10 Jan '22 17:32>
Why couldn't a supposedly omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God just have forgiven the human race for its failings? It seems to represent a big hole in the argument.
@c-j-horse saidHow could God condemn one and forgive another justly, if a human judge forgave those he liked and condemned those he didn’t is that justice? In order for justice to be done all crimes had to be settled completely and God personally paid the debt we owed Himself. Those who say Jesus is not God assume that is exactly what God did, that God made Jesus and made Him do it.
Why couldn't a supposedly omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God just have forgiven the human race for its failings? It seems to represent a big hole in the argument.
@sonship saidAs the person guilty of blasphemy, perhaps it is you who should be apologizing?
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
I forgive them.
@c-j-horse saidHe didn’t “have to die”, he had to be resurrected.
Why couldn't a supposedly omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God just have forgiven the human race for its failings? It seems to represent a big hole in the argument.
@c-j-horse saidJustice.
Why couldn't a supposedly omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God just have forgiven the human race for its failings? It seems to represent a big hole in the argument.
@josephw saidIf the person not responsible is held responsible and punished, then justice has not been done.
God took full responsibility for man's "failings" and suffered the judgment that was rightfully ours.
@fmf saidYou're merely obfuscating the clear meaning of scripture.
If the person not responsible is held responsible and punished, then justice has not been done.
But one must believe it. If one has no faith, then the atonement can't be applied.
...and then believing that somehow "...the person not responsible [Jesus] being held responsible and punished means justice HAS been done..." somehow absolves the believer! Ha! Thinking one's way to immortality.
@josephw saidOn the contrary, I think I have distilled the concept of "substitutionary atonement" notion clearly.
Try as you might you can't garble up the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
@josephw saidIf a person who was not responsible for something is held responsible, regardless, and then punished for it, then one can say an injustice has been done. Morally speaking, the concept is nonsense, the imperative that humans must believe it notwithstanding.
Justice was meted out against sin on the person of Jesus in an act of selfless love.
@fmf saidPlaying God again?
On the contrary, I think I have distilled the concept of "substitutionary atonement" notion clearly.
@josephw saidNot at all. I am simply engaging you on whether the ideology you espouse is nonsensical or not.
Playing God again?