Atontement: Was it "necessary" for God to die?

[dizerner]

Don't feel bad, jr, everything Jesus and Paul said sounds like a sermon too.

Actually, I'm not so sure. When I listen to radio sermons like that of Macarthur or Sproul, I don't picture Jesus in a hologram looking on telling his Apostles, "You see there boys, THAT'S how I wanted it done!" If he does, time for me to pack my valize and move to Velice.

Regards, Brenden.

I don't even know what your point is. I guess you don't like the sermons by those two individuals? And what is this random mention of a hologram? What are you even talking about? I certainly wasn't equating all sermons as being equal, if that's what you meant. I was saying when Paul or Jesus were asked a question or making a point, their answer was in the form of an exhortational sermon, and not a dry logical proof that satisfied the reasoning of their questioners.

God bless.

[TheEditor]

My mistake. I assumed one of God's gifts was a sense of humor.

Nothing vexes me more than having to explain good sarcasm, but I'll do my best. "Hologram"--a reference to Star Trek I suppose. I picture Jesus in the "whatever" dimension watching us humans as we interact. Back in the day when I met a traveling Minister that was overbearing and bombastic, I use to quip to my friends, "I'm sure if Jesus were watching now in a hologram, he would say 'Just like that guy Peter, that's how it's done'".

Jesus' sermons do not come across to me, in general, (unless the occasion warranted it), as being well-described by words such as bombastic, pedantic, stentorian, tumid, pompous, or sententious. The same cannot be said, however, about certain radio preachers who treat their audience as though they are in need of correction akin to the Pharisees. Whenever they are called on it, they say "The gentle Jesus was not so gentle with the Pharisees." Maybe so. But I'm not a Pharisee, you see, and I suspect most here are not.

Regards, Brenden.

[steve7150]

What you have NOT shown, is that Jesus paid for our sins









Paidion,
Doesn't Col 2.14 essentially say he paid for our sins? It says he cancelled the certificate of debt that was against us. In different words it seems like the same thing as paying for our sins.

[steve7150]

Maybe so. But I'm not a Pharisee, you see, and I suspect most here are not.








But there are all kinds of preachers nowadays, some are pretty funny. Osteen has his humerous moments, so does Prince, even Joyce Meyer is funny. John Macarthur although i respect him, is at times overbearing.

You are a Star Trek fan? You probably know Spock just died. Do you remember an episode with the Organitarians?

[TheEditor]

I think so. Something to do with the "Prime Directive" and all that? Whether or not to interfere in human development and etc. Pacifists, yeah, I think I remember, but I haven't watched too many of the early episodes in quite a long while.

Regards, Brenden.

[steve7150]

I think so. Something to do with the "Prime Directive" and all that? Whether or not to interfere in human development and etc. Pacifists, yeah, I think I remember, but I haven't watched too many of the early episodes in quite a long while.










Yes outstanding! The Clingons wanted to conquer them and they apparently would not defend themselves. Kirk intervened to save them but they wouldn't cooperate. Anyway they were super pacifists but millions of years advanced ahead of the Clingons and humans so they disabled everyones weapons and sent everyone home.

[darinhouston]

Boy, we're really off topic now, aren't we? My point on the sermon is that it was misplaced. I love a good sermon, but responding to an intellectual curiosity with a sermon seems a bit condescending.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TheEditor]

Yes, we appear to have taken a Bajoran wormhole into the Gamma Quadrant and I apologize for that, but it is perhaps only there where the answers to theodicy and other pressing matters have finally been discovered.

Regards, Brenden.

[Paidion]

Paidion,
Doesn't Col 2.14 essentially say he paid for our sins? It says he cancelled the certificate of debt that was against us. In different words it seems like the same thing as paying for our sins.

Steve, I think that translation is misleading. With what justification can δογμα (dogma) be translated as "debt"? I know the ESV, Murdoch, and the HCSB do so, but most translators render it as "ordinances." Others translate it as "decrees."

Here are some other verses which contain the word (in the NKJV):

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.
Acts 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered to them the decrees to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem.
Acts 17:7 "Jason has harbored them, and these are all acting contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying there is another king—Jesus."
Ephesians 2:15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances , so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace.

Now consider the verse in question in Young's Literal Translation:

Colossians 2:14 having blotted out the handwriting in the ordinances that is against us, that was contrary to us, and he hath taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross;

Indeed, doesn't this verse suggest the same type of abolition of the Mosaic law as in Ephesians 2:15 above? The handwriting of these Mosaic decrees, that is, the written law of Moses, was abolished by Christ as far as their application to His disciples is concerned. Christ's disciples were thereafter under the law of Christ.

I don't think the verse has anything to do with the cancellation of a debt.

[mattrose]

Boy, we're really off topic now, aren't we?

Well, I am coming in real late and have chosen not to read this lengthy thread. Such being the case, I may not be interpreting the nature of your question correctly. Nevertheless, I would respond to your question with the classic thought, "God became what we are so that we can become what God is." The atonement, as I most essentially understand it, depends on a 2nd Adam (fully human) who is simultaneously perfectly holy (fully God). In Adam (the 1st one), we all die in our sins. But in becoming flesh, Christ creates a new race of humans. This race doesn't face extinction, but resurrection.