Man imputed Jesus with sin on the cross, not God.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
God imputing His Son's soul with sin, is the beginning accusation of the devil against God and Christ.

Gen 3:4
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Imputing the Son with our sin, is blaming the Son for our sin. If the Son is guilty by our sin, then we're justified to transgress His commandment, because of His envy against us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulThomson
Isaiah 53:6.

I already dealt in post #56 with this verse cited by you from you.
I will repeat that post here.

Isa 53:5
But he was wounded out of / because of our transgressions (M-PSha'eNU), he was bruised out of/because of our iniquities (M-'aOnNTheNU: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and in/with his stripes (U-B-aKhaBeRaThU) we are healed.
Isa 53:6
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath caused to light (HiPhGiYa' , Hiphil perfect) in Him (B-U) the iniquity of us all.

This may be saying that He was wounded because OUR transgressions wounded Him; He was bruised because OUR iniquities bruised Him. In other words WE practised transgressions and iniquities against Him. When He prayed for our forgiveness as OUR chastisement of Him wounded Him, we learned that God is wanting to reconcile with wicked people, not to strike back at them, and so we can come to Him without fear to make peace with Him.
All we like sheep have transgressed. We have all turned to doing our own iniquities. And by leaving Jesus in our midst when WE were wanting to murder Him, JHWH caused him to suffer at OUR iniquitous hands. God could hve delivered Jesus before WE murdered Him, but He chose to leave Him in OUR power. In this way, He cause Jesus to experience in Himself the effects of our iniquity being poured out BY US on Him.

Hence, God was not the one afflicting Jesus. We were.
 
I already dealt in post #56 with this verse cited by you from you.
I will repeat that post here.

Isa 53:5
But he was wounded out of / because of our transgressions (M-PSha'eNU), he was bruised out of/because of our iniquities (M-'aOnNTheNU: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and in/with his stripes (U-B-aKhaBeRaThU) we are healed.
Isa 53:6
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath caused to light (HiPhGiYa' , Hiphil perfect) in Him (B-U) the iniquity of us all.

This may be saying that He was wounded because OUR transgressions wounded Him; He was bruised because OUR iniquities bruised Him. In other words WE practised transgressions and iniquities against Him. When He prayed for our forgiveness as OUR chastisement of Him wounded Him, we learned that God is wanting to reconcile with wicked people, not to strike back at them, and so we can come to Him without fear to make peace with Him.
All we like sheep have transgressed. We have all turned to doing our own iniquities. And by leaving Jesus in our midst when WE were wanting to murder Him, JHWH caused him to suffer at OUR iniquitous hands. God could hve delivered Jesus before WE murdered Him, but He chose to leave Him in OUR power. In this way, He cause Jesus to experience in Himself the effects of our iniquity being poured out BY US on Him.

Hence, God was not the one afflicting Jesus. We were.
I'll help...that's not what it means.
 
I'll help...that's not what it means.
I'll help. It may not be saying what you read it as saying. Maybe someone can see some meaning of the Hebrew that is different from what you believe is its meaning, based on you choosing a translation into English that sounds most like what you agree with. You need to learn to consider issues from more perspectives than just your own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rewriter
Isa 53:6 "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."

Read the entire chapter. You have a bible don't you?

Isa 53:5
But he was wounded out of / because of our transgressions (M-PSha'eNU), he was bruised out of/because of our iniquities (M-'aOnNTheNU: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and in/with his stripes (U-B-aKhaBeRaThU) we are healed.
Isa 53:6
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath caused to light (HiPhGiYa' , Hiphil perfect) in Him (B-U) the iniquity of us all.

This may be saying that He was wounded because OUR transgressions wounded Him; He was bruised because OUR iniquities bruised Him. In other words WE practised transgressions and iniquities against Him. When He prayed for our forgiveness as OUR chastisement of Him wounded Him, we learned that God is wanting to reconcile with wicked people, not to strike back at them, and so we can come to Him without fear to make peace with Him.
All we like sheep have transgressed. We have all turned to doing our own iniquities. And by leaving Jesus in our midst when WE were wanting to murder Him, JHWH caused him to suffer at OUR iniquitous hands. God could hve delivered Jesus before WE murdered Him, but He chose to leave Him in OUR power. In this way, He cause Jesus to experience in Himself the effects of our iniquity being poured out BY US on Him.

Hence, God was not the one afflicting Jesus. We were.
 
While the terms don’t exist, Scripture repeatedly describes a condition of being “dead” in relation to God:
“dead in trespasses and sins” — Ephesians 2:1
“dead in your sins… God made you alive” — Colossians 2:13
“the wages of sin is death” — Romans 6:23
These passages describe a real condition of death, but Scripture never labels it “spiritual death.” That phrase is a later theological shorthand, not biblical vocabulary. Was not my intention to mislead in my use of it.
A) According to Romans 6:2 those who are in Christ are "dead to sin". What does dead mean here? Paul, in Rom. 7, uses marriage to explain what dead to sin means. The law is like an overbearing husband who stirs up lusts in his wife so that she does what is unclean and immoral. The fruit of that union is still-born children. The fruit of our coupling ourselves to the law is lust and sin, sin being dead works. And being dead to sin means that we are no longer beholden to obey the law as our husband, but we now serve Jesus Christ as our new husband.
Rom 7:5
For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

So, this death is not our own death, but the death of our works, our fruit.

According to Romans 6, the "death" that is "the wages of sin" occurs when -
1) "our old man is alive (producing dead works);
2) the sinful body is not destroyed, so is producing dead works);
3) we are serving sin (and so are producing dead works);
4) sin is reigning in our mortal body, so that we are obeying sin in its lusts, (and producing dead works);
5) we are yielding our members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, ( producing dead works);
6) sin has dominion over us (so we are producing dead works);
7) we are under law (which impregnates us with dead works);
8) we are servants of sin (producing dead works);
9) we are yielding our members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, (producing dead works);
10) we are free from righteousness (not bearing live works to righteousness, but are bearing dead works );
11) we are producing fruit that saints are ashamed of. (dead works).
So, "the wages of sin is death" in this context seems to mean "the fruit of sin is dead fruit, dead works, not producing live fruit/works".
So, it seems to me that labelling the death that comes from sin as "spiritual death" is presumptuous. Doing so sometimes comes from imposing the theory of total depravity into scripture. And it also comes from assuming that God's jurisprudence must be analogous to human models of jurisprudence: that pain must be inflicted on a law-breaker for them to hav truly paid for their sins and justly be granted forgiveness.


B) According to Col. 2, "dead in your sins" means -
1) the handwriting of ordinances that is against us, the handwriting which is contrary to us, that handwriting is condemning us. This says either -
that we are presently being charged with law-breaking and will be convicted in the future at the judgment. The recompense for breaking these laws will be the second death at the judgment of the unrighteous which will happen after the unsaved are resurrected after the millennium.
Or, considering Romans 6 and 7 above -
the law is identifying our works as being dead works, and because we are producing dead works we are labelled as dead in/because of the sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh (ἐν τοῖς παραπτώμασιν καὶ τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν).


C) According to Eph. 2, "Dead in trespasses and sins" means -
1) walking according to the course of this world (and so producing dead works),
2) walking according to the prince of the power of the air (and so producing dead works),
3) walking according to the spirit that now is working in the children of disobedience (and so producing dead works),
4) having our behaviour in the lusts of our flesh (and so producing dead works),
5) fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind (and so producing dead works),
6) being by nature children of wrath (because producing dead works).
And besides, how can one be "spiritually dead" while also "walking" according to "the spirit" working in the children of disobedience?
 
I'll help. It may not be saying what you read it as saying. Maybe someone can see some meaning of the Hebrew that is different from what you believe is its meaning, based on you choosing a translation into English that sounds most like what you agree with. You need to learn to consider issues from more perspectives than just your own.
I have considered your perspective. I disagree with it.
 
If crucifying the Son by our own sins and trespasses does not produce whole repentance from sinning against Him, then God is exceeding just to destroy all His enemies, that repent not of His death.

Rom 7:13
Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

A) According to Romans 6:2 those who are in Christ are "dead to sin". What does dead mean here? Paul, in Rom. 7, uses marriage to explain what dead to sin means. The law is like an overbearing husband who stirs up lusts in his wife so that she does what is unclean and immoral. The fruit of that union is still-born children. The fruit of our coupling ourselves to the law is lust and sin, sin being dead works. And being dead to sin means that we are no longer beholden to obey the law as our husband, but we now serve Jesus Christ as our new husband.
Rom 7:5
For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

So, this death is not our own death, but the death of our works, our fruit.

According to Romans 6, the "death" that is "the wages of sin" occurs when -
1) "our old man is alive (producing dead works);
2) the sinful body is not destroyed, so is producing dead works);
3) we are serving sin (and so are producing dead works);
4) sin is reigning in our mortal body, so that we are obeying sin in its lusts, (and producing dead works);
5) we are yielding our members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, ( producing dead works);
6) sin has dominion over us (so we are producing dead works);
7) we are under law (which impregnates us with dead works);
8) we are servants of sin (producing dead works);
9) we are yielding our members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, (producing dead works);
10) we are free from righteousness (not bearing live works to righteousness, but are bearing dead works );
11) we are producing fruit that saints are ashamed of. (dead works).
So, "the wages of sin is death" in this context seems to mean "the fruit of sin is dead fruit, dead works, not producing live fruit/works".
So, it seems to me that labelling the death that comes from sin as "spiritual death" is presumptuous. Doing so sometimes comes from imposing the theory of total depravity into scripture. And it also comes from assuming that God's jurisprudence must be analogous to human models of jurisprudence: that pain must be inflicted on a law-breaker for them to hav truly paid for their sins and justly be granted forgiveness.


B) According to Col. 2, "dead in your sins" means -
1) the handwriting of ordinances that is against us, the handwriting which is contrary to us, that handwriting is condemning us. This says either -
that we are presently being charged with law-breaking and will be convicted in the future at the judgment. The recompense for breaking these laws will be the second death at the judgment of the unrighteous which will happen after the unsaved are resurrected after the millennium.
Or, considering Romans 6 and 7 above -
the law is identifying our works as being dead works, and because we are producing dead works we are labelled as dead in/because of the sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh (ἐν τοῖς παραπτώμασιν καὶ τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν).


C) According to Eph. 2, "Dead in trespasses and sins" means -
1) walking according to the course of this world (and so producing dead works),
2) walking according to the prince of the power of the air (and so producing dead works),
3) walking according to the spirit that now is working in the children of disobedience (and so producing dead works),
4) having our behaviour in the lusts of our flesh (and so producing dead works),
5) fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind (and so producing dead works),
6) being by nature children of wrath (because producing dead works).
And besides, how can one be "spiritually dead" while also "walking" according to "the spirit" working in the children of disobedience?
Is there a question here?
 
Is there a question here?
You said, "While the terms [spiritually dead and die spiritually] don’t exist, Scripture repeatedly describes a condition of being “dead” in relation to God"

The three texts you cited do not describe 'a condition of being "dead" in relation to God'. I was showing that they all speak of being dead in terms of one's works being dead.
 
The following verses are determined by Is 53:3-4. But, you are the first to at least acknowledge Is 53:3-4.

First, what God actually did not do, was impute His Son with sin, nor esteem Him guilty of death. But only by sinful men.

Second, what God actually did do, was command His Son to submit Himself into the hands of sinful men, who unlawfully smote Him. Not of God.
And so, the only question is how God, who did not impute Him nor smite Him, did lay the iniquity of the sinful men upon Him?

First, he did not lay their iniquity upon His Son Himself. But only hands of sinful men did so.

Second, Their iniquity was laid by them only upon His body, not His soul.

And so, God laying the iniquity of the smiters upon His So's body, is not Himself laying stripes upon Him, nor does he lay any iniquity upon His soul.

By command of the Father to submit to sinful men's hands, do they lay stripes on Him and smite Him to a tree. Both the command and obedience are met with death, but not by their own hands.

The Commander does not kill the obedient soldier by sending him into battle, though His command does send him to meet his death.

The Father's hands do not stripe nor smite His Son's body, by commanding submission to the wicked smiters.

Nor does the Father impute the Son with sin worthy of death, by the Son obediently submitting to the sin and unworthy death at the hands of His enemies.

The obedeint Son is not imputed guilty of death, by obedient submission unto death.

The righteous are not imputed with the sin of the unrighteous, who unrighteously slay them: Might does not make right.



Though you do rightly acknmowledge Is 53:3-4, you are now trying to argue, that only sinful men imputed sin to the Son, and wrongly esteemed Him smitten of God, and yet God laying their iniquity upon Him, is imputing Him with sin and smitten of God...

If God imputed the Son with sin, then their judgment would have been right: That He was a blasphemer guilty of death by law of God.

Either men unjustly imputed the Son with sin and unrighteously smote Him, or God did impute Him with sin and rightly smote Him by law. It can't be both, without God also unjustly imputing and wrongly esteeming the Son smitten by law.

Is 53:3-4 declares the former, not the latter. Therefore, God laying iniquity of the smiters upon His Son's body by obedience, is not imputing His Son's obedient submission with sin and guilt worthy of death.

God commanded His Son to submit into the hands of sinners. God did not command the sinners to smite Him.

The Son obeyed God by submitting Himself into the hands of sinners. The sinners did not obey God by sinfully smiting Him. He was smitten against the law, not by law of God:

Mat 21:37
But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.

If God imputed His Son with sin, when sending Him into the hands of husbmandmen, then the husbandmen did right to kill the Son.
if God did not impute your sins to christ on the cross.

You have no means of forgiveness. You are dead in your sin
 
You said, "While the terms [spiritually dead and die spiritually] don’t exist, Scripture repeatedly describes a condition of being “dead” in relation to God"

The three texts you cited do not describe 'a condition of being "dead" in relation to God'. I was showing that they all speak of being dead in terms of one's works being dead.
What would you call a person whose spirit has not yet been quickened by God?
 
I had no idea so many do not actually understand that Jesus HAD to die on our behalf and GOD is the one who laid OUR sins upon Him. God raised Him up because death could not hold him as He was sinless.

I mean are people ignoring the Old Testament completely and then substituting humanistic 'feelings' and reasoning to scripture and coming up with 'oh that can't be right'?

“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” II Cor. 5:21

It could not be plainer. I am wondering if God just lets people think whatever they want at this point, since they deny the truth of scripture.

God made Jesus (who had no sin) to be sin for us.

Continuing to deny this fact, the actual heart of the Bible after being shown multiple times that scripture reveals God made Jesus to be sin...he was a substitutionary sacrifice on our behalf, would be called rebellion I would think. You are denying the actual gospel and for those who teach that lie, it will not go good in the future.
 
“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” II Cor. 5:21

It could not be plainer. I am wondering if God just lets people think whatever they want at this point, since they deny the truth of scripture.

God made Jesus (who had no sin) to be sin for us.
Jesus asked the Father in Gethsemane whether He could in any way avoid being judged by men to be a heinous sinner, sin incarnate even, falsely accused by men of capital crimes and tortured and murdered by men. And God made Him allow Himself to be judged by men to be a heinous sinner, sin incarnate even, falsely accused of capital crimes by men and tortured and murdered by men.

But Jesus was not judged by God to be a heinous sinner, sin incarnate, nor was he falsely accused by God of capital crimes, nor was He tortured and murdered by God.

He submitted His Son to man's venom so that He could reveal to us the abominable venom in our hearts that would rather scapegoat and kill a perfectly loving person, who was merely critiquing our destructive attitudes and behaviour and demonstrating to us a better way to treat one another. When we realise how hard-heartedly we have been insisting on living destructively. and how we have been hard-heartedly rejecting the nudging by God that we would not want to be treated they way we are treating others, and when we hear the desire of Jesus from the cross that God forgive His false accusers and murderers, and we learn that our attempts to eliminate Him undone, because God raised Him up from the dead and glorified Him, we are released from our trepidation against drawing near to a God we have made in our image, and whom we expect wants to punish us, and we are able to draw near to the True God, who we realise wants to reconcile with us and embrace us, and who as the Judge has revived the victim of our homicide, making the murder charge obsolete, and as the victim the victim does not wish to press attempted murder charges against us, if we are willing to hearken to the message we had killed Him for bringing to us. If we respond with remorse and thanksgiving, Jesus gives us the Holy Spirit to help us walk by faith in the light of His hitherto rejected message and become the righteousness of God as we express His nature by His power at work in us .

This is how “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (II Cor. 5:21) is fulfilled.
 
What would you call a person whose spirit has not yet been quickened by God?
I would ask you, "Where does the Bible mention there being a person whose spirit is not quickened by God ?"

Where does the Bible mention "a dead spirit"?

I would suggest that you may be reading some learned system into the Bible.
 
I have considered your perspective. I disagree with it.
I know you disagree with it, because you have a different perspective that you hold. But are you able to see how my perspective also fits with the actual wording of the text, when one considers the wording of the original language? Or do you skim the posts of those who differ from you, notice the differences and say to yourself,
"That can't be what the text possibly means, because that would make the passage contradict doctrine that I am sure is true"? And do you then fire off a nay-saying post that evades any engagement with your interlocutors actual analysis of the text itself?
 
I know you disagree with it, because you have a different perspective that you hold. But are you able to see how my perspective also fits with the actual wording of the text, when one considers the wording of the original language? Or do you skim the posts of those who differ from you, notice the differences and say to yourself,
"That can't be what the text possibly means, because that would make the passage contradict doctrine that I am sure is true"? And do you then fire off a nay-saying post that evades any engagement with your interlocutors actual analysis of the text itself?
Just because one offers another perspective doesn't mean that perspective is correct. The Bible is written in such a way that one can come up with plausible cases for a wide variety of understandings. And generally, this is done from a wider perspective of understandings that "seem" best to a particular individual. Undergirding these understandings are often wrong understanding based on personal experience, presumption, and bias.

We've had discussions in the past that have revealed a certain perspective. All that you share is born out of this perspective. It's not that I don't understand it. I can probably write from your perspective the answers I know you will respond with. This being the case, and because I don't believe what I share with you will make any difference, I see no value in continuing the discussion.

I do wish you well. Grace and peace.
 
I would ask you, "Where does the Bible mention there being a person whose spirit is not quickened by God ?"

Where does the Bible mention "a dead spirit"?

I would suggest that you may be reading some learned system into the Bible.
he is using AI completely, it regurgitates its digital vomit on us, its worth Nothing.
 
Just because one offers another perspective doesn't mean that perspective is correct. The Bible is written in such a way that one can come up with plausible cases for a wide variety of understandings. And generally, this is done from a wider perspective of understandings that "seem" best to a particular individual. Undergirding these understandings are often wrong understanding based on personal experience, presumption, and bias.

We've had discussions in the past that have revealed a certain perspective. All that you share is born out of this perspective. It's not that I don't understand it. I can probably write from your perspective the answers I know you will respond with. This being the case, and because I don't believe what I share with you will make any difference, I see no value in continuing the discussion.

I do wish you well. Grace and peace.
Thanks for your humble concession that my understanding of the text has validity in terms of the text itself, but is only being dismissed by you because it conflicts with your overall biblical paradigm, which you are unwilling to reconsider..
 
Thanks for your humble concession that my understanding of the text has validity in terms of the text itself, but is only being dismissed by you because it conflicts with your overall biblical paradigm, which you are unwilling to reconsider..
This is a very disingenuous response and does not reflect what I said. You are an open theist, and this is reflected in all your theology. So much so, a simple truth declared clearly in scripture...the LORD hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all...doesn't actually mean God laid our sins on Christ. So what more is there to say. It's tantamount to someone saying we are endowed by God with unalienable rights and the other person saying our rights are derived from government. If someone doesn't accept truth, it's not my job to convince them. That's the job of the Holy Spirit. I presented you with truth. I gave an answer for the hope that is within me. You are free to do with it what you will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Everlasting-Grace