The Nature of God in the Atonement

I like this translation.
“This is real love—not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a sacrifice to take away our sins.”

How do you think the sacrifice of the Son "takes away" our sins?

If God can just forgive by being merciful—the Son didn't need to be tortured to death, right?

If the sacrifice of the Son was just to show or exhibit sacrificial love, in what way is it connected to "our sins"?

It's like you are left with this meaningless, unnecessary sacrifice disconnected from any concept of "suffering for" and "taking away" sins.

It's really quite an evil thing to rob the Cross of it's significance and God of his holiness.

He doesn't just let sins "slide on by" for nothing, or forgive without a Cross.
 
How do you think the sacrifice of the Son "takes away" our sins?

If God can just forgive by being merciful—the Son didn't need to be tortured to death, right?

If the sacrifice of the Son was just to show or exhibit sacrificial love, in what way is it connected to "our sins"?

It's like you are left with this meaningless, unnecessary sacrifice disconnected from any concept of "suffering for" and "taking away" sins.

It's really quite an evil thing to rob the Cross of it's significance and God of his holiness.

He doesn't just let sins "slide on by" for nothing, or forgive without a Cross.
Jesus forgave many sinners of their sins before He died. And without any sacrifice being made for them. He just said your sins are forgiven and neither do I condemn you.

hmmmmm
 
Abraham Kuyper confirms my premise for the OP below !

"God is Love."—1 John 4:8.

Between natural love even in its highest forms and Holy Love there is a wide chasm. This had to be emphasized so that our readers might not mistake the nature of Love. Many say that God is Love, but measure His Love by the love of men. They study love's being and manifestations in others and in themselves, and then think themselves competent to judge that this human love, in a more perfect form, is the Love of God. Of course they are wrong. Essential Love must be studied as it is in God Himself; as He has manifested it in His Word. And the scintillations of the creature's feeble love must be looked upon only as sparks from the fire of the divine Love.

Our God is the very liberal Fountain of all good. Love being the highest good, God must be the very liberal Fountain of all Love. And from that Fountain flows every earthly love of whatever name, however faint or feeble. The Creator alone can create in His creature the irresistible love of instinct, in which we see a display of His glory. For the same end He created a strong creaturely attachment, not wholly instinctive, yet to some extent unconsciously active; to this belong the mother's love for her babe, love at first sight, brotherly love, etc. Higher than this is the love of moral kinship, whereby He has disposed spirit to spirit for congenial fellowship and mutual love. These are three forms in which is found something of the Love of God, but still belonging to Creation and Providence, in no wise partaking of the treasure of the divine Life.

Love on earth adopts this higher character only when it becomes self-consecrating, self-denying, self-sacrificing; when the object of love does not attract, but only repels. The devoted nurse caring for the pest-stricken stranger finds nothing in him to attract her; rather the reverse. And still she stays, she perseveres, not only from a sense of duty, but attracted by the misery and desolation of the sufferer. This is indeed the effect of a higher love, which flows from the Fountain of Eternal Love. That nurse exhibits devotion to the invisible, apprehension of the spiritual.

And altho God has so constituted our nervous system that suffering causes us discomfort, that the sight of pain affects us painfully, so that from a mere fellow feeling we are instantly ready to bear relief to the sufferer, yet that higher form of love usually rises from the lower nervous life to a higher expression which is impossible without an inward operation of grace.

It thus prepares the way for the highest love, that directs itself not only to the invisible things, but to the Invisible One, attracting the soul toward Him with irresistible drawings. And only then is Love itself reached.

The Word declares that God is Love, and the Spirit's testimony says in every heart: "Amen, not in us, but in Thee, O Eternal One. Thou art Love. There is no love that does not spring from Thee! " And this is a mystery that men and angels fail to fathom. Who ever expressed its perfection in words? Who does not realize that it is a harmony marvelously beautiful, blessed, and divine which the confused ear of the creature can not fully appreciate? Men confess it, drink in its sweetness and loveliness; the heart is blessed and cherished by it; but after the bliss is tasted and the cup taken from the lips, we know no more of the nature of Love than the babe that has enjoyed love at his mother's breast. We can not describe or analyze it; we can not fathom or penetrate its hidden essence. It takes possession of us, pervades us, refreshes us; but as the wind, of which we know not whence it cometh and whither it goeth, so in our best moments are the wonderful drawings of the Love of our God. It is not created nor conceived. It is eternal as God Himself. Love was never outside of Him, so as to come to Him from elsewhere; nor for a single moment throughout eternity was He without it. Without bearing in Himself deep, eternal Love, without being Love, He can not be our God.

Superficial minds, however, conceive of the Love of God only as forgiving sin; as too good to tolerate suffering; too peaceable to allow war. But the Word teaches that the Love of God is a holy Love, intolerant of evil, for its own sake causing the sinner to suffer that he may turn from his false joys. It was this very Love that said in Paradise, immediately after the breach of sin: "I will put enmity!"

God's children have derived from the Word deeper and richer conceptions of the divine Love, for they confess a Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, one God in three Persons: the Father, who generates; the Son, who is generated; and the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from both Father and Son. And the Love-life whereby these Three mutually love each other is the Eternal Being Himself. This alone is the true and real life of Love. The entire Scripture teaches that nothing is more precious and glorious than the Love of the Father for the Son, and of the Son for the Father, and of the Holy Spirit for both.

This Love is nameless: human tongue has no words to express it; no creature may inquisitively look into its eternal depths. It is the great and impenetrable mystery. We listen to its music and adore it; but when its glory has passed through the soul the lips are still unable adequately to describe any of its features. God may loose the tongue so that it can shout and sing to the praise of eternal Love, but the intellect remains powerless.

Before God created heaven and earth with all their inhabitants, the eternal Love of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit shone with unseen splendor in the divine Being. Love exists, not for the sake of the world, but for God's sake; and when the world came into existence, Love remained unchanged; and if every creature were to disappear, it would remain just as rich and glorious as ever. Love exists and works in the Eternal Being apart from the creature; and its radiation upon the, creature is but a feeble reflection of its being.

Love is not God, but God is Love; and He is sufficient to Himself to love absolutely and forever. He has no need of the creature, and the exercise of His Love did not begin with the creature whom He could love, but it flows and springs eternally in the Love-life of the Triune God. God is Love; its perfection, divine beauty, real dimensions, and holiness are not found in men, not even in the best of God's children, but scintillate only around the Throne of God.

The unity of Love with the Confession of the Trinity is the starting-point from which we proceed to base Love independently in God, absolutely independent of the creature or anything creaturely. This is not to make the divine Trinity a philosophic deduction from essential love. That is unlawful; if God had not revealed this mystery in His Word we should be totally ignorant of it. But since the Scripture puts the Triune Being before us as the Object of our adoration, and upon almost every page most highly exalts the mutual Love of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and delineates it as an Eternal Love, we know and plainly see that this holy Love may never be represented but as springing from the mutual love of the divine Persons.

Hence through the mystery of the Trinity, the Love which is in God and is God obtains its independent existence, apart from the creature, independent of the emotions of mind and heart; and it rises as a sun, with its own fire and rays, outside of man, in God, in whom it rests and from whom it radiates.

In this way we eradicate every comparison of the Love of God with our love. In this way the false mingling ceases. In principle we resist the reversing of positions whereby arrogant man had succeeded in copying from himself a so-called God of Love, and into silencing all adoration. In this way the soul returns to the blessed confession that God is Love, and the way of divine mercy and pity is opened whereby the brightness of that Sun can radiate in a human way, i.e., in a finite and imperfect manner to and in the human heart, to the praise of God.http://christianbookshelf.org/kuyper/the_work_of_the_holy_spirit/xviii_love_in_the_triune.htm

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited:
And Can it Be

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior's blood
Died He for me, who caused His pain
For me, who Him to death pursued?

Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou, my God, should die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou, my God, should die for me?
He left His Father's throne above
So free, so infinite His grace

Emptied Himself of all but love
And bled for Adam's helpless race
Tic mercy all, immense and free
For O my God, it found out me!
Amazing love! How can it be,

That Thou, my God, should die for me?
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature's night

Thine eye diffused a quickening ray
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light
My chains fell off, my heart was free
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee

Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou, my God should die for me?
No condemnation now I dread
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine
Alive in Him, my living Head
And clothed in righteousness divine
Bold I approach the eternal throne
And claim the crown, through Christ my own

Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou my God, should die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou my God, should die for me?
 
Last edited:
Thank you for sharing that, I'm of the Christus Victor persuasion myself.

A thought that came recently about the Holy Spirit who does not forgive blasphemy, perhaps this is the old testament God?

The scripture says the Father entrusted all judgment to the Son.

Maybe related, just a thought I was reminded of as I read.
 
Thank you for sharing that, I'm of the Christus Victor persuasion myself.

A thought that came recently about the Holy Spirit who does not forgive blasphemy, perhaps this is the old testament God?

The scripture says the Father entrusted all judgment to the Son.

Maybe related, just a thought I was reminded of as I read.
That is one of those "controversial" topics as to what the meaning of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit actually is and can that same sin be committed today.

Personally I think it could only be committed while Jesus walked this earth and His miracles could be seen in person then accusing Him of doing those miracles by the power of Beelzebub. That sin was committed by the Pharisees. Jesus after His death/resurrection was no longer performing miracles and gave us His last promised miracle which was the greatest- the bodily Resurrection form the grave.
 
That is one of those "controversial" topics as to what the meaning of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit actually is and can that same sin be committed today.

Personally I think it could only be committed while Jesus walked this earth and His miracles could be seen in person then accusing Him of doing those miracles by the power of Beelzebub. That sin was committed by the Pharisees. Jesus after His death/resurrection was no longer performing miracles and gave us His last promised miracle which was the greatest- the bodily Resurrection form the grave.
For this topic, it was the thought that one of the trinity did not forgive blasphemy. This seems to line up with the God personality in the old testament that would pay offenders back to their face.

Since the Father is depicted as having a different disposition by Jesus in the gospels, it would make sense.

As far as whether the unforgivable sin can be committed or not, unknown .. the closest offenders got off with a warning .. nothing else was really taught about it.
 
What I was taught about "The blaspheming of the holy spirit" was, 1. if you're worried about it you probably haven't committed it. The point being You are past that stage and have become a believer.

Number two is that it means that you do not believe and speak against what Jesus came to accomplish and who he is. In other words you don't believe the gospel and mock and ridicule it.

"Blasphemy against the Spirit—the unforgivable sin—is ongoing hardening of your heart against the Holy Spirit who is trying to lead you to repent of sin and believe in Christ. Furthermore, it is an issue of the heart that manifests in your words."
 
The main idea to me is, you know something is a miracle from God and still call it Satan.

These kids taking the "blasphemy" challenge—are silly and don't even understand it.
 
Since the Father is depicted as having a different disposition by Jesus in the gospels, it would make sense.

I think you have the wrong Jesus—people don't closely examine his actual words.


He was the "spittin' image" of his Daddy.

16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!
17 For the great day of their1 wrath has come, and who can withstand it?" (Rev. 6:16-17 NIV)

Das' one angry Lamb!
 
I think you have the wrong Jesus—people don't closely examine his actual words.


He was the "spittin' image" of his Daddy.

16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!
17 For the great day of their1 wrath has come, and who can withstand it?" (Rev. 6:16-17 NIV)

Das' one angry Lamb!
I would counsel against building the house on anything other than the foundation identified by Jesus in the sermon on the mount.

And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:47-48)

This angry God paradigm makes it seem like actual humans can be more righteous than God.

I think you may infact have the wrong Jesus.
 
The main idea to me is, you know something is a miracle from God and still call it Satan.

These kids taking the "blasphemy" challenge—are silly and don't even understand it.
12:31-32 This reference to blasphemy against the Spirit is often called "the unpardonable sin." From the parallel in Mark 3:28 it is obvious that "Son of Man" was not a title for Jesus in this context but a generic use of the Hebrew idiom "sons of men" or "mankind."

This is supported by the parallelism of Matt. 12:31 and 32. The sin discussed was not the sin of ignorance but of willful rejection of God and His truth in the presence of great light.

Many people worry about whether they have committed this sin. People who desire to know God or are afraid that they have committed this sin have not! This sin is the continuing rejection of Jesus in the presence of great light, to the point of spiritual callousness. This is similar to Heb. 6:4-6 and 10:26-31.

"The Unpardonable Sin"


Remember that the Gospels reflect a first century Jewish setting
Two kinds of sins
unintentional
intentional


Pre-Pentecostal Jewish setting (i.e., the fulfillment of the gospel [i.e., death, resurrection, ascension] and the special endowment of the Spirit have not yet occurred)

Note the literary context of Mark 3:22-30
The unbelief of Jesus' own family (cf. Mark 3:31-32)
The unbelief of the Pharisees (cf. Mark 2:24; 3:1,6,22)

Compare the Gospel parallels, where the title "Son of Man" changes to "sons of men"
Matt. 12:22-37 (i.e., 12:32, "a word against the Son of Man")

Luke 11:14-26; 12:8-12 (i.e., 12:10, "a word against the Son of Man")

Mark 3:28 (i.e., "All sins shall be forgiven the sons of men")

In my understanding the unpardonable sin is the continuing rejection of Jesus in the presence of great light. The Pharisees clearly understood but refused to believe. In this sense it is related to the "sin unto death" in 1 John (i.e., Gnostic false teaching)

I think God never cuts humans off from His grace, but they cut themselves off by refusing to heed the promptings of the Spirit. When humans say "no" to the Spirit over and over, their hearts and minds become calloused! It is not that God is not speaking, but they cannot hear (i.e., Isa. 6:9-10).

As a pastor, I have been called on the phone many times late at night by people who fear they have committed the unpardonable sin. I try to help them by reminding them that "feeling guilty" is a good sign that the Spirit is still able to communicate to them. Therefore, they need repentance (i.e., 1 John 1:9).

Guess from whom? And it just make "sense" doesn't it?
J.
 
Back
Top Bottom