PDA

View Full Version : Sin?



mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 10:44 PM
Is it a disease that needs a cure or a crime that needs penalty?

stillforgiven
May 2nd 2008, 10:52 PM
IMO:
Sin itself could be a disease that needs to be cured, but the acts from sin usually lead to some form of crime that needs a penalty - even if just on the spiritual level.

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 10:54 PM
IMO:
Sin itself could be a disease that needs to be cured, but the acts from sin usually lead to some form of crime that needs a penalty - even if just on the spiritual level.

So its a disease that causes me to act criminally?

Rullion Green
May 2nd 2008, 10:55 PM
It definetly needed a penalty !!! and the one that paid the penalty also provided the cure ! :)

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 10:59 PM
It definetly needed a penalty !!! and the one that paid the penalty also provided the cure ! :)

Are you suggesting that it is both crime and disease?

Brother Mark
May 2nd 2008, 11:05 PM
Neither word is correct. Sin is a transgression against God's law. And the breaking of that law, requires death.

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 11:12 PM
Neither word is correct. Sin is a transgression against God's law. And the breaking of that law, requires death.

Is a transgression against a law breaking a law and isn't death a penalty?

Brother Mark
May 2nd 2008, 11:14 PM
Is a transgression against a law breaking a law and isn't death a penalty?

Yes. But crime is more centered around man's laws. I was agreeing that it requires a penalty. The only penalty that fits is death. Sin always brings about death.

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 11:16 PM
Yes. But crime is more centered around man's laws. I was agreeing that it requires a penalty. The only penalty that fits is death. Sin always brings about death.


Doesn't disease if not treated?


Transgression:
: an act, process, or instance of transgressing: as a: infringement or violation of a law, command, or duty

Rullion Green
May 2nd 2008, 11:16 PM
Are you suggesting that it is both crime and disease?

I see it like this, i'll pretty much be telling you the gospel lol so i'll be preaching to the converted...Since the fall of man we have been seperated from God by sin and are born in sin. Through Adam all are fallen but we were given a promise in the garden that one would come and crush the head of the serpant. He has came and paid the price or penalty for those who love God. That i see as the penalty that had to be made for us to be reconsilled to God, His son gave his life for us, so there was a penalty to be paid and cost more than any human mind can comprehand.... the Son of God laying down his life for us.

Sin can also be called a disease likened to cancer or some other terminal disease that kills the body as it kills the human from birth spiritually and physically for the wages of sin is death. So i suppose the way i see it sin is both. What do you think..?

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 11:18 PM
Did Christ come to treat a disease or to penalize a crime?

Brother Mark
May 2nd 2008, 11:21 PM
Did Christ come to treat a disease or to penalize a crime?

He came to take the punishment for us for the sin we committed. He will come later to penalize all who won't accept him. Then there is the judgment to come later.

If one wants to use terms such as crime and disease, that's OK. But we need to be careful about developing truths from those kinds of thoughts.

Rullion Green
May 2nd 2008, 11:24 PM
Did Christ come to treat a disease or to penalize a crime?

Gods justice demandeds payment for sin. Those who have salvation have it through the work on the cross of Jesus. He has shown the way for us to be reconsilled...through him. In paying the penalty he has given the cure, if thats how you wish to put it.

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 11:36 PM
He came to take the punishment for us for the sin we committed. He will come later to penalize all who won't accept him. Then there is the judgment to come later.

If one wants to use terms such as crime and disease, that's OK. But we need to be careful about developing truths from those kinds of thoughts.


It seems to me that there was a plan before the foundations of the world.
The plan was between the Father, Son and Spirit to save us from sin not to appease God's anger toward sin.


The conversations might go like this:

"OK we know there going to sin and that's really going to make me mad, so I'll punish You as my Son to satisfy the anger."

or

"OK We know there going to sin and that is going to separate them from us, but we really do love them and they need to know how much. Lets show them."

Brother Mark
May 2nd 2008, 11:39 PM
It seems to me that there was a plan before the foundations of the world.
The plan was between the Father, Son and Spirit to save us from sin not to appease God's anger toward sin.


The conversations might go like this:

"OK we know there going to sin and that's really going to make me mad, so I'll punish You as my Son to satisfy the anger."

or

"OK We know there going to sin and that is going to separate them from us, but we really do love them and they need to know how much. Lets show them."

As Paul wrote, we are crucified with Christ. Just as the wrath of God fell on the ark, those in the Ark were spared. But those outside the ark, God's wrath fell on them.

mikebr
May 2nd 2008, 11:53 PM
As Paul wrote, we are crucified with Christ. Just as the wrath of God fell on the ark, those in the Ark were spared. But those outside the ark, God's wrath fell on them.

You separate God's love and his wrath, I don't.

Brother Mark
May 2nd 2008, 11:54 PM
You separate God's love and his wrath, I don't.

His love won't keep him from showing wrath. He loved his Son and still punished him. The wrath of the Lamb in revelations is a real thing.

Rullion Green
May 3rd 2008, 12:02 AM
You separate God's love and his wrath, I don't.

Would you say that in the day of judgment if you were a athiest...?

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 01:13 AM
Would you say that in the day of judgment if you were a athiest...?

Would an atheist say that?

Will I be judged for saying it? Thats the better question.

I live on a road where huge dump trucks speed up and down. I have a six year old son. I have taught him since birth not to play near the road. He experiences my wrath when he goes near it. But its to save him not punish him. My wrath is an extension of my love.

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 01:28 AM
Would an atheist say that?

Will I be judged for saying it? Thats the better question.

I live on a road where huge dump trucks speed up and down. I have a six year old son. I have taught him since birth not to play near the road. He experiences my wrath when he goes near it. But its to save him not punish him. My wrath is an extension of my love.

Hell is not an extension of God's love nor is it a place of redemption. It is a place of eternal torment for unbelievers.

Rullion Green
May 3rd 2008, 02:03 AM
Would an atheist say that?

Will I be judged for saying it? Thats the better question.



I don't think the wrath of God will be mistaken for love, you say the two are the same. !

I say your analogy is totaly wrong and doesn't even come close to God's wrath.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 04:02 AM
Hell is not an extension of God's love nor is it a place of redemption. It is a place of eternal torment for unbelievers.

Who said anything about Hell? Give me just a small break, Brother Mark. Everything I post is not about Hell. My reason for posting this is about the purpose of the cross. Relax. I'd prefer not to talk about hell if you please.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 04:05 AM
I don't think the wrath of God will be mistaken for love, you say the two are the same. !

I say your analogy is totaly wrong and doesn't even come close to God's wrath.
I didn't say anything about God's wrath being mistaken for love. I said it is an extension of His love. God is love and cannot do anything apart from who He is.

Rullion Green
May 3rd 2008, 10:00 AM
I didn't say anything about God's wrath being mistaken for love. I said it is an extension of His love. God is love and cannot do anything apart from who He is.


I thought you said you didn't see His love and wrath as seperate..?

He is Love but he is also just and Holy and will demand an account of sin to be paid for, and the payment is wrath not love the reason i said the thing about the atheist is i dont think they will see it as an extenstion of love when they are in hell, but i suppose it depends what side you are on. I don't seem to get what your point is here. Perhaps the subject is a bit too deep for me, mayby i'll see things different in future ?

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 10:43 AM
I didn't say anything about God's wrath being mistaken for love. I said it is an extension of His love. God is love and cannot do anything apart from who He is.

God is also Holy. Love is not all he is. If we think that he is only love, we miss a large part of his person.

Personally, I think there is a difference between his wrath and his anger. We do not experience his wrath but we do experience his anger.

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 10:45 AM
Who said anything about Hell? Give me just a small break, Brother Mark. Everything I post is not about Hell. My reason for posting this is about the purpose of the cross. Relax. I'd prefer not to talk about hell if you please.

The problem is Mike, that God's wrath is not always redemptive and that was the reason I brought up hell. Your previous post made it out to be redemptive in all cases. But I am willing to lay that aside for now. Still, as I said previously, while God is love. God is also Holy. Holy is as much a part of his character as love. There are other things that we know about God as well. Love is only part of who he is.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 01:21 PM
The problem is Mike, that God's wrath is not always redemptive and that was the reason I brought up hell. Your previous post made it out to be redemptive in all cases. But I am willing to lay that aside for now. Still, as I said previously, while God is love. God is also Holy. Holy is as much a part of his character as love. There are other things that we know about God as well. Love is only part of who he is.

love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.


I know you recognize these as the Fruit of the Spirit. It the fruit that He produces. Its WHO God is. You could also read 1Cor 13 to get a picture of who God is.

13:4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails.

It could just as easily say: God is patient, God is kind, etc

Ephesians 3:19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with ALL THE FULLNESS of God.

Why do you suppose Paul didn't say " and to know the holiness of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God.

Rullion Green
May 3rd 2008, 01:44 PM
Why do you suppose Paul didn't say " and to know the holiness of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God.

What about Isaiah 6:1:4


In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple. Above him were seraphs, each with six wings: With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying. And they were calling to one another:

"Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of Host's; the whole earth is full of his glory."

At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook and the temple was filled with smoke.

Many see this as perhaps the most powerfull vision of the Lord in the Bible and the apostles John tells us that the one who Isaiah saw was the Lord Jesus Christ. The attribute given here and emphasised is Holy not love, love, love.

He is both and a lot more, i think we can agree on that :)

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 01:46 PM
love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.


I know you recognize these as the Fruit of the Spirit. It the fruit that He produces. Its WHO God is. You could also read 1Cor 13 to get a picture of who God is.

13:4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails.

It could just as easily say: God is patient, God is kind, etc

Ephesians 3:19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with ALL THE FULLNESS of God.

Why do you suppose Paul didn't say " and to know the holiness of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God.

God is like that. That is only part of who he is. There is much, much more to God than love. Love is very important and he is that. He is patient. But his patience does have a limit. He teaches us that in his word.

Gen 6:3
3 Then the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years."
NASB

God ran out of patience with man during Noah's day, and the God of love, destroyed the entire earth.

Heb 10:30-31
30 For we know Him who said, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge His people." 31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
NASB

God is also a God of vengeance and he will take it.

But most importantly, he is a God of love and God of holiness.

Ps 77:13
13 Thy way, O God, is holy;
What god is great like our God?
NASB

and

Rev 4:7-8
8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say,

"Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God, the Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come."
NASB

In heaven, we will sing that he is HOLY, HOLY, HOLY.

God is described far more often in scripture as holy than he is as love. Love is who He is. But holiness is also who He is. When one separates God's holiness from his love, he gets an unbalanced view of God. God is also just and he will repay and take vengeance. When one overlooks God's holiness, then one might be inclined to view God's wrath in a way that is unbiblical.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 03:50 PM
When one separates God's holiness from his love, he gets an unbalanced view of God.

What about when one separates his love from his holiness? Does he then get an unbalanced view also?

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 03:54 PM
What about when one separates his love from his holiness? Does he then get an unbalanced view also?

One without the other is unbalanced. It is all. God is not ALL love. He is just. He is holy. He is love. All are part of who he is. If we preach a god that is only love, we are preaching another Jesus.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 04:03 PM
If you don’t love God, you would be well-served to fear him. Wayne Jaconsen


“There is no fear in love, because fear has to do with punishment,”

John the disciple that Jesus loved.

ravi4u2
May 3rd 2008, 04:05 PM
One without the other is unbalanced. It is all. God is not ALL love. He is just. He is holy. He is love. All are part of who he is. If we preach a god that is only love, we are preaching another Jesus.I think quite to the contrary, real love, agape love comprises of all the ingredients of holiness, justness.....God is love...

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 04:05 PM
Wayne Jaconsen


John the disciple that Jesus loved.


Luke 12:4-6
5 "But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who after He has killed has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him!
NASB

Jesus Christ, preaching to both Wayne Jaconsen and John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Brother Mark
May 3rd 2008, 04:06 PM
I think quite to the contrary, real love, agape love comprises of all the ingredients of holiness, justness.....God is love...

It can, if you truly understand that love is just and holy. Yet, some people believe that love will not have justice by condemning one to hell for eternity.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 04:37 PM
Luke 12:4-6
5 "But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who after He has killed has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him!
NASB

Jesus Christ, preaching to both Wayne Jaconsen and John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.


You verse trumps mine. I fold. We could do this from now on...............:hug:

Scruffy Kid
May 3rd 2008, 04:41 PM
I think mikebr asks a very important and fruitful question.

Sin?
Is it a disease that needs a cure or a crime that needs penalty?


About reading the Scriptures:
Why I think questions like mike's can, though important,
get overlooked

It's easy for us to read the Bible through the lenses of a particular way of thinking about things that we just happened to adopt, and then got confirmed in by finding that way of thinking congenial, or confirmed by experience, or having supporting corrolates in Scripture. Or, more frequently just that occurs not just by happenstance, but by the Christian context (church, group, tradition) in which we came to know Christ, or by our culture, and then those social factors also reinforce that reading. But none of those things provides good warrant that this is the only thing we are to be getting from the Scriptures.

Let me emphasize that that is particularly important with respect to our seeming to find our views supported by Scripture. Scripture is very large -- it expresses the mind of God -- and thus always much larger than our views and understanding of it. That's why, or one reason why, it always speaks afresh to us. Of course, what I'm arguing here is not that we cannot have secure and certain doctrines which arise from Scripture: of course we can. Rather, it is that when we take a somewhat lopsided view of Scripture -- as we inevitably will, as individuals and as communities, including the larger evangelical community (including me) that this board (at least in part) represents -- usually that lopsided view can find very much Scripture which fits with it, and very many doctrines which we'd all agree with that fit with it. That is because a lopsided view is a often a view which is "true" in the sense that it is faithfully presenting an aspect of the truth, but which is off-base in that it is neglecting other parts of the truth.

For this reason, it's very important to pay close attention to approaches which suggest that we need to think of the truth more broadly than we do: that is, which open the question of whether our approach, while perhaps true in the sense that it does faithfully represent part of the truth, nevertheless does not correctly give, even on matters pertinent to that part of the truth which it deals with, the whole counsel of God.


About Mike's question

Mike asks about what sin is. Implied in that question is how we understand the fallenness of human nature. Therefore, implied in the question are matters of the ways God responds to sin. That means, that the question takes us into matters of soteriology (how God saves, what God does in rescuing us). That, I'd assume, is why Mike later says that he is trying to get at the significance of the cross.

In my view, this is a very fundamental thing which we need, always, to be thinking about. God, God's mighty acts whereby He saves us from sin, the nature of our brokenness, fallenness, and sinfulness, are things which are at the center of our faith, the faith once given to the saints, which we must guard and preserve, because the Gospel is the one thing that saves. At the center of these mighty acts, also, are Christ and His cross. To understand God's word to us, and (as best we can) to know God, means to open our hearts, day by day, more and more, to the fathomless depths of Who He is, Who Christ is, and to the profound mystery of His saving acts.

By asking about the nature of sin -- and by raising the helpful distinction between crime, or transgression, and disease in this connection -- Mike opens up a very important topic which needs careful, thoughtful consideration, IMO. It can't be properly addressed by pre-packaged formulae: it requires careful thought, testing our ideas, and seeing where we may have seen part, but missed part, of all that God has revealed to us in the Scriptures.

That kind of reflection -- like all Christ's core teaching -- is not a kind of intellectual chess-game of building arguments that seem logical out of various Scriptural bases. It's something that searches our hearts, and forces us to examine our lives, as a part of the process of understanding the Scripture.

I hope that the wonderful question Mike poses will lead us to do that.

mikebr
May 3rd 2008, 05:01 PM
The word "rescue" really sticks out in you post. Thanks by the way. I guess another way of stating the question could be: Are we being rescued or hunted down?

Scruffy Kid
May 3rd 2008, 05:31 PM
Is sin more like a crime (requiring punishment) or more like a sickness (needing healing)?

That's the question that I think mike's post confronts us with.


"Christ died for our sins": the center of our faith!

Paul states the essence of Christian belief with great focus and compactness in I Cor. 15 when he says (15:3-4)
....."Christ died for our sins ... and rose again"
and was seen by many witnesses (15:4-5f.); it's this, Paul says which is "the Gospel I preached" and "you received" (15:1), "by which you are saved" and without which you "believed in vain" (15:2), which Paul also received and hands on to us, and which is "of the first importance." (15:3)

This is, in a sense, a succinct and accurate summary of the whole Gospel, the whole Bible. That's not just Paul's view: the Gospel writers, and other Epistle writers, all make that clear in their own way. The whole Bible attests that this is the center of our faith: Christ Jesus died for our sins and rose from the dead! By this, the whole universe has been radically changed; this is the full manifestation, and the great and comprehensive act, of God: the most important thing, by far, in the whole world.

Therefore it's going to be deep: much more worthy of study and contemplation that minor details of the end times, or OT history. This is the key to it all, this is the center of it all, this is where God is revealed most fully, this is the cross of Christ in which we glory, this is the most important thing, this is the revelation of God's goodness.

So, a huge part of understanding Christianity -- that is, of knowing Christ Jesus, not just with the lips or even the mind, but with heart and soul and strength as well -- is in meditating on and understanding this statement more fully. And crucial to doing so -- one important way of starting to explore the depths of this statement, the depths of the mystery of salvation, of our lives and of God -- is asking about: what then is this sin that Christ died for, in order to save us??


What is sin,
and What is the salvation that Christ accomplishes?
Jesus' earthly ministry, and his descriptions of it:

Healing as an aspect of Salvation
And Sickness as an aspect of sin

The overview statements of Jesus' ministry

Luke introduces Jesus' ministry with Jesus' reading from Isaiah at the synagog in Nazareth, where (4:18-19) Jesus said "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set the captives free and to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."

In Mark, Jesus' proclamation of the Kingdom of God begins (1:15) with his announcement "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe the gospel", which is followed by His commissioning (3:14-15) of the Apostles "that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils." Mark gives emphasis to Jesus' healing (and exorcism) by concentrating on it for 2 1/2 chapters after Jesus' proclamation of the Kingdom of God (up to chapter 4, where we first get concentrated preaching), and also throughout chapter 5, and much of the rest of Mark's testimony.

Matthew's introduction (4:17) to Christ's ministry is very similar, Jesus says: "Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"

John introduces Jesus' ministry in various ways (for instance saying "the light shines in darkness, and the darkness has never been able to grasp it"); but in a sense the principle introduction, in the narrative of Jesus' ministry in John, is John the Baptist's statement "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world"

Jesus' healings:
Prominent in the Gospels, and tied to Salvation

There is no doubt that all the gospel writers give great attention to Jesus' mighty works, which principally are works of healing, though they include exorcism and command of nature as well.

Not only this: The gospel writers clearly testify that Jesus identifies his salvation, his saving, in some discussions, as a kind of healing.

For instance, when Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for consorting with notorious sinners He replies (Mark 2:7; see also Matt 9:12 and Luke 5:31): "They that are whole have no need of the physician; only those who are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

Similarly, when the four friends bring Jesus a paralyzed man whom they lower through the roof, expecting and hoping for healing, Jesus says, first, "Son, your sins are forgiven." When the Pharisees then, in a sense rightly, note that "only God can forgive sins", Jesus replies (Mark 2:10, Matt. 9:6, Luke 5:24) by healing the man and saying of his healing that this is "so you may know the Son of Man has the power on earth to forgive sins." In this way, Jesus closely identifies his healing with his forgiveness of sins. Again, in John's gospel, in the discussion of the healing of the man born blind (John 9) Jesus, in dialogue with the Pharisees at the end of the chapter indicates that their unbelief is a form of willful blindness; and thus he identifies the healing of the ailment of the man born blind with healing.

More broadly it is important to recall that the greek verb for "save" and the cognate words for "salvation" are also words for "healing"; and that in any case the concept of "saving" in so far as it refers to something other than healing is not a specifically religious word, but rather more like what we would use the word "rescue" for. It certainly does not have the monetary and debt connotations of "redeem", or the judicial overtones of language about penalty.


Clarifying the (both-and) intent of my discussion thus far

What I am seeking to explicate from the Scriptures here is not (emphatically not) to deny that Jesus' dying for our sins involved His taking upon himself the punishment and the penalty for our sins, with those sins understood as judicial retribution for wrongdoing or crime. There is no doubt, I think, on any honest reading of the Scriptures, that Christ did indeed do that, and that this is a central part of the Rescue, or Salvation -- the saving us from out sins -- which he effected (accomplished). This forensic, judicial explanation of Jesus atoning sacrifice is absolutely essential, and undeniable.

(That does not mean, though, that we can sum it up with a line, and then not think further about it. Loving God, in regard to Jesus bearing the penalty and paying the price for our sins needs our continual thanks and praise and gratitude and joy, yes, but also the careful pondering and application of our minds. Attention to this, as well as to the healing aspect is one important place where Mike's post should take us.)

Rather, the intention of my post is to follow up Mike's question by thinking through things that the Scriptures say which set out the ways in which the salvation Jesus wrought also needs to be looked at as healing. We must not, as I explained in the previous post, allow one thing that Scripture definitely says to cause us to ignore, in a one-sided way, other aspects of what Scripture says about the same or related matters.

It does seem to me, then, that the New Testament accounts of what God did, in Jesus dying for our sins, is not confined to the idea of penal substitution, but has other aspects as well, one of which is healing.

And the idea of Christ's work of atonement (reconciliation, at-one-ment) of humanity to God being a work of healing as well as a work of satisfying God's wrath is scripturally, theologically, historically and logically, very much a part of the Christian message, which implies that one way in which sin must be regarded is as a kind of illness, or brokenness, as well as (not instead of) a transgression or crime.

Taking this theme from the side of starting with sin, rather than Christ's work on the cross, or in His ministry, is also a very useful way to investigate it, IMO. I think we can find this understanding of sin in the account of the Fall, in Genesis. It would be interesting to look at that (if there are any members of this board who think Genesis theologically important enough to be worth looking at carefully).

Blessings to all!
Scruff

ravi4u2
May 4th 2008, 05:47 AM
Hell is not an extension of God's lovehell IS also an extend of God's love to those that love Him. The kinda love where leaven (sin) is purged so that those that love Him may be free from contamination by it.

Brother Mark
May 4th 2008, 11:55 AM
hell IS also an extend of God's love to those that love Him. The kinda love where leaven (sin) is purged so that those that love Him may be free from contamination by it.

So was the rich man purged of sin in hell? Was that why he was sent there? Or was he sent there to be tormented for eternity as a just punishment?

Brother Mark
May 4th 2008, 11:58 AM
The word "rescue" really sticks out in you post. Thanks by the way. I guess another way of stating the question could be: Are we being rescued or hunted down?

Both. God declared that he would war against Amalekites from generation to generation. In Esther, many think it was about how God set Israel free. That is a good way to look at it. But it is also about God hunting down Haman, an offspring of Agag, the king of Amalekites.

God desires for all to be saved. But he will judge flesh. After a man dies, there's judgment. To be cast into the lake of fire for eternity is a scary thing. And yes, God will go hunting at the proper time.

mikebr
May 4th 2008, 12:24 PM
So was the rich man purged of sin in hell? Was that why he was sent there? Or was he sent there to be tormented for eternity as a just punishment?


That's a great question. Why was the rich man sent there, Brother Mark? Can you show me in scripture why he went to hades?

Brother Mark
May 4th 2008, 12:27 PM
That's a great question. Why was the rich man sent there, Brother Mark? Can you show me in scripture why he went to hades?

Sure. he went there for the same reason all men go there. For eternal punishment because of his rejection of Jesus.

Matt 25:44-26:1
"Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' 45 "Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' 46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
NASU

Having went by Lazarus every day and ignored the situation, revealed that he did not have the love of God in him. God sent him to eternal torment.

ravi4u2
May 4th 2008, 02:58 PM
So was the rich man purged of sin in hell? Was that why he was sent there? Or was he sent there to be tormented for eternity as a just punishment?Maybe, I was not clear enough. Hell is an extension of love for those that love Him. Was the rich man a lover of God?

Brother Mark
May 4th 2008, 04:40 PM
Maybe, I was not clear enough. Hell is an extension of love for those that love Him. Was the rich man a lover of God?

No, he was not a lover of God. Though I am not sure what you are hinting at.

mikebr
May 5th 2008, 12:23 AM
Sure. he went there for the same reason all men go there. For eternal punishment because of his rejection of Jesus.

Matt 25:44-26:1
"Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' 45 "Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' 46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
NASU

Having went by Lazarus every day and ignored the situation, revealed that he did not have the love of God in him. God sent him to eternal torment.


Maybe taking a little liberty with this scripture Bro. Mark. The Matthew Passage doesn't mention belief or faith at all.

So why did Lazarus go to Heaven er' a Abraham's Bosom?

Brother Mark
May 5th 2008, 12:26 AM
Maybe taking a little liberty with this scripture Bro. Mark. The Matthew Passage doesn't mention belief or faith at all.

So why did Lazarus go to Heaven er' a Abraham's Bosom?

Same reason we all do. Repentance and trusting in God. No liberty at all with that scripture. Those that have faith will have works. That's what James taught us. Jesus shows that too.

And of course, paradise and heaven are different. Though CHrist led all those in paradise to heaven after he rose again.

Be careful Mike.

ravi4u2
May 6th 2008, 02:37 PM
No, he was not a lover of God. Though I am not sure what you are hinting at.
So, the leaven (rich man) was purged from the lover of God (Lazarus). When God purges the leaven (those that love not God) in hell, it is because of His overwhelming love for those that love Him. Lest the leaven (sin) in them, contaminate the lovers. That was why he instructed the Israelites to wipe out entire nations in the OT. So, hell is also an extension of God's love for those that love Him. To keep them free from sin for all eternity.