more futile sacrifices … I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting” (Is.1:13, NKJ). ‘Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet to Me’ (Jer.6:20, NKJ). What mattered to God was a change of heart: ‘Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit’ (Ezek.18:31, NKJ).

The sacrifices, offered as God intended, allowed the people a ritual demonstration of their seriousness before God. The offering of sacrifices acted as an expression of this desire for purity. Nevertheless, sacrifices had to be offered year by year, indicating that the problem of sin remained and could not be dealt with through the Mosaic law.

Your mention of Leviticus 5 is interesting. The NIV, in Leviticus 5:15, interprets the guilt offering as a ‘penalty’ but please note: the word ‘penalty’ does not occur in the Hebrew. This is an addition to the text. The offering was not intended as a penal fine, but as a requirement of the law for those who, after committing such sins as those prescribed, desired forgiveness and restitution, with the attitude to offer up to God a life of spiritual purity (as symbolized by the offering of the ram without blemish).

The principle of making a true restitution and compensation for sins (when this is possible) is supported by the guilt offering. True repentance for sins will be demonstrated by a willingness to make amends in some way for the hurt caused by past actions. The story of Zacchaeus the tax collector (Luke 19:5-9), illustrates the fruit borne of godly sorrow. He gave half his goods to the poor and restored fourfold to those he had cheated. This needs to be the attitude of all who truly admit their guilt and repent, turning to Christ. For all who do, Christ’s sacrifice avails. As John the Baptist said to the multitudes, ‘Bear fruits worthy of repentance’ (Luke 3:8). We, also, must bear the good fruit of repentance to be accepted of God.

The one who commits the sins is guilty and must bear his iniquity (Lev.5:17). That is biblical. To be free of condemnation for sins today, one only has to repent with faith in Christ and so abide in His grace. He is ‘The Lord Our Righteousness’. As a lamb without blemish or defect (1 Pet.1:19), He gave His life as a covering for all who will live in Him. Now, just as the Father accepted the sweet smelling offering of His Son upon the cross, so He will accept all who accompany His Son, as His chosen followers.

J

 

[jerusalem]

"Does just punishment help the child put the offence behind them? "

- If the correction is remedial, then the offender will show repentance. In the Middle-Ages, princes sometimes had 'whipping boys' to suffer punishment in their place. Whether this had any remedial impact on the princes is highly doubtful.

When we are corrected by loving parents, we know that they have acted for our good - to help us think about the consequences of our wrongful actions and change (hopefully) our behaviour. It is not simply punishment for punishment's sake - because we broke the rules. However, if a child displays genuine sorrow for having done wrong and seeks forgiveness - what loving father would punish? Surely the reaction would be akin to that of the father of the 'prodigal' son (Lk.15).

J

 

[bling]

- If the correction is remedial, then the offender will show repentance. In the Middle-Ages, princes sometimes had 'whipping boys' to suffer punishment in their place. Whether this had any remedial impact on the princes is highly doubtful.

Whipping boys where used much longer than just the Middle-Ages. They probably had a “negative” effect on the prince’s actions, since he felt no punishment for his transgressions. The “whipping Boy” was there to help relieve some of the anger the teacher was having over the privileged prince student miss behavior which he could not punish.

When we are corrected by loving parents, we know that they have acted for our good - to help us think about the consequences of our wrongful actions and change (hopefully) our behaviour. It is not simply punishment for punishment's sake - because we broke the rules. However, if a child displays genuine sorrow for having done wrong and seeks forgiveness - what loving father would punish? Surely the reaction would be akin to that of the father of the 'prodigal' son (Lk.15).

Amen to this: “It is not simply punishment for punishment's sake - because we broke the rules.” It is there to help us (the way God is always doing stuff to help us).

The Father in the story of the prodigal son allowed the son to windup exactly where the father knew the son would end up. As little as I know about this young son where he wound-up does not surprise me. A wonderful Father does not have to directly punish his children, but he is ,if at all possible, to see to a just disciplining (punishment) that best fits the transgression, in the case of the prodigal son, winding up hungry, lonely, friendless, and facing a cruel slow death, seems to be a “just” punishment for his transgression.

All good and wonderful parent find forgiving easy, but they also must be fair and just if at all possible, no matter if some children repent or not (to be fair also to those that do not repent). If all the child has to do is say “I am sorry” that can send the wrong message to other wrong doers, while the message the parent wants to get across is that sin has huge negative consequences.

 

[bling]

If we want to know how the O.T. laws ought to have been administered, as God intended, we should look to the example of Christ.

Among His followers were known former adulterers and prostitutes – all legally guilty and required to suffer the penalty of death. What was His reaction? – It was to be merciful: “Go and sin no more.”

He told the Pharisees, “Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance” (Mt.9:13, NKJ).

Without repentance, of course, the sacrifices were meaningless: “Bring no more futile sacrifices … I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting” (Is.1:13, NKJ). ‘Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet to Me’ (Jer.6:20, NKJ). What mattered to God was a change of heart: ‘Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit’ (Ezek.18:31, NKJ).

The sacrifices, offered as God intended, allowed the people a ritual demonstration of their seriousness before God. The offering of sacrifices acted as an expression of this desire for purity. Nevertheless, sacrifices had to be offered year by year, indicating that the problem of sin remained and could not be dealt with through the Mosaic law.

I do not find scripture expressing the idea that these sacrificial rituals were “demonstration of their (sins) seriousness before God”. Without the symbolisms it had with Christ known by these early Jews, I see it as being just a ritualistic ceremony to the people.

Your mention of Leviticus 5 is interesting. The NIV, in Leviticus 5:15, interprets the guilt offering as a ‘penalty’ but please note: the word ‘penalty’ does not occur in the Hebrew. This is an addition to the text. The offering was not intended as a penal fine, but as a requirement of the law for those who, after committing such sins as those prescribed, desired forgiveness and restitution, with the attitude to offer up to God a life of spiritual purity (as symbolized by the offering of the ram without blemish).

I was not really referring to Lev. 5: 15 which seems to be a little more severe discipline (it mentions breach of faith) then you find in the previous verses since a ram is required and Lev 5: 16 He shall also make restitution for what he has done amiss in the holy thing, and shall add a fifth to it and give it to the priest, that does sound like a penalty fine?

Verse 1-14 talk about the sin offering and the sins being atoned for and forgiven. The point I am trying to make is the sin offering is not set by the offence but by the wealth of the sinner, showing it is trying to somewhat justly equate the hardship on the sinner; a poor person could give just a bag of flour.

The principle of making a true restitution and compensation for sins (when this is possible) is supported by the guilt offering. True repentance for sins will be demonstrated by a willingness to make amends in some way for the hurt caused by past actions. The story of Zacchaeus the tax collector (Luke 19:5-9), illustrates the fruit borne of godly sorrow. He gave half his goods to the poor and restored fourfold to those he had cheated. This needs to be the attitude of all who truly admit their guilt and repent, turning to Christ. For all who do, Christ’s sacrifice avails. As John the Baptist said to the multitudes, ‘Bear fruits worthy of repentance’ (Luke 3:8). We, also, must bear the good fruit of repentance to be accepted of God.

Zacchaeus was not told to do as much as he did (I do think he was supposed to pay back double what he had cheated someone out of by Jewish Law). Zacchaeus does not say he is doing it for restitution or pay back something for his sinning, but it was out of gratitude. If you are suggesting I need to “pay something back for all my sins”, that is way beyond a million life times of helping others.

The one who commits the sins is guilty and must bear his iniquity (Lev.5:17). That is biblical. To be free of condemnation for sins today, one only has to repent with faith in Christ and so abide in His grace. He is ‘The Lord Our Righteousness’. As a lamb without blemish or defect (1 Pet.1:19), He gave His life as a covering for all who will live in Him. Now, just as the Father accepted the sweet smelling offering of His Son upon the cross, so He will accept all who accompany His Son, as His chosen followers.

J

Yes, “we need salvation”, but as children do we also not need the parent’s fair/just punishment for our rebellious disobedience?

Is just punishment a needed deterrent to the criminal and those around the criminal?

Is just punishment not a way the parent shows concern for the child’s behavior?

Is Just punishment one of the ways we measure the severity of the offence?

Does just punishment help the child put the offence behind them?

 

[jerusalem]

"Is just punishment a needed deterrent to the criminal and those around the criminal?"

- It is needed for those who engage in crime, not for those who repent in Christ.

"Is just punishment not a way the parent shows concern for the child’s behavior?"

- Yes, when the child shows no sign of repentance and is in need of reform. Again, consider the reaction of the father of the prodigal son, in the parable. He did not call his servants to beat him for having dishonoured his family. He called for a celebration and rejoiced that his son, who was lost, had returned.

"Is Just punishment one of the ways we measure the severity of the offence?"

- Just punishment cannot be applied to the innocent:

It is written, ‘The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself’ (Ez.18:20, NKJ). The context of Ezekiel chapter 18 makes it clear that God’s justice does not allow for the transfer of guilt from one person to another. The responsibility for sin lies with the sinner. Even the conscience and reason testify that justice must be correctly applied and is not simply a matter of exacting a penalty—as though the issuing of the penalty is all that is important, even if it falls upon one who is innocent of the offence. True justice requires that the penalty for a crime be applied to the guilty alone, as it states in the Law: ‘Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall the children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin’ (Deut.24v16, NKJ; cf. 2 Chron. 25v4). In ancient times, it was a practice to also punish close relatives of the guilty for serious crimes. The Lord loathes all injustice. Prov.17:15: ‘Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent—the LORD detests them both’ (NIV).

 

[bling]

- Yes, when the child shows no sign of repentance and is in need of reform. Again, consider the reaction of the father of the prodigal son, in the parable. He did not call his servants to beat him for having dishonoured his family. He called for a celebration and rejoiced that his son, who was lost, had returned.

The prodigal son sounded half dead by the time he reaches the Father, do you see that the son has already been punished (the punishment is very much related to his behavior and is an excelent way to see to the son’s punishment for his reckless behavior)?

- Just punishment cannot be applied to the innocent:

It is written, ‘The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself’ (Ez.18:20, NKJ). The context of Ezekiel chapter 18 makes it clear that God’s justice does not allow for the transfer of guilt from one person to another. The responsibility for sin lies with the sinner. Even the conscience and reason testify that justice must be correctly applied and is not simply a matter of exacting a penalty—as though the issuing of the penalty is all that is important, even if it falls upon one who is innocent of the offence. True justice requires that the penalty for a crime be applied to the guilty alone, as it states in the Law: ‘Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall the children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin’ (Deut.24v16, NKJ; cf. 2 Chron. 25v4). In ancient times, it was a practice to also punish close relatives of the guilty for serious crimes. The Lord loathes all injustice. Prov.17:15: ‘Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent—the LORD detests them both’ (NIV).

Yes! We are in full agreement here.

As I state some of the “benefits” to punishing the guilty and if at all possible punishing the guilty as quickly as possible so they can receive the full benefit of the punishment:
Is just punishment a needed deterrent to the criminal and those around the criminal?
Is just punishment not a way the parent shows concern for the child’s behavior?
Is Just punishment one of the ways we measure the severity of the offence?
Does just punishment help the child put the offence behind them?

Now you seem to make a significant distinction between disciplining (with punishment) those that sincerely seek forgiveness and those that remain unrepentant.

As a wonderful parent, you want to demonstrate fairness, justice, mercy and equality (equal but not exactly the same is understood) between your treatment of your children. Even children that are sorry are given time out and they understand that as being fair and consistent.

There can be situations in which even a wonderful parent cannot see to the “just” punishment of His children, which is sad for everyone involved (this was this situation repentant man was under in the OT, so Christ solved the problem by going to the cross.

Are punishments contingent on the crime committed or on the attitude of the transgressor after he commits the crime?

 

[jerusalem]

"There can be situations in which even a wonderful parent cannot see to the “just” punishment of His children, which is sad for everyone involved (this was this situation repentant man was under in the OT, so Christ solved the problem by going to the cross."

- Please explain how you can say this and say you agree with:

‘The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself’ (Ez.18:20, NKJ).

Prov.17:15: ‘Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent—the LORD detests them both’ (NIV).

Do you believe Jesus Christ was punished by the Father? - I'm not sure what you believe.

J

 

[jerusalem]

Bling: "The prodigal son sounded half dead by the time he reaches the Father, do you see that the son has already been punished (the punishment is very much related to his behavior and is an excelent way to see to the son’s punishment for his reckless behavior)? "

There are always consequences that cause suffering when there is sin. It is not always so obvious and evident, but it is there. What you seem to be saying is that unless the sinner's suffering is physically evident, then physical punishment of the sinner is just and necessary - in spite of repentance.

Most often, the mental suffering that ensues as a result of sinning can be far worse than any physical suffering or pain. God looks upon the heart and knows the depth of sorrow and repentance endured by a repentant offender. True godly sorrow is suffering for past wrongs.

Nevertheless, there must be a death for sin. The "old self" needs to be crucified with Christ: "And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires" (Gal.5:24, NKJ). "...if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of god, these are the sons of God" (Rom.8:13-14, NKJ).

When we look to Christ, repenting in faith, His righteousness becomes our covering, just as it is written: "For He has clothed me with the garments of salvation, He has covered me with the robe of righteousness" (Isa.61:10, NKJ).

J

 

[bling]

There are always consequences that cause suffering when there is sin. It is not always so obvious and evident, but it is there. What you seem to be saying is that unless the sinner's suffering is physically evident, then physical punishment of the sinner is just and necessary - in spite of repentance.

Yes! punishment for disobedience should always be “just and fair” (repentant or not) while not punishing the disobedient guilty party is unjust, unless there is no way to justly punish the guilty.

Most often, the mental suffering that ensues as a result of sinning can be far worse than any physical suffering or pain. God looks upon the heart and knows the depth of sorrow and repentance endured by a repentant offender. True godly sorrow is suffering for past wrongs.

Yes! Mental anguish can be very physical and debilitating, but without an actual reason (reality) to the mental anguish it lacks logical meaning. Think about it like this: You’re a first century Jew like Paul back when he was Saul and you’re coveting your neighbor’s donkey, so what harm is that doing to anyone including God? Yes, it is a waste of time, you are not “Loving” your neighbor as yourself, it might lead to something worse, but are you really going to get caught up in a debilitating sorrow over it? Why should God get so upset over your coveting, shouldn’t God be more understanding?

Nevertheless, there must be a death for sin. The "old self" needs to be crucified with Christ: "And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires" (Gal.5:24, NKJ). "...if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of god, these are the sons of God" (Rom.8:13-14, NKJ).

When we look to Christ, repenting in faith, His righteousness becomes our covering, just as it is written: "For He has clothed me with the garments of salvation, He has covered me with the robe of righteousness" (Isa.61:10, NKJ).

J

The problem with your explanation is: “His righteousness becomes our covering” happens after atonement and after God’s forgiveness.

What keeps you from having that same death blow to your heart that the Jews felt in Acts 2: 37 when they came to the realization of what their sins had done?

The only think that keeps me from having a totally debilitated in sorrow over what my sins caused as I think upon the cross is the fact that there is also the greatest Love being experienced. I could have provided that “other way”, Jesus asked for, but I did not.

Is God being just in seeing to our punishment for our transgressions, by allowing us to experience a death blow to our hearts?

 

[bling]

"There can be situations in which even a wonderful parent cannot see to the “just” punishment of His children, which is sad for everyone involved (this was this situation repentant man was under in the OT, so Christ solved the problem by going to the cross."

- Please explain how you can say this and say you agree with:

‘The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself’ (Ez.18:20, NKJ).

Prov.17:15: ‘Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent—the LORD detests them both’ (NIV).

Do you believe Jesus Christ was punished by the Father? - I'm not sure what you believe.

J

You are right to say: “I'm not sure what you believe”!!!

What I believe is what I have learned from scripture and the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, teaching others with lots of feedback and not from others (including books and commentaries) so you most likely have never heard from anyone else a similar belief.


I do not believe in Penal Substitution nor any “substitution”, the Bible never refers to what Christ did on the cross as “substitution”. Christ, Paul and the Hebrew writer do refer to it as a “ransom”, but it is not what others call the “ransom theory”(Christ “paying off” satan, evil or death to release the innocent “us”). The “ransom” analogy fit my understanding very well, but you need to understand who the kidnapper is and why this ransom payment has value to the kidnapper?

I thought hard about leaving out: “(this was this situation repentant man was under in the OT, so Christ solved the problem by going to the cross)” because this prematurely gets us into a discussion of Romans 3: 21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction; 23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; 26 it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.

Under the Old Law there was no “atonement” for intentional sins. Under the Old Law, intentional sins had severe (yet just) punishments attached to them (big fines, banishment or death) and no mention of forgiveness.

Under the Old Law was there ever any “way” to get around these server punishments?

Yet in the Old Testament was there ever forgiveness?

Did some people in the OT repent and what happened to those that truly repented?

John the Baptist preaches and baptizes people for “repentance” so what is he talking about and why are they Baptized?

It appears, God under the Old Testament is “passing over” repented sins of those that were forgiven, since there is no way to justly “punish” the guilty party (for severe sins) when they repents and still have the person live. After Christ goes to the cross there is a just way to see to the punishment of those that believe what Christ did because of their sins and still allow them to live (but not through substitution!).