WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

436

The broken law of God demanded the life of the sinner. In all the universe there was but one who could, in behalf of man, satisfy its claims. Since the divine law is as sacred as God Himself, only one equal with God could make atonement for its transgression. None but Christ could redeem fallen man from the curse of the law and bring him again into harmony with Heaven. Christ would take upon Himself the guilt and shame of sin—sin so offensive to a holy God that it must separate the Father and His Son. Christ would reach to the depths of misery to rescue the ruined race. PP 63.2

God was to be manifest in Christ, "reconciling the world unto Himself." 2 Corinthians 5:19. Man had become so degraded by sin that it was impossible for him, in himself, to come into harmony with Him whose nature is purity and goodness. But Christ, after having redeemed man from the condemnation of the law, could impart divine power to unite with human effort. Thus by repentance toward God and faith in Christ the fallen children of Adam might once more become "sons of God." 1 John 3:2. PP 64.1

The broken law of God demanded the life of the sinner. In all the universe there was but one who could, in behalf of man, satisfy its claims. Since the divine law is as sacred as God Himself, only one equal with God could make atonement for its transgression. None but Christ could redeem fallen man from the curse of the law and bring him again into harmony with Heaven. Christ would take upon Himself the guilt and shame of sin—sin so offensive to a holy God that it must separate the Father and His Son. Christ would reach to the depths of misery to rescue the ruined race. PP 63.2 God was to be manifest in Christ, "reconciling the world unto Himself." 2 Corinthians 5:19. Man had become so degraded by sin that it was impossible for him, in himself, to come into harmony with Him whose nature is purity and goodness. But Christ, after having redeemed man from the condemnation of the law, could impart divine power to unite with human effort. Thus by repentance toward God and faith in Christ the fallen children of Adam might once more become "sons of God." 1 John 3:2. PP 64.1

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

So you're all for reparations? You obviously think we're supposed to go to hell for the crimes of our original parents.

[–] 1 pt

No, YOU deserve hell for YOUR sins!

[–] -1 pt

Did God or the devil make you write that?

[–] 1 pt

In response to your assumption: A blanketed no. We are not culpable for the sins that predate our existence, i.e. slavery, and Adam and Eve's disobedience to God's commands. However, if anyone thinks that he is sinless, he is disillusioned: “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” [1 John 1:8]

Now let's look at a topical, anecdotal scenario that ties us into the relation of our original parents' sin:

We know that receiving this Covid 'vaccine' would be a bad idea. But let's argue that we decide to receive it anyways due to our own free will granted to us by our Father, and we are somehow coerced into receiving it due to some purposed benefit from the 'adversary'. The adversary says something to the likes of, "In order to buy and sell you will need this 'vaccine'."

As we might find out, this new 'vaccine' alters our genes and we are no longer in the perfected state that our Creator defined and made us - we have now become corrupted. There is nothing that we can do by our own accord to correct this corruption, and continue to live with the circumstances. We then decide to bare children (if even possible), and our children then inherit our corrupted genes. Our children now inherit our corrupted genes, even though they were not culpable in the decision of our disobedience. Still, there is nothing that they can do, by their own accord, to resolve their inheritance of incorruption.

Now let's say that the children come to the understanding that their parents made an ill-informed decision and should never have received the 'vaccine' in the first place. But then a new strain 'emerges', and the 'tempter' is successful in supplanting the same doubt unto the new generation as was the first. The children, who are now adults, decide to receive the next inoculation to the 'new strain' because of the doubts and false promises of the original snake-oil salesman.

You can see that this scenario could play out ad nauseam.

Now just like in this scenario, the corrupted ones are only culpable for their direct involvement in the denial of God's commandments. However, you can see that the only way for the corrupted ones to be reconciled to their originally designed stature, they would need the service of a tremendous Physician. Jesus is our Physician, hence why His teachings are called 'doctrines'. Jesus has come to reconcile the whole genealogy of their denial of God's commandments. Not only did he receive unto His shoulders the sins of the ancient days, He also paid for the sins that were to take place after His sacrifice. We only need to repent of our disobedience and follow his doctrine in order to receive Salvation.

[–] 0 pt (edited )

Well that's my problem with God. That he's so wrathful that he unleashed on all of human history the unbridled destruction of the most evil thing in the universe just because some uneducated naive naked humans didn't understand the rules and made a poor decision.

That seems fair to you?

[–] 1 pt (edited )

It sounds like you are pulling your conclusion from an idea that you heard others conclude about the Bible and the character of God. Nowhere in your comments can it be inferred that you have actually read the Scriptures for your self and meditated on their meanings.

The story of the forbidden fruit has been a story that has lasted for millennia. To think that someone who has just showed up to the conversation thousands of years later with a dart-on-the-wall conclusion of its interpretation has the authority to ridicule others looking into the deeper and truer meanings of the controversy is astounding.

That seems fair to you?

It has nothing to do with what I think is fair. The crux of the matter lies in the idea that humans believe that they are wiser, more just, and better equipped to decide for themselves what is right and wrong, over the One who made them... Any close look into human history proves contrary. We consistently ruin everything with our self exhortation.

Why don't you state your beliefs about what happens after death, and how to achieve the various outcomes (if you believe there are more than one), so that we can critique those beliefs, rather than doing the straw man thing?

[–] 0 pt

I'm not sure what you mean. Christian's are making the claim that I'm a sinner from birth. I'm pointing out that this sounds like what blacks are doing to whites by blaming today's whites for the sins of their ancestors.

While we are all descended from Adam (and Eve), what makes us "children of Adam" is our behavior. I'm not very well-versed in original vs actual sin, but I doubt it would make a difference for the purpose of this conversation. You are hostile towards God, at least towards what you think he is (and maybe that's because of what you've seen done/said in the name of God, or by his supposed followers).

You should find out for yourself. Was Jesus resurrected? That's the whole linchpin of the faith. Take it or leave it.

[–] 0 pt

We don't have to "pay" reparations. Jesus Christ did that for us, first by taking upon Himself the sins of the world at Gethsemane, and then giving His life at Calvary. He paid the "reparations" for our sins. To make this effective, we need to accept Christ as our personal Savior, and then make any necessary changes in our lives to reflect this. We do this first by kneeling in prayer, confessing to the Father that we are sinners, and that we claim the sacrifice of Jesus Christ as binding upon us.

[–] 0 pt

What do you mean "make this effective". His dying for us either saved us or didn't. Which is it?

If there's more on our end that we need to do, then his dying did nothing for us.

[–] 0 pt

Wrong. Faith justifies, but works sanctify. Faith without works is dead. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ saved us from the consequences of what the Catholics call "original sin".

The Atonement doesn't confer a licence to sin; it confers a licence to repent. So if you sin in the future, you repent of it by changing your behavior and making restitution to the person you sinned against, if possible. Otherwise, you risk losing your salvation.

If Wesley throws Buttercup a rope while she's sinking in sand, is she saved?