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

[rewriter]

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.

Many verses can be understood in multiple ways depending on one's assumptions. Different people on this forum post the same verse to make different points. Now there likely is one proper way to understand every verse, but who is interpreting any given verse properly is largely a matter of opinion for those of us who are still physical. Even your comment about unalienable rights falls into that category. God might well grant the rights, but if the government refuses to recognize them, what good are they to the individual. Thus it can be proper to attribute the rights to either God or the government.

 

[Cameron143]

Many verses can be understood in multiple ways depending on one's assumptions. Different people on this forum post the same verse to make different points. Now there likely is one proper way to understand every verse, but who is interpreting any given verse properly is largely a matter of opinion for those of us who are still physical. Even your comment about unalienable rights falls into that category. God might well grant the rights, but if the government refuses to recognize them, what good are they to the individual. Thus it can be proper to attribute the rights to either God or the government.

Your basic argument is one I made earlier in the discussion. And your last point doesn't answer my assertion. The question isn't whether one recognizes that rights come from God or not. The question is what is actually true.

 

[OMC]

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.

couldn't answer the question hey?

 

[PaulThomson]

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.

You said, "The Bible is written in such a way that one can come up with plausible cases for a wide variety of understandings". That sounded like a concession that I had presented a plausible case for my understanding.
What bearing does open theism have upon those verses and my understanding of them? I do not see any connection. Please, could you explain the connection?

The Hebrew word used for "he has laid" is HiPGiY'a, a Hiphil perfect form of HaaPa' which means "fall" (Strong's), or "strike" (Gesenius). The Hiphil expresses the action performed causatively, "YHWH caused to fall/strike upon Him the iniquity of us all."

Clearly, this could fit a scenario where God commanded our Lord to expose Himself to arrest, trial and execution by the Jews and Romans without resisting. Thus the iniquity of the Jews and Romans fell upon/struck upon Christ, and God caused those iniquities performed by the Jews and Romans to fall/strike upon Him by leab=ving Him exposed and not coming to His rescue. You don't have difficulty agreeing with that as a possible way that the prophecy was fulfilled, do you?

 

[PaulThomson]

couldn't answer the question hey?

No I couldn't answer your question directly, because you asked a question predicated on a false premise: that the Bible declares that some spirits become quickened. Where is such a thing suggested in scripture?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Where does the Bible say that God imputed our sins to Jesus Christ on the Cross ?

who else imputed our sins to christ? How else did he who knew no sin become sin for us?

 

[OMC]

No I couldn't answer your question directly, because you asked a question predicated on a false premise: that the Bible declares that some spirits become quickened. Where is such a thing suggested in scripture?

I did not say "some spirits become quickened" That is you twisting my words and my meaning.
Biblically, “quickened” means one thing only: God making a dead human alive.
It never refers to angels, demons, or “spirits” being made alive.
The term shows up in older English translations (KJV), but the underlying Greek verb is ζῳοποιέω — to make alive, to give life, to cause to live. Ephesians 2:5: “even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ.”
And every single time Scripture uses it for salvation, the subject is God, and the object is a human who was spiritually dead.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I did not say "some spirits become quickened" That is you twisting my words and my meaning.
Biblically, “quickened” means one thing only: God making a dead human alive.
It never refers to angels, demons, or “spirits” being made alive.
The term shows up in older English translations (KJV), but the underlying Greek verb is ζῳοποιέω — to make alive, to give life, to cause to live. Ephesians 2:5: “even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ.”
And every single time Scripture uses it for salvation, the subject is God, and the object is a human who was spiritually dead.

I am amazed at those who do not think we were spiritually dead..

 

[rewriter]

Your basic argument is one I made earlier in the discussion. And your last point doesn't answer my assertion. The question isn't whether one recognizes that rights come from God or not. The question is what is actually true.

How does one prove absolute truth? Note, this is not to declare that something is absolute truth, but to prove that such a claim is true. Hint, in a fallen world it cannot be done, thus variant views all have potentially credible standing (obviously some more than others based on evidence) even when you do not like what they say.

 

[Cameron143]

How does one prove absolute truth? Note, this is not to declare that something is absolute truth, but to prove that such a claim is true. Hint, in a fallen world it cannot be done, thus variant views all have potentially credible standing (obviously some more than others based on evidence) even when you do not like what they say.

There is a way in a fallen world to know absolute truth. Do you know what it is?

Proving it is not my job. Only sharing. God Himself doesn't offer proof for all He claims. He simply declares truth.

 

[pinebeach]

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.

Jesus was judged by God and bore the wrath of every sinner. Yes Jesus was judged by God...that's the whole point. What you wrote about sounds like an apology to people who don't believe in God. God is not up for our judgement yet you don't like the fact He judges sin and found His Son who took our place in obedience to the Father to be guilty of all of it....including your sin tod

The rest of your post just keeps getting worse.

There is no excuse for denial of what scripture states and trying to make it more palatable so you can present a worldly hypocritical Jesus so that YOU will be accepted.

“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

The above verse days nothing of what you say.

I'm not addressing your private feelings again. Obviously it's a waste of time judging by all those who already did their best to explain to you how you are so very very wrong and you dismiss what is written because it seems
to make you uncomfortable.

Yup. Wait until Revelation. You will really feel out of sorts then.

Right now, I do not see where you understand the actual gospel. In fact, you dismiss it and rewrite it.

 

[pinebeach]

Many verses can be understood in multiple ways depending on one's assumptions.

Not really but it does help to understand why you and others are so badly mistaken about what actually happened.

I guess you take your handle seriously.

 

[Burn1986]

A common Christian tradition is that God imputed our sins to His Son Jesus on the cross, so that He would pay the price of our sins instead of us.

First, No Scripture ever says that the righteous God imputes any evil to the righteous, especially not the sins of those doing unrighteousness. And by no means to His own Son Jesus Christ the righteous, who never sinned, nor knew any sin in His own soul and life.

What is the Scripture, that is abused by men to say. that God did impute sin, and esteem Jesus legally guilty, and smitten by law?

Isa 53:34:
He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Who is it, that Scriptures says will impute Jesus Christ with sin, and esteem Him smitten of God on the cross, as if by law of God? God Himself, or man? Only man, not God.

And so, we see the prophecy was not of God Himself esteeming Jesus guilty of sin unto death by law, but only of sinful men believing He was guilty of blasphemy and smitten by law:

Mar 14:64
Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

Only men imputed Jesus with sin of blasphemy, and esteemed Him guilty by law and smitten of God on the cross. Not God Himself at all...And only some men still believe by false tradition, the lie that God imputed His Son with sin, and made Him legally guilty of sin unto death.

Jesus Christ was the Christ and Son of God on earth, and not a blasphemer, even though all men believed otherwise at the cross, and in death. No one went to His tomb on the third day to watch Him rise again, as He said, but only to anoint His dead body...

Lemme guess, we’re stuck at salvation? Another baby staring at his mother’s womb, gaining insight about if he was really born or not.