This should be interesting:

(August 1, 2014 at 2:26 pm)RobbyPants Wrote: So, did God save our sins by subjecting his son/avatar/himself to torture?

Yes.

Again, the actions portrayed on the cross were a physical representation of the emotional/spiritual cost God went thought to pay for our sins. (So that we may have something of an understanding of the level of pain He went through.)

(August 1, 2014 at 2:54 pm)Drich Wrote: Again, the actions portrayed on the cross were a physical representation of the emotional/spiritual cost God went thought to pay for our sins. (So that we may have something of an understanding of the level of pain He went through.)

True. I can't wrap my head around what it means for a sinless being to be made sin. I can't grasp the magnitude of the loneliness of a being which had always known complete fellowship with others to now be alone. Another thing to consider is whether an omniscient being ever really forgets that pain.

BTW nice to see you again D!

(August 1, 2014 at 2:54 pm)Drich Wrote: Again, the actions portrayed on the cross were a physical representation of the emotional/spiritual cost God went thought to pay for our sins. (So that we may have something of an understanding of the level of pain He went through.)

What cost? Hell for two-and-a-half days seems to be about the only thing I can see that he "paid".

---

(August 1, 2014 at 3:03 pm)alpha male Wrote: True. I can't wrap my head around what it means for a sinless being to be made sin.

Well, whatever it was, he got better, from all the sins of the world; however, each person having only one person's worth of sin gets to stay in hell forever. This all seems rather unbalanced and nonsensical.

To be resurrected, glorified beyond comprehension, seated at the right hand of the creator of reality. Is. Not. A. Sacrifice.

Well Robie if you don't like the price paid for you, and it is certainly your choice.
You can pay it yourself.
But why would you choose that?

The principle is, the soul that sins shall die.
That was spelled out in the first Covenant and the animals that were killed (prior to roasting) were a shadow and type and a temporary "Covering" for sin until God established the New and final Covenant paid for in His blood.

If you think His sacrifice was bogus- go to the first paragraph above.

(August 1, 2014 at 3:32 pm)RobbyPants Wrote: What cost? Hell for two-and-a-half days seems to be about the only thing I can see that he "paid".

Why isn't that a cost?

Quote:Well, whatever it was, he got better, from all the sins of the world; however, each person having only one person's worth of sin gets to stay in hell forever. This all seems rather unbalanced and nonsensical.

Unbalanced, yes, but that's what I would expect, comparing God to man. It's nonsensical to expect the two to be identical.

---

(August 1, 2014 at 3:44 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: To be resurrected, glorified beyond comprehension, seated at the right hand of the creator of reality. Is. Not. A. Sacrifice.

Correct - those things aren't sacrifice. The sacrifice part was taking the sins of the world upon himself and dying on the cross.

(August 1, 2014 at 3:46 pm)professor Wrote: Well Robie if you don't like the price paid for you, and it is certainly your choice.
You can pay it yourself.

How can you sensibly do that if someone just paid the price for you.

I may not have wanted my manager to buy me a drink, but I cannot undo the transaction once its done, now can I?

Have a nuclear war, manufacturer killer cyborgs, build a time machine and then terminate Jesus?

Unless of course, you're arguing from a slippery slope that he didn't die for everyone's sins.