Our Lord Jesus Was Made A Curse?

[journeyman]

We live in an imperfect world, and you are as imperfect as the next guy. None of us handles the word of God with perfection. What matters is that we cover the doctrine of Christ's atonement for our sins.

What matters is listening to God's Spirit, which might come from within yourself, or from another person. 

As I said, many Christians may describe how Jesus "became sin" wrongly, and I think you do too. But the important thing is to know that Jesus assumed the curse, or punishment, of sin for us, so that we may be resurrected into perfection in the future.

The only way "Jesus became sin" was by people lying about him. And if Jesus assumed the curse of the law (according to what the curse of the law actually says), we would never have heard from him again.

How else could our punishment be removed unless Jesus suffered that same punishment, and then communicated to us his grace? Saying it perfectly is not the issue. Believing it as fact is what transforms us, and that's what's important.

The punishment (death) is removed by asking God for forgiveness. And the mercy of God is that Jesus didn't smash our stupid faces in for sinning against him.

False. Christ, in suffering punishment and death from both God and men, did experience the curse of sin, which is death. God caused this to happen to him not because he deserved it but because it was necessary in order for him to forgive us.

God doesn't punish himself for sin. As a man, he behaved as a godly man, putting his flesh with its desires to death. And he forgave sinners before he born on earth.

No, hanging on a tree is not being lied about.

It was the result (or consequence) of being lied about.

It is the curse of God visited upon a sinner when he is hung upon a tree like one might display one executed for criminal behavior.

In the case of Jesus, it's not the curse of God. And when Christians were crucified by Rome because of their faith, it wasn't because they werebeing cursed by God. 

This was a position Jesus was given, by God, to assume--not because he deserved it but only so that in experiencing it he could forgive us for causing this to happen to him.

Jesus forgave sinners before he was crucified.

Yes, all sin is against God. And so, God became a man so that in experiencing human sin He could forgive all sin.

Then this,

But he, being full of compassion, forgave their iniquity, Psa.78:38

Is senseless to you. The truth is, Jesus displayed who he always has been.

[journeyman]

I agree with Slug that this is over the top unChristian, accusing Christian brothers of "not knowing the Father" simply because we don't agree with you. Incidentally, I still believe you fall far short of the truth of what it meant for Christ is "become sin."

I never said Christian brothers who disagree with me don't know God. I cited Jesus saying people who persecute his disciples don't know God. As fas as believers go, some know the Lord more intimately than others do.

Nobody would dispute that Jesus bore the consequences of sin when he allowed sinful men to put him to death. Nobody would dispute that righteous Christians, like Jesus, are persecuted.

Good. That's the right way to see his sacrifice, as Paul said, he wanted to know the Lord intimately,

That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; Phil.3:10

But saying this falls far short of describing how Jesus' death brought about our redemption. He atoned for our sins by "becoming sin" for us, ie by putting himself in our place, and then forgiving those willing to repent.

Unless sinners repent, they won't be redeemed. And when Paul says God made his Son sin who knew no sin, he means false witnesses accused him,

the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me. Psa69:9

[Slug1]

Seems vailed accusations are slung from behind scripture(s) ??

I'm not making veiled accusations. I cited Jesus's statement that his followers would be persecuted because the persecutors didn't know him or his Father. Do you understand? Jesus wasn't being punished because his Father viewed him as "the substance of sin". He was being punished by people who hate God.

While I understand your point, we have to view context as well. What are the wages of sin? What are the consequences?

The wages of sin is the death of the sinner, not the deathof the innocent.

You are correct, in that a wage of sin is the death of Christ, and also the persecution of those who have put faith in Him.

I never said this. Here's what I'm saying,

they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love.
 Psa.109:5

Our Lord suffered because he is the embodiment of God, not the embodiment of sin.

And yes, there are some who do not understand these are "some" of the consequences and wages of sin. But to say any lack of understanding by those in this thread, is due to having not known the Father, nor Christ... is a false witness and a fleshly accusation.

Again, Jesus was referring to people who would persecute his followers, as they persecuted him. But as far as not knowing the consequence of sin where Christ is concerned, you don't know what it means, but neither did I, being indoctrinated with false teaching for many years.

If I am in error and have reacted in the flesh, please explain how my view of a vailed accusation equaling a false witness is to see your post in a faulty light, offer correction! Should I find in your words that you are not making accusations and a false witness, I will apologize.

The consequence of sin can be summed up in simple terms, the consequence of sin, it's wage is "death!" Death to Christ, death to mankind (spiritually), death to peace/health on earth, death to relationship (a separation) with God, etc. Paul is led to state this:

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Now, I am not adding this scripture to refute you, I add this for the illumination of context and understanding. You mention only "some" of the consequence of sin, I mention some, why the innuendo that because yours were not mentioned in my post, you raise there is a lack of understanding, is because some do not know the Father, nor Christ?

Not very well and the proof is in the passage you cited. Who is Paul saying will be paid with death for their sin?

Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? Rom.6:16

Paul isn't teaching that Christ's Father paid him with death for mankinds sin. The entire Bible says if you could keep the whole law, you would be paid with blessing by God, not cursing by God.

Let's first reconcile so truth can be pursued... I've placed my gripe before you and should I be wrong, I will apologize in effort to reconcile. Believe me, those who know me, know I am all about reconciliation. I pray it is a simple lack of understanding on my part but "words" hold power.

Your statement, "I will apologize in effort to reconcile", is how reconciliation with God should be viewed, because it was God in human flesh being sinned against who is owed the aoplogy.

My final comments were:

Let's first reconcile so truth can be pursued... I've placed my gripe before you and should I be wrong, I will apologize in effort to reconcile. Believe me, those who know me, know I am all about reconciliation. I pray it is a simple lack of understanding on my part but "words" hold power.

Here is what you also stated and failed to address:

Others here don't understand it's "the consequence of sin".

because they have not known the Father, nor me. Jn.16:3

If you won't address your accusation and the innuendo that any lack of understanding is due to those HERE not knowing the Father, nor Jesus... if you can't/won't address this false witness, then just be honest.

I'll wait for your next response and will evaluate your words in any effort to reconcile. If you avoid this... must the leadership of this message board be alerted of your words?

[journeyman]

If you won't address your accusation and the innuendo that any lack of understanding is due to those HERE not knowing the Father, nor Jesus... if you can't/won't address this false witness, then just be honest.

I'll wait for your next response and will evaluate your words in any effort to reconcile. If you avoid this... must the leadership of this message board be alerted of your words?

I already answered your misunderstaning of how our Savior bore thee sins of man by citing Jn.16:3. Apparently you didn't reat the context. I wasn't accusing you of persecuting believers. Alert whoever you want.

[Slug1]

If you won't address your accusation and the innuendo that any lack of understanding is due to those HERE not knowing the Father, nor Jesus... if you can't/won't address this false witness, then just be honest.

I'll wait for your next response and will evaluate your words in any effort to reconcile. If you avoid this... must the leadership of this message board be alerted of your words?

I already answered your misunderstaning of how our Savior bore thee sins of man by citing Jn.16:3. Apparently you didn't reat the context. I wasn't accusing you of persecuting believers. Alert whoever you want.

I agree that you did not accuse others here of persecuting believers. I also will not be distracted from what you DID say.

Your accusation is that "others here don't understand it's the consequence of sin:

because they have not known the Father, nor Christ. (then you post a scripture ref)

[journeyman]

I agree that you did not accuse others here of persecuting believers. I also will not be distracted from what you DID say.

Your accusation is that "others here don't understand it's the consequence of sin:

because they have not known the Father, nor Christ. (then you post a scripture ref)

You're already distracted by the passage I cited, because you took it personally, instead of looking at the context of what Jesus said would cause his suffering.

[RandyPNW]

We live in an imperfect world, and you are as imperfect as the next guy. None of us handles the word of God with perfection. What matters is that we cover the doctrine of Christ's atonement for our sins.

What matters is listening to God's Spirit, which might come from within yourself, or from another person.

And I suppose you think *you're* that person? You don't appear to be very mature to me.
 

The only way "Jesus became sin" was by people lying about him. And if Jesus assumed the curse of the law (according to what the curse of the law actually says), we would never have heard from him again.

This is where you err. Dying does not necessarily lead to eternal death, obviously. The 1st death is not the 2nd death!

And so, Jesus did suffer the curse of sin, which is death, because he died. Yes, he did not die for his own sin. But he died *for our sins!*

And so, Jesus became sin *for us,* and not for himself. But he did "become sin" in the sense of a simile, and even more, as a replacement for us. Literally, he became the replacement for our sin, and died on our behalf, so that when he exercised his divine power to rise from the dead, he could take with him all those who he chooses to go with him.

The punishment (death) is removed by asking God for forgiveness. And the mercy of God is that Jesus didn't smash our stupid faces in for sinning against him.

You are being entirely unbiblical about this. If confession and forgiveness was all that was needed, then Christ didn't need to die at all! But the Bible says he became a kind of atoning passover lamb.

God doesn't punish himself for sin. As a man, he behaved as a godly man, putting his flesh with its desires to death. And he forgave sinners before he born on earth.

You are in the arena of heresy, brother. God did suffer via His Son on the cross, and even before. Although He planned in advance for our redemption, it did not actually take place until after the cross.

In the case of Jesus, it's not the curse of God. And when Christians were crucified by Rome because of their faith, it wasn't because they were being cursed by God. 

As far as I know, nobody has said Christian martyrs were cursed by God?

Jesus forgave sinners before he was crucified.

Yes, forgiveness from God was available before the cross. But God deemed it necessary to have Jesus die on the cross, and our acceptance of that necessary act, in order to give us eternal atonement. Before that, all acts of atonement were forms of temporary redemption, and could not result in eternal life.

Is senseless to you. The truth is, Jesus displayed who he always has been.

What is unbiblical to me is your continual denial of the need for Christ to "become sin" for us. He did this not by becoming sin itself, but rather, by becoming the substitute for sinners. It is in grammar a kind of personification of sin, in which Jesus places himself sacrificially and in our stead.

Whether we understand the language or not, the simple fact is that forgiveness before the cross did not win for anybody eternal life. It was only after the cross that final atonement was made, resulting in eternal redemption.

This is what's important to accept because it makes us conform to Jesus' life and to his Father's lordship over our wills. Without this, we are stuck somewhere between God and our own wills, which is not good enough.

[RandyPNW]

I agree that you did not accuse others here of persecuting believers. I also will not be distracted from what you DID say.

Your accusation is that "others here don't understand it's the consequence of sin:

because they have not known the Father, nor Christ. (then you post a scripture ref)

You're already distracted by the passage I cited, because you took it personally, instead of looking at the context of what Jesus said would cause his suffering.

You're being dishonest, brother. You said what you said. You just refuse to own it. But that's between you and God. It's best to be honest about it, but I can get past it, if you stop suggesting that those *here* who don't believe what you say "don't know God."

[Slug1]

You're already distracted by the passage I cited, because you took it personally, instead of looking at the context of what Jesus said would cause his suffering.

I did not "take" your response personal, I weigh words, view the use of scriptures to discern context, or "intent".

This is what you said:

Others here don't understand it's "the consequence of sin".

because they have not known the Father, nor me. Jn.16:3

You specifically identify "who" you are speaking about in the first statement (others here = everyone in the thread BUT you).


Then you manipulate a verse to fit the specificity of your statement and the result is to bear a false witness against all "others here" who don't understand your posts.


Here is the verse brother:


v3 And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me.

Why omit a portion and thus lose context of the verse and reveal intent of it's use, instead?

[The Parson]

I agree that you did not accuse others here of persecuting believers. I also will not be distracted from what you DID say.

Your accusation is that "others here don't understand it's the consequence of sin:

because they have not known the Father, nor Christ. (then you post a scripture ref)

You're already distracted by the passage I cited, because you took it personally, instead of looking at the context of what Jesus said would cause his suffering.

Journeyman, you're making an assumption that all in this thread don't seem to know the Lord Jesus as their personal Savior, best I can tell. Why is that???

[journeyman]

And I suppose you think *you're* that person? You don't appear to be very mature to me.

Well, our Lord warned about false teachers and I was taught things for many years that weren't true. In prayer, I asked God if he poured his wrath out on his Son and the response I got was, "No, mankind did". Shortly after this, I met a Jewish believer in Jesus who corrected me.
 

This is where you err. Dying does not necessarily lead to eternal death, obviously. The 1st death is not the 2nd death!

And so, Jesus did suffer the curse of sin, which is death, because he died. Yes, he did not die for his own sin. But he died *for our sins!*

And so, Jesus became sin *for us,* and not for himself. But he did "become sin" in the sense of a simile, and even more, as a replacement for us. Literally, he became the replacement for our sin, and died on our behalf, so that when he exercised his divine power to rise from the dead, he could take with him all those who he chooses to go with him.

Our Lord taught repentance, not replacement.

You are being entirely unbiblical about this. If confession and forgiveness was all that was needed, then Christ didn't need to die at all! But the Bible says he became a kind of atoning passover lamb.

These are not "entirely unbiblical",

He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy. Pro.28:13

I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, Lk.15:18

I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Lk.13:5

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: Isa.1:18

And with respect to our Passover Lamb, Peter said,

because Christ also suffered for us 1Pet.2:21

Take a close look at how Peter is using the word "also".

You are in the arena of heresy, brother. God did suffer via His Son on the cross, and even before. Although He planned in advance for our redemption, it did not actually take place until after the cross.

Well, I would be in the realm of heresy if I said God through Christ didn't suffer for us, but that's not what I said. What I did say is....God doesn't punish himself. It's mankind that punished God through Christ and although God is willing to forgive, he also came into this world for judgement.

As far as I know, nobody has said Christian martyrs were cursed by God?

So not everyone who is hanged on a tree is cursed of God. Some Christians were crucified for following Jesus, who was also not cursed of God.

Yes, forgiveness from God was available before the cross. But God deemed it necessary to have Jesus die on the cross, and our acceptance of that necessary act, in order to give us eternal atonement. Before that, all acts of atonement were forms of temporary redemption, and could not result in eternal life.

No, what God shows through his Son is how this world despised him. God didn't need to be abused to forgive. He does need to be asked for forgivness and I already showed that Jesus forgave people who came to him.

What is unbiblical to me is your continual denial of the need for Christ to "become sin" for us. He did this not by becoming sin itself, but rather, by becoming the substitute for sinners. It is in grammar a kind of personification of sin, in which Jesus places himself sacrificially and in our stead.

Whether we understand the language or not, the simple fact is that forgiveness before the cross did not win for anybody eternal life. It was only after the cross that final atonement was made, resulting in eternal redemption.

This is what's important to accept because it makes us conform to Jesus' life and to his Father's lordship over our wills. Without this, we are stuck somewhere between God and our own wills, which is not good enough.

He became sin for us who knew no sin means he was wronged. And eternal life does not belong to anyone who will not acknowledge that he was wronged. And repentance is necessary or else, "evey man will be put to death forhis own sin". Therefore, Jesus is no ones substitute.

[journeyman]

You're being dishonest, brother. You said what you said. You just refuse to own it. But that's between you and God. It's best to be honest about it, but I can get past it, if you stop suggesting that those *here* who don't believe what you say "don't know God."

What I said was people here don't understand our Lord's suffering was the consequence of sin, that is, sinners inflicting pain on him. Then I cited a passage proving it.

[journeyman]

I did not "take" your response personal, I weigh words, view the use of scriptures to discern context, or "intent".

Thats exactly what you're not doing, because if you looked at the context, you'd agree with me.

This is what you said:

Others here don't understand it's "the consequence of sin".

because they have not known the Father, nor me. Jn.16:3

You specifically identify "who" you are speaking about in the first statement (others here = everyone in the thread BUT you).

Then you manipulate a verse to fit the specificity of your statement and the result is to bear a false witness against all "others here" who don't understand your posts.

Here is the verse brother:

v3 And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me.

Why omit a portion and thus lose context of the verse and reveal intent of it's use, instead?

Because I thought you'd look at it, or might know italready. What I said was, "Others here don't understand it's "the consequence of sin".", and that's true, because the verse I cited is the reason Jesus suffered.

I never said disagreeing over this point means you don't know the Lord at all. You took it that way.

[journeyman]

Journeyman, you're making an assumption that all in this thread don't seem to know the Lord Jesus as their personal Savior, best I can tell. Why is that???

Because instead of looking at the context of the verse I cited proving why our Lord suffered, people imagined it as a personal attack.

[Slug1]

Thats exactly what you're not doing, because if you looked at the context, you'd agree with me.

You'll find in post #11, I stated the following:

You are correct, in that a wage of sin is the death of Christ, and also the persecution of those who have put faith in Him.

Because I thought you'd look at it, or might know italready. What I said was, "Others here don't understand it's "the consequence of sin".", and that's true, because the verse I cited is the reason Jesus suffered.

The posting of that half a verse only reveals why Christ's death happens (is actually necessary) and also why, those who believe in Him will be persecuted for their faith in Him. However, your posting of that half verse does NOT answer this specific question:

What "is" the reason WHY, others here don't understand the death of Christ, is a consequence of sin??