Zone1 Catholics (real ones) do NOT go against Scripture or add to it. It's a lie.

[ding]

It is full of FORGIVEN sinners. God did NOT ignore the sin, He PAID the penalty for it. That is the key.

Sure. Forgiven sinners. He paid the penalty so he could overlook their sins.

 

[ding]

Significant term, COULD BE. Why do you persist in this line when I've made it clear that, if all sin is simply overlooked, there is no need for Christ to die and rise from the dead and no need for us to repent and no need for the Church to spread the Gospel. Why bother when God is just going to ignore everything you've ever done and force you to live with Him for eternity?

Are you suggesting God isn't powerful enough to have forgiven all sins without Christ having to die?

 

[hadit]

Sure. Forgiven sinners. He paid the penalty so he could overlook their sins.

It's the difference between a mortgage holder simply cancelling your mortgage and someone paying it off for you. In the one case, the holder overlooks the money owed, in the other, he gets paid in full. You're really stretching here, trying to make a linguistic argument that doesn't hold up.

 

[hadit]

Are you suggesting God isn't powerful enough to have forgiven all sins without Christ having to die?

It would not have been justice to do that. This way, there can be no complaint that God is not just and that sin was left unpunished. Look, you're ignoring the bottom line, which is that there would be no need for Christ to die and rise again or for anyone to repent of sin at all if God just ignored sin. Why do you refuse to deal with that?

 

[Meriweather]

It would not have been justice to do that. This way, there can be no complaint that God is not just and that sin was left unpunished. Look, you're ignoring the bottom line, which is that there would be no need for Christ to die and rise again or for anyone to repent of sin at all if God just ignored sin. Why do you refuse to deal with that?

Did Jesus ever say he was here to be punished for the sins of mankind? Jesus had a message: Repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Turn away from sin, and sins will be forgiven; God will remember them no more. In Jesus' day, remember what was happening at the Temple: Sacrifice where Temple authorities were rich and well-fed at the expense of the poor. At that time the poor were losing everything, including their land, while Temple authorities lost nothing. Jesus pointed out the shepherds were fattening themselves on the sheep. The people could be compared to sheep without a shepherd.

God cares for us, cares for his people. He sent his son with the message of it is the turning away from the sin--not Temple sacrifice--for the forgiveness of sins. It was this message of God's concern and care of his people--not a wish to punish--for God to send his Son to us. In obedience to this command to proclaim repentance for the forgiveness of sins that the worldly mankind put Jesus to death. God did not punish himself--he sacrificed himself so that we might know it is repentance for the forgiveness of sins. The worldly would no longer fatten themselves on God's own flock.

Obedience to God was Jesus' whole life. Instead of following the way of disobedience as did Adam and Eve, he took the path they did not take. Their path resulted in death, while his resulted in resurrection and new life. God sent Jesus with a mission, and Jesus went through death to remain obedient to this mission. He is our shining example of obedience to God, our example of how to live this life.

To reduce this message to, 'Hurray! Someone else was punished for every time I choose disobedience to God!' is a travesty.

 

[rstrats]

Tell us this since you obviously don't think people will choose hell over God, which have you chosen, knowing the consequences?

re: "Tell us this since you obviously don't think people will choose hell over God..."

At least no one who hasn't been certified as clinically insane.



re: "...which have you chosen, knowing the consequences?"

I haven't chosen either one.

 

[hadit]

re: "Tell us this since you obviously don't think people will choose hell over God..."

At least no one who hasn't been certified as clinically insane.



re: "...which have you chosen, knowing the consequences?"

I haven't chosen either one.

You have already chosen.

 

[hadit]

Did Jesus ever say he was here to be punished for the sins of mankind? Jesus had a message: Repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Turn away from sin, and sins will be forgiven; God will remember them no more. In Jesus' day, remember what was happening at the Temple: Sacrifice where Temple authorities were rich and well-fed at the expense of the poor. At that time the poor were losing everything, including their land, while Temple authorities lost nothing. Jesus pointed out the shepherds were fattening themselves on the sheep. The people could be compared to sheep without a shepherd.

God cares for us, cares for his people. He sent his son with the message of it is the turning away from the sin--not Temple sacrifice--for the forgiveness of sins. It was this message of God's concern and care of his people--not a wish to punish--for God to send his Son to us. In obedience to this command to proclaim repentance for the forgiveness of sins that the worldly mankind put Jesus to death. God did not punish himself--he sacrificed himself so that we might know it is repentance for the forgiveness of sins. The worldly would no longer fatten themselves on God's own flock.

Obedience to God was Jesus' whole life. Instead of following the way of disobedience as did Adam and Eve, he took the path they did not take. Their path resulted in death, while his resulted in resurrection and new life. God sent Jesus with a mission, and Jesus went through death to remain obedient to this mission. He is our shining example of obedience to God, our example of how to live this life.

To reduce this message to, 'Hurray! Someone else was punished for every time I choose disobedience to God!' is a travesty.

There's no reducing the significance of Christ's sacrifice.

 

[Meriweather]

There's no reducing the significance of Christ's sacrifice.

In what way do you see it as being "reduced"?

 

[hadit]

In what way do you see it as being "reduced"?

You do, I do not. You said it was being reduced, I did not.

 

[rstrats]

You have already chosen.

No, I have not.

 

[rstrats]

God did NOT ignore the sin, He PAID the penalty for it.

But only for those who meet certain requirements. And BTW, exactly what was the penalty that was paid that would otherwise have to be paid by us?

 

[rstrats]

Did you actually think it was automatic, and everyone in the world regardless of if they believe or if they follow Jesus is automatically forgiven?

What does "believe" consist of?

 

[Meriweather]

You do, I do not. You said it was being reduced, I did not.

Incorrect. I am not the one who believes Jesus' purpose was to be punished for our sins.

 

[hadit]

No, I have not.

You absolutely have, by default. You are aware of Christ's sacrifice, you are choosing to ignore it, therefore you have made your decision.

 

[hadit]

Incorrect. I am not the one who believes Jesus' purpose was to be punished for our sins.

What do you call the death on the cross, but punishment for sin?

 

[hadit]

But only for those who meet certain requirements. And BTW, exactly what was the penalty that was paid that would otherwise have to be paid by us?

Death. If you are not aware of the Biblical reference, ask.

 

[rstrats]

Death.

So, death for 3 days and 3 nights.

 

[ding]

It would not have been justice to do that. This way, there can be no complaint that God is not just and that sin was left unpunished. Look, you're ignoring the bottom line, which is that there would be no need for Christ to die and rise again or for anyone to repent of sin at all if God just ignored sin. Why do you refuse to deal with that?

So you decide what is just and unjust for God? I refuse to accept you speaking for God is what I refuse.

 

[ding]

It's the difference between a mortgage holder simply cancelling your mortgage and someone paying it off for you. In the one case, the holder overlooks the money owed, in the other, he gets paid in full. You're really stretching here, trying to make a linguistic argument that doesn't hold up.

Actually the argument I am making is that God alone makes these decisions. But if you really want to believe you know God's decisions, then good for you. I'm not that arrogant to believe that I can speak for God.