I've read the theories about the atonement
He was our substitute
Forgiveness
Empowerment over sin
He was our example
Conquered the devil
They all have elements of truth but also neither do any seem to really be a complete answer.
Re forgiveness, it struck me that Jesus forgave sins before the atonement therefore the atonement apparently was'nt needed to exclusively forgive sins of individual people.
Re empowerment, The Holy Spirit empowers us to conquer sin which apparently could'nt be effectuated until after the crucifixion but it was'nt the actual atonement itself that empowered us but the Holy Spirit indwelling in believers.
Jesus was our example, but that was before the crucifixion.
He was our substitute yet if Jesus forgave sins before his crucifixion, why do we need a substitute since God can simply forgive sins arbitrarily.
It did conquer the devil but Jesus gave the 70 power over the devil before the crucifixion.
So i think when Jesus said "it is finished" as he died on the cross he meant the Law Of Moses which Jesus finally completely fulfilled and ended with his death on the cross. That law of animal sacrificing had to be completed by something greater or else it would still be in effect and be required for everyone.
So his atonement does'nt automatically forgive us for future sins but gives us the opportunity to be forgiven through confession and repentence because we now can have a direct relationship with God because the atonement removed the Mosaic Law which was a wall between man and God.
Why the atonement?
Re: Why the atonement?
I think the complete answer to the mysteries of the atonement will have to wait until Heaven.
I think when Jesus said "This is my new covenant" is when the Law of Moses was replaced.
I think Jesus' death on the cross was for the forgiveness of all sins for all time (past, present & future).
I think the reason the Jews didn't have a direct relationship with God is because they rejected one when God spoke to everyone at Mt Sinai and the people requested that Moses talk with God. We now have a direct relationship with God because we are in Christ and Christ has a relationship with the Father.
I don't think the Law was a wall between God and man. I think sin is the wall.
I also think this is a very interesting and deep topic.
tim
I think when Jesus said "This is my new covenant" is when the Law of Moses was replaced.
I think Jesus' death on the cross was for the forgiveness of all sins for all time (past, present & future).
I think the reason the Jews didn't have a direct relationship with God is because they rejected one when God spoke to everyone at Mt Sinai and the people requested that Moses talk with God. We now have a direct relationship with God because we are in Christ and Christ has a relationship with the Father.
I don't think the Law was a wall between God and man. I think sin is the wall.
I also think this is a very interesting and deep topic.
tim
Re: Why the atonement?
I think when Jesus said "This is my new covenant" is when the Law of Moses was replaced.
I think Jesus' death on the cross was for the forgiveness of all sins for all time (past, present & future).
I think the reason the Jews didn't have a direct relationship with God is because they rejected one when God spoke to everyone at Mt Sinai and the people requested that Moses talk with God. We now have a direct relationship with God because we are in Christ and Christ has a relationship with the Father.
I don't think the Law was a wall between God and man. I think sin is the wall.
On the cross i believe Jesus said "the debt is paid" referring to the debt we owe God for violating the Mosaic Law which did identify sin therefore once this debt was paid in full we could then have a direct relationship with God.
I think Jesus' death on the cross was for the forgiveness of all sins for all time (past, present & future).
I think the reason the Jews didn't have a direct relationship with God is because they rejected one when God spoke to everyone at Mt Sinai and the people requested that Moses talk with God. We now have a direct relationship with God because we are in Christ and Christ has a relationship with the Father.
I don't think the Law was a wall between God and man. I think sin is the wall.
On the cross i believe Jesus said "the debt is paid" referring to the debt we owe God for violating the Mosaic Law which did identify sin therefore once this debt was paid in full we could then have a direct relationship with God.
Re: Why the atonement?
Is the Gospel All About Forgiveness?
A short “devotional” I once read contained the statement:
“Jesus Christ shed His blood to forgive our sin not to remove our sin”
The author had it exactly backwards. Jesus shed his blood to remove our sin, not to forgive our sin. This is obvious from this statement from Hebrews 9:26:
...he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Throughout the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, it is obvious that God wants righteous people. We may well be satisfied merely with forgiveness so as to escape the Lake of Fire, but not God. He wants the very the very best for us, and He knows that we cannot dwell in total joy and health of soul until sin is removed from us. At this point, some may object that it is obvious that salvation is all about forgiveness of sin. How about scriptures such as?
Acts 13:38 Let it be known to you therefore, brethren, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you...
Colossians 1:14 ...in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
There is reason to doubt that the Greek word ἁφεσις should be translated as “forgiveness”
This becomes obvious in the words of Jesus in quoting Isaiah 61:1
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed...”
The word translated as “release” to the captives (“deliverance” in the Authorized Version)
is none other than ἁφεσις. Indeed, the word is used again in the phrase “set at liberty those who are oppressed.” This last phrase is literally “send away in deliverance the ones having been shattered”. Surely, Christ was not sent to forgive the oppressed, but was sent to deliver them from their oppression. Surely Christ was not sent to proclaim forgiveness to those who were unjustly imprisoned, but to proclaim their release from prison. So in addressing the men of Israel in Acts 13:38, surely Paul was saying that through Christ deliverance from sin, or release from sin was being proclaimed to them! Indeed, other than Jesus’s quote from Isaiah 61, all other instances of ἁφεσις in the New Testament relate to being delivered from sin.
Did John the Baptizer preach forgiveness of sins? According to most translations he did.
Mark 1:4 John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
Looking at the record of John’s dealing with people, do we ever find that he ever mentioned forgiveness — even once? How did he deal with the multitudes that came to be baptized by him? Did he ever tell them, “Repent and be baptized, and your sins will be forgiven?” No. He warned them to bear fruit that is consistent with repentance. Here is Luke’s record:
Luke 3:7-16 He said therefore to the multitudes that came out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruits that fit repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."
And the multitudes asked him, "What then shall we do?"
And he answered them, "He who has two coats, let him share with him who has none; and he who has food, let him do likewise."
Tax collectors also came to be baptized, and said to him, "Teacher, what shall we do?"
And he said to them, "Collect no more than is appointed you."
Soldiers also asked him, "And we, what shall we do?"
And he said to them, "Rob no one by violence or by false accusation, and be content with your wages."
As the people were in expectation, and all men questioned in their hearts concerning John, whether perhaps he were the Anointed One, John answered them all, "I baptize you with water; but he who is mightier than I is coming, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into his granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." So, with many other exhortations, he preached good news to the people.
In examining further the true message of salvation, we may ask ourselves how we become regenerated. What do we actually do to appropriate the sacrifice of Christ so that we may have the enabling grace to do right and avoid wrong? If we repent of our way of living, submit ourselves to Jesus as Lord of our lives, and become baptized into Christ, then we shall enter the Kingdom of God now, and Christ’s enabling grace will become available to us. John the Baptizer and Jesus proclaimed the same message concerning the Kingdom of God:
The Gospel According to John the Baptizer
According to John the Baptizer in the words we just read, there were two requirements necessary to become a member of the Kingdom:
1.Repent
2. Be baptized. The end or purpose of baptism was the affirmation of one’s decision, the entrance into the door of salvation, and the beginning of the process of sending sin out of one’s life, and thus the bearing of fruit that is worthy of repentance.
The Gospel According to Jesus
Matt 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
John 4:1-3 Now when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples), he left Judea and departed again to Galilee.
Jesus proclaimed the same requirements! Repent and be baptized.
The Gospel According to Peter
After Peter had addressed the men of Judea, showing that God had raised Jesus from the death, and that they had crucified Him, the following exchange took place:
Acts 2:36-39
“... Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."
Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the sending away of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."
What were Peter’s requirements to appropriate the benefits of gospel? Repent and be baptized! The only difference was that now that Jesus had been raised, the gift of His Spirit was given.
Now some claim that John the baptizer and Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom, but the apostle Paul opened the new order of the Church, by preaching the gospel of grace.
C.I. Scofield, in his notes on the Sermon on the Mount went so far as to affirm that it is neither the duty nor the privilege for the Christian to obey the laws of Christ expressed in those chapters ---- that they were the laws of the kingdom offered to the Jews, but that since the Jews rejected the kingdom it was to be postponed. Such teachers declare that now that we are under grace, we should listen to Paul, for the words of Christ no longer apply to us who live in the age of grace.
But as Paul made abundantly clear, there is only one gospel. That one gospel is the gospel of the Kingdom and Paul himself preached it!
The Gospel According to Paul
Acts 28:30,31 And he lived there two whole years at his own expense, and welcomed all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered.
But did Paul declare the necessity of repentance, as did John the Baptizer, Jesus, and Peter? Or did he teach that all that is necessary is to believe in the atoning work of Christ? In explaining to King Agrippa his experience with Jesus on the road to Damascus he concluded by saying,
Acts 26:19,20 "Wherefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, but declared first to those at Damascus, then at Jerusalem and throughout all the country of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God and perform deeds worthy of their repentance.
Does Paul’s gospel not resemble that proclaimed by John the baptizer?
Yes, Paul preached repentance, and doing deeds worthy of repentance. But did Paul proclaim the necessity of baptism? We read:
Acts 18: 8 ...many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.
It was after they heard Paul that they were baptized. The necessity of baptism must have been implicit or explicit in Paul’s message. Otherwise, why would they get baptized? So Paul’s gospel not only “resembled” that of John the Baptizer. It was identical! But is baptism really necessary in order to get right with God? Let’s look at the life of Paul himself. When were his sins washed away? Was it on the road to Damascus when Jesus spoke to him, and he submitted? That experience certainly turned him around. He was blinded, and was then ready to do what the Lord Jesus told him to do. But later, it was Ananias who counseled him to be baptized. From Paul’s own account of the matter, Ananias said:
Acts 22:16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’
So it was not when Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus, but at his baptism that Paul had his sins washed away.
Jesus taught:
John 3:5 ... "Truly, truly, I tell you, unless one is generated of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Although there is much controversy about the meaning of “generated of water”, many understand it to be baptism. This view is consistent with Justin Martyr’s explanation of the ways of Christians to Augustus Caesar and to his son. Justin was born in 110 A.D. In chapter 61 of Justin’s “First Apology”, we find his explanation of Christian baptism.
I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God having been made new through Christ; lest, if we omit this, we seem to be unfair in the explanation we are making. As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them.
Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated... For Christ also said, “Except ye be generated again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”... And how those who have sinned and repent shall escape their sins, is declared by Isaiah the prophet... he thus speaks: “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from your souls; learn to do well; judge the fatherless, and plead for the widow: and come and let us reason together, saith the Lord. And though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white like wool; and though they be as crimson, I will make them white as snow. But if ye refuse and rebel, the sword shall devour you: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.”...that he may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be regenerated, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe...”
What About John 3:16 and Acts 16:29-31...?
Acts 16:29-31 And he (the Philippian jailer) called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out and said, “Men, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Do these passages contradict the requirements Jesus and Peter gave for becoming right with God? Do they require something less to be saved? So often today, we hear that all you have to do to get right with God is “accept Christ as your personal saviour”. That’s a phrase we don’t find in any New Testament or early Christian writing. Or all you have to do is pray “God be merciful to me a sinner” , or “I realize I’m a sinner, Jesus, and that you died to save me. I hereby accept your finished work to make me fit for heaven.” Or some other prayer.
I recall a woman from my local area who affirmed that she would not become a Christian, because she just didn’t want to have to come to the front of a church and weep and cry. Some time later, she told me that she found out from her Christian friend that a person doesn’t have to come forward, weeping and crying. “All you have to do,” she explained, “is say a little prayer, and you’ll be a Christian.” That’s the way the woman understood the “gospel” which was presented to her. One wonders how many people have “said the little prayer” and remained unchanged, but are under the delusion that they are now “saved”, that they can go on living their lives as usual, but with the expectation that they’ll go to heaven when they die, or when they are raised again to life.
So, it is said, that all we have to do is believe in Jesus. However, the whole crux of the matter lies in that little word πιστευω which has been translated “believe”. Indeed, the word does mean “believe” in many contexts. But another meaning is given in John’s account of Jesus’ life:
John 2:23-25 Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many people saw the miraculous signs he was doing and believed in his name. But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all men. He did not need man’s testimony about man, for he knew what was in a man.
Is not “entrust” also the way the word is used in John 3:16 and Acts 16:29-31? If we entrust ourselves to Jesus, this includes repentance and baptism.
Luke 13:5 I tell you ... unless you repent you will all likewise perish."
John 3:5 Jesus responded, "Truly, truly, I tell you, unless one is generated of water and Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Then how is the death of Christ connected with salvation? For years I had no idea. Yet I believed the words of Paul that the Saviour’s death makes possible His enabling grace to help us live a life of righteousness before Him. More recently, I began to understand how Jesus’ death relates to our salvation from sin. Jesus began to identify with man when He was born as a human being. He was truly a human baby who cried and wet himself like any other baby. He lived the life of an ordinary man here on earth, becoming hungry and thirsty like other men, and being tempted to wrong doing like other men, though through His relationship with His Father, He always chose the right over the wrong. And finally He died as a human being. The identification was complete. After He was raised, He and His Father came to dwell within His people. Christ in us — infiltrated through our entire being, and we in Christ — infiltrated through His entire being. Christ has put on humanity, and we have put on Christ.
Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
God prepared a building made without hands, which is His Church. "In the Father’s house (again the Church) are many dwelling places" John 14. The Body of Christ, of which He is the Head ---- a single organism — we in Him and He in us. This magnificent unity has been made possible through Christ’s identification with us, the great finished work that Christ accomplished on Calvary’s tree.
Father, enable each one by your grace, who considers your great salvation to understand its wonder, its depth, and its expression of your magnificent LOVE! Show them that the easy way that is being proclaimed today is deceiving people and leading them into death. It is falsely portraying your character.
A short “devotional” I once read contained the statement:
“Jesus Christ shed His blood to forgive our sin not to remove our sin”
The author had it exactly backwards. Jesus shed his blood to remove our sin, not to forgive our sin. This is obvious from this statement from Hebrews 9:26:
...he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Throughout the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, it is obvious that God wants righteous people. We may well be satisfied merely with forgiveness so as to escape the Lake of Fire, but not God. He wants the very the very best for us, and He knows that we cannot dwell in total joy and health of soul until sin is removed from us. At this point, some may object that it is obvious that salvation is all about forgiveness of sin. How about scriptures such as?
Acts 13:38 Let it be known to you therefore, brethren, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you...
Colossians 1:14 ...in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
There is reason to doubt that the Greek word ἁφεσις should be translated as “forgiveness”
This becomes obvious in the words of Jesus in quoting Isaiah 61:1
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed...”
The word translated as “release” to the captives (“deliverance” in the Authorized Version)
is none other than ἁφεσις. Indeed, the word is used again in the phrase “set at liberty those who are oppressed.” This last phrase is literally “send away in deliverance the ones having been shattered”. Surely, Christ was not sent to forgive the oppressed, but was sent to deliver them from their oppression. Surely Christ was not sent to proclaim forgiveness to those who were unjustly imprisoned, but to proclaim their release from prison. So in addressing the men of Israel in Acts 13:38, surely Paul was saying that through Christ deliverance from sin, or release from sin was being proclaimed to them! Indeed, other than Jesus’s quote from Isaiah 61, all other instances of ἁφεσις in the New Testament relate to being delivered from sin.
Did John the Baptizer preach forgiveness of sins? According to most translations he did.
Mark 1:4 John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
Looking at the record of John’s dealing with people, do we ever find that he ever mentioned forgiveness — even once? How did he deal with the multitudes that came to be baptized by him? Did he ever tell them, “Repent and be baptized, and your sins will be forgiven?” No. He warned them to bear fruit that is consistent with repentance. Here is Luke’s record:
Luke 3:7-16 He said therefore to the multitudes that came out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruits that fit repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."
And the multitudes asked him, "What then shall we do?"
And he answered them, "He who has two coats, let him share with him who has none; and he who has food, let him do likewise."
Tax collectors also came to be baptized, and said to him, "Teacher, what shall we do?"
And he said to them, "Collect no more than is appointed you."
Soldiers also asked him, "And we, what shall we do?"
And he said to them, "Rob no one by violence or by false accusation, and be content with your wages."
As the people were in expectation, and all men questioned in their hearts concerning John, whether perhaps he were the Anointed One, John answered them all, "I baptize you with water; but he who is mightier than I is coming, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into his granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." So, with many other exhortations, he preached good news to the people.
In examining further the true message of salvation, we may ask ourselves how we become regenerated. What do we actually do to appropriate the sacrifice of Christ so that we may have the enabling grace to do right and avoid wrong? If we repent of our way of living, submit ourselves to Jesus as Lord of our lives, and become baptized into Christ, then we shall enter the Kingdom of God now, and Christ’s enabling grace will become available to us. John the Baptizer and Jesus proclaimed the same message concerning the Kingdom of God:
The Gospel According to John the Baptizer
According to John the Baptizer in the words we just read, there were two requirements necessary to become a member of the Kingdom:
1.Repent
2. Be baptized. The end or purpose of baptism was the affirmation of one’s decision, the entrance into the door of salvation, and the beginning of the process of sending sin out of one’s life, and thus the bearing of fruit that is worthy of repentance.
The Gospel According to Jesus
Matt 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
John 4:1-3 Now when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples), he left Judea and departed again to Galilee.
Jesus proclaimed the same requirements! Repent and be baptized.
The Gospel According to Peter
After Peter had addressed the men of Judea, showing that God had raised Jesus from the death, and that they had crucified Him, the following exchange took place:
Acts 2:36-39
“... Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."
Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the sending away of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."
What were Peter’s requirements to appropriate the benefits of gospel? Repent and be baptized! The only difference was that now that Jesus had been raised, the gift of His Spirit was given.
Now some claim that John the baptizer and Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom, but the apostle Paul opened the new order of the Church, by preaching the gospel of grace.
C.I. Scofield, in his notes on the Sermon on the Mount went so far as to affirm that it is neither the duty nor the privilege for the Christian to obey the laws of Christ expressed in those chapters ---- that they were the laws of the kingdom offered to the Jews, but that since the Jews rejected the kingdom it was to be postponed. Such teachers declare that now that we are under grace, we should listen to Paul, for the words of Christ no longer apply to us who live in the age of grace.
But as Paul made abundantly clear, there is only one gospel. That one gospel is the gospel of the Kingdom and Paul himself preached it!
The Gospel According to Paul
Acts 28:30,31 And he lived there two whole years at his own expense, and welcomed all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered.
But did Paul declare the necessity of repentance, as did John the Baptizer, Jesus, and Peter? Or did he teach that all that is necessary is to believe in the atoning work of Christ? In explaining to King Agrippa his experience with Jesus on the road to Damascus he concluded by saying,
Acts 26:19,20 "Wherefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, but declared first to those at Damascus, then at Jerusalem and throughout all the country of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God and perform deeds worthy of their repentance.
Does Paul’s gospel not resemble that proclaimed by John the baptizer?
Yes, Paul preached repentance, and doing deeds worthy of repentance. But did Paul proclaim the necessity of baptism? We read:
Acts 18: 8 ...many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.
It was after they heard Paul that they were baptized. The necessity of baptism must have been implicit or explicit in Paul’s message. Otherwise, why would they get baptized? So Paul’s gospel not only “resembled” that of John the Baptizer. It was identical! But is baptism really necessary in order to get right with God? Let’s look at the life of Paul himself. When were his sins washed away? Was it on the road to Damascus when Jesus spoke to him, and he submitted? That experience certainly turned him around. He was blinded, and was then ready to do what the Lord Jesus told him to do. But later, it was Ananias who counseled him to be baptized. From Paul’s own account of the matter, Ananias said:
Acts 22:16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’
So it was not when Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus, but at his baptism that Paul had his sins washed away.
Jesus taught:
John 3:5 ... "Truly, truly, I tell you, unless one is generated of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Although there is much controversy about the meaning of “generated of water”, many understand it to be baptism. This view is consistent with Justin Martyr’s explanation of the ways of Christians to Augustus Caesar and to his son. Justin was born in 110 A.D. In chapter 61 of Justin’s “First Apology”, we find his explanation of Christian baptism.
I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God having been made new through Christ; lest, if we omit this, we seem to be unfair in the explanation we are making. As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them.
Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated... For Christ also said, “Except ye be generated again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”... And how those who have sinned and repent shall escape their sins, is declared by Isaiah the prophet... he thus speaks: “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from your souls; learn to do well; judge the fatherless, and plead for the widow: and come and let us reason together, saith the Lord. And though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white like wool; and though they be as crimson, I will make them white as snow. But if ye refuse and rebel, the sword shall devour you: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.”...that he may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be regenerated, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe...”
What About John 3:16 and Acts 16:29-31...?
Acts 16:29-31 And he (the Philippian jailer) called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out and said, “Men, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Do these passages contradict the requirements Jesus and Peter gave for becoming right with God? Do they require something less to be saved? So often today, we hear that all you have to do to get right with God is “accept Christ as your personal saviour”. That’s a phrase we don’t find in any New Testament or early Christian writing. Or all you have to do is pray “God be merciful to me a sinner” , or “I realize I’m a sinner, Jesus, and that you died to save me. I hereby accept your finished work to make me fit for heaven.” Or some other prayer.
I recall a woman from my local area who affirmed that she would not become a Christian, because she just didn’t want to have to come to the front of a church and weep and cry. Some time later, she told me that she found out from her Christian friend that a person doesn’t have to come forward, weeping and crying. “All you have to do,” she explained, “is say a little prayer, and you’ll be a Christian.” That’s the way the woman understood the “gospel” which was presented to her. One wonders how many people have “said the little prayer” and remained unchanged, but are under the delusion that they are now “saved”, that they can go on living their lives as usual, but with the expectation that they’ll go to heaven when they die, or when they are raised again to life.
So, it is said, that all we have to do is believe in Jesus. However, the whole crux of the matter lies in that little word πιστευω which has been translated “believe”. Indeed, the word does mean “believe” in many contexts. But another meaning is given in John’s account of Jesus’ life:
John 2:23-25 Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many people saw the miraculous signs he was doing and believed in his name. But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all men. He did not need man’s testimony about man, for he knew what was in a man.
Is not “entrust” also the way the word is used in John 3:16 and Acts 16:29-31? If we entrust ourselves to Jesus, this includes repentance and baptism.
Luke 13:5 I tell you ... unless you repent you will all likewise perish."
John 3:5 Jesus responded, "Truly, truly, I tell you, unless one is generated of water and Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Then how is the death of Christ connected with salvation? For years I had no idea. Yet I believed the words of Paul that the Saviour’s death makes possible His enabling grace to help us live a life of righteousness before Him. More recently, I began to understand how Jesus’ death relates to our salvation from sin. Jesus began to identify with man when He was born as a human being. He was truly a human baby who cried and wet himself like any other baby. He lived the life of an ordinary man here on earth, becoming hungry and thirsty like other men, and being tempted to wrong doing like other men, though through His relationship with His Father, He always chose the right over the wrong. And finally He died as a human being. The identification was complete. After He was raised, He and His Father came to dwell within His people. Christ in us — infiltrated through our entire being, and we in Christ — infiltrated through His entire being. Christ has put on humanity, and we have put on Christ.
Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
God prepared a building made without hands, which is His Church. "In the Father’s house (again the Church) are many dwelling places" John 14. The Body of Christ, of which He is the Head ---- a single organism — we in Him and He in us. This magnificent unity has been made possible through Christ’s identification with us, the great finished work that Christ accomplished on Calvary’s tree.
Father, enable each one by your grace, who considers your great salvation to understand its wonder, its depth, and its expression of your magnificent LOVE! Show them that the easy way that is being proclaimed today is deceiving people and leading them into death. It is falsely portraying your character.
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Why the atonement?
I do not believe that Jesus paid the debt we owe God for violating the law, for two reasons:On the cross i believe Jesus said "the debt is paid" referring to the debt we owe God for violating the Mosaic Law which did identify sin therefore once this debt was paid in full we could then have a direct relationship with God.
1. Christ's sacrifice was not to satisfy some forensic requirement which God has in His big law office in the sky. Rather it was a means by which Christ could deliver us, set us free from sin.
2. God doesn't require people to "pay off the debt of their past sin". Rather God is interested in delivering us from our present sinful tendencies and in transforming our present characters is such a way that we ultimately shall be conformed to the image of Christ.
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Why the atonement?
Good thoughts, Paidion.
My two cents:
Also, I think a survey of the New Testament shows that Jesus died also for those outside of the Law- to cleanse their consciences just as much as those under the Mosaic law.
My two cents:
Jesus was "slain from the foundation of the world", which I take to mean that all sins, before or after his earthly crucifixion in linear time and space were atoned for by his death on our behalf, which is the very means by which Jesus offered forgiveness. It wasn't ever artibrary.He was our substitute yet if Jesus forgave sins before his crucifixion, why do we need a substitute since God can simply forgive sins arbitrarily.
Also, I think a survey of the New Testament shows that Jesus died also for those outside of the Law- to cleanse their consciences just as much as those under the Mosaic law.
Pastor Josh Coles, Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Visit the Aletheia Discussion Forums
Visit the Aletheia Discussion Forums
Re: Why the atonement?
He was our substitute yet if Jesus forgave sins before his crucifixion, why do we need a substitute since God can simply forgive sins arbitrarily.
Jesus was "slain from the foundation of the world", which I take to mean that all sins, before or after his earthly crucifixion in linear time and space were atoned for by his death on our behalf, which is the very means by which Jesus offered forgiveness. It wasn't ever artibrary.
Slain from the foundation does'nt say , for what reason he was slain and also i think it means the plan was determined by God but not that the actual event happened. The fact is that Jesus did forgive sins prior to his crucifixion and i'm not aware of scripture saying that his crucifixion forgave sins going backwards. If that were the case why have sacrifices in the Mosaic law at all?
My singular point was why was he was crucified as oppossed to stoned to death or dying of old age. When Jesus said he came to fulfill the law i think the main purpose of the crucifixion was to fulfill the sacrificial part of the Mosaic law so that it was no longer necessary.
There are many other issues connected with the death of Jesus which Paidion and others have previously brought up but they don't address why he was crucified IMHO.
Paidion, Paul says in Col 2.14 "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us" which commentaries describe as a certificate of debt owed to God for not keeping the Mosaic law. What do you think?
Jesus was "slain from the foundation of the world", which I take to mean that all sins, before or after his earthly crucifixion in linear time and space were atoned for by his death on our behalf, which is the very means by which Jesus offered forgiveness. It wasn't ever artibrary.
Slain from the foundation does'nt say , for what reason he was slain and also i think it means the plan was determined by God but not that the actual event happened. The fact is that Jesus did forgive sins prior to his crucifixion and i'm not aware of scripture saying that his crucifixion forgave sins going backwards. If that were the case why have sacrifices in the Mosaic law at all?
My singular point was why was he was crucified as oppossed to stoned to death or dying of old age. When Jesus said he came to fulfill the law i think the main purpose of the crucifixion was to fulfill the sacrificial part of the Mosaic law so that it was no longer necessary.
There are many other issues connected with the death of Jesus which Paidion and others have previously brought up but they don't address why he was crucified IMHO.
Paidion, Paul says in Col 2.14 "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us" which commentaries describe as a certificate of debt owed to God for not keeping the Mosaic law. What do you think?
Re: Why the atonement?
Well, yes, determined to occur at a certain time and place.i think it means the plan was determined by God but not that the actual event happened.
Well, this passage in Hebrews tells us that the sacrifices weren't for the forgiveness of sins. They only "forgave sins" in that they reminded the people of their sins and pointed forward to Christ's atoning death.The fact is that Jesus did forgive sins prior to his crucifixion and i'm not aware of scripture saying that his crucifixion forgave sins going backwards. If that were the case why have sacrifices in the Mosaic law at all?
Hebrews 10:1-4
1The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Coupled with the Scriptural statement that there is "no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood", we have a good reason to think that God doesn't just "artibrarily forgive sins" apart from His sacrifice.
Why was he cruficied? I'm not sure it "had" to be crucifixion except that the associations crucifixion carried best highlight the main themes of atonement and salvation (guilt, shame, curse, piercing, etc..)
Sure, he was cancelling the "written code", but I don't think we can limit his death to that. He was also dying for the sins of the whole world. You didn't really answer what I said about how His death is efficacious for the Gentiles (those outside the law)
Pastor Josh Coles, Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Visit the Aletheia Discussion Forums
Visit the Aletheia Discussion Forums
Re: Why the atonement?
Coupled with the Scriptural statement that there is "no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood", we have a good reason to think that God doesn't just "artibrarily forgive sins" apart from His sacrifice.
Why was he cruficied? I'm not sure it "had" to be crucifixion except that the associations crucifixion carried best highlight the main themes of atonement and salvation (guilt, shame, curse, piercing, etc..)
Sure, he was cancelling the "written code", but I don't think we can limit his death to that. He was also dying for the sins of the whole world. You didn't really answer what I said about how His death is efficacious for the Gentiles (those outside the law)
Well, yes, determined to occur at a certain time and place.
Well, this passage in Hebrews tells us that the sacrifices weren't for the forgiveness of sins. They only "forgave sins" in that they reminded the people of their sins and pointed forward to Christ's atoning death.
Hebrews 10:1-4
1The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Coupled with the Scriptural statement that there is "no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood", we have a good reason to think that God doesn't just "artibrarily forgive sins" apart from His sacrifice.
Why was he cruficied? I'm not sure it "had" to be crucifixion except that the associations crucifixion carried best highlight the main themes of atonement and salvation (guilt, shame, curse, piercing, etc..)
Sure, he was cancelling the "written code", but I don't think we can limit his death to that. He was also dying for the sins of the whole world. You didn't really answer what I said about how His death is efficacious for the Gentiles (those outside the law)
You brought up a good point "there is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood" and Jesus forgave sins before the crucufixion so it's power could be going back.
In Dan 9.27 it says that he (Christ) would bring the sacrifices to an end in the middle of the week so those sacrifices are the ritual parts of the Law of Moses ( i believe) which ended with his death. I think the crucifixion may have been specifically necessary as the ritual type of death needed to end the Law of Moses.
The folks leaving Egypt were mostly Israelites but there were also some gentiles and i think anyone could accept and follow the Mosaic Covenant and also i think the Israelites were used by God as a picture of the world and God used this process to slowly reveal himself to mankind. So according to Paul there is no jew or gentile in Christ therefore if Christ's sacrifice provides forgiveness as well everything else the Leviticus sacrifices provided like acceptance and fellowship then it's efficacious for whosoever will partake.
Why was he cruficied? I'm not sure it "had" to be crucifixion except that the associations crucifixion carried best highlight the main themes of atonement and salvation (guilt, shame, curse, piercing, etc..)
Sure, he was cancelling the "written code", but I don't think we can limit his death to that. He was also dying for the sins of the whole world. You didn't really answer what I said about how His death is efficacious for the Gentiles (those outside the law)
i think it means the plan was determined by God but not that the actual event happened.
Well, yes, determined to occur at a certain time and place.
The fact is that Jesus did forgive sins prior to his crucifixion and i'm not aware of scripture saying that his crucifixion forgave sins going backwards. If that were the case why have sacrifices in the Mosaic law at all?
Well, this passage in Hebrews tells us that the sacrifices weren't for the forgiveness of sins. They only "forgave sins" in that they reminded the people of their sins and pointed forward to Christ's atoning death.
Hebrews 10:1-4
1The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Coupled with the Scriptural statement that there is "no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood", we have a good reason to think that God doesn't just "artibrarily forgive sins" apart from His sacrifice.
Why was he cruficied? I'm not sure it "had" to be crucifixion except that the associations crucifixion carried best highlight the main themes of atonement and salvation (guilt, shame, curse, piercing, etc..)
Sure, he was cancelling the "written code", but I don't think we can limit his death to that. He was also dying for the sins of the whole world. You didn't really answer what I said about how His death is efficacious for the Gentiles (those outside the law)
You brought up a good point "there is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood" and Jesus forgave sins before the crucufixion so it's power could be going back.
In Dan 9.27 it says that he (Christ) would bring the sacrifices to an end in the middle of the week so those sacrifices are the ritual parts of the Law of Moses ( i believe) which ended with his death. I think the crucifixion may have been specifically necessary as the ritual type of death needed to end the Law of Moses.
The folks leaving Egypt were mostly Israelites but there were also some gentiles and i think anyone could accept and follow the Mosaic Covenant and also i think the Israelites were used by God as a picture of the world and God used this process to slowly reveal himself to mankind. So according to Paul there is no jew or gentile in Christ therefore if Christ's sacrifice provides forgiveness as well everything else the Leviticus sacrifices provided like acceptance and fellowship then it's efficacious for whosoever will partake.