Do you dispute that words mean different things in one culture than in another, especially cultures separated by millenia?

T: Where in the Bible does the word "righteous" mean "someone who has kept the law perfectly their whole life." I don't think any Jew of that time had this concept of the word. Do you think they did?
R: Yes, I think they did.
T: Ok. I think they didn't.

Regarding the use of the word "righteous" by John, I'm now confused as to what you are saying. I am saying that when John says that one who does righteousness is righteous, he is simply referring to what he says later in the chapter, that one who is righteous is one who loves his brother and takes care of him. Simply put, a righteous person is one who does righteous things. He wasn't saying anything about imputed righteousness or making up for deficiencies or any of that. (I'm not commenting on the veracity of the idea, just that John was discussing this).

R: Because “forgiven” here is used in the sense of “as if you had not sinned.”
T: That's always what "forgiven" means. If you owe me money, and I forgive you your debt, then it's as if you hadn't incurred a debt. If you step on my toe, and say "pardon me," and I forgive you, it's as if you didn't step on my toe.

R: Because “forgiven” here is used in the sense of “as if you had not sinned.”
T: That's always what "forgiven" means. If you owe me money, and I forgive you your debt, then it's as if you hadn't incurred a debt. If you step on my toe, and say "pardon me," and I forgive you, it's as if you didn't step on my toe.

When Christ forgives us, it’s as if He had done what we did, and as if we had done what He did. It’s the same as if you killed my son and I was put to death with the lethal injection in your place, and you went free to live in my house. God doesn’t require that of us, and human forgiveness is not like that.
So, again, to me, this only makes sense from a legal perspective.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. We ask God to forgive us. He forgives us. Why does this only make sense from a legal perspective?

Didn't Jesus give us the parable of the Prodigal Son so that we could understand forgiveness? (i.e., how God forgives) Isn't that the whole point of the parable? Does this parable only make sense from a legal perspective?

I provided a host of definitions of "righteous" as the Jews conceived it. I've been looking around the internet, and I haven't seen the idea you're suggesting, that Jews had the concept of righteousness meaning perfectly keeping the law one's whole life. If you have some evidence that this is the case, I'd be very interested in seeing it.

R: Because “forgiven” here is used in the sense of “as if you had not sinned.”

T: That's always what "forgiven" means. If you owe me money, and I forgive you your debt, then it's as if you hadn't incurred a debt. If you step on my toe, and say "pardon me," and I forgive you, it's as if you didn't step on my toe.

R: When Christ forgives us, it’s as if He had done what we did, and as if we had done what He did. It’s the same as if you killed my son and I was put to death with the lethal injection in your place, and you went free to live in my house. God doesn’t require that of us, and human forgiveness is not like that.
So, again, to me, this only makes sense from a legal perspective.

T: But you're reading the legal perspective into the thing. That's not necessary. When Christ forgives us, He forgives us, out of the goodness of His heart. The same with God.

I can open this up further. Where does Christ anywhere teach the penal substitution idea of forgiveness? There are a number of parables and examples from Christ's life that suggest this is *not* the case (such as the prodigal son, the servant forgiven 10,000 talents, Christ's forgiving the paralytic, the Lord's prayer, to mention a few) but I don't know of any incidents, teachings, or parables of Christ which suggest this *is* the case.

In fact, this was a common concept:

Luke 18:21, BBE: And he said, All these things I have done from the time when I was a boy. (The Bible in Basic English) [referring to the keeping of the commandments]

Philippians 3:6 with respect to the righteousness which is by the law, blameless.
(Philippians 3:6, Phillips: As far as the Law’s righteousness is concerned, I don’t think anyone could have found fault with me.)

They believed in the righteousness of the law, that is, they had the notion that "righteous" were those who kept perfectly the law (the idea that it was during one's whole life is implied).

Of course they forgive us out of the goodness of their heart. But the legal dispositions of the plan of salvation exist to refute/avoid Satan’s accusations against God before the universe.

Well, of course the parables do not teach all the aspects of the plan of salvation.

Where do the parables teach that Christ had to die for our forgiveness?

None of Christ’s parables alludes to His death (except, if memory serves me well, that of Matt 21:33-44, but it speaks of His death in terms of the Jews taking His life, so in a way not related to our salvation).

22Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

23Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: (Acts 2:22,23)

24Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

25He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.

26If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour.

27Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.

28Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

29The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him.

30Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.

31Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. (John 12)

He took on Himself the curse (penalty) of the law which we had incurred, in order to redeem us from this penalty.

The idea isn't that they had never committed an error their whole life, but they were, at that time, keeping it.

R: Of course they forgive us out of the goodness of their heart. But the legal dispositions of the plan of salvation exist to refute/avoid Satan’s accusations against God before the universe.
T: What accusation could have been leveled against God if Lucifer had taken Him up on His offer to pardon him?

R: Well, of course the parables do not teach all the aspects of the plan of salvation.
T: Do they teach all the important aspects?

R: Where do the parables teach that Christ had to die for our forgiveness?
T: Where indeed.

R: None of Christ’s parables alludes to His death (except, if memory serves me well, that of Matt 21:33-44, but it speaks of His death in terms of the Jews taking His life, so in a way not related to our salvation).
T: How is the Jews taking Jesus' life not related to our salvation? The first recorded sermon after Jesus' ascension:

If one takes the penal substitution perspective, then one becomes embarrassed by the question of where Christ taught the ideas expressed by this perspective. Where did Christ teach that God could not legally forgive us unless He (Christ) died? The supposedly most important aspect to Christ's death then becomes something He Himself never personally taught. That's problematic.

R: He took on Himself the curse (penalty) of the law which we had incurred, in order to redeem us from this penalty.
T: This raises an interesting question. Did the Jews conceive of the curse as a penalty? I'll have to think about that.

T:The idea isn't that they had never committed an error their whole life, but they were, at that time, keeping it.

R:I’m afraid this is not the case.

Moreover, because the biblical heroes are so extraordinarily righteous, it is simply unthinkable that they should have grievously transgressed prohibitions such as idolatry, adultery, or even rank deception.

Leviticus 18:5 You shall therefore keep my statutes and my ordinances, by doing which a man shall live: I am the LORD.

And:

Deuteronomy 27:26 "‘Cursed be he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’”

If the Bible says you will live by your obedience to the law, and that you will be cursed by its transgression, of course if you do not believe in a Savior from sin (as was the case of the Jews), you must believe you have no sin.

Think for a little: the law cannot forgive. Therefore, if you commit even a little sin, at whatever point of your life, the law can no longer declare you righteous and you are subject to its penalty.

R: Of course they forgive us out of the goodness of their heart. But the legal dispositions of the plan of salvation exist to refute/avoid Satan’s accusations against God before the universe.
T: What accusation could have been leveled against God if Lucifer had taken Him up on His offer to pardon him?

R:After his transgression of the law (rebellion, defiance of God's will), Satan hadn’t been pardoned, therefore he held that no one else who transgressed the law (rebelled, defied God's will) could be pardoned.

R: Well, of course the parables do not teach all the aspects of the plan of salvation.
T: Do they teach all the important aspects?

Not all of them.

R: Where do the parables teach that Christ had to die for our forgiveness?
T: Where indeed.

They don’t, but Christ did.

Matthew 26:28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

R: None of Christ’s parables alludes to His death (except, if memory serves me well, that of Matt 21:33-44, but it speaks of His death in terms of the Jews taking His life, so in a way not related to our salvation).
T: How is the Jews taking Jesus' life not related to our salvation? The first recorded sermon after Jesus' ascension:

R:No, the fact that the Jews took Jesus’ life is not related to our salvation. It was related to theirs, because they needed to repent of that, and that's why the fact was included in Peter's sermon.

As I said, many aspects of the plan of salvation Christ taught only indirectly, because the disciples weren’t yet prepared to understand these things. These aspects would be expanded by the NT writers later.

R: He took on Himself the curse (penalty) of the law which we had incurred, in order to redeem us from this penalty.
T: This raises an interesting question. Did the Jews conceive of the curse as a penalty? I'll have to think about that.

R:What else could a curse be?

The blind person being born in sins doesn't mean someone not born in sins never sinned, but they weren't born that way.

Now if "righteous" means "keep the law perfectly one's entire life" what does "extraordinarily righteous" mean? This would be the epitome of redundancy. The phrase "extraordinarily righteous" makes sense with how Jews thought of the word "righteous," but not with what you're suggesting.

Leviticus 18:5 You shall therefore keep my statutes and my ordinances, by doing which a man shall live: I am the LORD.

And:

Deuteronomy 27:26 "‘Cursed be he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’”

T: This is a general principle, which agrees with the Jewish concept that righteousness is being obedient. Where do you get the idea that being righteous means perfectly keeping the law one's who life?

R: Think for a little: the law cannot forgive. Therefore, if you commit even a little sin, at whatever point of your life, the law can no longer declare you righteous and you are subject to its penalty.
T: I don't believe the Jews thought this way. None of this. This is what I'm asserting.

R: After his transgression of the law (rebellion, defiance of God's will), Satan hadn’t been pardoned, therefore he held that no one else who transgressed the law (rebelled, defied God's will) could be pardoned.
T: He wasn't pardoned because he didn't accept God's offer of pardon.

R: Well, of course the parables do not teach all the aspects of the plan of salvation.
T: Do they teach all the important aspects?
R: Not all of them.
T: And we could extend this to Christ's teachings in general? That is, there are important aspects of the Plan of Salvation which Christ did not teach?

I've always agreed that we needed Christ's death in order to be forgiven. I've questioned that *God* needed Christ's death.

R: No, the fact that the Jews took Jesus’ life is not related to our salvation. It was related to theirs, because they needed to repent of that, and that's why the fact was included in Peter's sermon.
T: How is Christ's death not related to our salvation? I'm sure this isn't what you mean, so you must have the idea that some things related to Christ's death have to do with our salvation, but other things don't? For example, Christ was crucified. Does that have to do with our salvation? Or is this something only the Romans who actually crucified Him need to be concerned with?

Your understanding, then, is that Christ did not deal with how one is saved, in relation to His death, to the disciples, because they weren't ready to understand this?

R:What else could a curse be?
T: An action. Being rejected of God, being cast off from the Covenant community. I think the Jews thought of the curse in these terms. Not as a forensic penalty prescribed by the law.

The blind person being born in sins doesn't mean someone not born in sins never sinned, but they weren't born that way.

????
The contrast was clearly that he was a sinner while they were righteous.

Now if "righteous" means "keep the law perfectly one's entire life" what does "extraordinarily righteous" mean? This would be the epitome of redundancy. The phrase "extraordinarily righteous" makes sense with how Jews thought of the word "righteous," but not with what you're suggesting.

????

T: This is a general principle, which agrees with the Jewish concept that righteousness is being obedient. Where do you get the idea that being righteous means perfectly keeping the law one's who life?

R:After you are cursed, how can this curse be removed? It can’t, unless a qualified Substitute bears it in your place. That’s why Paul says, “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse.” Why? Exactly because it’s impossible to obey the law perfectly during your whole life.

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.(Gal. 3:10)

This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? (Gal. 3:2)

Note the sharp contrast in verses 9 and 10. "They which be of faith are blessed," but "as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse." Faith brings the blessing; works bring the curse, or, rather, leave one under the curse. The curse is on all, for "he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God." John 3:18. Faith removes the curse.

Who are under the curse?--"As many as are of the works of the law." Note that it does not say that those who do the law are under the curse, for that would be a contradiction of Rev.22:14: "Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." "Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord." Ps.119:1.

So, then, they that are of faith are keepers of the law; for they that are of faith are blessed, and those who do the commandments are blessed. By faith they do the commandments. The Gospel is contrary to human nature, and so it is that we become doers of the law, not by doing, but by believing. If we worked for righteousness, we should be exercising only our own sinful human nature, and so would get no nearer to righteousness, but farther from it; but by believing the "exceeding great and precious promises," we become partakers of the Divine nature (2Pet.1:4), and then all our works are wrought in God. "The Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore?--Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling-stone;-stone; as it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a Stumbling-stone and Rock of offense; and whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed." Rom.9:30-33.

What the Curse Is.

No one can read Gal.3:10 carefully and thoughtfully without seeing that the curse is transgression of the law. Disobedience to God's law is itself the curse; for "by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin." Rom.5:12. Sin has death wrapped up in it. Without sin death would be impossible, for "the sting of death is sin." 1Cor.15:56. "As many as are of the works of the law are under the curse." Why? Is it because the law is a curse?--Not by any means. "The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." Rom.7:12. Why, then, are as many as are of the works of the law under the curse?--Because it is written, "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." Mark it well: They are not cursed because they do the law, but because they do not do it. So, then, we see that being of the works of the law does not mean that one is doing the law. No; "the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Rom.8:7. All are under the curse, and he who thinks to get out by his own works, remains there. The curse consists in not continuing in all things that are written in the law; therefore, the blessing means perfect conformity to the law. This is as plain as language can make it.

Blessing and Cursing.

"Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you this day; and a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the Lord your God." Deut.11:26-28. This is the living word of God, addressed to each one of us personally. "The law worketh wrath" (Rom.4:15), but the wrath of God comes only on the children of disobedience (Eph.5:6). If we truly believe, we are not condemned, but only because faith brings us into harmony with the law--the life of God. "Whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed." Jam.1:25.

(The Glad Tidings)

R: Think for a little: the law cannot forgive. Therefore, if you commit even a little sin, at whatever point of your life, the law can no longer declare you righteous and you are subject to its penalty.
T: I don't believe the Jews thought this way. None of this. This is what I'm asserting.

R:Was Paul a Jew? This is his reasoning in Galatians (see above).

R: After his transgression of the law (rebellion, defiance of God's will), Satan hadn’t been pardoned, therefore he held that no one else who transgressed the law (rebelled, defied God's will) could be pardoned.
T: He wasn't pardoned because he didn't accept God's offer of pardon.

I said after his transgression (rebellion). Then he asked to be pardoned, but Jesus said he couldn’t be. Do you remember this?

R: Well, of course the parables do not teach all the aspects of the plan of salvation.
T: Do they teach all the important aspects?
R: Not all of them.
T: And we could extend this to Christ's teachings in general? That is, there are important aspects of the Plan of Salvation which Christ did not teach?

R:There are important aspects He did not teach in detail.

What do you make of this passage?

“By dying in our behalf, he gave an equivalent for our debt. Thus he removed from God all charge of lessening the guilt of sin. By virtue of my oneness with the Father, he says, my suffering and death enable me to pay the penalty of sin. By my death a restraint is removed from his love. His grace can act with unbounded efficiency.” {YI, December 16, 1897 par. 7}

For all who receive Christ as their personal Saviour, there is opened an ample channel, in which human and divine instrumentalities can co-operate to communicate to the world the tide of God's love. All glory is of God and belongs to God. Yet in Christ also there is all power. In him divine power is combined with humanity. Faith in Christ holds the reins of eternal obligation. It settles upon the soul with a love that is the unfolding of divine mercy, and wins us back to God. "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God." Salvation through Christ is an infinite gift. There is no possibility of our receiving it by any merit of our own.

He didn’t die because He was crucified (which was what the Jews and Romans did); that’s the point.

Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:(Acts 2:23)

T:Your understanding, then, is that Christ did not deal with how one is saved, in relation to His death, to the disciples, because they weren't ready to understand this?

R:John 16:12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.”

Being rejected of God is OK. Or being under God’s wrath. Or feeling the weight of one’s own sins.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But 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. (Isa. 53:4,5)

It’s a forensic penalty if it happens as the outcome of a judgment.

At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe.

They weren't saying they were righteous because they had never sinned. They were saying simply that the other guy was born in sins, and they weren't.

If righteous means "to keep the whole law for one's whole life" that's something that can't be improved upon. "Extraordinarily righteous" would be meaningless. It would be like saying "extraordinarily virginal."

That's not Paul's argument at all. Paul says:

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.(Gal. 3:10)

The curse comes upon those who are disobedient.

R: After his transgression of the law (rebellion, defiance of God's will), Satan hadn’t been pardoned, therefore he held that no one else who transgressed the law (rebelled, defied God's will) could be pardoned.
T: He wasn't pardoned because he didn't accept God's offer of pardon.
R: I said after his transgression (rebellion). Then he asked to be pardoned, but Jesus said he couldn’t be. Do you remember this?
T: Yes, but I wasn't referring to that.

Could we say that? There are important aspects of the Plan of Salvation which Christ did not teach plainly. Would you agree to that? He didn't teach them plainly because the disciples weren't ready to hear it. This is what I'm understanding you to say. Is this correct?

R: What do you make of this passage?

“By dying in our behalf, he gave an equivalent for our debt. Thus he removed from God all charge of lessening the guilt of sin. By virtue of my oneness with the Father, he says, my suffering and death enable me to pay the penalty of sin. By my death a restraint is removed from his love. His grace can act with unbounded efficiency.” {YI, December 16, 1897 par. 7}

T: I think it (especially the part you underlined) means this:

R: He didn’t die because He was crucified (which was what the Jews and Romans did); that’s the point.
T: Peter says He did:

R: Being rejected of God is OK. Or being under God’s wrath. Or feeling the weight of one’s own sins.
T: Of course, Christ was not really rejected by God.

R: It’s a forensic penalty if it happens as the outcome of a judgment.
T: I don't believe any 1st century Jew would have had this thought. Or 1st century non-Jew. I don't think this was a concept which existed at this time.

Also I don't think is reflecting what really happened. Jesus' suffering was not the *result* of a penalty being arbitrarily enforced upon Him so that we could be let off. Instead, His suffering *was* the penalty; it was the result of sin.