The Principled Legal Standard
God has never punished the innocent and never will, starting with His own Son. Penal substitution was the honor doctrine, repackaged and rebranded as it were a different doctrine, but is the same doctrine. The same knuckleheads who invented the ball earth also came up with the satanic penal substitution doctrine. It is an abomination to condemn the innocent and acquit the wicked. Women and men found guilty of adultery were the ones who were punished with death. You will not find the lamb or bullock bitter waters, or the temple sacrificial rituals…the offering taking bitter waters. Gentiles were never married to God, but accuracy don’t matter now does it? “I thirst” is a fulfillment of psalms 69:21….not numbers 5. The Penal substitution heresy is the same as the ball earth doctrine. You’ve been deceived. The curse of falling short is sin in the flesh, the corrupted flesh….where a man does what he does not want to do, and what he wants to do he does not. Ignorance and conditions beyond a man’s control is what the offering was for…not for elective crimes, such as adultery and murder. Men are not slaves to elective crimes and man’s corrupt flesh does not make him commit murder, molestation, murder bank robbery, and so forth. You have caused a reverse atonement, for the purposes of thinking that man escapes punishment for criminal offenses that have nothing to do with slavery to sin. When the flesh is causing the problem, the flesh is targeted. The slavery is to the flesh, but that slavery is to certain things….not the entire criminal code of elective crimes. You commit murder under the law and you are put to death…AND THERE IS NO OFFERING FOR SUCH ELECTIVE CRIMES.
John Mark
What warped “world” do you live in?
The Principled Legal Standard
Why don’t you just keeping pretending that God punished an innocent guy instead of you, so you can continue to live like a liberal whore with impunity. I live in THE LAW. It is an abomination to punish the innocent, God never has and never will you satanic freak.
John Mark
What an idiot! It’s a good thing that YHWH’s mercy endures forever, because you are certainly going to need it.
The Principled Legal Standard
SO I should be punished because I plainly state God never punishes the innocent, nor does He bear false witness and call the unrighteous, righteous. But you who says God does punish the innocent, and pretends they are the guilty, then pretends that the guilty aren’t even guilty…are the conservative here? The law? The law never says to punish the innocent, and the day that you call “atonement” (which is not in the original languages Hilasterion anyone?) is for sins hamartia not (hamartano or kakourgon)…sins of ignorance…there is no offering for rape, murder, molestation, taking an eye and so forth. You idiots have created a reverse atonement, as if the offerings were for elective crimes, punishable crimes…AND THERE ARE NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR MAKING OFFERINGS FOR PUNITIVE OFFENSES…NONE. You see what is not there, and don’t see what is there. You are a liberal. Let’s see, God pretends that it is an unknown that a kingdom has been disobedient…which isn’t an individual woman…doesn’t have the woman take the bitter drink (as per simple instructions which Skiba has turned into modern art)…have an innocent drink (as if it is not known their adulatery, idolatry and immorality…WHEN IT IS KNOWN)…then pretend every nation and individual on the planet was married to God…then after punishing an innocent…then pretend that no one ever did wrong in the first place….THATS NOT LAW THAT PSYCHOTIC!
John Mark
I’ve NEVER been one to back down from defending YHWH’s Word, but this time, IT IS NOT EVEN NECESSARY. I will not ‘cast my pearls before swine”. YOU FILTHY, BLASPHEMOUS PIG.One thing I will say is: YHWH’s mercy is NOT a punishment.WHAT AN IDIOT!
John Mark
+The Principled Legal Standard – by the way, what are you even doing in a forum like this? To the best of MY knowledge EVERYONE that watches Rob Skiba’s videos believes that Yahushuah was crucified, died, and was raised the 3rd day. They believe that THAT was the Messiah PAYING THE PRICE THAT HAD TO BE PAID FOR THEIR SINS, (WITH HIS INNOCENT BLOOD).. And these people accept His payment for their Salvation.So why don’t you go somewhere and find other “like minded” IDIOTS in your foolishness, instead of hanging out in here, where you will get NO SYMPATHY or agreement for your NONsensical FILTHY TRASH?
The Principled Legal Standard
I’m just busting “ball theologists”…which are liberals who have disguised themselves as conservatives. And naturally just as they will not peer review or take on true scientists…you “ball theologists” can’t handle being busted by the actual truthful and lawful depiction of God. The same jesuits that invented the big bang, magic gravity, heliocentrism…ALSO INVENTED PENAL SUBSTITUTE HERESY. I got news for you bruce jenner…you didnt die 2,000 years ago. And God doesn’t lie and call those who are not righteous, righteous. You guys are just the same as the “gender identity” witches, sex not being based on ones actual state or actual gender…you have “righteousness” not being based on your actual state…livin the unreal just like bruce jenner. YOU’RE LIBERALS.
John Mark
yada, yada, yada, yada. Make up some more lies and pat yourself on the back. You’re such a joke! Can’t you find someone to play with? Don’t you have subscribers to your FILTH and LIES on your own youtube channel?Take a hike, moron!
The Principled Legal Standard
Proverbs 17:15 Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent– the LORD detests them both. (it’s not His policy pal). Isaiah 13:11 I will punish the world for its evil, the wicked for their sins. … “I, the LORD,will punish the world for its evil and the wicked for their sin. (God is not a liar, leave it to liberals like you to rationalize the exact oppposite through illogic and rationalzations…into “God punishes the innocent and does not have wrath on those who commit wickedness”…you have to attempt to spin away these verses to mean the exact opposite…because the same satanic freaks who invented the ball earth, invented penal substitution…its not in the bible.
John Mark
yada, yada, yada, yada. How many more followers do you have now?
The Principled Legal Standard
going by “consensus” now? lol…see, in theology you do just as the ball earthers and liberals do. having a lot of followers, when faith is a rare bird is not a good sign, idiot.
John Mark
Consensus? Not me. I don’t make videos… and I don’t sell books. I don’t seek the followers, nor do I have any that I know of. Last time I checked, I had 0 subscribers. What would they subscribe to? I have nothing to sell.
John Mark
Once again, WHAT are you doing in here? There is NO ONE in here that believes your nonsense. NOT EVEN ONE. And agreeing with yourself doesn’t count. We all do that!
The Principled Legal Standard
I’m ruining your day you “ball theologist”…so that you may be held accountable, and you will be.
Joseph Sherrill
So you do the believe in Yeshua/Jesus? or what’s your take on Him? I see you saying a lot of words and not much sense. if someone sins is that it for them, are they’re doomed in your understanding? no repentence, or atonement? No salvation through faith in Jesus? what do you believe? Also remember David commited adultery and murder, God forgave him, because he repented and had faith in God’s Mercy, and God counted him as “faithful”. Salvation by faith, and the wicked unpunished, or forgiven.
Joseph Sherrill
So why did Jesus Die? And can you make your answer a little shorter. thanks
The Principled Legal Standard
It’s pretty simple, and basic principles of law. People got drilled into their heads that God is “maximally severe”…that it is doom forever regardless of the type of offense. Some unlawful states and deeds are non-punitive. Other unlawful states and deeds (crimes and doing things that are completely avoidable), are punitive. Like I said about the same idiots that came up with the ball earth, came up with the penal substitute heresy. Jesus Christ wasn’t punished for anyone’s sins. God says he will repay, measure for measure. The bible is littered with God executing his wrath on individuals and people committing criminal conduct. And David did not get off scott free, God gave David a choice. Though it was a punishment less than death, and this is because David fessed up and was willing to face punishment. In fact David said that if there was an offering for the criminal offenses that he committed…HE WOULD HAVE OFFERED IT. There is no offering for rape, murder, molestation, homosexuality, Baal worship and so forth. I know the law, unlike others who admit that they are not authorities I AM THE AUTHORITY OF MY DOCTRINES…unique to me. The original christian doctrines brought back. God does not punish for punishments sake, the principle of beneficiality is akin to deciding not to punish your child, after he wised up, learned his lesson and is doing what he is supposed to do. I could post 50 verses on God having wrath on people committing punitive offenses. The bible has been mistranslated to create vagaries, also to make it seem like heresies like the penal substitute blasphemy is in the bible, when it is not. You suffer from thinking according to false premises and the satanic view of God. It is very simple, if a person does commit a criminal offense (what i call elective wrongdoing, that is totally avoidable) and they are punished by God, they are…and that’s it. Peoples eyes have been blinded to the numerous parts of the bible that haven’t been messed with (they could only alter so much without it becoming obvious). People like you read the bible where it states dogmatically and plainly that God had wrath on his people for their immoralities…then you do mental gymnastics to try and make passages like that jive with penal substitution…and then conclude “nah that aint wrath, thats just discipline”. God did not punish his Son, and pretend it was you being punished, then pretend that you died 2,000 years ago…then take a second look at you here today and say “nah, that ain’t that sinner, hes a new creation, in fact he never sinned at all and is innocent”. Thats beyond liberal…that psychotic…thats katlyn jenner livin the unreal. I deal with law, I am a theological lawyer. Anyone who debates me wishes they never did. Because the truth cannot be refuted or argued against. I know every argument and “line of reasoning” that exists. Man sinned-God has wrath for sin-perfect justice demands punishment-but God loves man-has to come up with a way to get around that nasty sticking point called justice-God punishes an innocent then LIES TO JUSTICE (actually lies to himself since he is justice)-God declares that the people who were not punished but deserved to be punished…were put to death…WHEN THEY WERE NOT. Should I continue? I think not. In fact, the law has nothing to do with faith. Evidence decides the case and no man can be charged in a court of law with anything when neither the man or the claimed deeds DO NOT EXIST. God’s court uses evidence and deals with men in time, IN THEIR LIFETIMES…like David, Job, etc. It is legally impossible to adjudicate any legal case when there is no habeas corpos, no defnedant, no evidence whatsoever. I write a book with a student of mine on all of this. I have reconstructed the original doctrines and put them in a single volume. The book lives up to it’s title: The Principled legal Standard for the First Genuine Doctrinal Reformation of the Church. The penal sub is simply the honor doctrine, repackaged and rebranded as though it is a different doctrine…but it isn’t, it is the same satanic corrupt depiction of God…using judges robes and prison orange, instead of gentleman’s clothes, silk collars pistols and the field of honor. They are the same doctrine Man has offended God’s honor-God must defend his honor and cannot let it slide-but God loves man-so God has a “second” stand-in for man on the field of honor-to take the bullet for man…yada yada yada. its all convoluted liberal rationalizations and is anything but law. To make people think that penal substitution is believable, God must be portrayed as overly severe, maximally severe. using false premises such as: The higher in perfection one is, the more intolerant one is with lesser beings. The more absolute the justice, the more punitively severe it is with punishments. The legal distinctions between punitive and non-punitive offenses have been erased..to where it is death and maximum suffering for any and all sin and unlawful states. But I heard John say once that there is sin that is mortal and there is sin that is not. It is not life for all, it is tooth for tooth, eye for an eye, and life for life. Where is this eternal doom or eternal separation for simply being born? What of Paul, he was forgiven because he was ignorant and thought he was doing right by oppressing the church? salvation is not through the punishment of sin, but through faith in Jesus Christ to carry it out. So it is not the scriptures in most cases, it is peoples misinterpretation of the scriptures. There is no single place where it says that God had wrath on His Son. It is not found in Peter’s gospel in acts chapter 2 or 3:15 or anywhere in the bible. The same assholes that been preaching ball earth and heliocentrism been preaching penal substitution. We sent Mr. Rob Skiba a copy of our book as we did to many dozens of others…so that he might wise up and pull his head out of satan’s ass…and also that he may be held accountable for refusing to do so. SO BE IT EITHER WAY.
The Principled Legal Standard
When two parties disagree and neither suffer from ignorance of what the truth actually is…each party is calling the other a liar. This is the rebellion and the accusation Satan made against God, in the attempt to make his rebellion appear justified. He who lies has an impure motive, is not good, is claiming to abide in a higher estate that he actually abides in. Satan accused God of being guilty of what Satan himself is actually guilty of…this is satanic and biblical hypocrisy. God cannot be tested in his form, Jesus Christ the CEO was chosen to represent the Godhead and take on a testable form, HUMAN. Just like Job was tested, Daniel, etc., Jesus Christ was tested. The cross was a demonstration of His righteousness, which proved the accusations of Satan against God not only to be false, but also that Satan was guilty of those very accusations himself, thereby condemning Satan. Thus, the angelic rebellion was resolved through the testing of Jesus Christ. He said “I came to testify that God is truthful”. Because the courts and standard of law works by evidence and not by faith, also the inherent accusation of a conflict of interest…testimony of the angels, Satan and God did not resolve anything…no legal progress. Along with the rebellion, came the Genesis 6 corruption of the flesh, and prior to that mankind’s involvement, since having the knowledge of good and evil mankind was subject to legal inquiry and even accusations of impure motive and false testimony. But because of the Genesis 6 corruption to which man is forced into an unlawful state…and an as yet unconfirmed legal status of God…until the legal specter of unproven accusations was concluded, mankind could not legally be handed into God’s custody…for since when can a possibly corrupt God (speaking in terms of the lack of legal proof and evidence) qualify or be appointed to deliver man? This is what the enclosed garden (referred to as the garden of Eden when it was above ground) was for. The saints who died were wards of the legal process or court, until such time that Christ was motive tested and God’s testimony about himself and Satan were proven true. Then Jesus Christ was appointed the guardian and deliverer of mankind, and captivity and the whole paradeisos was taken up and ascended with Him. This is how all those who believed and trusted in Him were “justified”…by God being proven through undeniable legal evidence to be venerable and trustworthy and truthful…Abraham, Job, Moses and you name em…were vindicated and show to be justified in having faith in God and taking Him at His word. When I type I waste no words, nor type any unnecessary sentences. I mediate on the law day and night and do the due diligence, if your laziness and slothfulness makes you so impatient that you simply cannot read a few paragraphs, then shame on yas. Neither you nor anyone else can refute what I say, because it is the undeniable principles of law and jurisprudence. You take an eye you may lose yours…so whats the big deal.
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
Might want to read Isaiah 53, ask your daddy the devil how to twist that? Jesus was sent as the perfect lamb to pay for our sins, his blood paid it all. Repent of your sins and accept your savior today! Jesus is the only begotten son of God and our salvation!
his father sent him to deceive, that is what Satan loves
notice he is just like his father the devil, mixing facts to hook people, then adding Devils lies? Flat earth is true, confirmed all throughout Bible, the rest of his garbage is to lead people to hell. Lucifer is more evil than you or I could ever imagine!
You are truly Satans child! Take your demonic deception into a heard of swine and drown them!
Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost! Jesus, what a beautiful name!! The Son of almighty God, you know, the one that will soon judge you!
it’s pretty simple, so simple you need 5000 words to twist the actual truth! Here is simple for you, Jesus Saves!
The Principled Legal Standard
You cannot deal with anything I have said, so you can pretend to be intelligent…while trying on a Bruce Jenner dress.
Christian Ernst
I was reading over this comment thread and was just wondering how can one be saved and go to heaven? You may have already said it and if so I do apologize for that. I am just trying to figure out why Jesus died or why the sacrificial system was ever put into place? Thanks for the help.
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
This question is the only reason I am here! Jesus came to pay the sins of the world, we are all guilt of the law, the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord! All you have to do is this, confess with your mouth that you are a sinner and can’t reach heaven on your own. Accept the fact that Jesus is the Son of God, and ask him into your heart, that’s it! He promised he will save your soul and make you a new creature in Christ. Please pray today! I’m praying for you, God bless you! Get a King James Version 1611, do not settle for any other version! Open to the New Testament and read all of the red writing, those are Jesus words!
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
Brothers and sisters in Christ, please pray for this man Christian Ernst, he has no idea how close he is to eternal life and peace in his heart!! Pray the Holy Spirit pays him a visit, pray!!
Christian Ernst
Thank you Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen! for telling me all that, I am sorry though to have mis-represented myself. I am a born again Christian and have been for many years, I should have been more specific as I was intending to ask +The Principle Legal Standard those questions. I am trying to better understand what he believes as what he/she was saying could be a bit confusing at times. Thank you so much for giving me the gospel and caring to bring me to Christ, even if I already am saved, it still means so much you are actively and willing to bring me to God. Thanks again brother.
oukexergon
A person is saved by faith in Christ, not by punishment of sin. The sacrifices were for sins of ignorance and inability only, never for elective crimes like murder, theft, rape etc. because people can stop those things by themselves and they have a choice to do them or not and they are held accountable and punished measure for measure accordingly (eye for eye tooth for tooth life for life). People who are enslaved to sin because of the corrupt nature, are not held accountable for being slaves. With knowledge comes accountability. The sacrifices were a teaching tool and pointed to what would occur in the future. The sacrifice was examined as Christ was examined and found to be without spot (no lies were found in His mouth). Christ was tested because of accusations made against God by Satan. The ignorant priest put the sacrifice to death on behalf of the people who had sinned in ignorance. It was not put to death by God. Just as Christ was put to death by ignorant men, not by God. Peter said, “you murdered the author of life, but you did this in ignorance.” God was pleased with the impeccable life of the animal as He was pleased with the impeccable life of Christ. Paul says why Christ died on the cross… “for the demonstration of His righteousness, and again I say for the demonstration of His righteousness.” So sin in the flesh is what man is delivered from, not punishment of sin, since punishment is given to those who know what they are doing and are able to make the choice to do it. Paul said “for the very thing I want to do I do not and the very thing I don’t want to do I do. It is not I, but sin in me.” He also said that the only reason God had mercy on him was because he was ignorant. All of this and much more is explained thoroughly and exhaustively in our book The Principled Legal Standard, available on amazon.
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon You are mixed up my friend. God created man to have fellowship, he gave man only one law, but he also gave him a free will. Man chose to break the law, and God promised death when he did. Because of the original sin, now we are all born sinners, bible says there is none good, NO NOT ONE! No man can keep the commandments, we all break them daily, our righteousness, the good things we do are as filthy rags to our Perfect God! He had to send his son to sacrifice his perfect blood to cover our imperfect sins. Our sins are the reason he was nailed to the cross! All we have to do is repent of those sins, acknowledge Jesus is the son of God, and accept him as savior, he is the way the truth and the life and NO man cometh into the Father BUT BY him!
oukexergon
Satan rebelled against God accusing Him of being a liar and claimed himself to be the one who was righteous. Christ killed two birds with one stone. He was proven to be trustworthy and made the justifier of all who believe in Him. Paul says it was a demonstration of His righteousness. Adam had no knowledge of good and evil before he ate and therefore was not held accountable and no man is accountable for the actions of another. Adam and Eve and all who were born through him gained mortality and were and are tested. They were not given death as a punishment. Your twisted doctrines are not found in scripture. The corruption of all flesh began in Genesis 6. Show me the corruption of all flesh happening before that. You cant. You are saying that everyone chooses to sin. What was the meaning of Paul saying “that which I want to do I do not and that which I dont want to do I do”? What do you think man is delivered from? It is all over the place that man is delivered from sin. Do you actually think that God expects man to be righteous without Christ apart from Him? Your nuts.
Christian Ernst
So I agree with what +Jesus found me in this Dark World! Amen! but I am interested to understand better what oukexergon and The Principle are saying. So if Jesus died only for unintentional sins then if, for example, we intentionally lie what happens then? After we die does God punish us in heaven or does he punish us on the earth while we are alive? I am just trying to understand in the The Principle’s point of view how we are to go to heaven and be in the presence of God. Thanks for the info.
oukexergon
and furthermore, it was sinful for the people who put Christ to death to nail him to the cross. Christ got what He did not deserve. You believe God committed an injustice by participating with those sinful men and gave Christ what He did not deserve. Peter said they killed the author of life not God. He also said that while Christ was being reviled BY MEN, Christ kept entrusting Himself to the ONE WHO JUDGES RIGHTEOUSLY.
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon Welcome to new age religion, it will lead you straight to hell! Study John the Baptist, he said repent of your sin ye generation of vipers! You sir are a viper, Jesus said there has never been a prophet as great as John the Baptist, and even he had to repent! The devil wants to trick you into thinking you are good enough, Jesus wouldn’t have had to shed blood if that was the case. Take your new age garbage somewhere else, in Jesus name!
oukexergon
also, the ONLY ONE law you say God gave is the ONE law that Christ followed perfectly and was justified by. Christ did not go around punishing the innocent. This is an abomination. Proverbs 17:15 You penal substitute psychos love to blaspheme and accuse God of injustices all the time.
oukexergon
repent means to change your mind. they were to change their mind about who Christ was and believe in Him. Youre an idiot and this is a public forum. Im not going anywhere unless Im blocked by the video maker.
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
I used to think you new agers were actual demons, now I think you are just really lost souks buying into these devils lies! Jeremiah 6:16 Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ASK me for THE OLD PATHS, where IS the GOOD WAY, and Walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, we will not walk there in.That is exactly what you are saying, you like your new way, you are serving a false god, his name is lucifer. Search the scriptures, for in them ye THINK ye have eternal life. Whoever you are listening to you better break away from, sounds like Joel Osteen garbage! He is a free mason, illuminati sellout and will be in hell with you if you don’t wake up!
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon only injustice is your sin that put my Lord on the cross, but he will forgive you if you repent
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon you don’t think God could have stopped it if he wanted idiot! Wake up! You are believing lies! Read Isaiah 53, Satan HATES that prophecy! The lamb of God came to die for you! Wake up!!
+oukexergon I can’t believe you buy this garbage! You believe cause it makes you feel good, I don’t have to apologize or turn from my sin, hogwash! YOUR sin nailed him to the cross, repent means to turn away from your sin, truth not as comfortable as your hypocrisy is it? 2 Corinthians 5:21 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. Praise God! He loved us so much he sent his perfect son to die and give us away to join them in heaven! That is a love you won’t understand until you give up the false doctrine and meet my savior!
oukexergon
funny how I am going to hell because I say God is righteous and you accuse God of injustices constantly. Yeah thats real spiritual. Im not the one who wants to escape justice fleshbag. So a baby who lives a little while then dies… what did that baby do that he is responsible for that God holds against Him?
Isaiah does not say that christ was punished in your place. Christ died for our sins not in place of our sins. you like to add to scripture things that arent there.
sorry but I havent committed any sin worthy of death. There are sins worthy of death and sins that are not. I jn. 5:17, Rom. 1:32
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon Isaiah 53:5 But he was Wounded for OUR transgressions!!!!!!!!!!, he was bruised for OUR iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; with his stripes we are healed. Leave it say what it says, do not add commentary, neither will I. I don’t need to defend my beliefs, the King James 1611 does it for me!
oukexergon
doesnt say he died in our place or was punished by the Father. How can Christ die in the place of sins? how can he die in place of murder, rape etc? “for” doesnt mean “in place of”.
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon Ever read the 10 commandments? Thou shalt not lie? You just did! Thou shalt not bear false witness, you are right now. We all break Gods laws daily! But he is merciful, He sent his son to pay all our sins! Repent and ask him into your heart! I am the way the truth and the life and NO man cometh onto the father but by me! The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord! He is a wonderful savior!
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon Yes, he died in our place. That is his amazing grace! God is perfect, he does not accept any sin, we are hopeless without Christ
oukexergon
its eye for eye tooth for tooth life for life measure for measure. so what was it babies have done that they are responsible for?
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon repent of your sins, ask Jesus to save you, and in heaven you can ask God. Worry about your soul first, God bless, you need to get out of whatever church or tv minister you are listening too right away! They are lying, and it is straight from the devil. Read the bible on your own, God will show you truth. God bless
Jesus found me In this Dark World! Amen!
+oukexergon I apologize for calling you a demon earlier, I really thought you were purposely misleading others. I realize now you believe what you say, I’m praying for you, I really care!
oukexergon
+Christian Ernst God will punish the wilful sinner measure for measure. eye for eye tooth for tooth. and unintentional sins are overlooked (passed over). Christ wasn’t punished for any sins at all. he did nothing wrong. And not all sins are deserving of death. If they are not punished here God will see to it that they are if they have not repented and learned from it. David didn’t get death as a punishment for murdering and committing adultery because he repented and learned his lesson. there would be no reason for God to have punished him. also he said if there was an offering for it he would have given it. but there wasn’t any.
oukexergon
+Christian Ernst why would God not overlook unintentional sins? God would be expecting man to know better when he knows they don’t know better. makes no sense at all and isn’t even scriptural. God doesn’t give people (including Christ) what they don’t deserve because he’s not unjust.
The Principled Legal Standard
I guess according to +Christian Ernst…God isn’t gentle with the ignorant and misguided…HE SEES NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM AND CHARLES MANSON…DROP THE BOMBS! BOMB EM ALL THE WAY TO HEEEEELLLLLL!
To the Principled Legal Standard author (and to anyone else who may have ears to hear).
Truly, the doctrine of penal substitution or any idea of substitution is the most wicked (unjust), insane and stupid idea, and the opposite of the truth, and is a complete denial of the gospel of Jesus Christ. However, it is held even by innocent (and some intelligent) people who have been abused, without knowing it. It is an abusive “gospel”. But what I don’t understand, is that people who claim to want to know the truth still don’t change their view in the light of reason when it is shown to them. I can understand being deceived, but what I don’t understand is not being willing to be corrected. No matter how long a view is held, or how much work is put into it, a person should renounce belief in lies when the truth is made clear. This is the real issue. How can Christians preach to someone who may have held wrong beliefs for decades, and yet not submit to the words of Scripture themselves, because they don’t want to be challenged?
God in his grace has uniquely shown to me the truth of the Gospel, and it is not anything like what is preached in the world today, or has been preached since the first century. The truth has become obvious to me. But to find an audience who even cares for it, when it is such a great blessing, appears extremely difficult in the light of the lying abuse that has brainwashed even God’s children into bondage.
If I can only get the truth into the heart and mind of the Christian! But only God can. For I know exactly why Jesus died, which is clear in Scripture when one just believes what is written (defining basic words). And beyond this primary knowledge, I have also understood exactly how the world was reconciled to God. But the concept is so precious and far above the thinking of men that they will not seem to appreciate it, and I would forbear to tell it, unless there is an open ear that would appreciate it.
God revealed to me the gospel, and not a single thought has come from men, but only by revelation in the Scripture. The only hard part to understanding is discarding the words of men, which is like the sands of the seashore. If you can achieve this unlearning, then the greatest truth will be comprehensible and believable.
So who will hear me? Or rather, who will hear the understanding of the Scripture? Many claim truth, and yet it is from men, not by the inspiration and revelation of God.
The strange thing is that the truth of why Jesus died is obvious, and inescapable. It is blinded eyes that do not see.
Satan really doesn’t care what view of the atonement one adopts so long as he can get you to believe a central lie, which all appear to accept. It would seem that lie is Scriptural, however it is not. Satan is the accuser, and all the theories of atonement are based on accepting the condemnation of the devil. That is why all “theories” of the atonement fail. The lie is this: that all the world is truly guilty of sin. Working on that gospel denying “lie”, people argue endlessly. And this is why penal substitution is so popular. Because it perfectly affirms this lie.
What if I should tell the Christian that he is perfectly innocent? What if I should tell the non-Christian, who has not denied the gospel, but simply lives ignorantly, doing what he thinks is right, that Jesus died to prove to God that he is innocent of all sin? He probably wouldn’t fight me, but might find it hard to believe, because he would tell me how imperfect he is. But he would be grateful if he is burdened by a sense of guilt and seeking freedom from it.
But the Christian would fight me, most likely! I would suffer abuse for trying to tell him that he is not guilty and that Jesus died to prove it. How insane has the said church become? What is good news? Is good news telling you that you are guilty of sin and deserving of death and hell? Or is good news telling you that in spite of sins, God knew that you never meant to sin, but out of abuse of the devil, you have sinned? And so Jesus came specifically to represent you in his perfection as perfect to God? That you might be viewed as truly innocent – because you really are truly innocent! Paul even says in Romans 7 that he never sinned (in spirit) but that it was his flesh sinning!!
Can anyone look up the meaning of the word “justify”? Look up the meaning of the English word “justification”. Also look up the meaning of the word “exonerated”. Understand that a person can actually sin in innocence. Can anyone understand that concept? It was there from the beginning. Adam and Eve sinned in innocence. They had no knowledge of good and evil. They didn’t even know they were naked. That’s how innocent they were. They sinned therefore in innocence. And they never would have sinned had not the devil abused them. Their sin was an act of innocence. If you can understand this, you will be able to understand all. Without this knowledge, the gospel cannot be fully understood (if at all).
Is it good news to say you are guilty, or is it good news to say that you are innocent? Can anyone answer this simple question?
Oh, but someone might say, in Romans 3 it says the whole world is guilty before God. Oh, but why don’t you read the rest of Romans 3? Because the devil only highlights the verses where sin is emphasized, and you don’t know any longer what you are reading. Look carefully. The Scripture says that under the law, everyone is declared guilty of sin. But does this mean that everyone is really guilty of sin? No. Because through Jesus Christ everyone is justified (proven innocent). The Scripture says that we are justified by the blood of Jesus. Therefore the blood of Jesus is our justification, or “proof of innocence” before God. This is the reconciliation. This is at least what everyone should believe, because it is plainly stated. How this is true requires a deeper look into the Scriptures concerning the gospel, which I have perfectly understood. There is a specific revelation concerning what it means that Jesus bore our sins. This is the greatest thing to comprehend in the Bible, but even if you don’t see it yet, how can anyone deny the basic meaning of words? That Jesus died to prove our innocence is stated by the word “justified”.
The “churches” have denied the truth that Jesus TOOK AWAY SIN, by saying that Jesus paid for sin. Now if Jesus paid for sin, that establishes guilt, but if Jesus took away sin, it means that guilt is removed. Thus Jesus died to prove the innocence of God’s children.
I can explain why this is all true, how this is all true, and how exactly the cross works in the heart of God. I can tell why Jesus died only for the children of God, and not for the children of the devil. By the grace of God, there is nothing that I cannot explain concerning the gospel. I have written many articles to prove the truth. But who will listen? That is the question.
THE ACCUSER MUST BE CAST DOWN.
God bless you,
Richard Paulson.
“but if Jesus took away sin”
For that which i want to do i do not and the very thing I hate I do <----might want to consider that that is what He came to take away. The Greeks had a word for guilty, if the bible wanted to say "removes guilt' it would have said so. (removes sin is not secret code for removes guilt). Consider the real use of words, for correct use of words is according to reality. The definition of justified is not and never has been "removes guilt". Since Christ was without sin or impure motive, being totally righteous...one is "justified" in trusting in Him. Consider also entering into a justified state.
Hi Oukexergon,
The definition of the word “justified” is defined in English or understood plainly to mean proved innocent, because it means to uphold as blameless. To say someone is justified or justifiable is to say that they are not really guilty. To say someone has a justification for something is to say that they have proof of innocence. This cannot be misinterpreted, it is only that people have been blinded to the meaning through continual lies.
Also, to say Jesus “paid for sin” which the true Bible does not state, is to say that people are really guilty, because Jesus had to “pay for it” (which thing is not true). The Bible says Jesus took away sin, meaning that sin is not attributable to mankind through Jesus Christ, because of ignorance. Jesus said to “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Numbers chapter 15:22-36 says that the atonement was for sins of ignorance, not for wilful sin in the knowledge of the truth. The Scripture states that God will not acquit the guilty. In 2 Corinthians 5 it says that sin is not attributable to mankind through Jesus Christ.
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
If sin is not attributed to men, then they cannot be guilty of it. Hence to take away sin is to take away guilt.
Even in the earthly walk of Jesus before he went to the cross, he said that if anyone does not believe him he does not judge him, but that his word will judge him in the last day. In John 3:17 Jesus said that he came not to condemn the world, which means not to censure it, not to doom it or declare it unfit or guilty. He came to save it. There is a coming judgement when after people have made their choice condemnation will come. Jesus said also that the only ones that are condemned already, are those that have seen the light and have hated him.
You saying that taking away sin, might mean taking away sinful behaviour cannot be true, because the atonement would then be meaningless. Justification would then have no meaning. The atonement was to remove the sins already committed. For example, let’s say if you went to court for a crime, you would have to be judged for it. What if you told the judge that your crime was removed? He would laugh at you. What is that supposed to mean? But this is what Jesus did, and I know exactly how he did it. He took away sins committed. Taking away sin does not mean taking away sinful behaviour, although that is the result after believing in Jesus. He then helps us to live according to his commandments.
Moreover, the Scripture does actually say that Jesus took away our guilt as well! The Scripture speaks of us having a good conscience. It says that our conscience is purged by the blood of Jesus! By faith in the blood of Jesus taking away our past sins, we no longer feel guilty of them, because the blood of Jesus justified us for sinning! We are proved innocent of those sins through Jesus Christ, so then we obtain a good conscience through Jesus Christ.
A good conscience which “some having put away concerning the faith have made shipwreck”.
1 Timothy 1
9 Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:
20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
How can a person have a good conscience if he has ever been guilty of sin? He cannot. Unless there is a way of removing past crimes, or showing them to be indeed (in spirit) acts of innocence! This is what Jesus did! Hear O world!!!
Numbers 14:18 The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.
On one hand God forgives, on the other hand he does not forgive nor justify. Why? Because “true” guilt cannot be removed. True sin cannot be removed. True sin is of the spirit, not of the flesh.
The Scripture actually states in 1 John that he who sins is “of the devil”! The child of the devil sins, but the child of God does not sin and “CANNOT” sin. All sins are of the flesh, and the flesh is not born of God, but whosoever is born of God does not sin and cannot sin. So there is a distinction in Scripture between flesh and spirit. The true person is a spirit, and the flesh is the temple of that spirit. But a truly evil person is an evil spirit who sins, and he is a child of the devil. Thus even the Christian (confirmed child of God) can sin with his flesh, without really sinning. Compare 1 John 1 with 1 John 3. This is all stated plainly in the Authorized King James Bible (true translation).
This is the best “good news” possible.
There has been a satanic movement afoot to find a replacement of the penal substitution heretical “gospel”, since legal and common sense questions and critiques have been raised against it. The hurdle they cannot overcome is the legal questions and contradictions must be addressed and answered. Every false gospel has two things in common that occur (though there are more), which is; 1.The unjust portrayal of God and 2. The depiction of God conducting Himself and His court in violation of the principles of law and jurisprudence and judicial process in their entirety. I will state plainly that your “system of law” just as penal substitutionists are born of and created by liberal interpretation. You have not done due diligence and because of that you are depicting God just like the penal substitutionists do…as violating the principles of law and acting unjustly. I could go through the many contradictory statements you have made and your false premises and your “psuedo-law born of pure interpretation”, in their entirety, but I will not.
[quote]The definition of the word “justified” is defined in English or understood plainly to mean proved innocent, because it means to uphold as blameless. To say someone is justified or justifiable is to say that they are not really guilty. To say someone has a justification for something is to say that they have proof of innocence. This cannot be misinterpreted, it is only that people have been blinded to the meaning through continual lies.
[quote] If sin is not attributed to men, then they cannot be guilty of it. Hence to take away sin is to take away guilt.
[quote] You saying that taking away sin, might mean taking away sinful behaviour cannot be true, because the atonement would then be meaningless. Justification would then have no meaning. The atonement was to remove the sins already committed. For example, let’s say if you went to court for a crime, you would have to be judged for it. What if you told the judge that your crime was removed? He would laugh at you. What is that supposed to mean? But this is what Jesus did, and I know exactly how he did it. He took away sins committed. Taking away sin does not mean taking away sinful behaviour, although that is the result after believing in Jesus. He then helps us to live according to his commandments.
You are a cesspool of not only violations of fundamental law and reality itself but the unreal use of common English words. You also seem to have a problem understanding simple physics concerning things like “time” itself. I could write a 50 page semi exhaustive critique and destroy your “doctrines” so utterly and show where all the violations of law, rational thinking, interpretation, eisegogics, convoluted liberal rationalizations and violations of simple physics itself, but I won’t. I will however point out a few things. First in order for “guilt to be removed”<---guilt has to be assigned first in order for it to be removed. Even a below average 5th grader knows that in order for something to be removed...IT HAS TO BE THERE FIRST(but what do you care about proper use of English, or logic?). Now I am not talking about literary standards or spell check. I talk to people all the time who's speech and writing is so error laden it almost needs deciphered first to be understood, but petty things like that aren't no big deal and not worth pointing out. So I am saying this so you will not confuse me addressing your irrational liberal interpretations and unreal use of words with common grammar standards. In order for guilt to "be there", that clearly implies a previous judgment of a court has to have taken place. This causes a conundrum for you. Since it is God's own court that is making the judgments, in order for guilt to be assigned and then removed, means a reversal or overturning of a judgment of God's court. basically one of the many things you are doing in this instance is the attempt to repackage and rebrand the "positional truth" doctrine...and pretend that isn't what it is..."but is something new". Anyone with any legal brains whatsoever knows that guilt never assigned is not there in order to be taken away. I choose my words very carefully as to not mislead people and to not be vague. Typically the only times people say "I don't understand what you are saying or meaning here", is not because of any lack on my part, but rather theirs. So the average person reading your posts and your "doctrinal diatribes" certainly might just think that God assigned guilt to people and found them guilty and then removed that guilt..this winds up with them thinking that the court just bore falsewitness against itself...PORTRAYING GOD AS UNJUST, VIOLATING LAW, CONTRADICTORY COURT, ETC. But what the hell do you care? You must not care, YOU HAVE NOT DONE DUE DILIGENCE IN EXAMINING YOUR OWN DOCTRINAL THEORIES OR EVEN HOW YOU USE WORDS! You are lazy, full of zeal, liberal in thought and unprincipled. This rebukes for you pal. You want to stand up with big boys you better expect a grueling cross examination of every word you speak! (And I heard that the trademark of one who that is teachable has humility and will take what he has coming to him and EXAMINE HIMSELF!) -------------------------- [quote] The “churches” have denied the truth that Jesus TOOK AWAY SIN, by saying that Jesus paid for sin. Now if Jesus paid for sin, that establishes guilt, but if Jesus took away sin, it means that guilt is removed. Thus Jesus died to prove the innocence of God’s children. Here "took away sin" is secret code for "took away guilt"..."guilt that was not really there". So then one might argue that "it was not really removed, since it was not really there". You're the one playing mind games. What is interesting is that nasty "time thing" and basic physics. [quote] "The atonement was to remove the sins already committed." Already committed<---what is the grammatical literal meaning, tense and definition of those words? At the time of the cross just the sins that were already committed? Were yours already committed? This where you have the same brick wall problem that penal substitionists have TIME AND REALITY...among other things. Now I am sure this is where you will automatically resort to suggesting that "already committed" NOW SUDDENLY MEANS BEFORE ONE IS SAVED! (then declare victory?) Shawn Connery on Celebrity Jeopardy: "Not so fast Trebek!" Apart from arguing the case and asking how it is even possible for the Mosaic law court to find you guilt in 2018 of sin...I will not bother to even ask. Rather let's "travel back in time to the Mosaic law courts". The "day of atonement" (and they wrongly call it, since "atonement" is a penal substitution mistranslation to support their heresy, but funny that you still use it)...The day of atonement was of course "post sin" or after the fact. But what you now have to explain is how you pretend that the Jewish believers are compared by you (without saying it in words) with presalvation people....(remember the sins already committed assigned to people before they are saved?). So who is presiding over this mythical Mosaic court? (paraphrase: "the law found people guilty but not really"). It is funny how the Mosaic courts(which people tend to think were just people trying cases before them in real time)...found you guilty???? Is the Mosaic court operating today? Did the Mosaic law look into the future and assign guilt? Oh this is where you are forced to get a little closer back to that thing called REALITY, that it is the standard of the Mosaic law, not an actual court. This is where you do exactly as the penal substitutionists do and have criminal and no criminal cases and acts tried thousands of years before the defendants even exist! And beyond that you now have another conundrum: The so called two tiered justice system, in which penal substitutionists claim the Mosaic law and its standards and method of operation was "man's law only" and that there is a "higher law", "divine law"(born and created purely by liberal interpretation). Aside form this "higher law" not only being "a complete violation and antithesis of the lower"...you face an additional conundrum: Who apploes this Mosaic standard of law to you in order to "assign guilty, but not really"??? God?? So how does a standard of law judge you, assign guilt(but not really)...AND THIS OCCUR BEFORE THE CROSS, in order for Christ to remove it???(but not really because it really isn't there, but He removes it anyway, but not really because it ain't there to remove...but yet "He removes sin" is secret code(surely not literal translation) for: The previously aforementioned "there but not theres"). So who applied the "guilt" to you, but not really??? God??? I thought God was the judge of all men (but that's just me). So who assigned sin to you??? Who assigned guilt to you??? Don't bother saying "the law as just a standard"...IT TAKES A COURT AND A JUDGE TO APPLY LAW! This is where you just like penal substitutionists have God fighting Himself, making verdicts and then being thrown out by God Himself...the law as a standard(which I heard was justice) becomes an obstacle to overcome or do an end run around like Obama around the houses of Congress! Where the standard of the law (which I heard that rightly defines what sin is and guilt too)...where the standard of law becomes an impediment to salvation itself! Therefore the law(which I heard was good and knoble...Galatians 3:21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! Is there a conflict, then, between God's law and God's promises?) According to you there is a conflict! I could go on for days but I will not, but nevertheless I will continue a bit. Occam's Razor does apply and should when interpreting or translating, and beyond that principles of law must govern translation and interpretation. There is a principled legal standard for studying, interpreting and translating the bible...which you do not use anymore than penal substitutionists or hardline Calvinists or anyone for that matter. Except us here at THE PRINCIPLED LEGAL STANDARD FOR THE FIRST DOCTRINAL REFORMATION OF THE CHURCH. What is interesting is what you have implied but have not said plainly, which is the "believers are sinless and no one commits sin after they are believers! And any believer that does sin intentionally, from his spirit is of the DEEEEVVVIIILLLL!"(yeah that cultish weird ass heretical doctrine). Nothing like the TULIPS doctrine rebranded and relabled ad repackaged as if it isn't what it is but is "new! and different!" uhuh. Back to Occam's razor He came to and His sacrifice was to "remove sin". One cannot argue that to overcome the flesh and to mortify the corrupt natures instincts and impulses that that is the purpose and goal for the believer and Christ accomplished through the sacrifice of Himself. I will further add that "to remove sin", first of all is a lousy translation "REMOVE" ISN'T THERE. ἀναφέρω anapheró "to bear or offer up or take up" does not mean "remove". Nor does it state in anyway that "sins were removed at the time of the offering of Himself". In Hebrews 9:28 you will find the same word ἀναφέρω anapheró, which again does not mean remove. And the definition of hamartias is not "guilt". Now one could argue that you are implying that guilt is removed but the people still stay in their sins! What you do is see what is not there while ignoring and rejecting what is there. (that's another thing heretics love to do). You see when we said "take away sins" we meant it post cross, the christian superior life, rescued from bondage to sins of the flesh. You of course rejected that and though you still admitted it to be true. What it comes down to is your twisted convoluted liberal eisegogical (you twisting the bible to fit and conform to your preconceived doctrines) interpretations and rationalizations that is the problem with you. I believe you are part of the feeble satanic crowd trying to come up with a seemingly acceptable and yet equally blasphemous replacement for the penal substitution doctrine (and that didn't come from the flesh baby, it came from you!). Reality is a good thing and God's law and legal viewpoint and judgments are according to reality and God's view of an incident or a person at a moment in time does not change or waver later on. (but you have God doing just that). So let's examine God's view. You wrote about the law and assigning guilt in so many words...that would be the law's view of people and sins committed and the law taking the view that people are guilty....WHAT WAS GOD'S VIEW AT THE EXACT SAME TIME??? DID GOD'S VIEW DIFFER FROM THE LAW...DID THE LAW ASSIGN GUILT AND GOD NOT??? If "people were not guilty all along", taking the view that they were would be bearing false witness, would it not? (or is this time for a "wing it" convoluted liberal rationalization to try and extricate yourself from this conundrum? One that you just made up and yet try to pretend you had this new view all along? This would be the desperate tactic of "departing from one's doctrines in the attempts to save them..called "winging it" by me.) So what of God's view an the law's view of a man at the time he sins? How does a legal standard not applied or executed by anyone assign guilt? Did God refuse to assign guilt, and why would God not take the same view as the law? It is your pajamas so you have to wear em to bed, it is your conundrum. (is it time for some fresh liberal interpretation improvisation from you?). What I also find interesting is when Christ said "Father do not hold this against them"...he was not talking about all human in human history...event hose not born yet. He was applying that to those in ignorance that were responsible for having Him put to death and the crowds that were mocking Him. He did not say they were not guilty of infractions and violations of the law nor was Christ speaking about the entire sins each person in the crowd committed during their whole lives! But what do you care about misleading people? The principled legal standard is simple and is fundamental law that fits reality, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IT IS DESIGNED FOR AND TO BE APPLIED TO! Example: A man who wants to do the right thing and thinks he is doing right commits an act of wrongdoing. He is guilty of having committed wrongdoing but because of ignorance he is not guilty of intentional wrongdoing and it is not held against him in the penal sense. The man is not punished, but he has committed wrongdoing and that is the truth of the matter. It is true from the moment it occurred and remains so today thousands of years later...and you twisted satanic version of the cross does not change the truth. And this is where we get into the positional truth B.S. which you are using and are trying to not make it obvious that that is exactly what you are doing.To have a person judged and found guilty under law (which is legal undeniable proof of the truth of the matter), then later have another verdict that changes that verdict is bearing false witness and reveals a violation of law, due process, process violations, violations of jurisprudence..basically violating the law in it's entirety. Do you know that it takes facts and evidence to decide a case in a court of law? When your "law" assigned "guilt", was it based on evidence, facts and reality? Were they actually proven guilty by the law? How can guilt be declared without it being proven and actually being the truth of the matter? Well? So now after they are declared "innocent" of sins they were previously guilty of(but not really)...are their court records expunged and does the court now bear false witness about their past? What i also find interesting is your "depiction" of pre salvation people and pre cross people...you pretend they all "acted in ignorance and all were decent fellows and didn't deserved to be punished". Of course I could get into what people usually do...David and his committing murder and adultery..and you either say David is in hell, or come up with some such rott. But I will not. So does the court lie about people's pasts? What if someone says "that man is guilty" and you say "NO! THE CROSS REMOVED HIS GUILT, BUT HE NEVER REALLY WAS GUILTY!"...don't you think that belongs in an Andy Warhal flick??? It's beyond bizarre and that is not law, its mental! You know anyone can say "pigs can fly". The impossible part is explaining in detail how they can fly. It is rather "convenient" how you seemed to leave out the impossible part of your doctrine...exactly how guilt is removed by His sacrifice. Knock yourself out pal. I am not only smart but I am scary smart. Lots of people have a hard time following me because your brain has to be turned on 100% to follow what I say, not because it is complicated, but because it takes principled thinking and learning it as you read. People tend to mentally pass out after a while of reading what I write. I swim in this, i am baptized in the law, whole chapters flow through my mind, this is my arena. I am the am the big dog, the 800 pound gorilla of theological law. To argue against me you have to argue against irrefutable fundamental principles of law and jurisprudence itself. We can examine "justified". The definition of justified in any ductionary (except your own twisted one)isn't "used to be guilty by law but not longer is guilty". Guilt once established, remains. It is part of a persons permanent record because it is history itself. You make "justified" not to be being about a persons current state as they stand...but justified with regard to all their wrongdoings in their past. Who invented this? YOU DID. It does not say Abraham was justified (of his past sins) by faith. It doesn't say that about anybody, YOU ADD THAT. It's not in the bible. That is why your "justification" or being declared "not guilty" is just like "gender identity"...NOT BASED ON THEIR ACTUAL PRESENT STATE IN REALITY. I could entertain other areas, like the Mosaic law itself. You want to paint an unreal picture of the Mosaic law it's people and the way it operated in peoples minds! The same people who took and eye and lost theirs as a judgment of the court, before, during and after that criminal offense...offered up offerings for sins of ignorance...AND THEY REMAINED WITHIN THE CONGREGATION OF GOD'S PEOPLE...THEY WERE NUMBERED WITH THE OTHERS! It is my belief that you need to see a psychologist because you have mental problems with being divorced from reality to a notable extent. The offerings are interesting and are basically a stage play of the offering that was and did come! The day of "atonement" (divine benevolence and proper overlooking of unavoidable offenses) occurred once year, every year. Are we to pretend that the Jews were "not saved" year after year? Are we to pretend that a man who acted in ignorance or made an error, and judged by the law as having done so...then offers up and offering and the law then pretends that he never did the act or committed the transgression? Offerings did not wipe out history, nor did they conflict with the judgment and standard of the law. Where is the verse where as part of making offerings that the court is to be notified and a persons guilt is erased from their legal file? Missing completely isn't it? The reason why they had lawyers was to check people's stories and see if an offense really was one and whether the offense was an accident, due to ignorance or other mitigating factors...or if it was the case of a person who committed and intentional violation and was trying to escape penalty by sneaking in an offering under false pretenses. The reason you did not explain or give examples of people who committed crimes and were found guilty and punished and still remained numbered as among God's children is because it smashes your heretical bordering on psychotic twisted doctrines. :)<---that smile is massive sarcasm big boy. You did not explain how the Mosaic law found you guilty before you even existed(because you cannot explain in detail how pigs fly either). That is the reason why your words concerning that are "remote" and "carefully chosen"... How did the law find you guilty, establish guilt without any facts, evidence or even an offender(namely you)??? This is where "God had foreknowledge and knew all who would sin!"...Oh so now it's God who is assigning guilt and not "the Mosaic law"? Foreknowledge isn't fact or legal evidence, foreknowledge is not proof. Judgments are made by evidence deciding the case. Is the law a prophet? How did a standard of law or a Mosaic court foresee your sins and you before you existed? huh? You claim Jesus removed your guilt in AD33 or thereabouts...And that the law assigned guilt to you knowing your sins...and God disagreed with the law and God sent His Son to be sacrificed in order to remove your guilt. Explain how "the law" talked to God, and how "the law" made judgments, tried you and made declarations about you...TO GOD??? Where was this record of the law at and who made it??? How did the law talk to God about you?(you do realize how crazy this is don't you?). I will stop here but could go on and on. A judge laugh at me??? lol You are puffed up and full of hubris, bouy. Now as to the use of proper language
Tim Alleman,
I noticed that you did not use Holy Scripture to refute anything I said. That’s because you know nothing at all concerning the gospel and have no revelation from God.
So the word “remove” is a lousy translation? You think it isn’t in Scripture? And you think you know more than 47 of the greatest scholars who were authorized by king James to give us the Holy Scripture in English. LOL SOMEBODY
John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and
saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin
of the world.
1 John 3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our
sins; and in him is no sin.
Hebrews also speaks strongly of this “removal” of sins, referring to past sins, a concept you cannot fathom. You have no spiritual understanding. Can’t you even see that “removal” and “take away” mean the same thing? You don’t even have to be spiritual to see that.
I am not proud at all, because I submit to Scripture, but you are in the pride of your own thoughts.
The Scriptures I quoted are not a bad translation, they are perfect, and anyone who knows Scripture at all cannot deny it. For truly, Jesus took away sin, and does not attribute sin to his children. There is no use quoting more Scriptures to refute you, since you don’t listen to the word of God at all. Since my words have proven you wrong already, as does a basic understanding of English, logic and Scripture.
Scripture was translated into English, not into man-made “theological” definitions (theology is a false science warned against by Paul). What I said is absolutely proved by the meaning of words and the proper use of language (which you wrongly deny):
English Encyclopedic Dictionary:
Justify 1. to defend or uphold as blameless, just, or right.
2. declare guiltless; absolve; acquit.
Justification:
1. something that justifies; a defensive plea; an excuse: a justifying fact or circumstance.
Anyone who knows English knows that justification therefore means proof of innocence, and that to be “justified” means to be proved innocent.
Simple logic: if sin can be excused and defended as not willful sin, then sin being a choice, was not actually done. If this can be proved, then the flesh sinning has no substance. This is why Jesus came to justify, and to appease God’s anger at what provokes him (to make atonement). This means taking away sin in the eyes of God, that he might see us not according to the sins of the flesh, but in Jesus Christ.
So you think you have rebuked me and shown intelligence? Your waffle can’t be taken seriously. I condemn your words of evil judgment.
You are the one rebuked. And yet you don’t hear it. You don’t believe what Jesus said. Even one word:
John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which
all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the
resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the
resurrection of damnation.
But enough of this. I quoted a number of Scriptures and made reference to them, none of which you believe. I will not debate. What I have stated is incontrovertible. Anyone ought to see this.
But I would hate to hear the reply to this which surely would be more foolishness, unless you be willing to repent. I won’t reply again to folly.
Richard Paulson.
[quote]Tim Alleman, I noticed that you did not use Holy Scripture to refute anything I said.
I use principles of law and even when I source scripture, exegete, interpret, that is subject to the principled standard of law. Again, what you do is (aside from contradict yourself repeatedly) engage in liberal interpretation in the pathetic attempt to create a fantasy psudeo system of law, when it is anything but law. When asked how you interpret a verse or word (if you were honest,which you are not) you would say you interpret or define a word because of what your beliefs are.
The definition of innocent, justified, not guilty never has been “found innocent of what they were proven to be guilty of”. In fact in common law and criminal law, anyone found to be innocent after they have been convicted and found guilty, is because the “guilty verdict” was false. In fact a person later exonerated after being found guilty, the law states clearly that they were never actually guilty, that for whatever reason as the particular individual case may be, it could have been due to error, ignorance, presumption, corruption, false witnesses, etc. Anyone with more than a 4th grade education and mental understanding level knows it is IMPOSSIBLE, legally and in reality, for anyone to be actually guilty in reality and at a later time be actually not guilty of the same offense or offenses. It is simply impossible. One cannot “throw a ball” and that be the truth, and later the truth be “he did not throw the ball”<---at best one is a lie. Because you are a "LEGAL MORON" and cannot grasp this and actually believe that a person can be guilty and also completely innocent of whatever offense and infraction...you "LIB-TERPRET" the bible to your unreal asinine and moronic liberal delusions. There is nothing in the bible where a person or persons are found to be guilty of offenses, then later found completely innocent of the same. It actually is not possible. Again even if a human court declares someone to be guilty and later evidence is discovered that proves them innocent, what then has actually transpired is evidence is discovered that proves they were never actually guilty in the first place. It would be the admission that the first verdict of guilty was a lie. Because you believe what you believe...that is why you "lib-terpret" Abraham being justified is referring to his legal history or past offenses of which he was previously guilty of(according to you)...There is nothing in the grammar or the word definitions, the Greek, tenses or whatever that says that or implies that. This is why you lib-terpret; "justified" the way you do, the reason you "lib-terpret" hamartias, paraptoma, anaphero etc., and define all those words as "removed guilt"...which they don't. You have mental problems and are probably a psychotic personality. You First you say this: [quote] Truly, the doctrine of penal substitution or any idea of substitution is the most wicked (unjust), insane and stupid idea, and the opposite of the truth, and is a complete denial of the gospel of Jesus Christ. However, it is held even by innocent (and some intelligent) people who have been abused, without knowing it. It is an abusive “gospel”. But what I don’t understand, is that people who claim to want to know the truth still don’t change their view in the light of reason when it is shown to them.
Then you say this:
[quote] This is why Jesus came to justify, and to appease God’s anger at what provokes him (to make atonement). This means taking away sin in the eyes of God, that he might see us not according to the sins of the flesh, but in Jesus Christ.
Care to reconcile those statements? Because your first statement damns penal substitution, but your second statement relies on penal substitution and advocates it.
The truth is that you are a psychotic weirdo, and that is why you could not address any of my statements and questions which destroyed your asinine beliefs. This is why you vacated your position, while pretending you haven’t. You are the one who waffles back and forth more than eggo himself.
1. First you say no one is guilty.
2. Then you say guilt has to be removed.
3. Then you say it is was not really there.
4. Then you say Christ’s crucifixion and death was the means to prove that people were innocent.
5. Then you say this: [quote] This is why Jesus came to justify, and to appease God’s anger at what provokes him (to make atonement). This means taking away sin in the eyes of God, that he might see us not according to the sins of the flesh, but in Jesus Christ.
6. Conclusion: How is it that you make out God to be a dumb ass? You portray God as being angry at innocent people who are not guilty, then you have Christ come and die to prove that they are not guilty, so God will no longer be angry at them? So the Son had to prove to the Father that people are not guilty, so the Father will admit His mistake at being angry at completely innocent people!
You are a fucking piece of work you satanic shithead. YOU ARE DONE POSTING ANYTHING ON THIS SITE. WELCOME TO THE WALL OF SHAME.