Mercy beyond the Law

[RandyPNW]

And after this, his greatest work was his resurrection. And you're meshing the repentant receiving the Holy Spirit, which has nothing to do with penal substitution.

On the contrary, having Jesus go through an ordeal he didn't deserve, that *we deserved,* so that his Spirit becomes our source of eternal guidance, is the whole sense of his being our substitute. We substitute *his spiritual life* for our life. How is this *not* substitution?

His life has a blameless record, whereas when we depend on our own life and ways, we display our flaws and the very sins that keeps us out of heaven. So we *must* substitute our flawed life for dependence on his sinless life. This is the very idea of substitution, that he went through what he didn't deserve so that we could obtain what we didn't deserve.

[journeyman]

A loving father is the reason a substitutionary atonement for wrath was possible

No. A loving Father doesn't mercilessly torture his Son. People that don't know God did that.

Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths. Isa.59:7

Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked. Exo.23:7

These six things doth the LORD hate....hands that shed innocent blood Pro.6:16-17

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 1Cor.15:3

Why don't you look at what God is really saying?

[journeyman]

Are you capable of disagreeing without insulting people? This is a really bad look for someone who claims to follow the loving God.

I wasn't insulting you. I put your false witness where it belongs.

what you said is, "I'll let them know that God doesn't let the "good people" die.

Yes, that's right. Life doesn't end with the death of the body. The Messiah proved that.

And God is patient with the "bad people"".

Yes, that's right. God is longsuffering for people to come to know him. The Messiah proved that.

Which is a horrible thing to say to a mourner.

Well, It seems you have me showing up to a funeral with nutshell comments for grieving people, instead of explaining in time the comfort God affords. Miserable.

[journeyman]

On the contrary, having Jesus go through an ordeal he didn't deserve, that *we deserved,* so that his Spirit becomes our source of eternal guidance, is the whole sense of his being our substitute. We substitute *his spiritual life* for our life. How is this *not* substitution?

People don't receive the Spirit, unless they repent. And have you noticed you didn't give your view of the scriptures I cited?

His life has a blameless record, whereas when we depend on our own life and ways, we display our flaws and the very sins that keeps us out of heaven. So we *must* substitute our flawed life for dependence on his sinless life. This is the very idea of substitution, that he went through what he didn't deserve so that we could obtain what we didn't deserve.

Actually, repentance begins with a confession that our life is flawed. And God forgives the repentant. Even forgives those who put him through what he didn't deserve. You do know that what was done to Jesus was sinful, don't you?

[RandyPNW]

On the contrary, having Jesus go through an ordeal he didn't deserve, that *we deserved,* so that his Spirit becomes our source of eternal guidance, is the whole sense of his being our substitute. We substitute *his spiritual life* for our life. How is this *not* substitution?

People don't receive the Spirit, unless they repent. And have you noticed you didn't give your view of the scriptures I cited?

No. It must've seemed irrelevant to me. Nor is your answer relevant, that people don't receive the Spirit unless they repent. This goes without saying, and doesn't do a thing for your argument.

Substitution requires that we draw upon Christ's Spirit and upon Christ's record, and not upon our own. If we drew upon our own record of sin, we'd be lost. But because we draw upon his Spirit and his record, there is nothing preventing us from obtaining eternal life and resurrection from the dead. It *requires* substitution!

His life has a blameless record, whereas when we depend on our own life and ways, we display our flaws and the very sins that keeps us out of heaven. So we *must* substitute our flawed life for dependence on his sinless life. This is the very idea of substitution, that he went through what he didn't deserve so that we could obtain what we didn't deserve.

Actually, repentance begins with a confession that our life is flawed. And God forgives the repentant. Even forgives those who put him through what he didn't deserve. You do know that what was done to Jesus was sinful, don't you?

You're suggesting that killing Jesus was a sin? Have you had a cup of coffee this morning?

Confessing that our life is flawed is confessing that we can't get to heaven apart from Christ! It requires substitution!

You'll never get around this. You're advocating for heresy. You're advocating for Pelagianism, for Works-oriented, get to heaven by the Law belief, which is why Judaism could not obtain for Israel salvation until Christ came.

Actually, you're not arguing that we're good enough to get to heaven. Rather, you're arguing that it doesn't matter that we're sinners, that all we need is a get out of jail free card, via confession of sin.

This "end around" maneuver flies in the face of the very thing that got Adam and Eve kicked out of the garden, the idea that "sin doesn't matter." If all Adam and Eve had to do was repent, then the human race shouldn't have had to spend the next 6000 years doing penance!

[RabbiKnife]

Actually, the only thing that a spiritually dead human can be empowered to confess is the truth of who Jesus is.

Confession that "our life is flawed" is meaningless has horns on a brass billy goat unless accompanying that confession is a confession that Jesus is Lord by means of his substitutionary sacrifice on the cross and his resurrection from the dead.

Otherwise, it's just a human saying "I screwed up," and that's certainly not salvific.

[RandyPNW]

Actually, the only thing that a spiritually dead human can be empowered to confess is the truth of who Jesus is.

Confession that "our life is flawed" is meaningless has horns on a brass billy goat unless accompanying that confession is a confession that Jesus is Lord by means of his substitutionary sacrifice on the cross and his resurrection from the dead.

Otherwise, it's just a human saying "I screwed up," and that's certainly not salvific.

This kind of pulls me in a different direction, partly, although I agree with the sentiment, that Christ's substitutionary death was critical for our forgiveness and for our salvation. I believe that the good God allows men to do apart from Christ is no different than what anybody under the Law in the OT could do or that a pagan could do outside of the Law.

They can choose to operate by means of God's word of not. Under the Law or not, OT men could either cooperate with God's word or not. To make the Law effective, and to make good works real without the Law, men in the OT had to actually work in concert with God's word within.

Men in the OT who were under the Law could do good and still fall short, just as Christians who do good can fall short of rebirth. It requires a total commitment to God's word by assuming a completely new nature that qualifies one for ultimate salvation. The Cross was necessary, but it was just as necessary that men, OT or NT, make a complete commitment to one God.

People can operate by the word of God without fully committing to God as their only god. As such, as you say, it is not "salvic." It does not save. It only produces good, which is what God wants from all men.

It's just that God wants men to do more than "do good." He wants them to be saved. He wants them to "be good." To do that, men must cooperate with the word of God by completely embracing a new nature from Christ. I don't know if you agree with this or not?

[journeyman]

You're suggesting that killing Jesus was a sin?

God said killing an innocent man is sin and he hates it. I cited scripture showing it, which you ignored. You think that because the Messiah allowed himself to be sinned against, that God approves of the sinful way he was treated. The truth is, God was pleased how his Son was longsuffering toward people who deserved death for committing such vile acts against him. In fact, Jesus showed mankind how his Father really is. Ya better take another look.

[RandyPNW]

You're suggesting that killing Jesus was a sin?

God said killing an innocent man is sin and he hates it. I cited scripture showing it, which you ignored. You think that because the Messiah allowed himself to be sinned against, that God approves of the sinful way he was treated. The truth is, God was pleased how his Son was longsuffering toward people who deserved death for committing such vile acts against him. In fact, Jesus showed mankind how his Father really is. Ya better take another look.

Yes, I know killing Jesus was a sin. I was kidding, because it's so obviously true.

[journeyman]

Yes, I know killing Jesus was a sin. I was kidding, because it's so obviously true.

Good. Now you know it's obvious that God doesn't commit sin.

What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel.  Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Unless of course the sinner repents. But by God's own reputation, that proverb cannot be used in Israel. Not even for Jesus.

[RandyPNW]

Yes, I know killing Jesus was a sin. I was kidding, because it's so obviously true.

Good. Now you know it's obvious that God doesn't commit sin.

*Now* I know it? When didn't I know it?

Your point is lost on me. God did put Jesus to death, unless you think God isn't God? Last time I checked, God is in charge of everything that happens--even though He can't be charged with any sins. He controls the agents of both good and evil. And He has responsibility over what Satan and evil men do, including the murder of Jesus.

[journeyman]

I know killing Jesus was a sin.

God did put Jesus to death.....

You're contradicting yourself.

[RandyPNW]

I know killing Jesus was a sin.

God did put Jesus to death.....

You're contradicting yourself.

No, that's the point I'm trying to make, that God oversees both good and evil agencies, and controls what they do in every detail. He gave them the range and ability to do both, and supervises every choice.

God did not murder Jesus and thus commit sin. But He did allow it to happen, and in fact, supervised the deed that men caused when they chose to go their own way.

[journeyman]

No, that's the point I'm trying to make, that God oversees both good and evil agencies, and controls what they do in every detail. He gave them the range and ability to do both, and supervises every choice.

God did not murder Jesus and thus commit sin. But He did allow it to happen, and in fact, supervised the deed that men caused when they chose to go their own way.

People who commit sin aren't being supervised by God to commit sin. They're being supervised by the devil to commit sin. That God allows people to commit sin, yet withholds judgement against them is another matter.

Of course God knew his Son would be murdered, but this is not what he wanted. Here's what God wanted,

But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. Mt.21:37

[RabbiKnife]

Serious question... are you Jesus only and reject the writings of Paul and the epistles?