toldailytopic: Why did Jesus need to die?

[IXOYE]

I am glad you asked. God said that Adam had to die if he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

No. He most certainly did not. You are presuming words not in evidence into what God said.

He said you will surely die. The difference is, "had to die" implies power over God that supercedes Grace. That would mean God isn't omnipotent. Who is your God? :wazzup:

IDeath means separation. So when Adam ate of the fruit he became separated. Separated from what you might ask? From God, of course because Adam remained on earth for another 900 years before he died physically.

NO. Death means death. ADAM was separated from GOD by his own shame. HE FLED GOD.
GOD SOUGHT HIM OUT.
THus they weren't forced to separate from GOD, GOD went to HIM! That's just a silly position to hold.

Adam was booted from EDEN to avoid that KNOWLEDGE and the LIFE to both be in one person's life. Boot him to prevent him eating the tree of life.

IA man's spirit is the life within a man so when the spirit leaves the body then physical death occurs.

Man doesn't have a SPIRIT that is an entity like being. You just described what the HEBREWS called a soul.

IWhen a man is separated from God then that person has died or become separated from God.

When does that occur, then? Your above positions are not the answers.

IJesus did not die to prevent physical death. I personally believe that man has an appointment with physical death. Even if Adam had not ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he was still subject to physical death as was all of physical creation because of physical creation's transient nature.

It's nice you recognize this as a belief and not as a biblically supported fact.

IMan is different than the rest of the life on earth because the life that man received was eternal life..

Really? You just said man was going to die from the get go. Make up your mind. See underlined above.

The life of all other living things is temporary in nature because God's life was not breathed into them. When a man dies, or woman for that matter, there life or spirit lives for eternity. That is the way man was created in the image of God and in His likeness.

You don't know if life was breathed into the animals or not. Because it's not mentioned in scripture only shows it's not important to God's Story. Not that it didn't happen.

IGod does have form and that form is like the form of God in appearance but not in substance.

Total nonsense.


Man is a created being and God is an eternal being. While man existed before the fall he was held guiltless for all that he did. Man's assignment and realm of authority was to have dominion over the earth and God delighted in man and all that he did and approved of his actions.

Relevance?

IThere came a time when God told man not to eat of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil but man chose to defy God and to do as he was instructed not to do. Man became an opposer of God. Instead of destroying man, God choose to separate man from Himself.

Man probably ate of the tree of knowledge out of misguided love for God. The Serpent told them it would make them as smart as God. If God left me a job to do, and always had to come give me directions, and I could become as smart as Him, thus making it easier on Him, why would I not do it? You presume a helluva lot.

ISin is the opposition to God. Adam committed an act that was in opposition to God and in so doing caused his on death. In so doing all his offspring were born into a world in opposition to God. Man's dominion was not taken from him so man used the world as man saw fit and not as God has designed it. So the world lies in opposition to God or in sin. Even those things we call good oppose the will of God because they are the will of man and not the will of God. That state of opposition and all choices and acts of man are called sin. Only those acts that are done in obedience to God are not sin.

The WORLD is not in opposition to GOD. Opposition is now a known option because of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil. It's not inherently opposed to God.

IIn order for man to be separated from sin he must first be come obedient to God. The normal state of man is opposition to God. God has in times past had witnesses to himself that he has chosen and they have born witness to God. Man choose to ignore those witnesses but no man has ever been completely obedient and has shown his human nature just as it is today.

Romans 6:22 says he must first accept atonement.
Then be a slave to God/Obedience.
Man can be obedient from a point forward, or so says scripture, but no man but Christ did it from birth.

And that Human Nature, post resurrection, is removed from man, AT A POINT, according to scripture.

IIt is not within the power of man to redeem himself. Over the centuries mankind has sought a path back to God and so the birth of religion. Christianity is no different. There are many who call themselves Christian but the faith they practice deny the very God that they purport to serve. That is why one cannot look at a particular sect and say this is a Christian and this one is not. The life of Christ is in the individual and not a particular group or denomination. God knows who His children are and who is not.

You just stated Xianity is an attempt by man to create a path back to God. :|

Speaking of Denying GOD, you believe He can't do things. That sorta eliminates this entity being GOD, no?

IAll who clame to be sinners ether do not know who they are as a result of there faith or are not chrildren of God. .

If you are a child of God/born of God, you no longer sin. Not you are no longer viewed as sinful, you can no longer commit a sin. 1 john 3:9

The chrildren of God do not sin. Why, because the seed of the Father (God) remains in them and they cannot sin just as Jesus the Christ was born of God and not of man and could not sin. If Jesus could have sinned according to your faith then two things are true to you even if you wont admit it. First, Jesus was not born of God and second you are subject to the law of God.

So, you agree a man born of GOD can not commit an act that is a sin. NOT that it's not perceived as sin. NOT that it's forgiven as a sin, but he can not commit an act that is a sin.

IWe as men die physically because we were created mortal not because we a sinners. Man is already dead spiritually unless he is born again and if he is born again he is as Christ is in this world. So I ask, Who is Christ to you?

:think:

 

[naatmi]

That shows he kept his death appointment, not my death appointment.

I was responding to your statement "God could have provided any of a multitude of alternatives for me to have faith in or could have provided something besides faith such as works or knowledge, if he wanted to."

That's not true. If you've sinned you deserve hell. Apart from the Lord's atonement, no amount of faith or works can make you not deserve hell. There is nothing else that could justify God pardoning someone who deserves hell. Your faith doesn't justify it, your works don't justify it. Only the Lord's bloody death justifies God in pardoning hell-deserving sinners. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.

EDIT: To clarify, those whom God pardons STILL deserve hell, but God no longer has the obligation to punish them when they repent and trust in the Lord's atonement.

 

[unknown]

I don't see the death of Jesus as necessary for anything except His resurrection. It's about eternal life and overcoming death. The wages of sin is death. Jesus had no sin, how long can death hold him? The one who believes in Jesus is he that does the will of The Father, those that do the will of The Father sin no more and do not fear death.

Just an opinion, carry on.....

 

[Krsto]

I was responding to your statement "God could have provided any of a multitude of alternatives for me to have faith in or could have provided something besides faith such as works or knowledge, if he wanted to."

That's not true. If you've sinned you deserve hell. Apart from the Lord's atonement, no amount of faith or works can make you not deserve hell. There is nothing else that could justify God pardoning someone who deserves hell. Your faith doesn't justify it, your works don't justify it. Only the Lord's bloody death justifies God in pardoning hell-deserving sinners. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.

EDIT: To clarify, those whom God pardons STILL deserve hell, but God no longer has the obligation to punish them when they repent and trust in the Lord's atonement.

No, our sin does not make us "deserve" hell, especially if you define hell as eternal conscious suffering. If you define hell as the grave and sessation of conscious existance (destruction of the soul) then we do earn it, like a wage, so I guess that's close to deserving it.

But you are still begging the question of whether the Lord's atonement was the only thing we could have had faith in in order to be justified or if God could have picked something else. Jesus atoning death does not make us not earn death, we still earn it, but we are given something else by grace. Grace is getting what we don't merit, and we don't merit eternal life whether we sin or not or whether Jesus atones for our sin or not. It's a gift, irrespective of what we merit. That's what grace is all about.

"Your faith doesn't justify it." Really? It worked for Abraham, and he didn't have faith in Jesus, he had faith that God would take care of things if he stabbed his son. Abraham was justified by his faith in God.

"Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins." Yes, only because that is the way God set it up in the beginning, not because that is the only possible way for him to have saved us. He was the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth."

Y'all just keep insisting Jesus was crucified because of our sin. If you can come up with a scripture for that that would be helpful but I think it reads he was crucified for our sins, ie, as a solution to our sins, which earned us death.

 

[naatmi]

What interest does God have in enforcing the law?

The well being of His creation. God is love. If a ruler does nothing about crime it shows he doesn't care about the community.

He enforced the law when Adam sinned.

Sinners deserve hell. Adam still has to stand before the Lord on judgment day.

If grace is by law then grace is no more grace.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Grace is not by the law. I never said that. The law is a grace, but the grace of redemption is definitely not by the law.

If you judge man by law do you not become a judge of the thoughts actions and intents of the one you are judging?

Of course

You are not then a doer of the law but a judge.

That verse was about judging by outward appearance, like if you judged me for having holes in my jeans. If you judge by appearance you are a law-breaker because you are not treating others as you would have them treat you. I would want people to judge me righteously, not by appearance. That's why the Lord said "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." (John 7:24) and Paul said, "he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." (1Cor 2:15)

Sense we do not do the law then what right have we to judge our brother by that same law. What right have we to pull the splinter out of the eye of our neighbor and do not pull the log from our own eye. We become the blind leading the blind and we both are in danger of falling into the pit.

We should also not judge hypocritically. Like if I condemned homosexuality but privately I was lustful then I would be a hypocrite and storing up wrath for myself just as much as any homo. But if we take the log out of our own eye then we are not hypocrites when we "judge all things" with "righteous judgment". Jesus commands hypocrites to take the log out of their eye. It is not an optional thing.

So hypocritical judging is bad, and judging by mere appearance is bad (like calling someone a fag because they have a pink shirt or whatever (who knows, it could be laundry day)) - so those two kinds of judgment are bad, but righteous judgment is good. Judging is just calling it like it is anyway, saying the truth.

Those who live by the law are required to keep the whole law. Not just the parts we like. If we violate the law in one place then we are guilty of violating the whole law. We are then in danger of Hell's fire.

Love fulfills the whole law. If we are loving then we will not sin. If we are sinning then we are not being loving. Perfect love casts out fear. But love is a constant daily choice. If we are not loving then we ought to fear.

The law was given as a demonstration. To demonstrate that man is incapable in his judgments of rights and wrongs.

That's not true. Men are capable of discerning right from wrong like God. We know good and evil like He does. Men know that they are worthy of punishment for sin because they know what sin is and what God's judgment regarding sin is.

The law demonstrates to man that he is in need of salvation and that salvation could not be achieved by mortal man by attempting to keep the law. Salvation cannot be achieved mortal man.

I agree that we can't save ourselves apart from the Lord's atonement.

Man cannot keep the law

That's not true. The law requires 100% of our ability, not 101% or 2000%. Love God with ALL of your heart, soul, mind, strength - not with MORE THAN ALL of them.

God did not say that Adam was necked and needed a covering. Adam did. In direct contradiction to the command of God.

It was right for Adam to cover himself since he gained enough understanding to recognize nakedness. God never told Adam anything about it one way or the other.

Today, man stands before God as he did then. passing judgment upon himself. All Christendom stands today and says that the covering of Christ Jesus our Lord is insufficient. If one goes to hell today it is because man has rejected the covering of the blood of the Cross that He (God) has provided for all the transgressions of man. Man still says that he is necked when God says I have provided a garment of righteousness for you.

Do we I believe in the sufficiency of Jesus to cover all our sin and the acts that flow (sins) from that sin? Is Jesus sufficient for us? If Jesus is not sufficient for us then what pray tell are we going to do to improve Jesus' finished work on the cross?

The Lord's atonement truly makes it possible for God to forgive us. But no atonement could ever make it possible for God to accept unrepentant sinners.

 

[naatmi]

No, our sin does not make us "deserve" hell, especially if you define hell as eternal conscious suffering.

What are you talking about! Of course it does. Don't you fear God?? If you ever sinned, you're a hell-deserving sinner. I'd send you there myself if God told me to. Not that I want you to perish of course! But if you sinned, you deserve it. Period. Hand and foot, in you go. Save the drama for your mama.

If you define hell as the grave and sessation of conscious existance (destruction of the soul) then we do earn it, like a wage, so I guess that's close to deserving it.

:liberals: oh well ok I guess it's kind of like I'm a little bad I guess blah blah lie - what are you even talking about? I can hardly believe my eyes. Earth to sinner. :sozo: God made you. You rejected Him. You're gonna burn!

But you are still begging the question of whether the Lord's atonement was the only thing we could have had faith in in order to be justified or if God could have picked something else. Jesus atoning death does not make us not earn death, we still earn it, but we are given something else by grace. Grace is getting what we don't merit, and we don't merit eternal life whether we sin or not or whether Jesus atones for our sin or not. It's a gift, irrespective of what we merit. That's what grace is all about.

I agree. I deserve to go to hell too. Being forgiven means I am NOT getting what I deserve. But God had to do something to justify Himself in pardoning rebels and criminals who broke his holy law. He had to provide an atonement to justify Himself. That's how bad our sin is. The reason God couldn't spare the precious Lord Jesus when He was sweating blood falling on his face pleading for mercy was because of sinners like you and I. If His prayer had not been refused then we might as well start screaming and writhing and gnashing our teeth right now so that we're already good at it by the time we go swimming.

"Your faith doesn't justify it." Really? It worked for Abraham, and he didn't have faith in Jesus, he had faith that God would take care of things if he stabbed his son. Abraham was justified by his faith in God.

If Abraham had sinned before being justified by faith then his faith only saved him because God was already planning to redeem us through Christ. The atonement did not have to happen right away, but eventually it had to happen. If it the atonement would never have been made then Abraham's faith could only justify him if he had never sinned. Without the atonement there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin. Period. Apart from God's plan to redeem men through the atonement a sinner's faith and repentance will do as much good as it did the rich man to ask Abraham for a drop of water from Lazarus. "Remember son, your chance is gone."

"Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins." Yes, only because that is the way God set it up in the beginning, not because that is the only possible way for him to have saved us. He was the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth."

It's not just a bunch of poetry. God wants you to understand the meaning behind these symbols. He wants you to understand how costly it is for Him to offer pardon to hell-deserving sinners. He knows we are so guilty that it would be wrong for him to just accept us without an atonement.

Y'all just keep insisting Jesus was crucified because of our sin. If you can come up with a scripture for that that would be helpful but I think it reads he was crucified for our sins, ie, as a solution to our sins, which earned us death.

So even if the the Bible said He was crucified for our sins it wouldn't mean what you don't want it to mean. It sounds like you've just decided what you want the Bible to say so that's what it says. I would worry about that if I were you!

If people sin, they deserve hell. If people deserve hell but God wants to offer them pardon, the atonement is the only solution. Jesus is the solution to our sins. Why did the solution cost so much? Because our sin is that bad. Why did God's own son have to be BEAT and SPIT on and MOCKED. Because of wicked hell-deserving sinners is why.

 

[Krsto]

So naatmi, you are saying that any sin, say I tell my mom a fib when I was 5 years old, makes it so that I deserve to suffer for all eternity. Forever and ever. No relief in sight. Ever.

Is this what you believe?

 

[Lazy afternoon]

How many more things do you know of that GOD CAN NOT DO?

I find that patently disqualifying of your intellectual prowess to participate in this conversation when you start saying God can't do something.

God cannot sin.

God can not deny His own righteousness evident in others to whom He has given it.

God can not deny a request of His son.

God can not deny a request from His sons when supported by His Son.

God can not deny his own word.

God can not suffer the sacrifice of fools.

LA.

 

[Lighthouse]

So naatmi, you are saying that any sin, say I tell my mom a fib when I was 5 years old, makes it so that I deserve to suffer for all eternity. Forever and ever. No relief in sight. Ever.

Is this what you believe?

It is not that you deserve to be separated from God for all eternity from the moment of your first sin, it is that even before your first act of sin you do not deserve to be in His presence, at all; let alone for all eternity. Yet He loves us so much that He determined to reconcile us all with an act on His own part in spite of that.

 

[IXOYE]

I meant once a person sinned the law can only condemn them. If they had not sinned then the law would not have to condemn them.

the law also provided reconciliation. That's why they killed so many animals.

Your nature can't make you sin. Sin is a choice. There is no such thing as unavoidable sin. Having a sinner for an father, grandfather, ancestor, etc does not make you have to be a sinner also. Ezekiel 18 addresses that idea.

When a person sins they are definitely being bad. Sinners are rebels against God, not victims of their nature. Sinners are criminals not cripples.

What do you mean? It sounds like you are saying we have no choice but to be self-centered.

 

[IXOYE]

God cannot sin.

God can not deny His own righteousness evident in others to whom He has given it.

God can not deny a request of His son.

God can not deny a request from His sons when supported by His Son.

God can not deny his own word.

God can not suffer the sacrifice of fools.

LA.

Boy, that last one seems you learned it from personal experience.

Stop confusing will not with can not.

Stop trying to fit God in your pea brained box.

Do learn the word omnipotent

The only one of the above that is true, is the cant sin. The problem with that as an examle is the definition of sin is acting against God. The word cant even apply to God as any action He took is His action.

I am pretty sure genocide would be a sin if I did it. For God it was not a sin.

And you don't even know what you said mostly. If all you said was true, THEN Jesus prayed we would be one with Him, thus the father just as Jesus himself was. John, the apostle Jesus loved, wrote, if you are in him you do not sin, can not sin. You would say all men can sin and will til they die. Which is it? We can be sinless or Jesus prayer was unanswered.

Father if there be another way lets do it! And no other way was provided.

 

[IXOYE]

It is not that you deserve to be separated from God for all eternity from the moment of your first sin, it is that even before your first act of sin you do not deserve to be in His presence, at all; let alone for all eternity. Yet He loves us so much that He determined to reconcile us all with an act on His own part in spite of that.

Sin doesn't keep God from you, it shames you and makes you flee God.

 

[john w]

Sin is transgression of the law. Sins are transgressions of the law. It is the same thing. It is like saying Affection vs affections. The singular is the abstract set of the plural, or the sum of the plural. Sin is selfishness, or the collected sum of all selfish choices. Transgression of love God and neighbor.

The law cannot forgive sin or sins. Neither can repentance forgive sins. The law can never justify people who have chosen to serve their flesh. It can only condemn. It did not condemn Jesus because He never chose to serve His flesh - therefore the law was not weak through His flesh regarding His own legal justification.

Nope.You missed it.

Sins(plural) can be forgiven-1 Cor. 15:1-4...............Subsitution.


Sin(singular) cannot-it must be judged-Ro. 8:3.

The wages of sin(singular)is death.

2 Co. 5:
21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. -Identification

 

[naatmi]

So naatmi, you are saying that any sin, say I tell my mom a fib when I was 5 years old, makes it so that I deserve to suffer for all eternity. Forever and ever. No relief in sight. Ever.

Is this what you believe?

What is this child psychology 101? Is that the last time you sinned?? If that's all you ever did then don't worry, you are probably fine.

Everyone knows children are not born morally accountable. But how many five years olds do you think choked to death in the waters of the great flood? Think about it. God had to think about. I'm not saying they were sinners. But don't get tripped up thinking that God's judgment can be blurred by appeals to emotion.

Children naturally lie without sinning. It's not a sin when a baby tries to throw rice at his mother. You think the Lord Jesus was not a baby? Like he never got fussy or did anything normal children do? People ALWAYS try to pass off innocent mistakes and acts of immaturity as "little" sins in an attempt to overthrow the justice of hell fire. No can do..

How many times do you have to rob a bank to earn the bank-robber punishment? Twenty? God's law has a penalty. You only have to break a law once to earn the penalty.

I wouldn't say a five year old who tells a fib deserves hell. If Jesus tried to sneak some ancient jewish cookies from the ancient jewish cookie jar when He was 5 years old I seriously doubt it would have been a moral sin. But any accountable adult who breaks God's law by being selfish deserves hell.

 

[naatmi]

the law also provided reconciliation. That's why they killed so many animals.

It is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to forgive sins. Those sacrifices were a foreshadowing of the atonement. If finite sacrifices could have atoned for our sin then the Lord could have had His prayer answered in the garden. He could have been replaced with a mountain of slaughtered bulls and goats. No way. Sin is worse than that. God's law is better than that.

God is justified for the forgiveness of sins past through the atonement, not through the animal sacrifices of the past.

 

[Krsto]

What is this child psychology 101? Is that the last time you sinned?? If that's all you ever did then don't worry, you are probably fine.

Everyone knows children are not born morally accountable. But how many five years olds do you think choked to death in the waters of the great flood? Think about it. God had to think about. I'm not saying they were sinners. But don't get tripped up thinking that God's judgment can be blurred by appeals to emotion.

Children naturally lie without sinning. It's not a sin when a baby tries to throw rice at his mother. You think the Lord Jesus was not a baby? Like he never got fussy or did anything normal children do? People ALWAYS try to pass off innocent mistakes and acts of immaturity as "little" sins in an attempt to overthrow the justice of hell fire. No can do..

How many times do you have to rob a bank to earn the bank-robber punishment? Twenty? God's law has a penalty. You only have to break a law once to earn the penalty.

I wouldn't say a five year old who tells a fib deserves hell. If Jesus tried to sneak some ancient jewish cookies from the ancient jewish cookie jar when He was 5 years old I seriously doubt it would have been a moral sin. But any accountable adult who breaks God's law by being selfish deserves hell.

Ok so if I was a perfect person until age 18 when I was selfish and stole something from somebody THEN I would deserve to suffer eternally, as in forever and ever and ever and . . .

This is not an appeal to emotion, this is an appeal to justice.

Is this what you believe?

 

[naatmi]

Ok so if I was a perfect person until age 18 when I was selfish and stole something from somebody THEN I would deserve to suffer eternally, as in forever and ever and ever and . . .

This is not an appeal to emotion, this is an appeal to justice.

Is this what you believe?

Absolutely. Our government down here on earth does not have the jurisdiction to legislate or punish men for the intent of the heart. Our laws bow to the idea of intent in order to avoid condemning the innocent, but they do not punish people for covetousness, selfishness, etc. The current system of human government has helped to restrain crime so that God has been able to allow society to continue for a long long time in order to show mercy to many people. On judgment day God will judge the heart and punish accordingly. The value protected by laws down here is all contingent, relative, finite. Eyes, teeth, property, physical body, etc. The value protected by God's law is intrinsic and therefore immeasurable.

God will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, ... But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good .. For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law ... in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. (Rom 2:6-16)

Whence then cometh wisdom? ... God understandeth the way thereof ... For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven ... Then did he see it, and declare it; he prepared it, yea, and searched it out [thought it through]. And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding. (Job 28)

 

[Krsto]

Absolutely. Our government down here on earth does not have the jurisdiction to legislate or punish men for the intent of the heart. Our laws bow to the idea of intent in order to avoid condemning the innocent, but they do not punish people for covetousness, selfishness, etc. The current system of human government has helped to restrain crime so that God has been able to allow society to continue for a long long time in order to show mercy to many people. On judgment day God will judge the heart and punish accordingly. The value protected by laws down here is all contingent, relative, finite. Eyes, teeth, property, physical body, etc. The value protected by God's law is intrinsic and therefore immeasurable.

God will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, ... But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good .. For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law ... in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. (Rom 2:6-16)

Whence then cometh wisdom? ... God understandeth the way thereof ... For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven ... Then did he see it, and declare it; he prepared it, yea, and searched it out [thought it through]. And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding. (Job 28)

Those who fear God also do not teach the doctrines of men as if they are the doctrines of God, hence my questions to you regarding what you believe. I asked you about eternal suffering as a consequence for sin, and I think you agree that even one sin, no matter how trivial, as long as done by a responsible adult with his eyes open, leads to the same fate. The question is, what fate? What would be just? You say a just God will condemn a person to eternal torment for a single sin and I say a just God would simply let the person live his life and then return to the dust with no gift of eternal life. Not only is your idea of justice contrary to all biblical teaching on the subject but the scriptures you quote support my doctrine, not yours.

 

[Krsto]

It is not that you deserve to be separated from God for all eternity from the moment of your first sin, it is that even before your first act of sin you do not deserve to be in His presence, at all; let alone for all eternity. Yet He loves us so much that He determined to reconcile us all with an act on His own part in spite of that.

No one deserves to be in his presence, even before sin, but obviously it is the nature of God to have fellowship with his creation, before and after sin. Adam & Eve had fellowship before and after sin, in fact, God took the initiative to rekindle the fellowship that was being lost due to A&E trying to hide from God.

Many teach sin caused a separation from a holy God who can not have fellowship with a sinner because that would be contrary to his holy nature, kind of like trying to mix oil and water. But the story of A&E shows otherwise.

God has determined in his wisdom that the wages of sin is death. It's his economy, he can do what he wants. To say death equates with eternal conscious suffering is a teaching with weak support in scriptures and is contrary to biblical teaching about destruction of the soul and the fact we are not born with immortal souls that have to go somewhere when we die.

The fact that death is the wages of sin does not mean that the death of a sinless man was the ONLY way for God to provide an alternative to his payment. He created the whole spiritual economy to begin with and he is in control. He can provide an alternative payment for sin any way he wants to. He's God.

 

[IXOYE]

It is not that you deserve to be separated from God for all eternity from the moment of your first sin, it is that even before your first act of sin you do not deserve to be in His presence, at all; let alone for all eternity. Yet He loves us so much that He determined to reconcile us all with an act on His own part in spite of that.

It's not about sin.

Go see how many times Paul wished his people would have clear conscience with God.

Sin is not the purpose of the Gospel.

Stop idolizing it, all of you!

Bad believers. BAD!@