Why the cross actually saves

[Dave L]

PROVIDED they (1) repent and (2) believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. So how does this fundamental Gospel truth elude your grasp.

Furthermore since Christ is called the Lamb of God which taketh away THE SIN OF THE WORLD, you are actually contradicting the Bible and Gospel truth.

= they are the savior, not Christ.

 

[Phoneman777]

And if the Christ could have sinned, He is no better than Moses. Because the cross of Christ becomes a cross that anyone could have done the job in His place.

No one could have taken Christ's place because thanks to Adam, none of us were born indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and the fact that Christ could choose obedience or sin will never change that.

 

[Ezra]

I believe Scripture is clear Jesus had no such advantage over us in overcoming sin,

i have to disagree eh knew no sin he had no sin sin could not touch him as far as causing him to sin. 2 cor 5:5:21 he became sin (sin offering) WHO KNEW NO SIN SO THAT WE COULD BECOME THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD IN HIM... he had every advantage over us when it came to sin.he was the son of God

 

[Preacher4Truth]

This is total NONSENSE since God does not decree anyone for damnation.

And you, and every Calvinist, had to come to the cross by repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. If not, then you were not saved. If so, then you too "voted yourself" in.

You're just showing your ignorance and rejection of the Gospel. You perpetually point to what you've done, rarely, if ever, Christ. We point to Christ; and him alone, 1 Corinthians 1:26-31.

But do tell us more about how you saved yourself and condemn God as unjust.

 

[Phoneman777]

Can God lie? The answer is no, and I’m sure we both agree. Now, the Christ, when He became man, He never ceased to be God. If He could have sinned in His flesh, He ceases to be God.

When dealing with the nature of Christ, we mustn't presume. He was 100% man and 100% God and that is something we're never going to be able to explain but have to accept by faith. His divine nature could not sin, but in His humanity, He could most certainly have sinned, which is why He sweat "as it were great drops of blood." He was fighting the temptation to run from Calvary and all the horrible suffering, the weight of the sin of the world, the separation from His Father that awaited Him there.

 

[Enoch111]

You perpetually point to what you've done, rarely, if ever, Christ.

Not at all. God and Christ have done absolutely everything for our salvation, and salvation is a supernatural work of God. We are saved by grace through faith EXCLUSIVELY in Christ and His finished work of redemption. But all sinners are commanded to obey the Gospel in order to be saved, and that is incontrovertible:

REPENTANCE
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent (Acts 17:30)

FAITH
And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. (1 Jn 3:23)

BOTH ESSENTIAL
And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house, Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts 20:20,21)

So unless your Gospel includes these truths, it is a false gospel, a bogus gospel, "another gospel".

 

[1stCenturyLady]

No one could have taken Christ's place because thanks to Adam, none of us were born indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and the fact that Christ could choose obedience or sin will never change that.

Actually John the Baptist was born with the indwelling Holy Spirit, but it wasn't his role to do anything but prepare the way for the Messiah through his preaching repentance.

 

[Phoneman777]

Us, no, but to the Jews Jesus was preaching to, definitely. Jesus was conceived of the seed of the Father, therefore he couldn't sin. When we are born again of the Spirit of Christ, we also receive the seed of the Father and cannot sin. 1 John 3:9.

Jesus couldn't sin but had to "learn obedience" anyway? Why?

Jesus couldn't sin but almost died twice fighting temptation both in the wilderness after His baptism and also in Gethsemane when He pleaded over and over for His Father to deliver Him from the agony and suffering of the Cross that His path of obedience would soon lead Him to?

Jesus' words in many places about keeping His Father's commandments and doing His will were just for show and bragging rights then, since there was no chance whatsoever of Him failing to keep them?

 

[Phoneman777]

i have to disagree eh knew no sin he had no sin sin could not touch him as far as causing him to sin. 2 cor 5:5:21 he became sin (sin offering) WHO KNEW NO SIN SO THAT WE COULD BECOME THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD IN HIM... he had every advantage over us when it came to sin.he was the son of God

A description of the life of Jesus which is what you've given above does nothing to answer the question of whether He was capable of choosing to sin.

What does offer evidence that He could choose to sin is the fact that on several occasions He fought very hard to resist the temptation to sin, such as sweating great drops of blood in Gethsemane while fighting the temptation to turn from the path leading to the Cross.

 

[Helen]

But isn't that the same thing as God demanding we who are riding tricycles keep up with Jesus Who's riding a ten speed, or die if we don't?

AGREE.
Where was the glory? Where was the Victory if Jesus couldn't not slip, fall, or sin?

He became a man.
Satan caused Adam the man, to sin and fall...
....Jesus , as a man, 'the last Adam' , faced off against Satan in the wilderness as a man, and took back what Adam the man, lost.

Anything else could not have legally reversed the fall of Adam on our behalf.

 

[Phoneman777]

AGREE.
Where was the glory? Where was the Victory if Jesus couldn't not slip, fall, or sin?

He became a man.
Satan caused Adam the man, to sin and fall...
....Jesus , as a man, 'the last Adam' , faced off against Satan in the wilderness as a man, and took back what Adam the man, lost.

Anything else could not have legally reversed the fall of Adam on our behalf.

Amen! Just bragging rights for something that was no great feat? Nope, He overcame sin.

 

[Episkopos]

The cross saves us in this life when we are nailed to it.

 

[Ezra]

but in His humanity, He could most certainly have sinned, which is why He sweat "as it were great drops of blood." He was fighting the temptation to run from Calvary and all the horrible suffering, the weight of the sin of the world, the separation from His Father that awaited Him there.

possible you have some good thoughts and i cant prove the sweat as of great drops of blood was the temptation to run from Calvary. how ever Scripture records him saying Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many.” i am not going to say how wrong you are .because there could be the possibility he knew in advance why he was born. at his birth it was foretold Luke 2 34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother“This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, 35 so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.”

of course at the beginning of this scripture it said they marveled at what he said .. so it is jut my point he knew in advance and for me it is hard to think he was tempted to run away . even the woman with the alabaster box he told of his death.. one thing for sure he was dealing with something in his human side

 

[Ezra]

A description of the life of Jesus which is what you've given above does nothing to answer the question of whether He was capable of choosing to sin.

What does offer evidence that He could choose to sin is the fact that on several occasions He fought very hard to resist the temptation to sin, such as sweating great drops of blood in Gethsemane while fighting the temptation to turn from the path leading to the Cross.

possible maybe probably on sin ..that i can not agree with . a lamb had to be pure john 1:29 behold the Lamb of God who takes a way the sins of the world . how could something that takes sin away .do sin ? 2nd Corinthian 5:21 states he became sin kjv which the proper way that should say is he became a sin offering .i see Jesus as sinless and not even having the thought of sin

 

[CoreIssue]

No doubt the reason why God incarnate alone qualifies as the only candidate to die for the sins of the world is because He was filled with the Holy Spirit since His conception and lived a perfect life through the power of that indwelt Holy Spirit. But the question is: did this initial filling of the incarnate Jesus with the Holy Spirit give Him an advantage over us in the fight to overcome sin? There are only two possible - yet unwelcome - answers to Calvinists and most everyone else:

1) The first answer most Christians want to be true, but if we're honest with ourselves, we know cannot be.
2) The second answer most Christians desperately do not want to be true.

If we answer "yes", we arm Satan with the most powerful argument that can be used in his campaign which began in heaven to represent God as unjust and unfair: "How can You demand they render the same perfect obedience to Your law - or die - as did Jesus when Jesus was empowered advantageously to do so while no one else was granted any such advantage?"

If we say "no", any and all excuses for our disobedience to God's law are swept away leaving sin exposed as a choice we make, not a condition from which we're helpless to escape.

The evidence proves we, too, have access to the same power that Jesus relied upon to live an obedient life, and therefore we have no "cloak for our sin". What say you?

The never says Jesus is filled Holy Spirit. Why would he be when his spirit is a second person?

Jesus couldn't sin but had to "learn obedience" anyway? Why?

Jesus couldn't sin but almost died twice fighting temptation both in the wilderness after His baptism and also in Gethsemane when He pleaded over and over for His Father to deliver Him from the agony and suffering of the Cross that His path of obedience would soon lead Him to?

Because he could send just as God can do evil.

But their natures are such that they never would. It is called free will choice.

Jesus' words in many places about keeping His Father's commandments and doing His will were just for show and bragging rights then, since there was no chance whatsoever of Him failing to keep them?

 

[justbyfaith]

They think if God exercises justice on a person, damning them eternally, without giving them "a chance" to vote themselves into heaven in their own ability, then he's a monster, unjust, unfair, the author of evil, not God &c &c &c. It just goes to show they have no fear of accusing God of anything, or, they don't know him, or, they are doing so in ignorance.

How is man accountable to God if he does not make the decision to receive or reject Christ? How is man responsible for his own fate in this?

It seems to me that the scenario that you present means that God arbitrarily chooses some people out for salvation; and by default, certain people out for condemnation.

Now the Bible teaches that God is just; but the god that you present to us is not just: and therefore he must not be the God of the Bible.

The God of the Bible gives everyone a fair opportunity to receive or reject the author of their salvation.

Everyone has access to the witness of creation around them to the eternal power and Godhead of the Lord (Romans 1). If they obey that light and believe in the Lord God, they will receive the 2nd light (conscience, Romans 2). If they receive that light, understanding that they are sinners, they will be faced with the third light, the light of Christ and the Cross. If they receive the 3rd light, they will be saved.

Each perspective receiving of light is a choice and a decision on the part of the person who is faced with the light in front of them.

Therefore every man is responsible for his own fate when he shall stand before the Lord. If he ends up being cast into the lake of fire, he will have no one but himself to blame.

 

[justbyfaith]

This is untrue,

Please explain to us why it is so imperative that we should take scissors and cut Romans 10:13 out of our Bibles.

 

[CoreIssue]

How is man accountable to God if he does not make the decision to receive or reject Christ? How is man responsible for his own fate in this?

It seems to me that the scenario that you present means that God arbitrarily chooses some people out for salvation; and by default, certain people out for condemnation.

Now the Bible teaches that God is just; but the god that you present to us is not just: and therefore he must not be the God of the Bible.

The God of the Bible gives everyone a fair opportunity to receive or reject the author of their salvation.

Everyone has access to the witness of creation around them to the eternal power and Godhead of the Lord (Romans 1). If they obey that light and believe in the Lord God, they will receive the 2nd light (conscience, Romans 2). If they receive that light, understanding that they are sinners, they will be faced with the third light, the light of Christ and the Cross. If they receive the 3rd light, they will be saved.

Each perspective receiving of light is a choice and a decision on the part of the person who is faced with the light in front of them.

Therefore every man is responsible for his own fate when he shall stand before the Lord. If he ends up being cast into the lake of fire, he will have no one but himself to blame.

That is true. Repentance comes by freewill asking or rejecting God. So if not in free will how can to be condemnation or salvation?

Sure cannot call it just.

 

[CoreIssue]

Please explain to us why it is so imperative that we should take scissors and cut Romans 10:13 out of our Bibles.

And Romans 8 as well.

 

[justbyfaith]

but, that hasn't stopped you from congratulating yourself either.

I don't congratulate myself; it was completely a work of grace that the Lord did in my life; this does not change the fact that He gave me a choice in the matter of whether I would receive or reject Him. The fact that I received Him does not indicate any virtue on my part...it simply means that I saw the gospel presented clearly enough to realize that the only sane option was to receive Him.