God, co-actor in Jesus' sufferings or contributive non-actor?
- Thread starter LeeLoving
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Although I'm still unsure what your questions have to do with the thread title, which asks whether God was a "co-actor" in the sufferings of His Son, I' ll have a go at answering. Paul was specifically sent to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. Peter was sent mainly to the Jews. But with neither of them was it exclusive. Paul did preach the gospel to Jews living in many of the places he visited on his missionary journeys, and God sent Peter to preach to Cornelius, a Gentile. I don't believe that as Christians today, we have to say (if we are Gentile Christians), "Well, Peter was the apostle to the Jews, so I won't bother with his two letters," or (if we are Jewish Christians), "Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, so I don't need to read or believe his epistles."
-
1
- Show all
I don't see the physical suffering and death of Jesus at the hands of men, as the mechanism for our salvation. In fact what we need saved from is not physical death but spiritual death. We need to be rescued from the Lake of fire yet since we are sinners that's where we deserve to go.
If suffering at the hands of men could pay for my sins, could someone other than Christ volunteer to take my place, would that be sufficient?
If physical suffering at the hands of men on a cross is the price that needs paid for my sins, then Ill just pay it myself, sure Ild rather not have to undergo it but hey if it means I have taken and paid the judgment for my sins and have therefore attained eternal life in the resurrection then ill take the punishment myself, the thought of the loveliest of man to walk the earth nay the creator taking my place on a cross if He doesnt have to it would be repulsive to me.
But, He does have to.
For it's Gods judgment that I fear not mans judgment and its Gods judgment that Christ bore for us when God poured out his wroth on Him. The bit that's hard to comprehend is how Christ could bear the spiritual judgment of God, to be separated from the Father and to bear the judgment of the soul. Something mere man cannot inflict upon me.
Isaiah 53:10
King James Version
10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin
If suffering at the hands of men could pay for my sins, could someone other than Christ volunteer to take my place, would that be sufficient?
If physical suffering at the hands of men on a cross is the price that needs paid for my sins, then Ill just pay it myself, sure Ild rather not have to undergo it but hey if it means I have taken and paid the judgment for my sins and have therefore attained eternal life in the resurrection then ill take the punishment myself, the thought of the loveliest of man to walk the earth nay the creator taking my place on a cross if He doesnt have to it would be repulsive to me.
But, He does have to.
For it's Gods judgment that I fear not mans judgment and its Gods judgment that Christ bore for us when God poured out his wroth on Him. The bit that's hard to comprehend is how Christ could bear the spiritual judgment of God, to be separated from the Father and to bear the judgment of the soul. Something mere man cannot inflict upon me.
Isaiah 53:10
King James Version
10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin
-
1
- Show all
I actually am repenting of my opinion that God did not cause physical harm to Jesus as I am reading Isaiah 53 in a new light and hopefully correctly. If I am correct it could be seen that Jesus' entire sufferings was God-done. God handed him over and supernaturally inflicted his sufferings through men.
Isaiah 53:4-5 King James Version
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
There's no language here to say he was not smitten of God when it goes on to say that he was wounded for our transgressions, so I think it is safe to think that his entire suffering was God-done.
Sorry if my opinion bothered anybody, I just kept reading verse 4 and 5 wrong and it threw off my reading of this chapter which I think might have contributed to me coming to the wrong conclusion.
Isaiah 53:4-5 King James Version
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
There's no language here to say he was not smitten of God when it goes on to say that he was wounded for our transgressions, so I think it is safe to think that his entire suffering was God-done.
Sorry if my opinion bothered anybody, I just kept reading verse 4 and 5 wrong and it threw off my reading of this chapter which I think might have contributed to me coming to the wrong conclusion.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
