Please name other things Jesus' death accomplished, things that were not already fulfilled before He suffered and died on the cross. Thank you.

Fifield wrote an entire chapter entitled "THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST HONORS GOD’S LAW." Now you may disagree with what he wrote, but it's not fair to say he didn't address the concerns you raised, because he did. He also wrote a chapter called, "The Atonement," and another called, "The Atonement Vicarious," which also deal with these issues.



You're simply not seeing that your questions are being addressed. Rather than just keep asking the same questions, and getting the same answers, spend some time looking at the answers, and try to understand how they address your questions. I offered to provide more material for you to study. I'm happy to do that if you wish.



T:Once again, if you think I've presenting the Moral Influence Theory, you are mistaken. It doesn't look like I misread what you wrote. I don't know why you think this. It seems pretty clear. You say "your version of the MITH." It's not the Moral Influence Theory, nor a version of it, that I'm presenting.



Yes.



This is an odd way of putting it. If your goal in communication is to be clear, I wouldn't put it this way. The other way is clearer, i.e. "The death of Jesus was required to accomplish His goals."



I'm not sure what "this context" is, but I've pointed out what I think is clear, and what is less clear, so hopefully this helps to sort things out.



I would say our disagreement involves that these are different things.



This idea comes short because of the reasons Fifield pointed out.



I agree with Fifield's points on this question. I think your ideas come short, because if they were true, God could not have offered Lucifer pardon as He did. They also don't involve the real problem, which has to do with man, and not with God. All that God did was what man needed in order to be reconciled to God. It's a one way street. As Ty Gibson puts it, God was already where He needed to be, very much in love with us.



I agree with Fifield's explanation of this. Again, if your view of this were true, God could not have offered Lucifer pardon, as He did; Christ's death would have had to have been involved.

There is a nice list in "It Is Finished." Why don't you put together a list, and we can review it together.

Neither you, nor anything you have quoted from Fifield, comes anywhere close to explaining the following insights:

Law and justice demand death for sin, therefore, death must happen in consequence of sin. Law and justice do not demand pardon for sin. Neither do they demand that sinners learn to cease sinning. If it were possible to merely pardon sinners, rather than demanding their death, God would have ordered and legislated things accordingly. But He didn't.

Instead, God established things in such a way that death must happen in consequence of sin. To pardon and save sinners, therefore, the substitutionary death of Jesus is required. In this way, and only in this way, the honor and integrity of law and justice are upheld and penitent sinners can be saved and live happily ever after.

Again, listen: "Justice demands that sin be not merely pardoned, but the death penalty must be executed. God, in the gift of His only-begotten Son, met both these requirements. By dying in man's stead, Christ exhausted the penalty and provided a pardon. {AG 139.2}

According to the chapter "It is Finished", Jesus' death accomplished the following things:

1. It clearly revealed to unfallen FMAs the character of Satan's rebellion. Page 758.

2. It demonstrated that mercy does not cancel out justice, thereby demonstrating the love of God. Page 762.

3. It guaranteed the destruction of sin and sinners. Page 764.

4. It assured the redemption of penitent sinners. Page 764.

5. It made the universe eternally secure. Page 764.

Excellent! My list:

1.Rebellion is not overcome by force. Satan was given the opportunity to demonstrate the fruits of his government. Page 759
2.By making clear the character of Satan, he was defeated in the GC. Page 761
3.A means was provided, by beholding the love of God, that man could be drawn back to God. Page 762
4.Both justice and mercy coexist, with neither one destroying the other, and the law of God is shown to be righteous, and shown to be capable of being obeyed. Page 762
5.The wicked are destroyed by their own choice, as opposed to an act of God upon them, by choosing to separate themselves from God. A life of rebellion places them so out of harmony with God, that his presence becomes to them a consuming fire. Page 764
6.The Universe was made secure. Page 764

Neither you, nor anything you have quoted from Fifield, comes anywhere close to explaining the following insights:

Law and justice demand death for sin, therefore, death must happen in consequence of sin. Law and justice do not demand pardon for sin. Neither do they demand that sinners learn to cease sinning. If it were possible to merely pardon sinners, rather than demanding their death, God would have ordered and legislated things accordingly. But He didn't.

Instead, God established things in such a way that death must happen in consequence of sin. To pardon and save sinners, therefore, the substitutionary death of Jesus is required. In this way, and only in this way, the honor and integrity of law and justice are upheld and penitent sinners can be saved and live happily ever after.

Again, listen: "Justice demands that sin be not merely pardoned, but the death penalty must be executed. God, in the gift of His only-begotten Son, met both these requirements. By dying in man's stead, Christ exhausted the penalty and provided a pardon. {AG 139.2}

MM, I've quoted many times from Fifield where he deals with this. He has a whole chapter called, "The Sacrifice of Christ Honors God's Law." This chapter is dealing with this theme. I've quoted at length from that chapter.

Again, if the way you are looking things were correct, then Christ's death would have been required in order for God to offer Lucifer pardon.



I think this is misleading, or at least somewhat vague, the reason being is it sounds as if God could have established things in such a way that sin would not result in death. The reason sin results in death is described here:



This death isn't something God "establishes," (it's not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God) but the result of the what the sinner himself has chosen to do, separating himself from God, who is "the fountain of life."

The following EGW quote posted by MM tells me that Christ had to die in order for us to receive pardon:

There's no doubt Christ had to die in order for us to receive pardon. The question is why? If it were something God-related (some requirement He needed) then the same requirement should have been necessary for Him to be able to offer pardon to Lucifer, but it wasn't. Therefore the reason for Christ's death being necessary must lie elsewhere.