Wed Aug 1, 2012, 03:23 PM
mr blur (6,978 posts)
14 replies, 1595 views
A Christian Tries Explaining the Concept of Sin (Original post)
|mr blur||Aug 2012||OP|
Response to mr blur (Original post)
Wed Aug 1, 2012, 04:01 PM
ThoughtCriminal (10,427 posts)
1. Maybe Part 2
will attempt to explain atonement through the suffering of another being.
I've been scratching my head on that one for about 40 years.
Response to ThoughtCriminal (Reply #1)
Wed Aug 1, 2012, 11:00 PM
dmallind (10,437 posts)
3. I can help there
Disclaimer - this is all utter hogswash, but even asinine concepts can be explained.
You have to deal with two basic concepts: 1) The hypostatic nature of Christ that is a fully human nature subsumed in a fully divine nature. If Christ had been entirely human, his sacrifice would neither have been sufficient nor universalized. If he had been solely divine, neither sacrifice nor suffering would have been possible as the divine physis can experience neither.
2) The penal substitution theory of atonement. Basically because humans offended the honor of God by disobedience, only a human sacrifice can atone for this sin. But only a divine sacrifice can be sufficient to atone for the sinful nature of all humanity. So only a fully divine and fully human sacrifice can achieve both.
It is the unique nature of Christ as being a single prosopon with two natures that allows substitutional atonement.
Response to dmallind (Reply #3)
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 03:52 PM
brooklynite (22,609 posts)
12. But what is the basis for them saying...
First there is the question of why a Capital Punishment is called for to substitute for lying, coveting, eating shrimp, etc.
But second, who says that a sacrifice is required? Why can't God change his mind, and/or compassionately waive the penalty?
Response to dmallind (Reply #4)
Thu Aug 2, 2012, 04:35 PM
Igel (21,797 posts)
There is no try, there is only do and not do.
There is sinner and not sinner. There is forgiven and not forgiven.
A forgiven sinner can't be punished. A forgiven non-sinner is redundant, but not punished.
An unforgiven sinner is punished. A unforgiven non-sinner isn't punished.
So if you're good, great; if you're forgiven, there's no need to be good.
That's Yoda. A nice 2 x 2 square. Yoda wasn't Xian, even though he loved binary systems.
Xians (not the once-saved/always-group, but many others) have "try". Call it the result of faith or commitment or whatever you want. They like the pizza. Doesn't matter for this argument. They stipulate that there is no 'non-sinner', so the right-hand column is gone.
A forgiven sinner can't be punished, if he tries.
A forgiven sinner can be punished, if he doesn't try. His forgiveness is revoked, but he has to take positive steps to indicate his commitment to non-trying. (Or rather, to trying God.)
An unforgiven sinner will be punished, unless he starts to try.
A nice 1 x 3 column. Xians apparently are Minbari. They like trinary systems. (And not, that's not related to the trinity.)
Response to dmallind (Reply #8)
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 03:09 PM
humblebum (5,881 posts)
9. Well, in Christian theology God sets the standard and
anything that deviates from that standard is a sin. It is impossible for any person to meet that standard, therefore everyone is a sinner.
Response to dmallind (Reply #10)
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 03:29 PM
humblebum (5,881 posts)
11. The cartoon is an atheist's concept of a christian's concept of sin.
I am not an atheist, therefore my concept does not necessarily match the cartoon concept.
But to answer your question more directly, of course sin can be forgiven.