Now, you didn't comment upon my post about justification.

It looks like your theory generates only questions. Any good theory provides answers to questions. You should lay aside your pride of opinion and face the fact that your theory cannot answer basic questions.

But maybe you do have answers, but just enjoy being coy. If you can, please answer my simple question with a yes or no.

But from what I know of your ideas, you cannot do it because either answer is fatal to one or more of your fundamental premises.

It seems you don't know what "legal" means. Let me help:

So you are basically saying that the solution has nothing to do with the law, even though it condemns. IOW:

• Smoking kills, but the solution has nothing to do with smoking.
• Lack of oxygen kills, but the solution has nothing to do with oxygen.

Weird, no?

The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. So if you want to avoid the death that comes with sin, you need to know how to deal with the law, which is by definition, a legal matter.

Is there a law of gravity? Is it legal?

Are the laws of nature "legal"? They are just as sure the laws of God as are the decalog. The decalog is a description of how one would behave if within the bounds of the law of God. The law of God is a design template on which all nature operates, both animate and inanimate. Everything is regulated by laws.

The law of God is a design template. It is not enacted legislation. There is no remedy in the law for breaking the law. If there is no remedy in the law, there is no legal way to recover the sinner because there is nothing in the law to recover the sinner. The only way to be saved is to be restored into compliance with the law. This is what Christ came to do and is doing.

The solution is to be brought back into compliance. That is the only solution. The iniquity has to be removed. [/quote=asygo] IOW:
     Smoking kills, but the solution has nothing to do with smoking.
     Lack of oxygen kills, but the solution has nothing to do with oxygen.

Weird, no? [/quote]Lack of oxygem kills, but the solution has nothing, nothing? to do with oxygen? If you say so.

These things kill. Is it by legal legislation that they kill? Is the penalty intrinsic or imposed? Intrinsic. The law of God is the same way. God does not have to execute the sinner. As I quoted above, God is not the executioner. Do you agree or disagree? Is the penalty of the law, execution by God?

Hm - where have I heard that line before? I KNOW!



Your comment and Satan's charges sound an awful lot alike.

Now tell me, how does God taking the consequences of sin on Himself allow us to be forgiven? Please, explain! I want the mechanism, in your view.

Can you disobey the law of gravity? No. But you can disobey the law of God.

But let's say you do manage to disobey the law of gravity. Can someone else impute to you their obedience? No. But that can and must be done for the law of God.

They're not quite the same kind of law. Your model is flawed.

Can you jump off a cliff? Yes. Will you die? Yes. Is the penalty intrinsic or imposed? Did God have to set in and kill you? No.

Legislated laws can be changed. Can the law of God be changed? Why not? After all, the penalty is imposed and thus it is arbitrary. If you are on a highway and exceeding the posted legal speed limit, is the penalty intrinsic or imposed? Speed limits are legislated and arbitrary. Imposed penalties are arbitrary. For murder, one country might have the death penalty. Another might have a maximum sentence of 20 years. The penalty is arbitrary. God's law not only will kill you for murder, but it will kill you for THINKING about murder. God created a pretty weak system is if just wrong thinking will cause death and not only of people, but of all life. Of course, sin does not kill plants and animals. It must be an imposed penalty.

If you don't know, Satan always mixes truth with lie. Which part of his statement, in your view, is the truth, and which is the lie?


Instead of my view, I'll give Ellen White's view:

"God's law has lost none of its force. In his sight sin is still a hateful thing. Because we have sinned, we must personally bear the condemnation of the law, unless some one else, one in whom no taint of sin can be found, will bear the condemnation in our behalf. Without a substitute, we have no hope of pardon and salvation. Although the sinner can not himself in any way evade the charge of disloyalty to God's law, he may by faith accept Christ as his personal Saviour, his suretyship, and be pardoned." {AU Gleaner, August 19, 1903 par. 3, 4

Besides this one, some other quotes that need to be explained by your view:

Christ died because there was no other hope for the transgressor. He might try to keep God's law in the future; but the debt which he had incurred in the past remained, and the law must condemn him to death. Christ came to pay that debt for the sinner which it was impossible for him to pay for himself. Thus, through the atoning sacrifice of Christ, sinful man was granted another trial. {FW 30.1}

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}

"Christ had come to give his life a ransom for many. As the Good Shepherd, he had laid down his life for the sheep. It was the righteousness of God to maintain his law by inflicting the penalty. This was the only way in which the law could be maintained, and pronounced holy, and just, and good. It was the only way by which sin could be made to appear exceeding sinful, and the honor and majesty of divine authority be maintained." {YI, August 4, 1898 par. 3}

HOW does god inflict the penalty of the law? Does sin cause death or does God cause death? Put all the EGW quotes together and you get the answer. Great Controversy: God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression.

God is not the executioner, is that not clear?

How does Christ's death atone for sin? Yes, nice words above, what what do they mean???

APL,

How did Jesus become "sin" if He never once sinned?

I see no way of explanation per your view to answer this one question.

Corollary questions to the above, which seem unanswerable per your view, include:

1) How did Jesus have sinful DNA if He was not a sinner?
- OR -
2) How did Jesus have perfect DNA if He became "sin" for us?

I would be surprised if you can provide a fully logical and inspired-quote supported answer to any of the above questions that would agree with your view.

Apart from your view, any of these questions is simple to answer.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.