Ritajanice
Born-Again
Well, I didn’t know that did I?
I posted scripture showing “ you” Gods wrath, still it’s relevant information, regarding the wrath of God.
TULIP an open discussion
- Thread starter CadyandZoe
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I posted scripture showing “ you” Gods wrath, still it’s relevant information, regarding the wrath of God.
I realized that, it's why I wanted to let you know.
I realize God's righteous anger towards man, and that it's not just play-acting.
Much love!
This is a contradiction. Either the sins were forgiven or they were paid. It can't be both.
Good question. Paul says that the cross of Christ was a public demonstration of God's righteousness.
As you can see, contrary to the satisfaction theory of atonement, the sins are forgiven. The debt is canceled.
Right. According to the Satisfaction theory of Atonement, the debt was paid. But the NT teaches us that the debt was canceled and the sins are forgiven.
Not true. As we have seen, the debt was canceled, and the sins are forgiven. Propitiation is the mollification of God's wrath, which gave Jesus the authority to enter into the heavenly temple to intercede for the saints. Making atonement is not paying a debt.
No, as we have seen, the debt was canceled. Strong's Concordance: #895 aphesis
That's right. The debt was canceled.
Right. But not by paying our debt to justice. The sins were forgiven and the debt canceled.
No. Sinners are redeemed because God accepted the blood of Christ as the means of propitiation of his wrath.
You truly don't see the contradistinction between forgiveness and punishment? Remember the Parable of the Unforgiving Debtor? Matthew 18:21-35
Either a debt was canceled or it was paid. If Jesus paid the debt, then the debt wasn't canceled. Right?
This is incorrect. We were in agreement up to your final statement. Propitiation is not a matter of justice, as you suggest. Rather, propitiation is an act of appeasement intended to mollify God's wrath. In summary, propitiation emphasizes God's wrath being turned away, while justice, in its broadest sense, refers to the concept that individuals should be treated in an equitable and fair manner. Achieving justice means ensuring that people receive what they “deserve.” Jesus didn't deserve the death penalty; we did. If justice was to be served, then we would get the death we deserved.
We are building a picture now. We talked about the "remission" of sins, which we learned is the cancelation of the debt. We talked about redemption, which is the act of freeing a slave. We talked about forgiveness of sins, which overlooks them and releases the offender from obligation or liability. And we talked about propitiation, which is the mollification of wrath.
In order to understand the gospel, we need to abandon the notion that no moral offense should go unpunished. The idea that Christ had to die in order to balance the moral equation is not true or Biblical.
No, I said that Christ paid for our release from sin. I thought that I was clear that payment isn't necessarily purchase.
Yes, but we were not redeemed by Jesus paying our debt to justice.
You should interpret my statement from within the context of our discussion. When I said that we can't have a personal relationship with God I was talking about God in his transcendence.
We certainly have a personal relationship with God because God is a person, and I am a person. But I take issue with those who pretend that one can meet God for coffee like one would do with a friend.
Ritajanice
Born-Again
No it’s not play acting...you would NOT want to be under the wrath of God.
We were at one time though were we not?
Short commentary.
By our very nature we were subject to God's anger, just like everyone else. KJV Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Romans 1:18-32
King James Version
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
I'm eager to hear your thoughts on this. :)
My explanation of the concept of "transcendence" relies on an analogy between God as the creator of all that exists and an author as the creator of all in his novel. I understand that a novel is a work of fiction, and by definition, the characters aren't "real" from the author's perspective.
Nonetheless, if God is truly transcendent over his creation, then he is more real than we are. We are not fictional characters, but we aren't as real as God is.
Certainly! Here's the rewritten text:
The most compelling fictional stories are those that accurately capture human emotions and moral values. Consequently, it can be quite challenging to distinguish between a fictional story and a true one. Therefore, it's not uncommon for an author to empathize with their characters and understand their feelings to some extent. The author aims to foster an emotional bond between the readers and the characters, and if the story is well-crafted, the author is likely to develop a similar emotional connection with the characters as well.
Haven't I been sharing them? I just find your reasoning unreasonable, your logic illogical. And your conclusion unscriptural. I think I've given my reasons a number of times.
Much love!
to some extent? Are you being serious? I was taking you as being serious, now I'm not so sure. Are you pulling one over on us all?
Are you a writer? I am. Nothing published! Even so . . . I know the difference between what I am and am not responsible for. I think you've strained my credulity past the breaking point.
I do, however, appreciate the opportunity to be refreshed on the implications of TULIP.
Much love!
Last edited:
By what cady is saying, we are all actors in God's play. So why be angry with a character you invented who is doing things you invented in a story you invented?
Much love!
Ritajanice
Born-Again
I don't know for sure, but wisdom would dictate that a slave's redemption would be formalized with a written document. Or else, if an ownership certificate were issued, there would be no official remedy for the former slave if the owner decided not to release the slave as promised. For this reason, I suspect that redemption was formalized with a written document stating that the slave was freed.
For this reason, I am reluctant to think of redemption as a purchase. Am I picking at nits? :)
You are concocting a scenario that would support your assertions, but you've invented it. I feel certain you could invent any number of scenarios which would both support and refute your assertions if you wanted to.
Acts 20 tells us God purchased us with His blood. Isn't that sufficient?
Much love!
Last edited:
From memory Tiny Tim sang that hit song. But I remember the song from long ago.
A debt we owe is stamped "Cancelled" if the charges are paid for by someone else.
The debt was cancelled because the charge of our indebtedness (our sins) was nailed it to the cross.
Colossians 2:13-14 (WEB) 13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.
The debt was cancelled because the payment for sin was on the cross.
1 Peter 2:24 (KJV) 24 Who his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree
Titus 2:14 (WEB) who gave himself for us, that he might redeem [lutroó: paying a ransom] us (believers) from all iniquity
Strong's Concordance #3084 lutroó
lutroó: to release by paying a ransom, to redeem
setst777 said: No doubt the Father was well pleased with His Son. God was well pleased, because Christ became that unblemished Lamb to atone (make propitiation) for our sins by His shed blood on the cross, thus satisfying God's justice.
So, you disagree with The Scriptures that the atonement of Christ's redemptive act justifies us from the wrath of God?
Romans 5:9 (WEB) 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we [believers] will be saved from God’s wrath through him.
Romans 3:23-24 (WEB)
23 for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; 24 being justified freely by his grace through [Greek: dia: because of] the redemption that is in Christ Jesus
Before the sacrifice of Lord Jesus, the justice or righteousness of God was not yet made for sin.
Romans 3:25 ... in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished
Christ's atoning sacrifice of himself, the shedding of his blood, is the demonstration of God's righteousness
Romans 3:25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood — to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished
Hebrews 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance — now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
Because God's justice or righteousness was fulfilled by Christ on the cross, God can justly forgive sins.
Matthew 26:28 for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the remission / forgiveness [Gk: aphesis] of sins.
So, you deny the following Scripture?
Romans 3:25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood — to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished
setst777 said: If Christ's sacrifice was not necessary to forgive anyone, then why did God have His Son sacrificed for our sins?
Exactly! The public demonstration of God's righteousness is his justice being implemented by the public sacrifice of His Son.
Romans 5:9 (WEB) 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we [believers] will be saved from God’s wrath through him.
So, you do not believe that redemption was a purchase made by God from Sin to be His Possession?
Revelation 5:9 and purchased [Greek: agorazó] us for God with your blood out of every tribe, language, people, and nation,
Strong's Concordance #59 agorazó
agorazó: to buy in the marketplace, purchase
CadyandZoe said: I agree.
So, you agree and disagree that God purchased us from sin to become God's possession?
Do you believe Christ redeemed believers from sin to be God's possession or not?
According to the Scriptures, does God use that redemption by blood as a purchase or not?
The debt was canceled because redemption is the payment made for sins (the charge). His Sacrifice paid for "the charge" (our sins) thus satisfying God's Justice for the legal debt; and so, cancelling the debt.
Colossians 2:13-14 (WEB) 13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.
What is "the charge" of legal indebtedness? Is it not our sins? Who paid the price to free us from our sins?
Titus 2:14 (WEB) who gave himself for us, that he might redeem [lutroó: paying a ransom] us (believers) from all iniquity
Strong's Concordance 3084 lutroó
lutroó: to release by paying a ransom, to redeem
Romans 5:9 (WEB) 9 Much more then, being now justified [dikaioó] by his blood, we [believers] will be saved from God’s wrath through him.
To justify is to declare righteous, which is by his blood.
Strong's Concordance 1344 dikaioó: to show to be righteous, declare righteous
Romans 3:25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood — to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness [Justice administered by the sacrifice of atonement]
Strong's Concordance 1343 dikaiosuné: righteousness, justice
God demonstrated his righteousness or justice by presenting Christ as a sacrifice of atonement.
So, now you should be able to see that Christ's sacrifice is the redemption, a payment, to purchase us from sin to become God's possession as God’s slaves. We are forgiven of all sins because Lord Jesus purchased us from all sin by His blood to be His possession.
The charge of our sins is what makes us indebted to the Law. That debt bound us to suffer God's wrath. The debt was cancelled because all sins (the charge of our indebtedness) were paid for by the Blood of Christ shed on the cross, thus satisfying God's justice or righteousness for sins committed - debt cancelled.
Romans 5:9 (WEB) 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we [believers] will be saved from God’s wrath through him.
1 Peter 2:24 (KJV) 24 Who his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree
Titus 2:14 (WEB) who gave himself for us, that he might redeem [lutroó: paying a ransom] us (believers) from all iniquity
Romans 3:25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood — to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness (Justice administered)
Last edited:
I don't remember you sharing your reasons why an author will or must remain unemotionally involved in a story he or she is telling.
As for scripture, do you believe that transcendence is an attribute of God?
Yes, I am being serious. I already gave the account of J. K. Rowling, who cried after she killed off one of her favorite characters.
And you never related to your characters emotionally, even as you were writing them?
I looked at the Greek for Acts 20:28, and whereas the word can mean "purchase," the main meaning of the word is "to keep safe, preserve." As to money "to save up."
Doesn't Paul mean to say that Jesus saved his church with his blood?
Isn't Paul comparing the danger he might face in Rome with the danger that Jesus faced in Jerusalem? If so, then he means to give the Ephesians a word of encouragement. Since Jesus was willing to die to save and preserve his church, Paul is willing to die for the same reason.
Isn't that what Paul means to say?
I can't take you seriously anymore. This line of reasoning is to me absurd.
Did you ever see Neverending Story? You may enjoy that movie, should you choose to see it. And then afterward you will still be in your life with real people, who do real things, things they have chosen to do.
Or I suppose you would say that God chose for me to disbelieve your arguments. I'm just writing out what was preprogrammed, just like you.
Much love!
Last edited:
Similar threads
