Did Jesus have to earn the right to pardon and save sinners? Some say, No, and others say, Yes. What do you think?

The following passages indicate that, yes, Jesus did have to earn the right to pardon and save us:

[Paul] lifted up Christ as One who hates sin and loves the sinner, the One who bore our sins that He might have full power and authority to impart to us His righteousness. {UL 342.4}

Mere forgiveness of sin is not the sole result of the death of Jesus. He made the infinite sacrifice not only that sin might be removed, but that human nature might be restored, rebeautified, reconstructed from its ruins, and made fit for the presence of God. (3SM 154)

Our salvation was wrought out by infinite suffering to the Son of God. His divine bosom received the anguish, the agony, the pain that the sinfulness of Adam brought upon the race. The heel of Christ was indeed bruised when His humanity suffered, and grief heavier than that which ever oppressed the beings He had created weighed down His soul as He was engaged in paying the vast debt which man owed to God. {HP 44.4}

On the cross of Calvary He paid the redemption price of the race. And thus He gained the right to take the captives from the grasp of the great deceiver, who, by a lie, framed against the government of God, caused the fall of man, and thus forfeited all claim to be called a loyal subject of God's glorious everlasting kingdom. {1SM 309.4}

Had they known that they were putting to torture One who had come to save the sinful race from eternal ruin, they would have been seized with remorse and horror. But their ignorance did not remove their guilt; for it was their privilege to know and accept Jesus as their Saviour. Some of them would yet see their sin, and repent, and be converted. Some by their impenitence would make it an impossibility for the prayer of Christ to be answered for them. Yet, just the same, God's purpose was reaching its fulfillment. Jesus was earning the right to become the advocate of men in the Father's presence. {DA 744.3}

The following passages also confirm it:

Christ bore all this suffering in order to obtain the right to confer eternal righteousness upon as many as would believe on Him. {TDG 216.4}

To the believer, Christ is the resurrection and the life. In our Saviour the life that was lost through sin is restored; for He has life in Himself to quicken whom He will. He is invested with the right to give immortality. The life that He laid down in humanity, He takes up again, and gives to humanity. {DA 786.4}

Death entered the world because of transgression. But Christ gave His life that man should have another trial. He did not die on the cross to abolish the law of God, but to secure for man a second probation. He did not die to make sin an immortal attribute; He died to secure the right to destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil. He suffered the full penalty of a broken law for the whole world. This He did, not that men might continue in transgression, but that they might return to their loyalty and keep God's commandments and His law as the apple of their eye. {TM 134.1}

Who says no? Is this right a moral right?

If we put our eyes only on our own selves, we may think the easy answer is "No." Jesus should not need to earn any rights. He is all-powerful God.

It is when we think more selflessly that we can soon see why God's law of love required that He earn our salvation. He is not only earning our salvation, but also the respect, love, and admiration of all the hosts of His creation throughout the universe, including the holy angels.

Had Jesus simply destroyed Satan in the beginning, all the other angels would have served Him thereafter from fear, and not of love. If Jesus were to take us to Heaven without a sacrifice to convert our hearts and help us see the true levels of degradation vs. holiness that were contrasted through His sinless life among us, we would either be sinning still, or would be serving Him from fear as well.

God is love. He does not want us to live in fear. Therefore, the sacrifice was required--for us, and for the hardness of our sinful hearts.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Had Jesus simply destroyed Satan in the beginning, it would have served to validate Satan's idea that sin was innocuous. What inspiration tells us if God had *left* Satan to reap the full result of his sin, he would have perished.



This is a good thought. This isn't how I've thought of this, but it's good.



A hearty Amen!

Was it also required by law, that is, did law and justice require death in consequence of sin?

Yes, for the reason GC pointed out.

Tom, please summarize in your own words what GC said. And, do you think he rejects the penal substitution view, that is, the idea Jesus had to die to earn the legal right to pardon and save sinners and to satisfy the just and loving demands of law and justice (i.e. death must happen in consequence of sin)?

GC said:



I understand this to be saying that apart from Jesus' example, culminating in his death, we wouldn't see ourselves as we really are, the result of which would be that we couldn't be set free from sin and/or we would serve God from a wrong motivation.



Since most people accept some form of the penal substitution view, I would guess he accepts some for of it, yet he is evidently not limited to that view, given his comment.

Regarding your specific question, regarding saving sinners to satisfy the just loving demands of law and justice, it seems to me he may have seen his comment above as addressing that. It seems a bit odd that you would ask me what I think he thinks when he's right here.