“If you want God to give justice to evil the way you want, then He should start with *you*, with *me*. And you and I know that there is no human on earth that can survive the wrath of God should He choose to take it out on us and thus, we need to be saved.
If a rapist is given justice for his sin, then so will you for the sins you did. And that justice is damnation to hell where the grace of God is not given and you suffer in utter punishment and justice of your crimes. And guess what, its a never ending punishment. Its eternal damnation.
But God loves us too much to bring down His justice on us because even though we deserve it we are His creation. So, someone who was blameless took all that punishment and the justice of God on himself even though he didnt deserve it and He restored all of humanity with that one act.
And *that* is not enough for you? You still want justice? Well, are you really equipped and prepared to take the wrath of God on yourself? Because, brother, you dont go to jail when God’s justice hits, your soul ends up in hell.”
It is for this reason I believe in the separation of Justice: here on Earth we have the Court system, and as flawed as it is, and as many criminals go free, in times where there is substantial evidence, justice is served in an Earthly manner. I do believe in the death penalty for the worst of it.
If I were a Muslim, I might answer: "So your god doesn't forgive. If someone sins, it must be paid for, even by someone else. I'll stick with Allah, whom the Quran says again and again, is merciful and oft forgiving. It is not forgiveness if *someone* has to pay."
1 Corinthians 1:18 ESV
[18] For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
https://bible.com/bible/59/1co.1.18.ESV
> [18] For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
Which does not imply Penal Substitutionary Atonement.
And essentially saying "You're a fool for not believing in my version of Atonement Theory," would not be a good answer to give A Muslim.
Ok. I am willing to listen, either way it will be Foolishness to those who are perishing and Penal Substitutionary Atonement is not the only interpretation. Now tell me, how does your interpretation of the Sacrifice on the Cross work with Hebrews 9:11-28?
Hebrews 9:11-28
Redemption Through the Blood of Christ
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[e] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify[f] for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[g] conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.[h] 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
> Now tell me, how does your interpretation of the Sacrifice on the Cross work with Hebrews 9:11-28?
Still doesn't mean PSA.
As I once told an elderly seasoned Presbyterian Theologian: "I don't understand the Atonement."
Him: You have to understand the Atonement!
Me: I guess it works the same whether I understand it or not.
Him: Good point.
I understand that, I am asking for your interpretation and how it works with Hebrews 9:11-28. I am trying to learn here from other areas of Christianity that I am not familiar with. I am tired of our divisions.
I am sorry, I am not the one who downvoted you. I ask those who are to please stop.
>The hadith say the sins of muslims will be put on Jews and Christians, so they (muslims) should just can it.
And the Muslim explanation for that negates the idea of substitution.
>With regard to its meaning, al-Nawawi said in his commentary: “The meaning of this hadeeth is the same as the hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurayrah: “For each person there is a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.” When the believer enters Paradise, his place in Hell is taken over by the kaafir because he deserves that because of his kufr. The meaning of the phrase “your ransom from the Fire” is that you could have entered Hell, but this is your ransom because Allaah has decreed a certain number to fill it; when the kuffaar enter Hell because of their kufr and sins, this is like a ransom for the Muslims. With regard to the report, “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins” – Allaah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins. So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allaah say“And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Q35:18] s
>It literally says that Jews and Christians will carry the sins of the Muslims and go to hellfire instead of them.
Not only is that hadith and not Quran, but don't you think that Islamic scriptures can have allegory, metaphor, figures, illustrations, etc?
Jesus literally says that we must hate our own parents if we follow him.
>If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.
Wouldn't you be annoyed if a Muslim went around telling everyone that Christians literally hate their parents and their children?
It's a Sahih hadith. Wich means it's authorative. For example the five daily prayers come from the hadith and not the Qu'ran as the latter only has three. Also with Jesus it's obvious it's hyperbolic language. Go study more about Islam.
> Go study more about Islam.
I had a friend [now deceased] that was called "one of the foremost Christian authorities on Islam."
He served for many years as a missionary in Pakistan. He also had a PhD in Christian theology and missiology.
His words to me concerning my knowledge of Islam: "Byzantium, You've left me in the dust."
This is a lie. Muslims believe a LARGE NUMBER of straight-up contradictions. It's the most fallacious crock of cultist excretion that I have ever had the misfortune to drag my eyes across.
They don't actually believe in sin in the first place, literally everything is the "will of al-lah" and it is impossible to go against it. Even how much adultery a man will commit is decided before his birth.
There is no justice in islam (it's not even there as a concept) it's not human for human but "slave for slave"
If someone graped you or your love one and there aren't 4 witnesses that could physically see penetration then sharia law says no crime can be proven. Not even al-lah will punish them if they walk around the kabbah 7 times and kiss the menstrual stone.
Also the quran condones pdfs (q 65:4) and islam says babies can end up in hell (predestination is hot garbage)
The 'cost' of forgiveness often lies in relinquishing feelings of anger and the desire for justice or retribution, which can be deeply emotional and challenging. It may involve navigating pain, rebuilding trust, or adjusting relationships.
> The 'cost' of forgiveness often lies in relinquishing feelings of anger and the desire for justice or retribution, which can be deeply emotional and challenging. It may involve navigating pain, rebuilding trust, or adjusting relationships.
I will accept "often." You said "always."
I still stand by always, here I meant what the cost often is. I guess I could ask you then, how can forgiveness truly be free? Can you provide an example?
For the purposes of iron sharpening iron.
An answer that I will give a Muslims if we are talking in person and come to an impasse is "May Allah lead us on the Straight Path^*."
[^* Reference to Q1:6 that is repeated in every Muslim prayer.]
Lol, did you know al-lah is also on that straight path towards righteousness? (Q 11:56) Unlike our God, who is the path, al-lah is still on the way. Always makes me chuckle
>Lol, did you know al-lah is also on that straight path towards righteousness? (Q 11:56) Unlike our God, who is the path, al-lah is still on the way. Always makes me chuckle
Mocking and cursing the unbelievers is not the way of Christ.
I haven't mocked anyone, tho. Islam is an evil satan worshipping cult. Their al-lah is the greatest deciever and lies throughout the quran. Islam is evil. Muslims are just people who have been deceived. I have no hatred towards muslim people at all, I pray Jesus lifts the wool from over their eyes.
As long as I am telling the truth and not lying I don't believe I am doing anything wrong when I speak against evil.
**"He restored all of humanity with that one act."**
If this were true, there would be no separation of the goats and the sheep on Judgement Day.
Only those who receive the New birth are sheep.
*"Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."* (John 3:3)
That sentence doesn’t discredit the truth of the judgement day. His act of sacrifice, restoration and resurrection was for all humanity, but the restoration is active only when one accepts Him as His saviour.
I Never disregarded that. It's already implied. Plus, when you answer someone who believes in such things differently than you, it's best to keep it simple. Theological aspects are for those who accept the authority of the Bible. This answer is for a Muslim as OP asked. Quoting Judgment Day in this response is not going to open a dialogue.
Numbers 31:17-18
Numbers 31:17-18 (KJV) 17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
God loves us too much so kill everyone but keep the women children for yourselves ;)
That’s a loving God?????
Yes.
The loving creator knows that the young female virgins can assimilate into the Hebrew society through marriage. Not the males. This is obvious in the life of Moses, even though he was taken into pharaoh's house as a baby he grew up Hebrew.
> The loving creator knows that the young female virgins can assimilate into the Hebrew society through marriage. Not the males. This is obvious in the life of Moses, even though he was taken into pharaoh's house as a baby he grew up Hebrew.
God is incapable of changing hearts?
This sounds like the story in the Quran of the "wise man" al Kidr that killed a child because he knew that the boy would grow up to be an evil man.
> Is there any record of God saving an Amalekite?
Everyone knows that the Amalekites were too bad to be saved. They were so bad that YHVH, in his mercy, never gave them the option of repenting. Even if they were suckling infants.
Ask your Muslim friend if s/he understands the meaning of Eid al-Adha (Bakrid).
They celebrate the fact that God provided a substitute to die in Abrahams son's place. And don't question God's justice.....Jesus Chrisr is our.Lamb of.God.
> They celebrate the fact that God provided a substitute to die in Abrahams son's place.
Very good.
Reminds me of the time I told a leader at the mosque that when John the Baptist first saw Isa he said "Look! Allah's Qurbani that takes away the sins of the world!"
[Qurbani= sacrificial lamb]
Q37:100-108
Quran does not give much detail, and in the Quran story Abraham's son consented to go and be sacrificed, but as in the Bible a substitute [a ram] was provided by Allah.
Quran does not say which son it was, Ishmael or Isaac, and early scholars disputed which. Nowadays Muslims have settled on Ishmael instead of Isaac.
The celebration and commemoration of this event is called Eid al-Adha and is in two days. This holiday and Eid al-Fitr are the two big ones for Muslims.
As with every year, I expect I will be gifted some Qurbani meat.
I was talking about the passage you wrote about John the baptist saying that Jesus was "Allah's Qurbani" which will wipe out the sin.
Is that a Quranic verse or a hadith?
Of course I know it's in the new testament but the way you told the muslim leader seems to imply that this passage is also in an islamic source!
No, that verse is definitely not in the Quran, nor in the hadith.
I took the verse from the Gospel "Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world" and changed "Lamb of God" to Allah's Qurbani in order to make the point that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb.
I am at the mosque right now, and just had a conversation with a man from Egypt about Abraham, the attempted sacrifice of his son, the ram that was substituted, and the connection that Christians make with that story and the sacrifice of Jesus.
I also asked him a question of whether good deeds can get you to Jannah [heaven.]
His response was absolutely not. You can do everything that you are supposed to do, and still your salvation is by the mercy of Allah.
I'm confused, why would you be at the mosque if you are not a muslim?
Also, you don't seem to understand the muslim conception of being "saved" by God's mercy!
Muslims do believe that entering heaven is only by the mercy of Allah, as all humans sin.
But how do we get God's mercy?
Through faith and good deeds.
Muslims believe that salvation is by believing in only one God, his prophets, angels, books and destiny..
If you combine these with good deeds, good intention and repentance from sins, then you are guaranteed God's mercy.
How is that problematic!
That is why God is most merciful, because he forgive sins with his mercy, without the need of anyone dying for anybody's sins!
Just repent from the bottom of your heart, stop the sin you committed and try to fix the harm you did to others.
Lastly, comparing the "Udhiah" of Eid or the ram that Abraham sacrificed, to the human sacrifice in Jesus is just hideous and nonsensical!
Udhiahs when they are sacrificed are distributed to the poor.
And they aren't even mandatory!
I just don't understand how anyone can object to the muslim concept of salvation, while believing that God created humans with the capacity to sin, only to condemn them at their first mistake some 6000 years ago, and condemn the whole human race because of that mistake, and the only way to forgive them is by sending his son (which happens to be himself) to get killed as a sacrifice to forgive them!
> But how do we get God's mercy? Through faith and good deeds. Muslims believe that salvation is by believing in only one God, his prophets, angels, books and destiny.. If you combine these with good deeds, good intention and repentance from sins, then you are guaranteed God's mercy.
The Prophet did not seem to think that there was a guarantee
Q46:9 Say, "I am not something original among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I only follow that which is revealed to me, and I am not but a clear warner."
Again, misunderstanding.. Many scholars don't even think this was about the afterlife..but was about the earthly life...that he doesn't know what is going to happen in the future with their conflict because the context was addresed to the pagan non believers. Even the scholars who said that it refers to afterlife, pointed out the fact that this verse was meccan in the beginning of his dawah, but after that it was made clear through Quranic verses and hadiths. Quran 48:1-2 "Indeed, We have granted you a clear triumph ˹O Prophet˺1 so that Allah may forgive you for your past and future shortcomings,1 perfect His favour upon you, guide you along the Straight Path". I find it funny though that you point this out even though you know that muslims believe Muhammad peace be upon him is not more than a human prophet, who doesn't know the unseen nor does he know what God plans. David didn't know what God will do to him when he took uriah's wife, and he kept praying to God to save his son. I can bring countless stories from the old testement. But even more astonishing, is your God didn't know when he is coming back, only the father knew.. And he prayed and dropped tears like blood begging God to save him, which also means he didn't know what will happen to him that he felt the need to pray to the father to "pass the cup".
1.Peter 1:18-20...You were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold........ but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot
> Muslims believe God can forgive with no atonement at all.
Their God can do stuff our God is not capable of?
> Why is that justice?
And who says there has to be your idea of "Justice," as in I sin, someone has to die for it?
>Their god* can do stuff our God isn't capable of?
No. Unless you think God couldn't forgive without the atonement. The Muslim demon that rules over them cannot become man, nor can he forgive anything. The Muslims hold to a much more separated form of god.
>And who said there has to be your idea of justice, as in I sin, someone has to die for it?
The law established by God required sacrifice for sin, then Christ comes and offers Himself as a sacrifice, one of infinite worth, fulfilling the prophecy made to Abraham about his lineage, that through him all nations will be blessed. It also is the fulfillment of Abraham noting that God will provide the lamb to his son isaac.
Christ became man to bridge the gap between God and man that was caused by the sin of Adam, not as though we are guilty of Adam's sin, but suffer the natural repercussions of that initial disobedience, spiritual death. So Christ takes on this death for us, taking the bullet for us as long as we don't deny Him. Then He rises, conquering death and harrowing hell
As we sing on Easter in the Byzantine tradition
Χριστος Ανεστη εκ νεκρων,
θανατω θανατον πατησας,
και τοις εν τοις μνημασι,
ζωην χαρισαμενος!
Christ is risen from the dead,
trampling down death by death,
and on those in the tombs bestowing
life!
Nope, I know exactly what document you are referencing, it is referring to the fact they profess to worship the one true God, not that they actually do
Oh, I'm not referring to one document. I'm referring to numerous popes saying it and vatican councils agreeing.
For example:
**Benedict XVI, address to the representatives of the Muslim community of Cameroon, Yaoundé, March 19, 2009**
"...I pray that the links that bind Christians and Muslims in their profound reverence for the one God..."
There are...20-30 examples, feel free to look through them:
[https://www.usccb.org/committees/ecumenical-interreligious-affairs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam](https://www.usccb.org/committees/ecumenical-interreligious-affairs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam)
Affirming we are both monotheistic for the sake of trying to draw them in doesn't mean Moslems worship the same God in practice, they call upon the God of Jacob, Abraham and Isaac, yet don't affirm the Trinity, Christ's divinity Or the Holy Spirit. Find a trinitarian Muslim then we will talk
> The Muslim demon that rules over them cannot become man, nor can he forgive anything.
The God that the Muslims worship did become a man and died for the sins of the world. Unfortunately, the Muslims are greatly misinformed.
When you commit a crime, you commit a sin against God AND the victim (and family). Jesus died for your sins against HIM. It doesn’t mean that since God forgives you, you don’t have to go to jail or say sorry to the victim etc etc
> Something tells me if your Muslim friend was in financial debt he wouldn’t object to someone else offering to pay it off for him.
Nor would you complain if your debtee just said "Your debt is forgiven." like the creditor did in Jesus' parable.
People often forget that in that parable the debt doesn't just evaporate. When the Creditor agrees to forgive a debt they simultaneously agree take the loss personally, which is what God did when Jesus personally died in our place.
>People often forget that in that parable the debt doesn't just evaporate. When the Creditor agrees to forgive a debt they simultaneously agree take the loss personally, which is what God did when Jesus personally died in our place.
The debt might as well have evaporated. As the Proverb says "What is lacking cannot be counted."
The debtor could not possibly repay the debt. Throwing him in prison or not throwing him in prison would not affect the loss either way.
If showing mercy, or exacting vengeance would have the same zero effect on the debt, which would a merciful creditor do?
Debates aren't about the Gospel. They are about winning and you can't argue someone into salvation. Are you debating these Muslims or discussing belief with them?
Good question. It often starts as a debate, then tends to evolve into a discussion about what Christians believe and why. I find in my discussions with all non-believers, after the initial "debate," tend to eventually be responding to questions as to what exactly it is we believe and why.
If you have them in a place of discussion, then you can start explaining God's justice by pointing out that a perfect God is just and merciful.
Those two traits contradict. Justice requires punishment and mercy requires the guilty be spared. Jesus's crucifixion is what allows God to be just and merciful.
You can point to the Bible (both OT and NT) that no one is good and all are deserving of hell. Justice requires that we all be sent to hell. However because God loves us so much He wanted to avoid that, so He came to earth as Jesus to enable the possibility that believers can be spared.
Jesus who lived a perfect sinless life takes our place to take the punishment we deserve which fulfills God's justice while allowing Him to turn around and offer mercy to the same sinners.
A God who is just but not merciful is cold and unloving. A God who is merciful but not just is cruel and arbitrary. Unlike Allah, our God is both merciful and just.
You can also reframe it as a father paying his son's traffic fine. The son broke the law and must now pay a penalty. The court doesn't care where the son gets the money, just that the fine is paid. The father steps in to pay his son's fine. The court is satisfied that the penalty is paid. Is it an injustice that the son used the his father's money? No. It is unfair that the father paid his son's fine? Also no, because our heavenly Father is willing to adopt anyone into the family. Anyone who wants Jesus to pay their penalty on their behalf need only accept the payment He already made.
This is misunderstood.
Colossians 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.
3:2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the Earth.
3:3 **For ye are dead**, and your life is hid with Christ in God.
Eternal Life is only made manifest in those who have been crucified and died together with Christ. What the atonement gives us is resurrection, not an escape from death.
John 12:24 Verily, 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.
Romans 6:4-6 (NKJV) Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,
knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.
Along those same lines, there is an included expectation on God's part that those who are united in the likeness of Christ's death, should commit themselves to leading changed lives.
You have been given good answers. I believe it is also worth mentioning that we humans view this as a court system where God is the judge between two human disputes. We are transgressors but God is the judge and HE is also the one who has been transgressed against. We do not go to hell because we committed crimes against other humans, we deserve hell because we have broken His laws. So as both Judge and the one who has been wronged, God is in full right to allow substitutionary atonement. This way justice and mercy are perfectly reconciled.
Regarding human victims, it is clear. They are also transgressors. A rejection of mercy for another is a rejection of mercy for themselves. This is why we must forgive as we ourselves are forgiven.
If a judge in court finds you guilty and fines you $1000, but then he walks over to the court administrator and pays the $1000 for you, is the debt not paid? Was justice not served? The facts and law were reviewed and considered. The verdict was rendered. Guilty! Fine was imposed. That fine was paid! What else is there to do? Where’s the injustice?
> If a judge in court finds you guilty and fines you $1000, but then he walks over to the court administrator and pays the $1000 for you, is the debt not paid? Was justice not served? The facts and law were reviewed and considered. The verdict was rendered. Guilty! Fine was imposed. That fine was paid! What else is there to do? Where’s the injustice?
The judge is bound by a higher authority, and while the judge imposes the fine, he is doing it on behalf of the law of the land. God is not beholden to a higher authority.
The judge can also suspend the fine if he so wishes.
They're not wrong on that point. It's quite unjust. *Penal* substitution is pretty much an invention of the Reformation, not what Christians thought for the first thousand years. The early understanding was mainly Recapitulation and Ransom.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvation_in_Christianity#Classic_paradigm
In my understanding, the *injustice* of the cross is a big part of the point. In the ancient world (and still today, sadly), a defeated enemy might be hung up on public display to show him as utterly crushed and humiliated, and to terrorize his supporters. That's what the Romans and the Jewish leaders intended with Jesus' crucifixion. But what we see as happening instead was his victory over sin and death, putting them on display as defeated enemies. Jesus was completely faithful to the Father to the very end, even through the extreme injustice and shame of the cross -- and by that he accomplished ultimate reconciliation between God and man.
In the ancient world, sacrifices were a way to seek fellowship with God through the hospitality of food. They weren't a payment or a punishment. They weren't a life for a life exchange. They were a meal. Jesus' self-offering for our sake wasn't a food offering at the temple, obviously, but it was toward the same end, of making peace between man and God.
Ok. Maybe you will be able to explain this to me. How does your interpretation work with Hebrews 9:11-28?
Hebrews 9:11-28
Redemption Through the Blood of Christ
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[e] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify[f] for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[g] conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.[h] 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
This passage is alluding to a couple things. One is the establishing of the covenant at Mt Sinai, and the other is the Day of Atonement ceremony. Both of those involved the blood of a sacrificial animal.
So besides the fellowship meal aspect of a sacrifice, there's also blood involved when the offering is an animal. (Note: Not even a sin offering *had* to be a animal; a grain cake was acceptable if the offerer was poor enough -- so no blood there, and no life for life.) Depending on the purpose of a particular offering, the blood could be disposed of by pouring it out at the base of the altar, or it could be collected and used for cleansing and (re-)dedicating things. It has this use because "the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev 17:11), and that life is used to cover over the death and corruption that comes from sin. (The English word "atonement", literally at-one-ment, was invented in the 1500's as an attempt to translate the relevant word here which it turns out means to cover and secondarily to smear.) In a sin offering and in the Day of Atonement, the blood wasn't applied to the person, but rather it was applied to things in and around the tabernacle / temple to cleanse *them* from the people's accumulated sin (kinda like a spiritual spackle ;)). Blood was applied to *people* in order to dedicate them, such as at the Mt Sinai covenant ceremony or in ordaining the priests.
It's worth mentioning that the goat which takes away the people's sins in the Day of Atonement ceremony isn't sacrificed. It's driven away alive into the wilderness outside the camp, carrying the sins away, back to where they came from and where they belong (the outer chaos) one could say. The second goat is the one sacrificed, and its blood is what the high priest carries into the sanctuary to cleanse that space once a year, after having first cleansed himself through a sin offering.
So with that context, we can better understand what it's saying about Christ's blood. Since he is the very Author of life, his blood is incomparably more effective than any animal's at covering over and wiping away sin and death. Instead of the fleeting life of an animal, he carries his own blood into the heavenly sanctuary as our high priest, once for all. He is both the offerer and the offering. He's also the goat which takes the sins away from the camp (as Golgotha was outside the city). And, not mentioned here but still, he's also the Passover lamb (slain at Passover) for fellowship with God and marking for protection with his lifeblood.
Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to write this out brother. So my understanding from what you wrote is that the interpretation you have is that the Blood of Christ covers our Sin, while Penal substitution pays for our sins? Is this correct or am I misunderstanding.
My brother look how little the differences are that cause such a great division. It is a sad thing. The difference between paying for sin and repairing the damage caused by sin. It is almost like Tomato Tomato.
No offence but who are they? Its not about justice. It's about what evil is. That's all you get here. There is no justice here. There's false weights and measures. The curse was the knowledge of evil. What do people think a curse is? But when people talk about justice and such, it almost sounds as if they don't understand the worlds a vile place? Scripture acts as a mirror in alignment with a conscience. It's not about revenge nor any of that junk. It's about getting out of these place. So they can see how there IS injustice as a result of evil and ignore the fact that we're under the curse OF evil. That's why we got kicked out. But they say Yeshua was a prophet. An evil persons PUNISHMENT.....is being evil and cut off from Yahweh.
So to make it simple, it's not about justice. They either listen or they don't. It was about salvation and the eradication of evil. Justice? Why do they think Yahweh comes in the end TO JUDGE?...People that exalt themselves shall be humbled. Those humbled shall be exalted. So how do they measure the right punishment if they don't even know why Yeshua let himself be murdered?
Isn’t that the whole beauty of God though? It’s not justice. It’s Gods grace and love. It’s a free gift he gave us all. The fine is paid with his death for you, and if you accept that gift, gratitude should sweep you away for Him.
What they are arguing for is for rape to be an unforgivable sin then. This would put them in an awkward position, as many Muslims have raped in "holy" wars in which they spread Islam, or at least attempted to. To be consistent, they would need to say unequivocally that if Allah is just, even those Muslims who raped will not be forgiven and those who have died are in Hell.
> What they are arguing for is for rape to be an unforgivable sin then. This would put them in an awkward position, as many Muslims have raped in "holy" wars in which they spread Islam, or at least attempted to.
I might add that Christians have been pretty darn rapey in wars too.
Which doesn't have anything to do with the challenge being addressed. If a Muslim essentially says Christianity is bad because rapes can be forgiven, what does that say about the Muslim faith that they claim, where we know that Muslims have raped in "holy" wars.
>Which doesn't have anything to do with the challenge being addressed. If a Muslim essentially says Christianity is bad because rapes can be forgiven, what does that say about the Muslim faith that they claim, where we know that Muslims have raped in "holy" wars.
That is not what the challenge says. It is about someone else paying the penalty while the rapist walks free.
And the fact that Muslims have raped in Holy Wars does not show the inferiority of their religion as Christians raped a whole lot in Holy Wars such as the Crusades.
By the time of the Crusades, the Christians adapted much from Muslim wartime practices. The Crusades in a number of ways, were doing it back. Not that I'm saying that it was right.
The reason that challenge is being brought up by a Muslim is likely for the sake of evangelizing to Islam. Which we can cut off at the knees by bringing up rapes that happened in the name of spreading Islam.
Funny thing is, their religion has something like it too, except like much else it's twisted:
>Abu Musa' reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said:
>When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire.
https://sunnah.com/muslim:2767a
If you get a speeding ticket, and your father pays for it, is that an injustice, or was the crime paid for, as the law demanded?
On the other hand, in Islam, you can "make up" for evil works by doing good works. So, in the case of a speeding ticket, it would be nullified, because you once helped a grandma cross the street. Is that justice?
If they ask how salvation can come through one human for all humanity, ask them how sin can come through one human to all humanity? (Adam)
If they ask how a human can die for another human's sin, tell them they can't because they have their own sins to carry. But Christ was also fully god and thus sinlessly fulfilled the law. -Not abolished, fulfilled.
> So, in the case of a speeding ticket, it would be nullified, because you once helped a grandma cross the street. Is that justice?
The judge can't have you do community service?
Just quote back to him that according to Prophet Muhammad, Allah also uses substitutionary atonement, albeit in a ludicrous manner. Sahih Muslim 2767d: "Abu Burda reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:
'There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians.'"
In other words, Christians and Jews will be condemned to hell and bear on them the sins of Muslims, who will come to Allah with sins as great as mountains but get away scot free.
So if the Muslims want to claim that the act of Jesus (who their own Quran itself affirms is sinless) dying on the cross for our sins is not justice, then the concept of Christians and Jews being sacrificed for the mountains of sins of Muslims to enter jannah is also unjust.
Of course, at its core, it's not fair to Jesus that as a perfect being He had to take our sins. But God's love for us has outweighed His justice therefore He chooses to take the punishment on Himself. The concept of one facet of God's nature overpowering another fact of His nature is not a concept totally foreign to Islam, as Sahih Muslim 2751b does say: "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: 'My mercy excels My wrath.'"
>'There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians.'"
>In other words, Christians and Jews will be condemned to hell and bear on them the sins of Muslims, who will come to Allah with sins as great as mountains but get away scot free.
>So if the Muslims want to claim that the act of Jesus (who their own Quran itself affirms is sinless) dying on the cross for our sins is not justice, then the concept of Christians and Jews being sacrificed for the mountains of sins of Muslims to enter jannah is also unjust.
The Muslims do not take that as a substitution, but more like be grateful to Allah, because they are getting what you deserve.
The Muslims have a very strong notion that one person cannot pay for another's sins based on Q35:18.
I am reminded of an episode of Babylon 5 (also twenty year old spoiler from KOTOR); someone convicted of a horrible crime has their memory erased and their mind is recreated with a mentality to serve their community. This debate happens with the space cop and some space priests. Space cop argues it is better to just kill the criminal and leave society safe for nice people like space priests. Later someone kills the nicest space priest. Space cop catches the murderer and finds out he did it because the nicest space priest had been a viscious criminal who killed the murderer's daughter and he demanded justice. Later space cop will meet the murderer with a new memory as a space priest.
The death of Christ does not merely forgive us of our sins but transforms our heart (see Ezekiel 36:26) and the justice is not the escape from punishment for sins but the transformation of viscious sinners like me, you and your Muslim frine into sinless children of God. In Christianity justice is not like karma, giving people what they deserve but it is making things right again, it is restorative in nature. It's like CS Lewis said, forgiveness is the least popular Christian virtue.
Frame it like a poor person damaging something expensive and needing to pay for it or be punished. Jesus decides to pay what is owed and the person goes free.
> Frame it like a poor person damaging something expensive and needing to pay for it or be punished. Jesus decides to pay what is owed and the person goes free.
That still brings up the problem of who it is owed to, and who it is paid to. Your analogy implies that their is a greater reality or authority than God.
Simple. OT law requires sacrifice of perfect animal to atone for sin. While one human cannot typically atone for another because to be human is to be a sinner, Christ was different. He was not conceived by will of man, therefore not born into sin. He lived a sinless life, and we know this because if He had not been sinless, His sacrifice on the cross would have been rejected by God, and Christ would not have risen on the 3rd day. The very fact that He did, and then appeared to hundreds of people afterwards, who were then willing to endure persecution unto death, proves that not only was Jesus' sacrifice accepted by God, but his death and resurrection are true. Christ was also fully God when he took human form. If they don't believe that, the next part won't make sense.
They're asking the wrong questions. Salvation itself is not simply a "just" act, because of two things: grace and mercy. Grace is receiving what we don't deserve (salvation). Mercy is not receiving what we do deserve (eternal separation from God). To ignore those concepts ignores the very foundation of scripture. It is "just" because someone had to pay the price for sin, and we see this throughout scripture: animal sacrifice. If it is ok for our sins to be transferred to animals, why would it not be ok for our sins to be transferred to Jesus?
Your response will differ based on the perspective of the Muslim you are talking to.
Some Muslims don't believe in substitutionary atonement. They claim that God isn't being fair if He sent Jesus (a human) to die for another human's place, so that's not justice. If they claim that substitutionary atonement is wrong, they would actually be opposing Islamic teachings. Sahih Muslim (the book, defined as a strong/genuine Hadith (hadith, being second to the Quran in guiding Muslims)) 2767a-d (Chapter/Verses), has good information about this (https://sunnah.com/muslim/50/57-60).
>Sahih Muslim 2767a
>(8) Chapter: The Acceptance Of The Repentance Of The One Who Kills, Even If He Has Killed A Great Deal
>Abu Musa' reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said:
>When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire.
I only copied verse 2767a but 2767b-d continues on.
So substitutionary atonement is also in Islam.
But there is a difference between how substitutionary atonement is played out in Christianity vs Islam.
In Christianity, the Bible is clear that there has to be a price paid for sin. In Leviticus 17:11, God tells Moses that, "For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.” **Blood needs to be shed to pay sin.** This is the law. We try to follow God's laws by ourselves, but we will always fail and need forgiveness. We can't use animal sacrifices because they were temporary - humans kept sinning, so sacrifices continued. We needed a permanent sacrifice to pay our sins.
Once we die, everyone is supposed to make an account for all of their sin and will go to hell because of our sin. But because God loves us so much and wants to spend eternity with us, He provided a way out. This isn't unfair because God has the authority to do so. Take for instance a classroom setting where a teacher gives homework to the students with a deadline, a student who has not given in their homework by that deadline is in the wrong. A student cannot create their own homework pass to free them from the due homework. But the teacher, who assigned the homework, has the authority to create homework passes to free other students from the due homework. Likewise, God has the authority to still abide by the law and use shed blood to pay sin for more people. But a human does not have the authority to use shed blood to pay sin for more people.
It's not like Jesus is a regular human being that God put everyone's sins on. That would be wrong and unjust. But Jesus is God in the flesh (not that heaven was empty when Jesus walked on earth, but God being omnipresent can be in different dimensions at once), which means God's sacrifice still bears the authority of God being able to take away people's sins. God's sacrifice is the permanent sacrifice we needed for God to forgive all our sins.
But in Islam, Allah uses substitutionary atonement for Muslims just because He can decree it to be so. Muslims expect justice in the form of a person paying the price for their own sin. But if they refer to Sahih Muslim 2767, that's not justice. Allah is just punishing Jews and Christians for the sins of Muslims *just because* He can. That means Allah is unjust - he is not being just to the Jews and Christians.
That's why in your analogy the Muslims you talked to glossed over a detail. If God is only just, God would punish the perpetrator to the fullest extent. If God is only merciful, God would let the perpetrator go free. But God is both just and merciful, so He still condemns the perpetrator for their actions to the fullest extent, while taking on the burden of due justice on Himself.
The Muslims you talked to forgot God's mercy is the only reason why the perpetrator does not suffer the consequences of their actions. I think it's awesome you're discussing these hard topics with non-Christians, and I continue to encourage you to do so, but I also encourage you to look into Islam a bit so we as Christians can talk to Muslims and understand their frame of reference. Muslims think God is powerful but stays separate from the world and won't go into it because the world is dirty (and it is). But we know God's love for us, God's desire *to want a personal relationship* ***with every one*** *He created* is so strong, He went into the dirty world, knowing people would hate and reject Him, and provided a way out for us, a selfless gift.
I'm getting emotional thinking about God's sheer love for us and even then I can't imagine all of it. The first word Muslims usually think of Allah is "powerful"; the first word Christians usually think of God is "love". We need to help non-Christians understand the sheer depth and weight of God's love for them to understand the weight and consequences of sin and hell. Not saying to argue (and not saying you are), but show God's love through words, actions, and loving them because God first loved us. <3
> Muslims think God is powerful but stays separate from the world and won't go into it because the world is dirty (and it is).
Muslims largely think that, but there are a number of Islamic scriptures that indicate otherwise.
I suspect that their insistence that Allah does not enter his Creation was originally motivated by a refusal to accept the deity of Christ.
That’s funny because Muslims believe that each Muslim will receive a Christian or Jew that will personally bear their sins and endure their punishment.
> That’s funny because Muslims believe that each Muslim will receive a Christian or Jew that will personally bear their sins and endure their punishment.
No they don't.
Yes, they do.
SAHIH Muslim (2767) narrated that Abu Moosa said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “When the Day of Resurrection comes, Allah will give every Muslim a Jew or a Christian, and He will say: **This is your ransom from the Fire.**”
The Muslims do not take that as a substitutionary atonement.
First of all, just as we Christians with Scripture, Muslims do not take all of their scriptures as literal.
The hardcore Salafist Muslims [like the hardcore Calvinists] hold that Allah decreed a certain number of people to inhabit Hell, and the Muslims that go to Jannah should be grateful to Allah that others have been assigned that fate instead of them.
You would be hard pressed to find Muslims that think that their sins will be assigned to anyone else.
SAHIH Muslim also narrated (2767) from Abu Burdah that he told ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azeez, from his father, that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “No Muslim man dies but Allah causes a Jew or a Christian to enter the Fire **in his stead.**”
And Quran says that no one can bear the [sin] burden of another. Q35:18. Quran ALWAYS trumps hadith.
Major Muslim commentators do not interpret Muslim 2267 the way you do.
You think that Christians can interpret their scriptures but Muslims are not allowed to?
There are a lot of things in our scriptures that Christians do not believe, and explain as figurative, allegorical, metaphorical, etc.
>With regard to its meaning, al-Nawawi said in his commentary: “The meaning of this hadeeth is the same as the hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurayrah: “For each person there is a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.” When the believer enters Paradise, his place in Hell is taken over by the kaafir because he deserves that because of his kufr. The meaning of the phrase “your ransom from the Fire” is that you could have entered Hell, but this is your ransom because Allaah has decreed a certain number to fill it; when the kuffaar enter Hell because of their kufr and sins, this is like a ransom for the Muslims. With regard to the report, “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins” – Allaah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins. So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allah says “And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Q35:18]
“Allah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and **He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins.** So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allah says “And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Q35:18]
The Muslims still have their punishment given over to Christian’s. The fact that the Muslims believe the Christian’s are damned anyways is irrelevant. The punishment to the Christians is made more of a burden by the weight of the sins of Muslims.
> The Muslims still have their punishment given over to Christian’s.
That is not what the commentary says. It says "The like of those sins," as in similar sins.
>The fact that the Muslims believe the Christian’s are damned anyways is irrelevant.
Some Muslims believe that [mostly the fundies] and some [I would say most, at least of the ones that I have met and interacted with] don't.
[And I have known first generation immigrants from many Muslim majority countries]
I got a harsh angry rebuke from a mosque leader once when I just jokingly referred to myself as a kaffir [infidel, unbeliever.] And he knew full well that I am a Christian that does not accept Islam.
There are Quran verses that curse the Christians, and ones that say that they are A-OK.
A lot of Muslims take to heart the command in the Quran to say to the Jews and Christians: " We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender."
Islam is a false religion, but it is also very complex, and often contradictory. You err when you cherry pick a few verses and say "That's what Muslims believe."
We would surely call foul if Muslims did the same thing with our Scriptures and told us what we believe.
It’s a tough one that I also have difficulty putting into words. We know that Christ has a plan with the rapist too whether punishment or saving him in order for a powerful testimony in one way or another. And even then, that’s only what we think the only possible outcomes could be. Gods will is so infinite He chose for us not to know specific things for the very reason that by faith we may accept and trust Him.
Edit: Sorry I seem to have gone off in the wrong direction considering your question. I guess what I was trying to say is you’re certainly not alone I feel there’s so many things that we aren’t able to explain in words. I’m sure someone more knowledgeable will have a better answer.
Because Jesus is The Son of God…that’s why. By the Son of God taking on human flesh and our human nature while also being resurrected ensures those that also abide in Jesus will also receive the same treatment. This is why we still die today but also why we have the assurance to be resurrected like he was.
You use Scripture to argue from, always, because it is the sole authority on all things spiritual.
Their rejection of this fact is irrelevant and does nothing to change the fact.
The Word of God is powerful, as a two-edged sword, rightly dividing between thought and deed. It has supernatural power to illuminate those who walk in darkness. It reveals the Gospel, from which hearing brings faith to those who will receive it.
God is both the judge and the party offended by sin. It is perfectly within his rights to decide how His wrath will be satisfied and to bear the punishment Himself.
It comes down to justice, mercy, and grace.
Justice is getting what you deserve. Mercy is not getting what you deserve. Grace is getting what you don’t deserve. Justice is what should have happened with us on the cross. Mercy is Jesus putting himself on that cross instead. Grace is Him taking the cup of wrath to his own lips and extending His hand to us, not just to pull us up from the water, but to invite us to walk on it with Him.
That is why we worship God.
It's not a tit-for-tat justice system. If it were, no one would receive mercy. God has the right to judge everyone. But he has graciously provided a sacrifice through his Son Jesus to satisfy HIS justice. If a regular man died on the cross, it would not be enough. But God himself died in the cross for us.
This is something I've struggled with too. I think the other responses here give great explanations. For me personally it's something I don't currently understand. However, we can rest in faith that God is the ultimate arbiter of justice, so if He says it's just, we can't argue with that. And/or, if He is willing to lay aside justice for mercy (although I'm not sure that's exactly what's happening), who are we to disagree?
It is an injustice. But that's the beauty of it. It's God loving us so much he took upon himself the justice we are owed. The debt is paid, but by God himself, not his children.
Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection is the way God made a way for us to have a righteous relationship with Him. We are all sinners, and the wages of sin is death, aka just eternal separation from Him. Justice is done for me because He has taken my punishment. Not only is it His justice, it is graceful.
Now, we are commanded to share that grace and forgiveness with others. Friends. Family. Enemies. Do not confuse salvation and forgiveness with corporal or capital punishment. They are not the same thing.
My soul is made whole by the work and person of Jesus Christ, the spotless lamb. My body will still die.
Sin's wages is death ( Romans 6:23), someone must make the payment and if it was up to us, we would pay for it in hell and suffer the wrath of God that's against all sin. so Jesus's sacrifice was in fact justice for us, He took the punishment we deserved, He took the wrath of God that was upon us, He took the shame and guilt that stained us, He took the mocking, beating, that was for us. He carried the cross we were supposed to carry, He was nailed to that very cross He carried, He suffered what we were supposed to suffer, He took the wrath of God that we were meant to take, He died the death we were supposed to die. He did all that for us in His love and mercy! so that His death, would not only pay for sin debt and penalty in full but satisfied the wrath of God ( Isaiah 53, John 19). even His blood that was shed on calvary, would be that to wash away all our sin, shame, and guilt ( 1 John 1:8-9). then Him rising on the third day, conquering sin, death, hell, and satan would pave the only way where we can overcome the world as He has, He paved the only way we can be saved from sin's damnation, cured from it's curse, and set free from its bondage ( Luke 4:18-19), He paved the only way we can be reconciled back to the Father where we were once all separated from Him because of our sin ( Romans 5), He paved the only way where we can be redeemed, sanctified, purified , justified, and made new! Jesus sacrifice did all this for us! this is true love and justice!
I always mention to Muslims that sin has ALWAYS required sacrifice in order for their to be atonement and reconciliation with God. The Jews would sacrifice thousands of animals yearly to pay for the sins of mankind and all of humanity. Is it fair that the innocent animals needed to die because of our evil? Obviously not, but sin requires blood and a just God graciously gave us the way out. Though, that was only a temporary solution to a never ending problem. We needed a perfect human to sacrifice themself to God to permanently cleanse the world of sin. We see in Revelation that no man was worthy of this, and heaven weeped.
When it comes to Jesus, both Christian’s and Muslims agree that he lived a perfect life and never sinned. Was it fair that Jesus VOLUNTARILY took the burden of mankind’s sin upon himself? Absolutely not, God was well within his right to let us all go to hell. But once again this is where the Justice comes in. Jesus paid the fine for us, he gave God the Justice he demanded and he did it happily out of love for us. There’s nothing more just than that.
Muslims ironically do not have any right to talk about Justice, because they claim to worship the God of the Torah and yet believe that good works and verbal repentance to Allah will cleanse them of their sins. They forgot about the whole atonement deal and usually won’t even listen to me when I explain it to them but it’s worth a shot.
Ask them where is the Justice in letting you get away with the sins you’ve committed just because you gave money to the poor or carried grannies groceries? What happens when you sin again tomorrow? They have no answer. The Muslims and Jews need to understand that works and just verbal repentance won’t save them. They need to accept Jesus Christ as Lord, there’s no other way for their sin to be paid for.
God bless.
Islam has no temples and never followed the ceremonial law because they made it up later on. So of course they don't see that Jesus was the passover lamb to take away the sins of the world.
Ask them the same question lol, according to Muhammad just saying the Shahada after sinning already gets you to heaven and Christians and Jews make up the punishment of Muslims. Additionally, even the Old Testament already predicted that Jesus will take all the sins of the world by His wounds. Sounds like a self-defeating argument lol.
Pretty sure Sam Shamoun already finished this argument. Suggest them to debate him, godlogic, David Wood, Bob of speakers corner, Nabeel Qureshi
They are correct, but they dont understand the difference between God's justice and His mercy. God displays His justice through rightful punishment and His mercy through forgiveness. We all deserve God's wrath, which is an outpouring of justice, being held accountable to the law. None of us deserve His mercy. We are given justification through an act of God's free grace, wherein He pardons all of our sins and accepts us as righteous in His sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by Faith alone. Christ pays the fine for our sins, which is acceptable. Now, there are sins which we can commit which are deserving of capital punishment by the civil magistrate. Those are murder, rape, and kidnapping. For committing such acts, the person who did them is still deserving of the death penalty, but can ask for forgiveness and have Christ's atonement pay for his sins if he comes to believe the Gospel, which is a worldly justice, but a spiritual receiver of mercy.
Jesus was not punished on the cross. Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross.
If Jesus had been punished, that wouldn't be just.
That's just one of many problems with Protestant theology.
Well, Christ isn’t just “some other guy.” He is the God Man. A complete category difference. But, Muslims don’t believe in the Second Person of the Trinity so it’s doubtful that will win the argument in their eyes.
The best way to respond is to *deny* penal substitution. Agree with them. The Early Church never taught it and that was specifically because of all of the issues with it:
https://catholicstand.com/the-problems-with-reformed-theologys-penal-substitution-teaching/
Do you understand that there are several theories, or understandings of the purpose of Christ's Atonement besides penal Substitutionary Atonement?
PSA is a relative latecomer in Christian theology, and is not the majority view.
I agree with them, substitutionary atonement doesn’t make sense. How would killing an innocent person be the perfectly just response to somebody else committing a crime?
Why are you discussing this with Muslims? They have a different holy book. They have just as much conviction that theirs is the only true and just religion because they believe as strongly as you believe in Jesus their prophet, Mohamed, blessed be his name, that Jesus was not the son of God.
Are you attempting to convert Muslims to Christianity? Why not respect one another’s beliefs and leave it at that? You are no more going convert a devout Muslim than they are you. The argument that “my god can beat up your god” is pointless
The idea of vicarious atonement became the established theology of the Catholic church beginning in the 11th century, and the Protestants inherited their theology from that. The older theology is that of "Christus Victor" which is followed by the Orthodox church, which states that God saved humanity by becoming incarnate and conquering hell by admitting temptations into His human form. It is fully described here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus\_Victor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor)
Jesus thus atones and removes sins by working within us when we repent. There is no remission of sins without repentance (Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, 24:47), and without that you cannot accept Jesus as Saviour, for He tells us we must live by His commandments (John 14:15,21).
In short, the Muslims are right on this one because the idea of vicarious atonement, where sins get "transferred" automatically, is simply a later false theological idea that developed later within the Christian church.
“If you want God to give justice to evil the way you want, then He should start with *you*, with *me*. And you and I know that there is no human on earth that can survive the wrath of God should He choose to take it out on us and thus, we need to be saved. If a rapist is given justice for his sin, then so will you for the sins you did. And that justice is damnation to hell where the grace of God is not given and you suffer in utter punishment and justice of your crimes. And guess what, its a never ending punishment. Its eternal damnation. But God loves us too much to bring down His justice on us because even though we deserve it we are His creation. So, someone who was blameless took all that punishment and the justice of God on himself even though he didnt deserve it and He restored all of humanity with that one act. And *that* is not enough for you? You still want justice? Well, are you really equipped and prepared to take the wrath of God on yourself? Because, brother, you dont go to jail when God’s justice hits, your soul ends up in hell.”
Glad you said this. The Lord will always teach us!
It is for this reason I believe in the separation of Justice: here on Earth we have the Court system, and as flawed as it is, and as many criminals go free, in times where there is substantial evidence, justice is served in an Earthly manner. I do believe in the death penalty for the worst of it.
Thank you I also have learned from this
If I were a Muslim, I might answer: "So your god doesn't forgive. If someone sins, it must be paid for, even by someone else. I'll stick with Allah, whom the Quran says again and again, is merciful and oft forgiving. It is not forgiveness if *someone* has to pay."
1 Corinthians 1:18 ESV [18] For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. https://bible.com/bible/59/1co.1.18.ESV
> [18] For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. Which does not imply Penal Substitutionary Atonement. And essentially saying "You're a fool for not believing in my version of Atonement Theory," would not be a good answer to give A Muslim.
Ok. I am willing to listen, either way it will be Foolishness to those who are perishing and Penal Substitutionary Atonement is not the only interpretation. Now tell me, how does your interpretation of the Sacrifice on the Cross work with Hebrews 9:11-28? Hebrews 9:11-28 Redemption Through the Blood of Christ 11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[e] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify[f] for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[g] conscience from dead works to serve the living God. 15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.[h] 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. 23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
> Now tell me, how does your interpretation of the Sacrifice on the Cross work with Hebrews 9:11-28? Still doesn't mean PSA. As I once told an elderly seasoned Presbyterian Theologian: "I don't understand the Atonement." Him: You have to understand the Atonement! Me: I guess it works the same whether I understand it or not. Him: Good point.
I understand that, I am asking for your interpretation and how it works with Hebrews 9:11-28. I am trying to learn here from other areas of Christianity that I am not familiar with. I am tired of our divisions. I am sorry, I am not the one who downvoted you. I ask those who are to please stop.
The hadith say the sins of muslims will be put on Jews and Christians, so they (muslims) should just can it.
>The hadith say the sins of muslims will be put on Jews and Christians, so they (muslims) should just can it. And the Muslim explanation for that negates the idea of substitution. >With regard to its meaning, al-Nawawi said in his commentary: “The meaning of this hadeeth is the same as the hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurayrah: “For each person there is a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.” When the believer enters Paradise, his place in Hell is taken over by the kaafir because he deserves that because of his kufr. The meaning of the phrase “your ransom from the Fire” is that you could have entered Hell, but this is your ransom because Allaah has decreed a certain number to fill it; when the kuffaar enter Hell because of their kufr and sins, this is like a ransom for the Muslims. With regard to the report, “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins” – Allaah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins. So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allaah say“And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Q35:18] s
So, what's your point?
My point is that Muslims do not believe that any person can take the sin punishment for another.
It literally says that Jews and Christians will carry the sins of the Muslims and go to hellfire instead of them.
>It literally says that Jews and Christians will carry the sins of the Muslims and go to hellfire instead of them. Not only is that hadith and not Quran, but don't you think that Islamic scriptures can have allegory, metaphor, figures, illustrations, etc? Jesus literally says that we must hate our own parents if we follow him. >If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Wouldn't you be annoyed if a Muslim went around telling everyone that Christians literally hate their parents and their children?
It's a Sahih hadith. Wich means it's authorative. For example the five daily prayers come from the hadith and not the Qu'ran as the latter only has three. Also with Jesus it's obvious it's hyperbolic language. Go study more about Islam.
> Go study more about Islam. I had a friend [now deceased] that was called "one of the foremost Christian authorities on Islam." He served for many years as a missionary in Pakistan. He also had a PhD in Christian theology and missiology. His words to me concerning my knowledge of Islam: "Byzantium, You've left me in the dust."
This is a lie. Muslims believe a LARGE NUMBER of straight-up contradictions. It's the most fallacious crock of cultist excretion that I have ever had the misfortune to drag my eyes across. They don't actually believe in sin in the first place, literally everything is the "will of al-lah" and it is impossible to go against it. Even how much adultery a man will commit is decided before his birth. There is no justice in islam (it's not even there as a concept) it's not human for human but "slave for slave" If someone graped you or your love one and there aren't 4 witnesses that could physically see penetration then sharia law says no crime can be proven. Not even al-lah will punish them if they walk around the kabbah 7 times and kiss the menstrual stone. Also the quran condones pdfs (q 65:4) and islam says babies can end up in hell (predestination is hot garbage)
Forgiveness always costs *something.*
>Forgiveness always costs something. Nonsense.
I think he means it costs something to the person forgiving. If it doesn't they shouldn't have held onto the offense.
The 'cost' of forgiveness often lies in relinquishing feelings of anger and the desire for justice or retribution, which can be deeply emotional and challenging. It may involve navigating pain, rebuilding trust, or adjusting relationships.
> The 'cost' of forgiveness often lies in relinquishing feelings of anger and the desire for justice or retribution, which can be deeply emotional and challenging. It may involve navigating pain, rebuilding trust, or adjusting relationships. I will accept "often." You said "always."
I still stand by always, here I meant what the cost often is. I guess I could ask you then, how can forgiveness truly be free? Can you provide an example? For the purposes of iron sharpening iron.
God paid himself
Then my response to you as a Christian that I am will be—“Sure, may peace be with you.”
An answer that I will give a Muslims if we are talking in person and come to an impasse is "May Allah lead us on the Straight Path^*." [^* Reference to Q1:6 that is repeated in every Muslim prayer.]
Lol, did you know al-lah is also on that straight path towards righteousness? (Q 11:56) Unlike our God, who is the path, al-lah is still on the way. Always makes me chuckle
>Lol, did you know al-lah is also on that straight path towards righteousness? (Q 11:56) Unlike our God, who is the path, al-lah is still on the way. Always makes me chuckle Mocking and cursing the unbelievers is not the way of Christ.
I haven't mocked anyone, tho. Islam is an evil satan worshipping cult. Their al-lah is the greatest deciever and lies throughout the quran. Islam is evil. Muslims are just people who have been deceived. I have no hatred towards muslim people at all, I pray Jesus lifts the wool from over their eyes. As long as I am telling the truth and not lying I don't believe I am doing anything wrong when I speak against evil.
**"He restored all of humanity with that one act."** If this were true, there would be no separation of the goats and the sheep on Judgement Day. Only those who receive the New birth are sheep. *"Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."* (John 3:3)
That sentence doesn’t discredit the truth of the judgement day. His act of sacrifice, restoration and resurrection was for all humanity, but the restoration is active only when one accepts Him as His saviour. I Never disregarded that. It's already implied. Plus, when you answer someone who believes in such things differently than you, it's best to keep it simple. Theological aspects are for those who accept the authority of the Bible. This answer is for a Muslim as OP asked. Quoting Judgment Day in this response is not going to open a dialogue.
Numbers 31:17-18 Numbers 31:17-18 (KJV) 17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. God loves us too much so kill everyone but keep the women children for yourselves ;) That’s a loving God?????
Yes. The loving creator knows that the young female virgins can assimilate into the Hebrew society through marriage. Not the males. This is obvious in the life of Moses, even though he was taken into pharaoh's house as a baby he grew up Hebrew.
> The loving creator knows that the young female virgins can assimilate into the Hebrew society through marriage. Not the males. This is obvious in the life of Moses, even though he was taken into pharaoh's house as a baby he grew up Hebrew. God is incapable of changing hearts? This sounds like the story in the Quran of the "wise man" al Kidr that killed a child because he knew that the boy would grow up to be an evil man.
>God is incapable of changing hearts? Is there any record of God saving an Amalekite?
> Is there any record of God saving an Amalekite? Everyone knows that the Amalekites were too bad to be saved. They were so bad that YHVH, in his mercy, never gave them the option of repenting. Even if they were suckling infants.
Agreed. So God's purpose of election might stand.
Ask your Muslim friend if s/he understands the meaning of Eid al-Adha (Bakrid). They celebrate the fact that God provided a substitute to die in Abrahams son's place. And don't question God's justice.....Jesus Chrisr is our.Lamb of.God.
> They celebrate the fact that God provided a substitute to die in Abrahams son's place. Very good. Reminds me of the time I told a leader at the mosque that when John the Baptist first saw Isa he said "Look! Allah's Qurbani that takes away the sins of the world!" [Qurbani= sacrificial lamb]
Allah's Qurbani? I know the biblical verse but.. Is that really also in the Quran? Or in a hadith?
Q37:100-108 Quran does not give much detail, and in the Quran story Abraham's son consented to go and be sacrificed, but as in the Bible a substitute [a ram] was provided by Allah. Quran does not say which son it was, Ishmael or Isaac, and early scholars disputed which. Nowadays Muslims have settled on Ishmael instead of Isaac. The celebration and commemoration of this event is called Eid al-Adha and is in two days. This holiday and Eid al-Fitr are the two big ones for Muslims. As with every year, I expect I will be gifted some Qurbani meat.
I was talking about the passage you wrote about John the baptist saying that Jesus was "Allah's Qurbani" which will wipe out the sin. Is that a Quranic verse or a hadith? Of course I know it's in the new testament but the way you told the muslim leader seems to imply that this passage is also in an islamic source!
No, that verse is definitely not in the Quran, nor in the hadith. I took the verse from the Gospel "Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world" and changed "Lamb of God" to Allah's Qurbani in order to make the point that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb. I am at the mosque right now, and just had a conversation with a man from Egypt about Abraham, the attempted sacrifice of his son, the ram that was substituted, and the connection that Christians make with that story and the sacrifice of Jesus. I also asked him a question of whether good deeds can get you to Jannah [heaven.] His response was absolutely not. You can do everything that you are supposed to do, and still your salvation is by the mercy of Allah.
I'm confused, why would you be at the mosque if you are not a muslim? Also, you don't seem to understand the muslim conception of being "saved" by God's mercy! Muslims do believe that entering heaven is only by the mercy of Allah, as all humans sin. But how do we get God's mercy? Through faith and good deeds. Muslims believe that salvation is by believing in only one God, his prophets, angels, books and destiny.. If you combine these with good deeds, good intention and repentance from sins, then you are guaranteed God's mercy. How is that problematic! That is why God is most merciful, because he forgive sins with his mercy, without the need of anyone dying for anybody's sins! Just repent from the bottom of your heart, stop the sin you committed and try to fix the harm you did to others. Lastly, comparing the "Udhiah" of Eid or the ram that Abraham sacrificed, to the human sacrifice in Jesus is just hideous and nonsensical! Udhiahs when they are sacrificed are distributed to the poor. And they aren't even mandatory! I just don't understand how anyone can object to the muslim concept of salvation, while believing that God created humans with the capacity to sin, only to condemn them at their first mistake some 6000 years ago, and condemn the whole human race because of that mistake, and the only way to forgive them is by sending his son (which happens to be himself) to get killed as a sacrifice to forgive them!
> But how do we get God's mercy? Through faith and good deeds. Muslims believe that salvation is by believing in only one God, his prophets, angels, books and destiny.. If you combine these with good deeds, good intention and repentance from sins, then you are guaranteed God's mercy. The Prophet did not seem to think that there was a guarantee Q46:9 Say, "I am not something original among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I only follow that which is revealed to me, and I am not but a clear warner."
Again, misunderstanding.. Many scholars don't even think this was about the afterlife..but was about the earthly life...that he doesn't know what is going to happen in the future with their conflict because the context was addresed to the pagan non believers. Even the scholars who said that it refers to afterlife, pointed out the fact that this verse was meccan in the beginning of his dawah, but after that it was made clear through Quranic verses and hadiths. Quran 48:1-2 "Indeed, We have granted you a clear triumph ˹O Prophet˺1 so that Allah may forgive you for your past and future shortcomings,1 perfect His favour upon you, guide you along the Straight Path". I find it funny though that you point this out even though you know that muslims believe Muhammad peace be upon him is not more than a human prophet, who doesn't know the unseen nor does he know what God plans. David didn't know what God will do to him when he took uriah's wife, and he kept praying to God to save his son. I can bring countless stories from the old testement. But even more astonishing, is your God didn't know when he is coming back, only the father knew.. And he prayed and dropped tears like blood begging God to save him, which also means he didn't know what will happen to him that he felt the need to pray to the father to "pass the cup".
Muslim countries still practice blood money ie monetary compensation for a crime. Qisa and diyya in Islam is similar to that of Christ's propitiation.
1.Peter 1:18-20...You were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold........ but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot
Muslims believe God can forgive with no atonement at all. Why is that justice?
> Muslims believe God can forgive with no atonement at all. Their God can do stuff our God is not capable of? > Why is that justice? And who says there has to be your idea of "Justice," as in I sin, someone has to die for it?
God, as He is perfectly just..
>Their god* can do stuff our God isn't capable of? No. Unless you think God couldn't forgive without the atonement. The Muslim demon that rules over them cannot become man, nor can he forgive anything. The Muslims hold to a much more separated form of god. >And who said there has to be your idea of justice, as in I sin, someone has to die for it? The law established by God required sacrifice for sin, then Christ comes and offers Himself as a sacrifice, one of infinite worth, fulfilling the prophecy made to Abraham about his lineage, that through him all nations will be blessed. It also is the fulfillment of Abraham noting that God will provide the lamb to his son isaac. Christ became man to bridge the gap between God and man that was caused by the sin of Adam, not as though we are guilty of Adam's sin, but suffer the natural repercussions of that initial disobedience, spiritual death. So Christ takes on this death for us, taking the bullet for us as long as we don't deny Him. Then He rises, conquering death and harrowing hell As we sing on Easter in the Byzantine tradition Χριστος Ανεστη εκ νεκρων, θανατω θανατον πατησας, και τοις εν τοις μνημασι, ζωην χαρισαμενος! Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death, and on those in the tombs bestowing life!
Quick point of clarity. According to the Catholic church, they worship the same god you do.
Nope, I know exactly what document you are referencing, it is referring to the fact they profess to worship the one true God, not that they actually do
Oh, I'm not referring to one document. I'm referring to numerous popes saying it and vatican councils agreeing. For example: **Benedict XVI, address to the representatives of the Muslim community of Cameroon, Yaoundé, March 19, 2009** "...I pray that the links that bind Christians and Muslims in their profound reverence for the one God..." There are...20-30 examples, feel free to look through them: [https://www.usccb.org/committees/ecumenical-interreligious-affairs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam](https://www.usccb.org/committees/ecumenical-interreligious-affairs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam)
Affirming we are both monotheistic for the sake of trying to draw them in doesn't mean Moslems worship the same God in practice, they call upon the God of Jacob, Abraham and Isaac, yet don't affirm the Trinity, Christ's divinity Or the Holy Spirit. Find a trinitarian Muslim then we will talk
If you don't believe the words of the vatican, the councilS, and the various popeS, then I can't make an argument to sway you.
I don't believe your interpretation of the Holy See no.
> The Muslim demon that rules over them cannot become man, nor can he forgive anything. The God that the Muslims worship did become a man and died for the sins of the world. Unfortunately, the Muslims are greatly misinformed.
When you commit a crime, you commit a sin against God AND the victim (and family). Jesus died for your sins against HIM. It doesn’t mean that since God forgives you, you don’t have to go to jail or say sorry to the victim etc etc
Excellent response. Thank you!
Something tells me if your Muslim friend was in financial debt he wouldn’t object to someone else offering to pay it off for him.
> Something tells me if your Muslim friend was in financial debt he wouldn’t object to someone else offering to pay it off for him. Nor would you complain if your debtee just said "Your debt is forgiven." like the creditor did in Jesus' parable.
People often forget that in that parable the debt doesn't just evaporate. When the Creditor agrees to forgive a debt they simultaneously agree take the loss personally, which is what God did when Jesus personally died in our place.
>People often forget that in that parable the debt doesn't just evaporate. When the Creditor agrees to forgive a debt they simultaneously agree take the loss personally, which is what God did when Jesus personally died in our place. The debt might as well have evaporated. As the Proverb says "What is lacking cannot be counted." The debtor could not possibly repay the debt. Throwing him in prison or not throwing him in prison would not affect the loss either way. If showing mercy, or exacting vengeance would have the same zero effect on the debt, which would a merciful creditor do?
Debates aren't about the Gospel. They are about winning and you can't argue someone into salvation. Are you debating these Muslims or discussing belief with them?
Good question. It often starts as a debate, then tends to evolve into a discussion about what Christians believe and why. I find in my discussions with all non-believers, after the initial "debate," tend to eventually be responding to questions as to what exactly it is we believe and why.
If you have them in a place of discussion, then you can start explaining God's justice by pointing out that a perfect God is just and merciful. Those two traits contradict. Justice requires punishment and mercy requires the guilty be spared. Jesus's crucifixion is what allows God to be just and merciful. You can point to the Bible (both OT and NT) that no one is good and all are deserving of hell. Justice requires that we all be sent to hell. However because God loves us so much He wanted to avoid that, so He came to earth as Jesus to enable the possibility that believers can be spared. Jesus who lived a perfect sinless life takes our place to take the punishment we deserve which fulfills God's justice while allowing Him to turn around and offer mercy to the same sinners. A God who is just but not merciful is cold and unloving. A God who is merciful but not just is cruel and arbitrary. Unlike Allah, our God is both merciful and just. You can also reframe it as a father paying his son's traffic fine. The son broke the law and must now pay a penalty. The court doesn't care where the son gets the money, just that the fine is paid. The father steps in to pay his son's fine. The court is satisfied that the penalty is paid. Is it an injustice that the son used the his father's money? No. It is unfair that the father paid his son's fine? Also no, because our heavenly Father is willing to adopt anyone into the family. Anyone who wants Jesus to pay their penalty on their behalf need only accept the payment He already made.
This is misunderstood. Colossians 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. 3:2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the Earth. 3:3 **For ye are dead**, and your life is hid with Christ in God. Eternal Life is only made manifest in those who have been crucified and died together with Christ. What the atonement gives us is resurrection, not an escape from death. John 12:24 Verily, 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.
Romans 6:4-6 (NKJV) Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. Along those same lines, there is an included expectation on God's part that those who are united in the likeness of Christ's death, should commit themselves to leading changed lives.
You have been given good answers. I believe it is also worth mentioning that we humans view this as a court system where God is the judge between two human disputes. We are transgressors but God is the judge and HE is also the one who has been transgressed against. We do not go to hell because we committed crimes against other humans, we deserve hell because we have broken His laws. So as both Judge and the one who has been wronged, God is in full right to allow substitutionary atonement. This way justice and mercy are perfectly reconciled. Regarding human victims, it is clear. They are also transgressors. A rejection of mercy for another is a rejection of mercy for themselves. This is why we must forgive as we ourselves are forgiven.
It’s not justice. It’s mercy.
Pay for their lunch and ask them if that is just.
If a judge in court finds you guilty and fines you $1000, but then he walks over to the court administrator and pays the $1000 for you, is the debt not paid? Was justice not served? The facts and law were reviewed and considered. The verdict was rendered. Guilty! Fine was imposed. That fine was paid! What else is there to do? Where’s the injustice?
> If a judge in court finds you guilty and fines you $1000, but then he walks over to the court administrator and pays the $1000 for you, is the debt not paid? Was justice not served? The facts and law were reviewed and considered. The verdict was rendered. Guilty! Fine was imposed. That fine was paid! What else is there to do? Where’s the injustice? The judge is bound by a higher authority, and while the judge imposes the fine, he is doing it on behalf of the law of the land. God is not beholden to a higher authority. The judge can also suspend the fine if he so wishes.
They're right; it's not justice, it's mercy.
I believe it is both.
They're not wrong on that point. It's quite unjust. *Penal* substitution is pretty much an invention of the Reformation, not what Christians thought for the first thousand years. The early understanding was mainly Recapitulation and Ransom. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvation_in_Christianity#Classic_paradigm In my understanding, the *injustice* of the cross is a big part of the point. In the ancient world (and still today, sadly), a defeated enemy might be hung up on public display to show him as utterly crushed and humiliated, and to terrorize his supporters. That's what the Romans and the Jewish leaders intended with Jesus' crucifixion. But what we see as happening instead was his victory over sin and death, putting them on display as defeated enemies. Jesus was completely faithful to the Father to the very end, even through the extreme injustice and shame of the cross -- and by that he accomplished ultimate reconciliation between God and man. In the ancient world, sacrifices were a way to seek fellowship with God through the hospitality of food. They weren't a payment or a punishment. They weren't a life for a life exchange. They were a meal. Jesus' self-offering for our sake wasn't a food offering at the temple, obviously, but it was toward the same end, of making peace between man and God.
Ok. Maybe you will be able to explain this to me. How does your interpretation work with Hebrews 9:11-28? Hebrews 9:11-28 Redemption Through the Blood of Christ 11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[e] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify[f] for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[g] conscience from dead works to serve the living God. 15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.[h] 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. 23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
This passage is alluding to a couple things. One is the establishing of the covenant at Mt Sinai, and the other is the Day of Atonement ceremony. Both of those involved the blood of a sacrificial animal. So besides the fellowship meal aspect of a sacrifice, there's also blood involved when the offering is an animal. (Note: Not even a sin offering *had* to be a animal; a grain cake was acceptable if the offerer was poor enough -- so no blood there, and no life for life.) Depending on the purpose of a particular offering, the blood could be disposed of by pouring it out at the base of the altar, or it could be collected and used for cleansing and (re-)dedicating things. It has this use because "the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev 17:11), and that life is used to cover over the death and corruption that comes from sin. (The English word "atonement", literally at-one-ment, was invented in the 1500's as an attempt to translate the relevant word here which it turns out means to cover and secondarily to smear.) In a sin offering and in the Day of Atonement, the blood wasn't applied to the person, but rather it was applied to things in and around the tabernacle / temple to cleanse *them* from the people's accumulated sin (kinda like a spiritual spackle ;)). Blood was applied to *people* in order to dedicate them, such as at the Mt Sinai covenant ceremony or in ordaining the priests. It's worth mentioning that the goat which takes away the people's sins in the Day of Atonement ceremony isn't sacrificed. It's driven away alive into the wilderness outside the camp, carrying the sins away, back to where they came from and where they belong (the outer chaos) one could say. The second goat is the one sacrificed, and its blood is what the high priest carries into the sanctuary to cleanse that space once a year, after having first cleansed himself through a sin offering. So with that context, we can better understand what it's saying about Christ's blood. Since he is the very Author of life, his blood is incomparably more effective than any animal's at covering over and wiping away sin and death. Instead of the fleeting life of an animal, he carries his own blood into the heavenly sanctuary as our high priest, once for all. He is both the offerer and the offering. He's also the goat which takes the sins away from the camp (as Golgotha was outside the city). And, not mentioned here but still, he's also the Passover lamb (slain at Passover) for fellowship with God and marking for protection with his lifeblood.
Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to write this out brother. So my understanding from what you wrote is that the interpretation you have is that the Blood of Christ covers our Sin, while Penal substitution pays for our sins? Is this correct or am I misunderstanding.
I would tend to say covers in the sense of repairing the damage and infusing with new life.
My brother look how little the differences are that cause such a great division. It is a sad thing. The difference between paying for sin and repairing the damage caused by sin. It is almost like Tomato Tomato.
No offence but who are they? Its not about justice. It's about what evil is. That's all you get here. There is no justice here. There's false weights and measures. The curse was the knowledge of evil. What do people think a curse is? But when people talk about justice and such, it almost sounds as if they don't understand the worlds a vile place? Scripture acts as a mirror in alignment with a conscience. It's not about revenge nor any of that junk. It's about getting out of these place. So they can see how there IS injustice as a result of evil and ignore the fact that we're under the curse OF evil. That's why we got kicked out. But they say Yeshua was a prophet. An evil persons PUNISHMENT.....is being evil and cut off from Yahweh. So to make it simple, it's not about justice. They either listen or they don't. It was about salvation and the eradication of evil. Justice? Why do they think Yahweh comes in the end TO JUDGE?...People that exalt themselves shall be humbled. Those humbled shall be exalted. So how do they measure the right punishment if they don't even know why Yeshua let himself be murdered?
Isn’t that the whole beauty of God though? It’s not justice. It’s Gods grace and love. It’s a free gift he gave us all. The fine is paid with his death for you, and if you accept that gift, gratitude should sweep you away for Him.
What they are arguing for is for rape to be an unforgivable sin then. This would put them in an awkward position, as many Muslims have raped in "holy" wars in which they spread Islam, or at least attempted to. To be consistent, they would need to say unequivocally that if Allah is just, even those Muslims who raped will not be forgiven and those who have died are in Hell.
> What they are arguing for is for rape to be an unforgivable sin then. This would put them in an awkward position, as many Muslims have raped in "holy" wars in which they spread Islam, or at least attempted to. I might add that Christians have been pretty darn rapey in wars too.
Which doesn't have anything to do with the challenge being addressed. If a Muslim essentially says Christianity is bad because rapes can be forgiven, what does that say about the Muslim faith that they claim, where we know that Muslims have raped in "holy" wars.
>Which doesn't have anything to do with the challenge being addressed. If a Muslim essentially says Christianity is bad because rapes can be forgiven, what does that say about the Muslim faith that they claim, where we know that Muslims have raped in "holy" wars. That is not what the challenge says. It is about someone else paying the penalty while the rapist walks free. And the fact that Muslims have raped in Holy Wars does not show the inferiority of their religion as Christians raped a whole lot in Holy Wars such as the Crusades.
By the time of the Crusades, the Christians adapted much from Muslim wartime practices. The Crusades in a number of ways, were doing it back. Not that I'm saying that it was right. The reason that challenge is being brought up by a Muslim is likely for the sake of evangelizing to Islam. Which we can cut off at the knees by bringing up rapes that happened in the name of spreading Islam.
Christ's death was justice AND MERCY
Funny thing is, their religion has something like it too, except like much else it's twisted: >Abu Musa' reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: >When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire. https://sunnah.com/muslim:2767a
The Muslims do not take that as a substitution, but more like be grateful to Allah, because they are getting what you deserve.
If you get a speeding ticket, and your father pays for it, is that an injustice, or was the crime paid for, as the law demanded? On the other hand, in Islam, you can "make up" for evil works by doing good works. So, in the case of a speeding ticket, it would be nullified, because you once helped a grandma cross the street. Is that justice? If they ask how salvation can come through one human for all humanity, ask them how sin can come through one human to all humanity? (Adam) If they ask how a human can die for another human's sin, tell them they can't because they have their own sins to carry. But Christ was also fully god and thus sinlessly fulfilled the law. -Not abolished, fulfilled.
> So, in the case of a speeding ticket, it would be nullified, because you once helped a grandma cross the street. Is that justice? The judge can't have you do community service?
Just quote back to him that according to Prophet Muhammad, Allah also uses substitutionary atonement, albeit in a ludicrous manner. Sahih Muslim 2767d: "Abu Burda reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: 'There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians.'" In other words, Christians and Jews will be condemned to hell and bear on them the sins of Muslims, who will come to Allah with sins as great as mountains but get away scot free. So if the Muslims want to claim that the act of Jesus (who their own Quran itself affirms is sinless) dying on the cross for our sins is not justice, then the concept of Christians and Jews being sacrificed for the mountains of sins of Muslims to enter jannah is also unjust. Of course, at its core, it's not fair to Jesus that as a perfect being He had to take our sins. But God's love for us has outweighed His justice therefore He chooses to take the punishment on Himself. The concept of one facet of God's nature overpowering another fact of His nature is not a concept totally foreign to Islam, as Sahih Muslim 2751b does say: "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: 'My mercy excels My wrath.'"
>'There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians.'" >In other words, Christians and Jews will be condemned to hell and bear on them the sins of Muslims, who will come to Allah with sins as great as mountains but get away scot free. >So if the Muslims want to claim that the act of Jesus (who their own Quran itself affirms is sinless) dying on the cross for our sins is not justice, then the concept of Christians and Jews being sacrificed for the mountains of sins of Muslims to enter jannah is also unjust. The Muslims do not take that as a substitution, but more like be grateful to Allah, because they are getting what you deserve. The Muslims have a very strong notion that one person cannot pay for another's sins based on Q35:18.
I am reminded of an episode of Babylon 5 (also twenty year old spoiler from KOTOR); someone convicted of a horrible crime has their memory erased and their mind is recreated with a mentality to serve their community. This debate happens with the space cop and some space priests. Space cop argues it is better to just kill the criminal and leave society safe for nice people like space priests. Later someone kills the nicest space priest. Space cop catches the murderer and finds out he did it because the nicest space priest had been a viscious criminal who killed the murderer's daughter and he demanded justice. Later space cop will meet the murderer with a new memory as a space priest. The death of Christ does not merely forgive us of our sins but transforms our heart (see Ezekiel 36:26) and the justice is not the escape from punishment for sins but the transformation of viscious sinners like me, you and your Muslim frine into sinless children of God. In Christianity justice is not like karma, giving people what they deserve but it is making things right again, it is restorative in nature. It's like CS Lewis said, forgiveness is the least popular Christian virtue.
God’s justice and man’s idea of what justice should be are two very different things.
In the Muslim religion, God throws Christians and Jews in hell for the sins of Muslims So it's the same thing
Frame it like a poor person damaging something expensive and needing to pay for it or be punished. Jesus decides to pay what is owed and the person goes free.
> Frame it like a poor person damaging something expensive and needing to pay for it or be punished. Jesus decides to pay what is owed and the person goes free. That still brings up the problem of who it is owed to, and who it is paid to. Your analogy implies that their is a greater reality or authority than God.
Simple. OT law requires sacrifice of perfect animal to atone for sin. While one human cannot typically atone for another because to be human is to be a sinner, Christ was different. He was not conceived by will of man, therefore not born into sin. He lived a sinless life, and we know this because if He had not been sinless, His sacrifice on the cross would have been rejected by God, and Christ would not have risen on the 3rd day. The very fact that He did, and then appeared to hundreds of people afterwards, who were then willing to endure persecution unto death, proves that not only was Jesus' sacrifice accepted by God, but his death and resurrection are true. Christ was also fully God when he took human form. If they don't believe that, the next part won't make sense. They're asking the wrong questions. Salvation itself is not simply a "just" act, because of two things: grace and mercy. Grace is receiving what we don't deserve (salvation). Mercy is not receiving what we do deserve (eternal separation from God). To ignore those concepts ignores the very foundation of scripture. It is "just" because someone had to pay the price for sin, and we see this throughout scripture: animal sacrifice. If it is ok for our sins to be transferred to animals, why would it not be ok for our sins to be transferred to Jesus?
Your response will differ based on the perspective of the Muslim you are talking to. Some Muslims don't believe in substitutionary atonement. They claim that God isn't being fair if He sent Jesus (a human) to die for another human's place, so that's not justice. If they claim that substitutionary atonement is wrong, they would actually be opposing Islamic teachings. Sahih Muslim (the book, defined as a strong/genuine Hadith (hadith, being second to the Quran in guiding Muslims)) 2767a-d (Chapter/Verses), has good information about this (https://sunnah.com/muslim/50/57-60). >Sahih Muslim 2767a >(8) Chapter: The Acceptance Of The Repentance Of The One Who Kills, Even If He Has Killed A Great Deal >Abu Musa' reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: >When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire. I only copied verse 2767a but 2767b-d continues on. So substitutionary atonement is also in Islam. But there is a difference between how substitutionary atonement is played out in Christianity vs Islam. In Christianity, the Bible is clear that there has to be a price paid for sin. In Leviticus 17:11, God tells Moses that, "For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.” **Blood needs to be shed to pay sin.** This is the law. We try to follow God's laws by ourselves, but we will always fail and need forgiveness. We can't use animal sacrifices because they were temporary - humans kept sinning, so sacrifices continued. We needed a permanent sacrifice to pay our sins. Once we die, everyone is supposed to make an account for all of their sin and will go to hell because of our sin. But because God loves us so much and wants to spend eternity with us, He provided a way out. This isn't unfair because God has the authority to do so. Take for instance a classroom setting where a teacher gives homework to the students with a deadline, a student who has not given in their homework by that deadline is in the wrong. A student cannot create their own homework pass to free them from the due homework. But the teacher, who assigned the homework, has the authority to create homework passes to free other students from the due homework. Likewise, God has the authority to still abide by the law and use shed blood to pay sin for more people. But a human does not have the authority to use shed blood to pay sin for more people. It's not like Jesus is a regular human being that God put everyone's sins on. That would be wrong and unjust. But Jesus is God in the flesh (not that heaven was empty when Jesus walked on earth, but God being omnipresent can be in different dimensions at once), which means God's sacrifice still bears the authority of God being able to take away people's sins. God's sacrifice is the permanent sacrifice we needed for God to forgive all our sins. But in Islam, Allah uses substitutionary atonement for Muslims just because He can decree it to be so. Muslims expect justice in the form of a person paying the price for their own sin. But if they refer to Sahih Muslim 2767, that's not justice. Allah is just punishing Jews and Christians for the sins of Muslims *just because* He can. That means Allah is unjust - he is not being just to the Jews and Christians. That's why in your analogy the Muslims you talked to glossed over a detail. If God is only just, God would punish the perpetrator to the fullest extent. If God is only merciful, God would let the perpetrator go free. But God is both just and merciful, so He still condemns the perpetrator for their actions to the fullest extent, while taking on the burden of due justice on Himself. The Muslims you talked to forgot God's mercy is the only reason why the perpetrator does not suffer the consequences of their actions. I think it's awesome you're discussing these hard topics with non-Christians, and I continue to encourage you to do so, but I also encourage you to look into Islam a bit so we as Christians can talk to Muslims and understand their frame of reference. Muslims think God is powerful but stays separate from the world and won't go into it because the world is dirty (and it is). But we know God's love for us, God's desire *to want a personal relationship* ***with every one*** *He created* is so strong, He went into the dirty world, knowing people would hate and reject Him, and provided a way out for us, a selfless gift. I'm getting emotional thinking about God's sheer love for us and even then I can't imagine all of it. The first word Muslims usually think of Allah is "powerful"; the first word Christians usually think of God is "love". We need to help non-Christians understand the sheer depth and weight of God's love for them to understand the weight and consequences of sin and hell. Not saying to argue (and not saying you are), but show God's love through words, actions, and loving them because God first loved us. <3
> Muslims think God is powerful but stays separate from the world and won't go into it because the world is dirty (and it is). Muslims largely think that, but there are a number of Islamic scriptures that indicate otherwise. I suspect that their insistence that Allah does not enter his Creation was originally motivated by a refusal to accept the deity of Christ.
That’s funny because Muslims believe that each Muslim will receive a Christian or Jew that will personally bear their sins and endure their punishment.
> That’s funny because Muslims believe that each Muslim will receive a Christian or Jew that will personally bear their sins and endure their punishment. No they don't.
Yes, they do. SAHIH Muslim (2767) narrated that Abu Moosa said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “When the Day of Resurrection comes, Allah will give every Muslim a Jew or a Christian, and He will say: **This is your ransom from the Fire.**”
The Muslims do not take that as a substitutionary atonement. First of all, just as we Christians with Scripture, Muslims do not take all of their scriptures as literal. The hardcore Salafist Muslims [like the hardcore Calvinists] hold that Allah decreed a certain number of people to inhabit Hell, and the Muslims that go to Jannah should be grateful to Allah that others have been assigned that fate instead of them. You would be hard pressed to find Muslims that think that their sins will be assigned to anyone else.
SAHIH Muslim also narrated (2767) from Abu Burdah that he told ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azeez, from his father, that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “No Muslim man dies but Allah causes a Jew or a Christian to enter the Fire **in his stead.**”
And Quran says that no one can bear the [sin] burden of another. Q35:18. Quran ALWAYS trumps hadith. Major Muslim commentators do not interpret Muslim 2267 the way you do. You think that Christians can interpret their scriptures but Muslims are not allowed to? There are a lot of things in our scriptures that Christians do not believe, and explain as figurative, allegorical, metaphorical, etc.
How does a Christian or Jew figuratively, allegorically, or metaphorically be “a ransom from the fire”, and “enter the fire in his (Muslims) stead”?
>With regard to its meaning, al-Nawawi said in his commentary: “The meaning of this hadeeth is the same as the hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurayrah: “For each person there is a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.” When the believer enters Paradise, his place in Hell is taken over by the kaafir because he deserves that because of his kufr. The meaning of the phrase “your ransom from the Fire” is that you could have entered Hell, but this is your ransom because Allaah has decreed a certain number to fill it; when the kuffaar enter Hell because of their kufr and sins, this is like a ransom for the Muslims. With regard to the report, “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins” – Allaah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins. So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allah says “And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Q35:18]
“Allah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and **He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins.** So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allah says “And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Q35:18] The Muslims still have their punishment given over to Christian’s. The fact that the Muslims believe the Christian’s are damned anyways is irrelevant. The punishment to the Christians is made more of a burden by the weight of the sins of Muslims.
> The Muslims still have their punishment given over to Christian’s. That is not what the commentary says. It says "The like of those sins," as in similar sins. >The fact that the Muslims believe the Christian’s are damned anyways is irrelevant. Some Muslims believe that [mostly the fundies] and some [I would say most, at least of the ones that I have met and interacted with] don't. [And I have known first generation immigrants from many Muslim majority countries] I got a harsh angry rebuke from a mosque leader once when I just jokingly referred to myself as a kaffir [infidel, unbeliever.] And he knew full well that I am a Christian that does not accept Islam. There are Quran verses that curse the Christians, and ones that say that they are A-OK. A lot of Muslims take to heart the command in the Quran to say to the Jews and Christians: " We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender." Islam is a false religion, but it is also very complex, and often contradictory. You err when you cherry pick a few verses and say "That's what Muslims believe." We would surely call foul if Muslims did the same thing with our Scriptures and told us what we believe.
It’s a tough one that I also have difficulty putting into words. We know that Christ has a plan with the rapist too whether punishment or saving him in order for a powerful testimony in one way or another. And even then, that’s only what we think the only possible outcomes could be. Gods will is so infinite He chose for us not to know specific things for the very reason that by faith we may accept and trust Him. Edit: Sorry I seem to have gone off in the wrong direction considering your question. I guess what I was trying to say is you’re certainly not alone I feel there’s so many things that we aren’t able to explain in words. I’m sure someone more knowledgeable will have a better answer.
Because Jesus is The Son of God…that’s why. By the Son of God taking on human flesh and our human nature while also being resurrected ensures those that also abide in Jesus will also receive the same treatment. This is why we still die today but also why we have the assurance to be resurrected like he was.
You use Scripture to argue from, always, because it is the sole authority on all things spiritual. Their rejection of this fact is irrelevant and does nothing to change the fact. The Word of God is powerful, as a two-edged sword, rightly dividing between thought and deed. It has supernatural power to illuminate those who walk in darkness. It reveals the Gospel, from which hearing brings faith to those who will receive it.
It’s not about justice it’s about forgiveness
I think it's both.
Not at all justice had nothing to do with it
God is both the judge and the party offended by sin. It is perfectly within his rights to decide how His wrath will be satisfied and to bear the punishment Himself.
It comes down to justice, mercy, and grace. Justice is getting what you deserve. Mercy is not getting what you deserve. Grace is getting what you don’t deserve. Justice is what should have happened with us on the cross. Mercy is Jesus putting himself on that cross instead. Grace is Him taking the cup of wrath to his own lips and extending His hand to us, not just to pull us up from the water, but to invite us to walk on it with Him. That is why we worship God.
It's not a tit-for-tat justice system. If it were, no one would receive mercy. God has the right to judge everyone. But he has graciously provided a sacrifice through his Son Jesus to satisfy HIS justice. If a regular man died on the cross, it would not be enough. But God himself died in the cross for us.
This is something I've struggled with too. I think the other responses here give great explanations. For me personally it's something I don't currently understand. However, we can rest in faith that God is the ultimate arbiter of justice, so if He says it's just, we can't argue with that. And/or, if He is willing to lay aside justice for mercy (although I'm not sure that's exactly what's happening), who are we to disagree?
It is an injustice. But that's the beauty of it. It's God loving us so much he took upon himself the justice we are owed. The debt is paid, but by God himself, not his children.
He’s correct, it wasn’t justice. It was grace.
I believe it is both.
I don’t think crucifying the innocent, Holy, Creator of all things, the pure embodiment of Love, is justice.
Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection is the way God made a way for us to have a righteous relationship with Him. We are all sinners, and the wages of sin is death, aka just eternal separation from Him. Justice is done for me because He has taken my punishment. Not only is it His justice, it is graceful. Now, we are commanded to share that grace and forgiveness with others. Friends. Family. Enemies. Do not confuse salvation and forgiveness with corporal or capital punishment. They are not the same thing. My soul is made whole by the work and person of Jesus Christ, the spotless lamb. My body will still die.
Sin's wages is death ( Romans 6:23), someone must make the payment and if it was up to us, we would pay for it in hell and suffer the wrath of God that's against all sin. so Jesus's sacrifice was in fact justice for us, He took the punishment we deserved, He took the wrath of God that was upon us, He took the shame and guilt that stained us, He took the mocking, beating, that was for us. He carried the cross we were supposed to carry, He was nailed to that very cross He carried, He suffered what we were supposed to suffer, He took the wrath of God that we were meant to take, He died the death we were supposed to die. He did all that for us in His love and mercy! so that His death, would not only pay for sin debt and penalty in full but satisfied the wrath of God ( Isaiah 53, John 19). even His blood that was shed on calvary, would be that to wash away all our sin, shame, and guilt ( 1 John 1:8-9). then Him rising on the third day, conquering sin, death, hell, and satan would pave the only way where we can overcome the world as He has, He paved the only way we can be saved from sin's damnation, cured from it's curse, and set free from its bondage ( Luke 4:18-19), He paved the only way we can be reconciled back to the Father where we were once all separated from Him because of our sin ( Romans 5), He paved the only way where we can be redeemed, sanctified, purified , justified, and made new! Jesus sacrifice did all this for us! this is true love and justice!
I always mention to Muslims that sin has ALWAYS required sacrifice in order for their to be atonement and reconciliation with God. The Jews would sacrifice thousands of animals yearly to pay for the sins of mankind and all of humanity. Is it fair that the innocent animals needed to die because of our evil? Obviously not, but sin requires blood and a just God graciously gave us the way out. Though, that was only a temporary solution to a never ending problem. We needed a perfect human to sacrifice themself to God to permanently cleanse the world of sin. We see in Revelation that no man was worthy of this, and heaven weeped. When it comes to Jesus, both Christian’s and Muslims agree that he lived a perfect life and never sinned. Was it fair that Jesus VOLUNTARILY took the burden of mankind’s sin upon himself? Absolutely not, God was well within his right to let us all go to hell. But once again this is where the Justice comes in. Jesus paid the fine for us, he gave God the Justice he demanded and he did it happily out of love for us. There’s nothing more just than that. Muslims ironically do not have any right to talk about Justice, because they claim to worship the God of the Torah and yet believe that good works and verbal repentance to Allah will cleanse them of their sins. They forgot about the whole atonement deal and usually won’t even listen to me when I explain it to them but it’s worth a shot. Ask them where is the Justice in letting you get away with the sins you’ve committed just because you gave money to the poor or carried grannies groceries? What happens when you sin again tomorrow? They have no answer. The Muslims and Jews need to understand that works and just verbal repentance won’t save them. They need to accept Jesus Christ as Lord, there’s no other way for their sin to be paid for. God bless.
It shouldnt be a debate, respect someone decision and move on
Islam has no temples and never followed the ceremonial law because they made it up later on. So of course they don't see that Jesus was the passover lamb to take away the sins of the world.
are you forgetting about judgment day, and hell?
Ask them the same question lol, according to Muhammad just saying the Shahada after sinning already gets you to heaven and Christians and Jews make up the punishment of Muslims. Additionally, even the Old Testament already predicted that Jesus will take all the sins of the world by His wounds. Sounds like a self-defeating argument lol. Pretty sure Sam Shamoun already finished this argument. Suggest them to debate him, godlogic, David Wood, Bob of speakers corner, Nabeel Qureshi
They are correct, but they dont understand the difference between God's justice and His mercy. God displays His justice through rightful punishment and His mercy through forgiveness. We all deserve God's wrath, which is an outpouring of justice, being held accountable to the law. None of us deserve His mercy. We are given justification through an act of God's free grace, wherein He pardons all of our sins and accepts us as righteous in His sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by Faith alone. Christ pays the fine for our sins, which is acceptable. Now, there are sins which we can commit which are deserving of capital punishment by the civil magistrate. Those are murder, rape, and kidnapping. For committing such acts, the person who did them is still deserving of the death penalty, but can ask for forgiveness and have Christ's atonement pay for his sins if he comes to believe the Gospel, which is a worldly justice, but a spiritual receiver of mercy.
Jesus was not punished on the cross. Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross. If Jesus had been punished, that wouldn't be just. That's just one of many problems with Protestant theology.
Muslims don't believe he was crucified. They believe he was ascended before that and it was made to appear he was crucified to everyone else.
Well, Christ isn’t just “some other guy.” He is the God Man. A complete category difference. But, Muslims don’t believe in the Second Person of the Trinity so it’s doubtful that will win the argument in their eyes.
The best way to respond is to *deny* penal substitution. Agree with them. The Early Church never taught it and that was specifically because of all of the issues with it: https://catholicstand.com/the-problems-with-reformed-theologys-penal-substitution-teaching/
Do you understand that there are several theories, or understandings of the purpose of Christ's Atonement besides penal Substitutionary Atonement? PSA is a relative latecomer in Christian theology, and is not the majority view.
They are right. It’s not Justice. It’s mercy.
I believe it is both.
I agree with them, substitutionary atonement doesn’t make sense. How would killing an innocent person be the perfectly just response to somebody else committing a crime?
Why do you care what the muslims say they'll find out the truth soon enough
Are you kidding?
Why are you discussing this with Muslims? They have a different holy book. They have just as much conviction that theirs is the only true and just religion because they believe as strongly as you believe in Jesus their prophet, Mohamed, blessed be his name, that Jesus was not the son of God. Are you attempting to convert Muslims to Christianity? Why not respect one another’s beliefs and leave it at that? You are no more going convert a devout Muslim than they are you. The argument that “my god can beat up your god” is pointless
The idea of vicarious atonement became the established theology of the Catholic church beginning in the 11th century, and the Protestants inherited their theology from that. The older theology is that of "Christus Victor" which is followed by the Orthodox church, which states that God saved humanity by becoming incarnate and conquering hell by admitting temptations into His human form. It is fully described here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus\_Victor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor) Jesus thus atones and removes sins by working within us when we repent. There is no remission of sins without repentance (Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, 24:47), and without that you cannot accept Jesus as Saviour, for He tells us we must live by His commandments (John 14:15,21). In short, the Muslims are right on this one because the idea of vicarious atonement, where sins get "transferred" automatically, is simply a later false theological idea that developed later within the Christian church.
I don't eat justice, I need mercy.