Was Jesus Sinful? Luther & Sproul

[u][b]Let's not turn this into a Calvinist vs. Arminian Debate please!!!!![/b][/u]

Luther and Sproul taught that Jesus became a sinner!!

…“If thou wilt deny him to be a sinner and accursed, deny, also, that he was crucified and dead.” Luther

“But if it is not absurd to confess and believe that Christ was crucified between two thieves, then it is not absurd to say that he was accursed, and of all sinners, the greatest.” Luther

“God, our most merciful Father, sent His only Son into the world, and laid upon him all the sins of all people, saying, be thou Peter, that denier; Paul, that persecutor, blasphemer, and cruel oppressor; David, that adulterer; that sinner which did eat the fruit in Paradise; that thief who hung upon the cross; and, briefly, be thou the person who has committed the sins of all people; see, therefore, that thou pay and satisfy for them” – Luther on the Galatians, Gal_3:13

“The Incarnate Christ who enjoyed intimate personal fellowship with the Father, such as no man had ever enjoyed, was suddenly and completely cut off. Once the sin of man was imputed to Him, He became the virtual incarnation of evil. The load He carried was repugnant to the Father. God is too holy to even look at iniquity. God the Father turned His back upon the Son” R. C. Sproul

Jesus was not sinful during the crucifixion according to:

Lev. 22:20 – blemished offering not acceptable
Ex. 12:5 – the lamb must be without blemish
1 Pet. 1:19 – Lamb without blemish or spot
Heb. 9:14 – offered without spot to God
1 Pet. 3:18 – Christ suffered the just for the unjust
Heb. 13:8 – Jesus the same yesterday, today, and forever
Lk. 23:41 – thief on cross admits Jesus did nothing wrong to deserve it
1 Pet. 2:22-23 – Jesus was not sinning when on the cross

“Jesus was not sinful, or a sinner, in any sense. He did not so take human guilt upon him, that the words sinful and sinner could with any propriety be applied to him. They are not applied to him any way in the Bible; but there the language is undeviating. It is that in all senses he was holy and undefiled. And yet language is often used on this subject which is horrible and only a little short of blasphemy, as if he was guilty, and as if he was even the greatest sinner in the universe. I have heard language used which sent a chill of horror to my heart; and language may be found in the writings of those who hold the doctrine of imputation in the strictest sense, which is only a little short of blasphemy” Albert Barnes

1. Was Jesus sinful or did He become a sinner?

2. Is it heretical to say yes?

[u][b]Let's stay on topic this time![/b][/u]

Adam Clarke's Commentary is also very good:
2Co 5:21

For he hath made him to be sin for us - Τον μη γνοντα ἁμαρτιαν, ὑπερ ἡμων ἁμαρτιαν εποιησεν· He made him who knew no sin, (who was innocent), a [u]sin-offering for us[/u]. The word ἁμαρτια occurs here twice: in the first place it means sin, i.e. transgression and guilt; and of Christ it is said, He knew no sin, i.e. was innocent; for not to know sin is the same as to be conscious of innocence; so, nil conscire sibi, to be conscious of nothing against one’s self, is the same as nulla pallescere culpa, to be unimpeachable.

In the second place, it signifies a sin-offering, or sacrifice for sin, and answers to the חטאה chattaah and חטאת chattath of the Hebrew text; which signifies both sin and sin-offering in a great variety of places in the Pentateuch. The Septuagint translate the Hebrew word by ἁμαρτια in ninety-four places in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, where a sin-offering is meant; and where our version translates the word [u]not sin, but an offering for sin[/u]. Had our translators attended to their own method of translating the word in other places where it means the same as here, they would not have given this false view of a passage which has been made the foundation of [u]a most blasphemous doctrine; viz. that our sins were imputed to Christ, and that he was a proper object of the indignation of Divine justice, because he was blackened with imputed sin; and some have proceeded so far in this blasphemous career as to say, that Christ may be considered as the greatest of sinners, because all the sins of mankind, or of the elect, as they say, were imputed to him, and reckoned as his own[/u]. One of these writers translates the passage thus: Deus Christum pro maximo peccatore habuit, ut nos essemus maxime justi, God accounted Christ the greatest of sinners, that we might be supremely righteous. Thus they have confounded sin with the punishment due to sin. Christ suffered in our stead; died for us; bore our sins, (the punishment due to them), in his own body upon the tree, for the Lord laid upon him the iniquities of us all; that is, the punishment due to them; explained by making his soul - his life, an offering for sin; and healing us by his stripes.

But that it may be plainly seen that sin-offering, not sin, is the meaning of the word in this verse, I shall set down the places from the Septuagint where the word occurs; and where it answers to the Hebrew words already quoted; and where our translators have rendered correctly what they render here incorrectly. In Exodus, Exo_29:14, Exo_29:36 : Leviticus, Lev_4:3, Lev_4:8, Lev_4:20, Lev_4:21, Lev_4:24, Lev_4:25, Lev_4:29, Lev_4:32-34; Lev_5:6, Lev_5:7, Lev_5:8, Lev_5:9, Lev_5:11, Lev_5:12; Lev_6:17, Lev_6:25, Lev_6:30; Lev_7:7, Lev_7:37; Lev_8:2, Lev_8:14; Lev_9:2, Lev_9:3, Lev_9:7, Lev_9:8, Lev_9:10, Lev_9:15, Lev_9:22; Lev_10:16, Lev_10:17, Lev_10:19; Lev_12:6, Lev_12:8; Lev_14:13, Lev_14:19, Lev_14:22, Lev_14:31; Lev_15:15, Lev_15:30; Lev_16:3, Lev_16:5, Lev_16:6, Lev_16:9, Lev_16:11, Lev_16:15, Lev_16:25, Lev_16:27; Lev_23:19 : Numbers, Num_6:11, Num_6:14, Num_6:16; Num_7:16, Num_7:22, Num_7:28, Num_7:34, Num_7:40, Num_7:46, Num_7:52, Num_7:58, Num_7:70, Num_7:76, Num_7:82, Num_7:87; Num_8:8, Num_8:12; Num_15:24, Num_15:25, Num_15:27; Num_18:9; Num_28:15, Num_28:22; Num_29:5, Num_29:11, Num_29:16, Num_29:22, Num_29:25, Num_29:28, Num_29:31, Num_29:34, Num_29:38.

Besides the above places, it occurs in the same signification, and is properly translated in our version, in the following places: -
2 Chronicles, 2Ch_29:21, 2Ch_29:23, 2Ch_29:24 : Ezra, Ezr_6:17; Ezr_8:35 : Nehemiah, Neh_10:33 : Job, Job_1:5 : Ezekiel, Eze_43:19, Eze_43:22, Eze_43:25; Eze_44:27, Eze_44:29; Eze_45:17, Eze_45:19, Eze_45:22, Eze_45:23, Eze_45:25. In all, one hundred and eight places, which, in the course of my own reading in the Septuagint, I have marked.

"If Jesus became actaully guilty, then He deserved to die, and His death could have no more merit than that of any other guilty being; and if He was properly guilty it would make no difference in this respect whether it was by his own fault or by imputation: a guilty being deserves to be punished; and where there is desert of punishment there can be no merit in sufferings.
This is truely rediculous to say that Jesus became guilty!

If Jesus became actaully sin its self. Then Jesus became a verb, a transgression of the law (1John 3:4).
Jesus became a literal lack of faith (Romans 14:23).
Jesus became All unrighteousness (1John 5:17)

For Jesus to literal become sin makes no sence at all." logic

I don't see this being said at all logic. Who is saying that Jesus was literally sinful and literally guilty?

Can those who have posted here clarify if Logic is correct in speaking for you? Whoever is saying that Jesus is literally sinful (as in He commited all kinds of sin) and literally guilty (just like we would be) of that sin please speak up.

A spotless lamb was sacrificed for the remission of sin in the OT. Whatever was sacrificed, it was something WITHOUT SPOT OR BLEMISH. This was a type and shadow. God foreknew that His lamb would come and fulfill the law in perfection. Otherwise it's not a type or a shadow. In the NT Jesus was called 'the Lamb of God' meaning the sacrificial lamb for the remission of sins. In order for Him to be spotless, He had to be in perfect obedience and innocent of the sin of humanity just as the OT sacrificial lamb had nothing to do with guilt, as a lamb cannot sin. Something innocent died for the guilty. This is the cross.

The perfect sacrifice that took away the 'sins of the world' was the FINAL SACRIFICE. The cross called for a sacrifice without blemish just as God did in the OT. Therefore the obedience of Christ was not just for Himself, it was a requirement for the innocent lamb, who knew no sin, to be made a sin offering just like the sin offering in the OT. Did the OT lamb know sin when it was sacrificed? These things are indeed relative to the mystery of the cross. If Jesus sins, He is no longer spotless. And if Jesus sins, what blood would cleanse Him of His crime? For 'without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin'. What blood would be good enough to cleanse Christ of a sin that He chose if His blood was foretold to be the blood that atoned for all of us? That's what wouldn't make sense. His obedience wasn't just for His own sake, He knew what was at stake.

Who is saying that Jesus was literally sinful and literally guilty?

Luther said Jesus became a sinner:

…“If thou wilt deny him to be a sinner and accursed, deny, also, that he was crucified and dead.” Luther

Sproul said Jesus became sinful:

"Once the sin of man was imputed to Him, He became the virtual incarnation of evil. The load He carried was repugnant to the Father." Sproul

Calvin said Jesus became guilty:

"Christ’s having been made sin.... What, on the other hand, is denoted by sin? It is the guilt..." John Calvin

Luther said Jesus became a sinner:

…“If thou wilt deny him to be a sinner and accursed, deny, also, that he was crucified and dead.” Luther

Sproul said Jesus became sinful:

"Once the sin of man was imputed to Him, He became the virtual incarnation of evil. The load He carried was repugnant to the Father." Sproul

Calvin said Jesus became guilty:

"Christ’s having been made sin.... What, on the other hand, is denoted by sin? It is the guilt..." John Calvin" truefaithdav

Uh huh. And are they on this thread?

Sin is not a substance

I disagree. If I punch someone in the face, they bear the marks of sin(noun) because I sinned(verb). Sin has taken on substance.

If you punch someone and give the a black eye, that doesn't mean that sin is now a substance. A black eye is not sin! You can get a black eye by accident without a punch. It is not the black eye that is a sin, it is the motive of a persons heart who punches you that is sinful!

Sin is a state of the will, a disobedient state. That will manifest into actions, but sin is never a substance or a quality of matter. That is Gnosticism.

Is sin a animal, vegetable, or mineral? Is sin a gas, solid, or liquid? Neither of these. Sin is a choice.

Sin is the violation of God's law. God's law does not tell us what type of substance to have! God's law tells us what type of choices we should make and what type of choices we shouldn't make. The moral quality of sinfulness can only be prescribed to choices, but it cannot be prescribed to substance or matter.

Luther said Jesus became a sinner:

…“If thou wilt deny him to be a sinner and accursed, deny, also, that he was crucified and dead.” Luther

Sproul said Jesus became sinful:

"Once the sin of man was imputed to Him, He became the virtual incarnation of evil. The load He carried was repugnant to the Father." Sproul

Calvin said Jesus became guilty:

"Christ’s having been made sin.... What, on the other hand, is denoted by sin? It is the guilt..." John Calvin"

Uh huh. And are they on this thread

Did you even read the first post?

This thread is about those quotes!

Are those quotes true or false? Are they orthodoxy or heretical?

"Did you even read the first post?

This thread is about those quotes!"truefaithsav

Listen pal you quoted my post. Did you read it? "Who is saying that Jesus was literally sinful and literally guilty?"

You were responding to my post. I said "can the people here clarify". Are Luther and Calvin here? I was talking to those on the thread to clarify, not the dead. Perhaps if you weren't so bent on having a smart alic response to each thing written then you would understand what exactly you are responding to.

Jesus who knew no sin (choice) became sin (sin offering) for us, that we might be might the righteousness of God (receive the forgiveness that comes from God).

Very simple.

I started a new thread explaining how "imputed righteousness" is synonomous with being forgiven and accepted.

"But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the camp, it is a SIN OFFERING". That is how it is translated even though the Hebrew simply says "SIN". But obviously the flesh and skin of the bullock was not SIN, it was a SIN OFFERING!

OTHER PASSAGES WHERE "SIN" IS TRANSLATED "SIN-OFFERING":

, Exo_29:14, Exo_29:36 : Leviticus, Lev_4:3, Lev_4:8, Lev_4:20, Lev_4:21, Lev_4:24, Lev_4:25, Lev_4:29, Lev_4:32-34; Lev_5:6, Lev_5:7, Lev_5:8, Lev_5:9, Lev_5:11, Lev_5:12; Lev_6:17, Lev_6:25, Lev_6:30; Lev_7:7, Lev_7:37; Lev_8:2, Lev_8:14; Lev_9:2, Lev_9:3, Lev_9:7, Lev_9:8, Lev_9:10, Lev_9:15, Lev_9:22; Lev_10:16, Lev_10:17, Lev_10:19; Lev_12:6, Lev_12:8; Lev_14:13, Lev_14:19, Lev_14:22, Lev_14:31; Lev_15:15, Lev_15:30; Lev_16:3, Lev_16:5, Lev_16:6, Lev_16:9, Lev_16:11, Lev_16:15, Lev_16:25, Lev_16:27; Lev_23:19 : Numbers, Num_6:11, Num_6:14, Num_6:16; Num_7:16, Num_7:22, Num_7:28, Num_7:34, Num_7:40, Num_7:46, Num_7:52, Num_7:58, Num_7:70, Num_7:76, Num_7:82, Num_7:87; Num_8:8, Num_8:12; Num_15:24, Num_15:25, Num_15:27; Num_18:9; Num_28:15, Num_28:22; Num_29:5, Num_29:11, Num_29:16, Num_29:22, Num_29:25, Num_29:28, Num_29:31, Num_29:34, Num_29:38. 2 Chronicles, 2Ch_29:21, 2Ch_29:23, 2Ch_29:24 : Ezra, Ezr_6:17; Ezr_8:35 : Nehemiah, Neh_10:33 : Job, Job_1:5 : Ezekiel, Eze_43:19, Eze_43:22, Eze_43:25; Eze_44:27, Eze_44:29; Eze_45:17, Eze_45:19, Eze_45:22, Eze_45:23, Eze_45:25.

When Isaac was a lad, God told Abraham to take his only son to a place that God would choose and to offer him up as a sacrifice. Abraham put the wood that was necessary for the sacrifice on the back of his son Isaac. Genesis 22:1-6

Because the wood was laid upon him, did the wood become apart of Isaac? Or was he just bearing the load alone?

Because Christ became sin, does it mean that He became a sinner? God forbid, we know that he that continues to sin is of the devil. Christ bore our sins, but did not participate in them. Like the wood, he was only nailed to it, did not become apart of it. The wood typifies the flesh. He was nailed to wood which typifies you and I.

Side note: We are not one through the flesh but through the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ which produced a New Creature, old things are passed away behold all things have become new.

"Jesus who knew no sin (choice) became sin (sin offering) for us, that we might be might the righteousness of God (receive the forgiveness that comes from God).

Very simple."truefaithsav

Okay. And I simply wanted those on the thread to clarify for themselve what they meant, not what you meant.

truefaithsav wrote:
Jesus who knew no sin (choice) became sin (sin offering) for us, that we might be might the righteousness of God (receive the forgiveness that comes from God).

Very simple.

I started a new thread explaining how "imputed righteousness" is synonomous with being forgiven and accepted.

"But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the camp, it is a SIN OFFERING". That is how it is translated even though the Hebrew simply says "SIN". But obviously the flesh and skin of the bullock was not SIN, it was a SIN OFFERING!

OTHER PASSAGES WHERE "SIN" IS TRANSLATED "SIN-OFFERING":

, Exo_29:14, Exo_29:36 : Leviticus, Lev_4:3, Lev_4:8, Lev_4:20, Lev_4:21, Lev_4:24, Lev_4:25, Lev_4:29, Lev_4:32-34; Lev_5:6, Lev_5:7, Lev_5:8, Lev_5:9, Lev_5:11, Lev_5:12; Lev_6:17, Lev_6:25, Lev_6:30; Lev_7:7, Lev_7:37; Lev_8:2, Lev_8:14; Lev_9:2, Lev_9:3, Lev_9:7, Lev_9:8, Lev_9:10, Lev_9:15, Lev_9:22; Lev_10:16, Lev_10:17, Lev_10:19; Lev_12:6, Lev_12:8; Lev_14:13, Lev_14:19, Lev_14:22, Lev_14:31; Lev_15:15, Lev_15:30; Lev_16:3, Lev_16:5, Lev_16:6, Lev_16:9, Lev_16:11, Lev_16:15, Lev_16:25, Lev_16:27; Lev_23:19 : Numbers, Num_6:11, Num_6:14, Num_6:16; Num_7:16, Num_7:22, Num_7:28, Num_7:34, Num_7:40, Num_7:46, Num_7:52, Num_7:58, Num_7:70, Num_7:76, Num_7:82, Num_7:87; Num_8:8, Num_8:12; Num_15:24, Num_15:25, Num_15:27; Num_18:9; Num_28:15, Num_28:22; Num_29:5, Num_29:11, Num_29:16, Num_29:22, Num_29:25, Num_29:28, Num_29:31, Num_29:34, Num_29:38. 2 Chronicles, 2Ch_29:21, 2Ch_29:23, 2Ch_29:24 : Ezra, Ezr_6:17; Ezr_8:35 : Nehemiah, Neh_10:33 : Job, Job_1:5 : Ezekiel, Eze_43:19, Eze_43:22, Eze_43:25; Eze_44:27, Eze_44:29; Eze_45:17, Eze_45:19, Eze_45:22, Eze_45:23, Eze_45:25.

I like this truefaithsav guy almost as much as Walter. He is just as unruly and dismissive of the moderators (no doubt he shares Walter's and my suspicion that the moderators are Illuminati infiltrators trying to impose One World Churchism on all of us). And no doubt he carries a Chick Publications Soulwinner's Bible (KJV) and wears horn-rimmed glasses and polyester leisure suits - that is, when he is not wearing sackcloth and a "FLEE FROM THE WRATH TO COME!" sandwich board.

By the way, where is Walter? In a thread this hair-splitting and tedious, he normally would have pasted at least couple of mile-long theological treatises by now. I hope nothing terrible has happened.

"By the way, where is Walter? In a thread this hair-splitting and tedious, he normally would have pasted at least couple of mile-long theological treatises by now. I hope nothing terrible has happened."loingirder

Come on now, this wasn't necessary nor Christlike. I can't ever see Christ rebuking in this kind of mean spirited sarcasm.

ccrider wrote:
"By the way, where is Walter? In a thread this hair-splitting and tedious, he normally would have pasted at least couple of mile-long theological treatises by now. I hope nothing terrible has happened."loingirder

Come on now, this wasn't necessary nor Christlike. I can't ever see Christ rebuking in this kind of mean spirited sarcasm.

No, a Christ-like rebuke is more like "Woe unto you, scribes and pharisees! Hypocrites! Brood of vipers! How shall ye escape the condemnation of hell!"

And then there is "Woe unto ye blind guides, who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel." (That's sarcasm.)

I'm sorry that's how you see it, nothing here was directed personally to you to provoke anything.

ccrider wrote:
I'm sorry that's how you see it, nothing here was directed personally to you to provoke anything.

Those quotes weren't directed at you, either. I was just demonstrating the flaw in your "you're-not-nice-like-Jesus" remark.

You mentioned moderators on the previous page. I'm sure they'll be helping you out soon enough.

"Those quotes weren't directed at you, either. I was just demonstrating the flaw in your "you're-not-nice-like-Jesus" remark".

Peace to you.

Jesus-is-GOD wrote:
You mentioned moderators on the previous page. I'm sure they'll be helping you out soon enough.

I don't know, the mods around here have pretty long fuses. Remember, this thread started when the mod shut down the first "Luther & Sproul" thread, saying: "This thread is officially in Cal/Arm waters now and will be shut down. Please refrain from these types of discussions on SermonIndex." That's what the moderator said. And what did you guys do? Started it right back up again.

For some reason you've triggered a funny memory.
Years ago, I was on one forum where the moderators would take on another account as a member and have lots of "fun" with the other members. :-)

To Jesus-is-God:

Yes, I had the same idea. One member takes on multiple "identies", that all "agree" with him/her on every issue. Also, on this thread, as well as several others recently, they all seem to agree with each other 100% of the time--- while the Bible disagrees with them 100% of the time! Maybe we just have one or two "heretics" on this website, instead of 5 or 6!

Just like in the Garden of Eden, when Satan said to Eve:

4. And the serpent said unto the woman,[color=990000][b] Ye shall not surely die:
5. 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.[/color][/b]

Did Yahweh crush Jesus Christ, the Messaiah, for our sin?

What does the Bible have to say?

Did He, who knew no sin, become sin for us? So much so, that God forsake Him, and could not even look at Him for 3 hours, while He took on all the sin of humanity, from the beginning of time to the end of time. The only catch is, that only those that repent, and believe the Gospel are saved. The rest will have no excuse at the Great White Throne Judgment for the lost:

(Matthew 27:45-46)
45. Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
46. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
(2 Cor 5:21)

What did Jesus do for us, as our Passover?

1 Cor. 5:7 Jesus is our Passover
The Passover of Mosaic Law:
God commanded, last meal in Egypt before Exodus
10th of the month of Abib: take a lamb or kid, without blemish
14th of month: kill the lamb at evening
sprinkle blood on doorposts and lintel of their houses

roasted the lamb with fire, and eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs
ate it in haste, with loins girded, shoes on the feet, and staff in hand, remaining in the house until the morning

burned all that was not eaten, so none was left over

Jesus is our Passover
because of Jesus’ blood which was sprinkled upon us when we obeyed Jesus
(1 Pet. 1:2)
"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied."

God passes over us , rather than punishing us for our sins – forgiveness – washed in blood of Lamb

(Acts 8:32-35) Philip taught the eunuch about Jesus, that He was a lamb led to slaughter – our "Passover" lamb

32. The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: 33. In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth. 34. And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35. Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

What did Jesus do for us as our Passover? (as found in Isaiah 53)
1. Jesus bore our griefs and carried our sorrows!
Is. 53:4 bore our griefs and sorrows by the way

2. He was treated – esteemed stricken, smitten, afflicted
Matt. 26:65-68 Jesus before the high priest – spat upon, beat with fists, slapped
--- the way Jesus was treated is the way we deserve to be treated

3. Jesus took the abuse we deserve, because of our sins
---Jesus allowed them to treat Him like a criminal, so we don’t have to be

Jesus was pierced, crushed, chastised, scourged for us, paying the debt for our sins!
(Is. 53:5-6, 11)
pierced (wounded) for our transgressions: thorns pierced His brow, nail pierced His hands and feet, spear pierced His side
[color=990000][b]crushed (bruised) for our iniquities: beaten and bruised body throughout the ordeal
chastised for our well-being (peace): we can now have peace with God through Christ, reconciled
5 scourging (stripes) we are healed: scourging hurt Him but healed us – chastisement resulting in peace
6 took our sins upon Himself and paid for them
11 justified us, bore our iniquities[/color][/b]

1 Pet. 1:18-19 redeemed (bought) with the precious blood of Jesus
1 Pet. 1:2 sprinkled with Jesus’ blood when obey (redeemed) – Passover, blood, sprinkle
1 Cor. 6:19-20 temple of Holy Spirit, not our own, been bought with a price, glorify God in our bodies –

our obligation, what we owe in return – i.e., 1 Pet. 2:21-24
1 Pet. 2:21-24 walk in footsteps of Jesus , not revile, not threaten, entrusted Himself to God, bore our sins

Jesus bore our sins on the cross, paid the debt we own, now we are to walk in His footsteps---obey, serve Him faithfully

Jesus didn’t stop them, although He had the power to do so!
Is. 53:7 Jesus silent, like a lamb led to slaughter
Matt. 26:53 (Peter, sword) Christ could have called 12 legions of angels to fight, stop the suffering and crucifixion

(legion at this time was 6,826 men x12 = 81,912)

Matt. 26:62-63; Jn. 19:1-8 Jesus before high priest and Pilate, kept silent some times
Jesus didn’t try to save Himself, rather He gave in to their desire to kill Him

Jesus died in our place!
Is. 53:8-10 Jesus died for us , in our place, to whom the stroke was due
He didn’t sin in undergoing our punishment, so we could be blessed through Him

Jesus did for us what we couldn’t do for ourselves

Jesus bore our sins and interceded for us!
Is. 53:12 Jesus bore our sins, interceded – intervened between us and God to reconcile us together

to intercede on our behalf for our sins, Jesus had to shed His blood – spotless, human, blood sacrifice

Heb. 9:11-12, 14 Christ offered Himself, and entered into the heavenly tabernacle to make atonement for our sins – Passover Lamb

What did Jesus do for us as our Passover Lamb?
Is. 53:4-12 – 4. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. 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.
7. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. 8. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. 9. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. 11. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Heb. 13:12-14 Jesus went outside the gate to be sacrificed as our Passover Lamb!

God bless,

Walter

Jesus-is-GOD wrote:
For some reason you've triggered a funny memory.
Years ago, I was on one forum where the moderators would take on another account as a member and have lots of "fun" with the other members. :-)

If sin is a noun, then it is a description of the verb.

Here is another way to look at this sin, as I was meditating on this for a split second, the holy Spirit brought to my attention this verse of scripture.

Galations 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

To Logic:

Only God, who spoke everything into existence out of nothing could handle the sin problem of mankind!

Only God could do such a [color=990000][b]supernatural[/color][/b] thing. Only God could take away the sin problem once and for all. God that sent Alpha & Omega, The Angel of the Lord, The Lion of the Tribe of Judah, part of the Trinity, God the Son, Jesus Christ, to take away the sin of man-by taking all of it onto Himself, from the beginning of time to the end of time.

The first Adam brought sin into the world, and the last Adam (Jesus Christ) took it away (for all those that repent of their sins and believe the Gospel).

[b]This was God's plan before the foundation of the world.[/b]

What did Jesus do for us as our Passover Lamb?
Is. 53:4-12 – [color=990000][b]4. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. 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.
7. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. 8. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. 9. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise (CRUSH) him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. 11. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.[/color][/b]

Heb. 13:12-14 Jesus went outside the gate to be sacrificed as our Passover Lamb!

Sincerely,

Walter

Logic wrote:

roaringlamb wrote:

By saying that both words "sin" are the same.

Taylor said that, but he's right. So answer the question he posed to you.

I answer all questions to me, But If I miss them, I will ask to give me the question again so I don't need to search out for the lost question.

[b]please answer mine.[/b]
If sin is a noun, then it is a description of the verb.
You're saying that Jesus became the literal description of the verb sin.
IOW, Jesus became an actual transgression of the law, an actual sin of its self. How is this posible; How did Jesus become transgression[/b]?[/b]
How did Jesus become a violation of a law or a command[b]?[/b]

Explain how a human person (Jesus) become the noun of sin[b]?[/b]
(Don't say it is a mystery, becauas mysteries are not imposibilities or nonsenses)

if sin is a noun, then it is a description of the verb.

That's what the text says not me, the form used is a noun and it says nothing about sin offering.

Well, Just like translaters using italics, one should put there own which says "[i]offering[/i]" after the 2nd word sin.

Some translations already do.
CLV (concordant literal view), CJB (Complete Jewish Bible)
And it still remains a noun.

Logic, is it doctrine that man can make it into heaven without Christ? Because this is what you have said. Christ said that no one makes it to the Father except through Him:

John 14

Jesus the Way to the Father
5Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"
6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

You said that if someone observes the law perfectly they can get to heaven and to the Father. This is not what Christ said and it is not truth. So in some ways you have a Christless theology when you say those who have observed the law perfectly from birth to death do not need Christ to see the Father in heaven. So your 'not doctrine' stuff is without any merit or credibility as a critique of other's.

Also you have said previously that Psalms, Proverbs, and Song of Songs 'as a general rule' should not be used as a source for correct doctrine. Yet I see you quoting from these books quite often when it benefits your argument. You're a walking contradiction yet you obsess over pointing out the seeming contradiction of others via your own skewed interpretation of what they said and meant.

"IF Jesus became sin, then He would resurrect; Sin can not resurrect." Logic

When you take an argument this far, the doctrine of others should be the least of your worries. When one has ventured this far in argument, they have no clue as to how it reflects on them.

Jesus-is-GOD wrote:
For some reason you've triggered a funny memory.
Years ago, I was on one forum where the moderators would take on another account as a member and have lots of "fun" with the other members. :-)

I'm here to put the "fun" back in fundamentalist dogma.

roaringlamb wrote:

It is a mystery in the same way that when two or three are gathered together Christ is there.

It is a mystery in the same way that the sheep and goats of the OT were made sin for the one who was offering them.

It is a mystery in the same way that we are seated with Christ in the Heavenlies while still being on the Earth.

It is a mystery in the same way that Chris is present in the bread and wine of communion.

The mystery of godliness is that we are saved by upholding correct dogma, yet the ambiguity of the Bible and the diversity of Christian experience makes a consensus on correct dogma impossible, as this thread demonstrates.

Jesus was not a sinner, Jesus was not guilty, Jesus was not sinful. Jesus was holy, sinless, and innocent.

Jesus was not a sinner because a sinner by definition is someone who has chosen to sin.

Jesus was not guilty because you can only be guilty of what you have done.

Jesus was not sinful because only someone who has sinned, or has a disobedient heart, can be called sinful.

When Jesus hung on the cross, He was a holy sinless innocent lamb of God. He was without any spot and without any blemish. That is the only reason He could die for our sin and that is the reason His sacrifice was acceptable to God.

I feel like I'm in a colloseum, watching two titans do battle: Achilles vs. Hector; the Merrimac vs. the Monitor; Thor vs. the Midgard Serpent; Logic vs. roaringlamb. The fate of the nations hangs in the balance. The eternal destiny of billions hangs on the definition of "logizomai", or the nounage or verbage of "sin," or whether guilt was "imputed" or "transferred" to Jesus, or whether this "imputation" is a "transferring" or a "deeming," or whether this imputation was an accreditation or a transferal. This is Theological Armageddon. Weak men can only look on in awe and cower under the Thunders of Absolute Intellect.

To Logic:

Did Jesus die for our sin or with our sin?. Was our sin upon Him? Was it within Him? For 3 hours before Christ gave up the Ghost and died FOR US--For 3 hours before that time--between noon and 3:00 P.M. there was darkness over all the earth. God could not even look upon His son because our sin was upon His Son. What was Christ’s response to God? WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME. Why could God not even look upon His Son? Because he bore the sins of the World UPON/WITHIN HIMSELF.

What does the Bible say?

Mark 15:33-38
33. And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.
34. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
35. And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elias.
36. And one ran and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down.
37. And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
38. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

Not to worry. Was it on him? Was it in Him? Did He die for me, did He die for you? That is the real question. How we understand it is not. We will all find out the truth when are absent from the body, and present with the Lord, at the end of our days.

God bless,

Walter

No, Nonsense for saying that Jesus became an ambiguous sin on the cross.
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was a transfer of guilt from the sinner to the offering. An imputation of the sinner's guilt to the guiltless animal, that is why the hand was laid on the head of the animal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was no "transfer of guilt" to Jesus.
If there was, then Jesus was guilty and deserved to die.
Furthermore, He wouldn't have rose from the grave having guilt.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Imputation is also seen in the scape goat, as the sins of Israel were "imputed" to it and then it was allowed to go being a symbol of God's removing their sins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imputation is not a "transfer".
Imputation is a "deeming"
We are deemed righteous because Jesus was our sin offering.
Our faith is "deemed" as righteousness just as Abraham's.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's not too hard to see.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scape goat took the penalty of sin, it did not have sin imputed to it.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jesus is not "present in the bread and wine", He is present in our company while we take the bread and wine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as the communion goes, perhaps you should do some research before you jump to conclusions because Jesus also said, "this IS my body", "this IS my blood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is not His literal body & blood.
It is symbolic.
Jesus is not "present in the bread and wine"

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Corinthians 11:29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not Jesus' literal body, but the congregation as the body.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And still, you have not answered taylor about why one use of the word "sin" is meant "sin offering", while the next one(same word) is not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did answer that question already.
Because it doesn't make sense.
2Co 5:21 For He has made Him who knew no sin offering, to be a sin offering for us...
This makes no sense.

For He has made Him who knew no literal sin , to be a literal sin for us...
This makes no sense either.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know why though, it doesn't fit with your view.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huh?

One last thought. What does the Bible say about the sacrificial system in the Old Testament. Wasn't it a picture, a "type" of the final sacrifice, Jesus Christ, The Messiah, The Seed of the Woman?

The teaching on the Sacrifices of Leviticus

If you were a Jew, living at the time of the Tabernacle, or afterwards at the time of the Temple, all the way to 70 A.D. you were required to perform two sacrifices. The Sin Sacrifice and the Trespass Sacrifice were mandatory. The Sin Sacrifice was a Sacrifice to God for your Sin nature, the Sin originally caused by Adam. The Trespass Sacrifice was for your own sins, that you and your family committed- knowing and unknowingly. The procedure consisted of the Father (the Family Priest) taking the unblemished animal to the Tabernacle or the Temple. The Priest would meet him at the altar and examine the sacrifice, paying no attention to offerer. Everything was focused on the unblemished sacrifice, to be certain that it was worthy.[color=990000][b] Then, the sinner (family Priest) would lay his hands onto the sacrifice, and lean into the sacrifice, becoming one with the sacrifice, and then symbolically he would pass all of his & his family’s sin nature into the sacrifice, and he would then slit it’s throat.

If it was a Trespass Sacrifice, he would go through the same procedure, lay his hands upon the head of the sacrifice, and become one with it, and lean onto it and symbolically pass all of his and his family's committed sins (known and unknown) into the sacrifice (the substiture).[/color][/b]Then, he would slit the throat of the sacrifice. Like it says in Hebrews 5:2- there is no remission (forgiveness) without the shedding of blood "22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.]

Then, the Priest would put the blood on the altar. Next, the sinner would filet (skin) the animal and:
1.for the Sin Sacrifice he would cut out the fat that surrounded the inner organs, plus cutting out the kidneys and the liver and give them to the Priest, who would place them on the altar. They were salted and then burned it to. The rest of the animal, including the skin, was burned outside the camp.

2.For the Trespass-Guilt Sacrifice he would cut out the fat that surrounded the inner organs, plus cutting out the kidneys and the liver and give them to the Priest, who would place them on the altar. They were salted and then burned to smitherens. The rest of the animal, including the skin, was given to the Priest.

Was our sin upon Him, was it within Him?

Maybe all of us should spend more time in the Old Testament?

Sincerely,

Walter