OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 03, 2014, 01:32:17 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: In what sense did Jesus 'die for our sins'?  (Read 6187 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GammaRay
The Awful Preacher
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


Alexandros Papadiamantis


« on: July 31, 2009, 10:10:31 AM »

I know it wasn't because the Father was angry and He had to calm down (which could be done only by sacrificing His Son) and that it was just a move of unconditional love, not justice.

In fact, I already know in what sense Jesus died for our sins, but I can't exactly express it. Can anyone help?
Logged

Though I've walked the valley of the shadow of the death, I've fallen not. Not completely. Not yet.
recent convert
Orthodox Chrisitan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian (N.A.)
Posts: 1,891


« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2009, 10:23:48 AM »

John 3:16?
Logged

Antiochian OC N.A.
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2009, 10:48:49 AM »

It was a rescue mission.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,244


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2009, 10:37:33 PM »

I'm not sure that the idea of justice should be completely eradicated from our understanding of the purpose of the atonement. I agree that the Protestant Calvinist idea of the Cross being necessary to appease the wrath of God goes too far in one direction. But perhaps we shouldn't over-compensate by negating the idea of justice as it relates to the Cross altogether.

Love and justice go hand in hand. God loves us, but God is also just. The human tendency is to think that love and justice are somehow at odds, which is incorrect thinking. God requires that we love mercy and do justice. [Micah 6:8] I think the Cross of Our Lord demonstrated the epitomy of the interconnectedness of love, mercy, and justice. Christ died for our sins because He loves us. He died in our place because of His mercy towards us. And He died so that if we trust in Him we will be spared from divine wrath. These are all components of one redeeming act that occurred on Calvary. I think we err when we compartmentalize these various components, or when we emphasize one aspect to the exclusion of the others.

But this is only my humble opinion. Perhaps I am still too influenced by my past Protestant soteriology.

Selam
« Last Edit: July 31, 2009, 10:46:06 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2009, 06:14:53 AM »

I would like to flesh out this topic a little bit if I may.

I understand how Jesus died for our ancestral sins. Before we were unable to "cross over" to the Kingdom of God because the relationship was severed by the fall.  Now that Jesus became God in the flesh he restored that connection by the incarnation and association with our fallen nature. This part makes sense to me.

Now, how he died for our actual ("missing the mark") sins is where I am getting confused. What was the reason he gave his life on the cross according to the orthodox viewpoint?


Logged
AlexanderOfBergamo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Traditionalist Christian
Jurisdiction: The Original First Millennium Church
Posts: 706


« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2009, 08:11:24 AM »

As the New Adam, Jesus had to do the contrary then his ancestor. Adam chose pride, Jesus had to choose humility. Pride brings to death (the Tree of Knowledge if Good and Evil), while humility grants life eternal (Tree of Life). So, while on the cross Jesus humbled himself until death. The weakened human nature is thus deified and purged of all influence of sin. We, as we are consubstantial with Him, can have the same opportunity. For this reason through baptism we can die in Christ's death and be reborn "not of blood, not of fleshly will, not of human will, but by God" in Christ's resurrection. Our own nature is sanctified as belonging to the Body of Christ. In this sense did Jesus offer himself for the remission of our sins: to get rid of the power of sin over those who live according to God's justice.
Logged

"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2009, 08:43:46 AM »

The phrase "Christ died for our sins" is interesting in the original New Testament because the words which are translated as "for" are actually "υπερ" ("hyper" literally meaning "above" or "over") and "περι" ("peri" literally meaning "around" or "about"). For example:

1 Corinthians 15:3
      For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died υπερ (over) our sins according to the Scriptures,
    
 Galatians 1:4
      who gave Himself υπερ (over) our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father,

1 John 2:2
      And He Himself is the propitiation περι (around/about) our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

1 John 4:10
      In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation περι (around/about) our sins.


In each of these cases, the words in bold are translated as "for" in English.

When we ask the Saints to pray "for" us in Koine (Greek) Liturgies, we literally say "Saints of God pray over us!"

In English, when we have a difficult decision to make, we pray "over" it. When we have a problem, we pray "about" it.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2009, 04:48:47 PM »

Interesting observation regarding the translation.  However, I'm having difficulty interpreting the phrase of "Jesus died above/around our sins" It seems to contradict the idea in my mind of "He became sin, who knew no sin"
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2009, 08:17:09 PM »

Interesting observation regarding the translation.  However, I'm having difficulty interpreting the phrase of "Jesus died above/around our sins" It seems to contradict the idea in my mind of "He became sin, who knew no sin"

Lets I am mugged and killed and there is only $1:50 in my wallet. The newspaper headline might read:
"Extremely Handsome And Witty Man Killed Over $1:50"
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GammaRay
The Awful Preacher
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


Alexandros Papadiamantis


« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2009, 06:12:47 PM »

Yeah, everything's fixed now, people. Thank you for the information, I rarely read the the Ancient Greek text, so that helped a lot. Another mistranslation, then...? Roll Eyes

I now see it in the same way Alexander said. Catholics and Protestants (and I used to as well!) view the matter as this; our sins were great and only Christ's death could make God forgive our sins, since He had been bothered so much for them. Well. Makes no sense. Undecided

Concerning Christ becoming a ransom, I found the following interpretation from an Orthodox apologetics site (it didn't cite any sources though).
Jesus Christ was a sinless man, but Satan took Him down to Hades anyway. But Satan could impose death only on those who were sinful, not on sinless people. Thus Christ stormed the gates of Hades and requested a ransom for the way that Satan mistreated Him and cheated; the ransom is our lives, Christ's request was to ransom us all from death.
To add, we now have His Grace and have realized His infinite Love, which makes Theosis easier. Plus, is there anything to be afraid or hesitant of when your Lord has defeated death itself?

Truly, Orthodoxy is orthodox. Smiley
Logged

Though I've walked the valley of the shadow of the death, I've fallen not. Not completely. Not yet.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2009, 08:03:34 PM »

I think that when people start to ask to whom the ransom was paid the theory begins to fall apart. Christ died as a ransom in the sense that he died for us, we shouldn't push the analogy further.
Logged
AlexanderOfBergamo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Traditionalist Christian
Jurisdiction: The Original First Millennium Church
Posts: 706


« Reply #11 on: September 08, 2009, 02:28:31 PM »

Quote
Yeah, everything's fixed now, people. Thank you for the information, I rarely read the the Ancient Greek text, so that helped a lot. Another mistranslation, then...? Roll Eyes
I wouldn't call it a mistranslation. I would call it a "translation problem". Nothing to do: ancient languages had multiple meanings which no translator could ever solve. Fortunately, we have the power to add notes in our Bibles, huh? LOL

Quote
Jesus Christ was a sinless man, but Satan took Him down to Hades anyway
The true question is this: How could Jesus, who created hades, be made a prisoner of hades himself? Jesus is Life, Hades is Death... there's no possibility for Death to constrain Life, that would be a contradiction... That's why Jesus couldn't be contained in hades, but on the contrary he used its keys to deliver the holy souls of the Old Testament and used another key to open Heaven for us who were waiting this liberation.

In Christ,    Alex
Logged

"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")
sodr2
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 121


القديس الانبا رويس


« Reply #12 on: October 19, 2009, 09:15:51 AM »

Athanasius: On the Incarnation:
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/ath-inc.htm#ch_4
Logged

"Happiness depends on the relationship between man and God." Pope Shenouda III
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2009, 06:19:30 PM »

One way of thinking about it is that Christ immersed Himself into the world that was overpowered by the enemies of Man (Satan, sin, and death) (this being overpowered being caused by Man's choice to sin), so that by His ultimate divine power He could overtake these oppressors, and by His sharing in our human nature convey this victory to us.

But of course, that's no the only way of thinking about it. There are numerous legitimate Atonement models.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2009, 06:20:33 PM by deusveritasest » Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2009, 03:25:03 AM »

Interesting observation regarding the translation.  However, I'm having difficulty interpreting the phrase of "Jesus died above/around our sins" It seems to contradict the idea in my mind of "He became sin, who knew no sin"

Lets I am mugged and killed and there is only $1:50 in my wallet. The newspaper headline might read:
"Extremely Handsome And Witty Man Killed Over $1:50"

^^ I just saw this!  laugh
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2009, 03:39:46 AM »

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1088949815257678826&ei=SBj5SrvFM4f6lAeo2-z_CQ&q=kallistos+ware&hl=en# (Metropolitan KALLISTOS Ware Salvation in Christ - The Orthodox Approach -Lecture) (A variety of modals)

and

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5932925362367103900&ei=Axn5Sq75M4b0lQfYmuj5CQ&q=fr+thomas+hopko&hl=en# (Fr. Thomas Hopko speaks at St. Elijah about Christianity and Armageddon) (The Christus Victory modal)


In the old days, the Ransom theory was mostly dominate, but in modern times, people tend to shun the idea of paying the devil a Ransom in order to set us free from the captivity of .....hmmmm....was it sin and death or just death? I forgot.

But the old idea was that when Adam and Eve fell, the Devil took mankind captive/hostage, and Jesus came to rescue mankind from captivity. But in general, the Orthodox use a variety of modals, we just don't use the modern Reformed Protestant one. We tend to fight that idea of the Atonement.










ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 03:54:06 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2009, 03:51:54 AM »


I think that when people start to ask to whom the ransom was paid the theory begins to fall apart.

Why? If we are to imagine it as a literal ransom (this may be the faulty premise), it's clear that the answer is that the ransom is payed to Satan.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2009, 04:05:08 AM »


I think that when people start to ask to whom the ransom was paid the theory begins to fall apart.

Why? If we are to imagine it as a literal ransom (this may be the faulty premise), it's clear that the answer is that the ransom is payed to Satan.

Hebrews 2:14-18
"Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. 17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make expiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted."

I changed the word "propitiation" to "expiation", so if you can't find the word "expiation" in your english translation of the NKJV in regards to this text, it's because I changed it.

Hilasterion was mostly seen by alot of early church fathers and nonfathers as "expiation", and that's why I did it. The death of Christ cleanses(expiates) our sins, and I see this as a wonderful alternative to the modern Protestant Reformed modal that alot of us grew up with......unknowingly.

But I agree, historicaly the finger was pointed at the devil, but in modern times, you will see us looking down on the idea. I really don't understand why our scholars no longer like the idea, maybe it's because it seems embarrassing, and we want to look good in front of western christian scholars.

I really don't know. I just know that we tend to shun it now, or at least not speak about it. But it is part of our heritage, and I'm actually proud of it, for it is a wonderful alternative to the Reformed Protestant satisfaction theory.

Alot of us converts, and maybe nonconverts get blasted or bombarded by evangelical and Reformed protestants when it comes to the topic of the Atonement. And so, I am proud of our history and what was tought long long ago.......in regards to this issue.











ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 04:22:35 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2009, 11:17:04 PM »


But I agree, historicaly the finger was pointed at the devil, but in modern times, you will see us looking down on the idea. I really don't understand why our scholars no longer like the idea, maybe it's because it seems embarrassing, and we want to look good in front of western christian scholars.

I really don't know. I just know that we tend to shun it now, or at least not speak about it. But it is part of our heritage, and I'm actually proud of it, for it is a wonderful alternative to the Reformed Protestant satisfaction theory.

Alot of us converts, and maybe nonconverts get blasted or bombarded by evangelical and Reformed protestants when it comes to the topic of the Atonement. And so, I am proud of our history and what was tought long long ago.......in regards to this issue.

If we are to imagine that the original sin sold us over to bondage to the devil because of submission to his word rather than God's, I think it makes perfect sense that the devil is the personage that Jesus would have been paying the ransom to to buy our souls back.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,584



« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2009, 11:27:50 PM »

As ozgeorge has pointed out in similar discussions, St. Gregory the Theologian said:

Quote
Now we are to examine another fact and dogma, neglected by most people, but in my judgment well worth enquiring into. To Whom was that Blood offered that was shed for us, and why was It shed? I mean the precious and famous Blood of our God and High priest and Sacrifice. We were detained in bondage by the Evil One, sold under sin, and receiving pleasure in exchange for wickedness. Now, since a ransom belongs only to him who holds in bondage, I ask to whom was this offered, and for what cause? If to the Evil One, fie upon the outrage! If the robber receives ransom, not only from God, but a ransom which consists of God Himself, and has such an illustrious payment for his tyranny, a payment for whose sake it would have been right for him to have left us alone altogether.

But if to the Father, I ask first, how? For it was not by Him that we were being oppressed; and next, On what principle did the Blood of His Only begotten Son delight the Father, Who would not receive even Isaac, when he was being offered by his Father, but changed the sacrifice, putting a ram in the place of the human victim? Is it not evident that the Father accepts Him, but neither asked for Him nor demanded Him; but on account of the Incarnation, and because Humanity must be sanctified by the Humanity of God, that He might deliver us Himself, and overcome the tyrant, and draw us to Himself by the mediation of His Son, Who also arranged this to the honour of the Father, Whom it is manifest that He obeys in all things?

So much we have said of Christ; the greater part of what we might say shall be reverenced with silence. But that brazen serpent was hung up as a remedy for the biting serpents, not as a type of Him that suffered for us, but as a contrast; and it saved those that looked upon it, not because they believed it to live, but because it was killed, and killed with it the powers that were subject to it, being destroyed as it deserved. And what is the fitting epitaph for it from us? O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory? You are overthrown by the Cross; you are slain by Him who is the Giver of life; you are without breath, dead, without motion, even though you keep the form of a serpent lifted up on high on a pole. - St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 45, 22
« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 11:29:07 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

I'm not quite sure what to make of the common argument for Christianity that might be rephrased as: "Well, it's better than suicide, right?"
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2009, 02:10:21 AM »

I know it wasn't because the Father was angry and He had to calm down (which could be done only by sacrificing His Son) and that it was just a move of unconditional love, not justice.

In fact, I already know in what sense Jesus died for our sins, but I can't exactly express it. Can anyone help?

We just went over this in catechesis today.  He died for our sins not for the sake of satisfactionary atonement, but substitionary.

Our priest made a mention that John 3:16 reads, "For God so loved the world..." not "For God was so angry at the world..."
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,866



« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2009, 02:35:07 AM »

I just wanted to say that I really found this thread helpful, particularly ozgeorge's contributions.
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,244


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 18, 2009, 03:35:08 AM »


But I agree, historicaly the finger was pointed at the devil, but in modern times, you will see us looking down on the idea. I really don't understand why our scholars no longer like the idea, maybe it's because it seems embarrassing, and we want to look good in front of western christian scholars.

I really don't know. I just know that we tend to shun it now, or at least not speak about it. But it is part of our heritage, and I'm actually proud of it, for it is a wonderful alternative to the Reformed Protestant satisfaction theory.

Alot of us converts, and maybe nonconverts get blasted or bombarded by evangelical and Reformed protestants when it comes to the topic of the Atonement. And so, I am proud of our history and what was tought long long ago.......in regards to this issue.

If we are to imagine that the original sin sold us over to bondage to the devil because of submission to his word rather than God's, I think it makes perfect sense that the devil is the personage that Jesus would have been paying the ransom to to buy our souls back.

But Jesus didn't owe the devil anything, for that would make Him subservient to satan. And Jesus didn't owe God anything either, since He is God. And certainly He didn't owe humanity anything, since He is Lord of humanity.

So, I admit, I'm still a bit confused here. Huh


Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
GammaRay
The Awful Preacher
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


Alexandros Papadiamantis


« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2009, 10:46:39 AM »

Clarifying my earlier post.

Maybe the curse of death (which comes from sin, which comes from the devil) was on humans thanks to the devil and he had every right to do with our weak souls whatever he wants. When one dies, the demons (kind of those toll houses) have the power to take him with them in Hades; probably because that man has no Grace in order to fight.
So, I suppose that the same thing happened to our Lord. But, when He was taken down in Hades, instead of remaining locked up like the rest souls, He stormed its gates. Many souls followed Him, while He was making His way up. Now, the righteous and the faithful can fight over those demons, for they have God's Grace with them; they know Who to call, how to call Him, they know His Name.

What do you think? Does this sound heretical to you?
« Last Edit: November 26, 2009, 10:53:26 AM by GammaRay » Logged

Though I've walked the valley of the shadow of the death, I've fallen not. Not completely. Not yet.
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,450


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 27, 2009, 01:47:12 PM »

I know it wasn't because the Father was angry and He had to calm down (which could be done only by sacrificing His Son) and that it was just a move of unconditional love, not justice.

In fact, I already know in what sense Jesus died for our sins, but I can't exactly express it. Can anyone help?
Sin is separation. By dying, Jesus united that which was separated.

Why should death lead to union?

To die to something is to relinquish that something.

To relinquish something means either (1) you don't need that something; or (2) you already (or inherently) possess what that something is supposed to give.

Jesus died, Jesus relinquished His Divinity, because He already inherently possessed Divinity.

By dying, by relinquishing His Divinity, He affirmed His inherent Divinity.

By dying, by relinquishing His Divinity, He affirmed His union of Divinity and humanity.

His union of Divinity and humanity dissolves sin, dissolves the separation of Divinity and humanity.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2009, 01:49:55 PM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Mivac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 247


« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2009, 03:20:06 PM »

Clarifying my earlier post.

Maybe the curse of death (which comes from sin, which comes from the devil) was on humans thanks to the devil and he had every right to do with our weak souls whatever he wants. When one dies, the demons (kind of those toll houses) have the power to take him with them in Hades; probably because that man has no Grace in order to fight.
So, I suppose that the same thing happened to our Lord. But, when He was taken down in Hades, instead of remaining locked up like the rest souls, He stormed its gates. Many souls followed Him, while He was making His way up. Now, the righteous and the faithful can fight over those demons, for they have God's Grace with them; they know Who to call, how to call Him, they know His Name.

What do you think? Does this sound heretical to you?

Was death a curse?  I have tended to seeing death not as a punishment but an act of mercy that was allowed to over come us after the ancestrial sin.  Death leads to sin for us, which then gives the accuser (satan) the right of ownership of the sinner, making satan our old master or lord, satan, sin and death declare ownership of mankind.  It would seem to me that Jesus turning death into the means of renew so that we maybe risen in Him makes death an ally.  His blood also covered our sins taking ownership rights of satan away so that the just judge would not see past sins.    In a sense Jesus was like a thief in the dark.  Not sure if I am making my thoughts clear, but I don't see substitutionary as significant and most especially don't see penal substitutionary as valid.
Logged
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2010, 10:03:19 PM »

The basic idea in atonement is to make two as one, to reconcile a difference, or to bring together two persons who have been separated. In his atoning work Christ has made reconciliation possible. God made man for his fellowship, a fellowship broken by man's sin. A holy God could not ignore man's sin, as St. Athanaisus points out in his work On the Incarnation. A merciful, loving God could not ignore man's plight in sin, again as St. Athanaisus points out in his work. In his incarnated being God was in Christ reconciling man to himself (2 Cor. 5:19-21).

I would point out that even St. Athanaisus points out that there is a 'satisfaction' in this work to God's Holiness, to allow Him to keep his word as St. Athanaisus puts it but none of this seems to call into dispute the fact that in sin we are the bond-slaves of Satan and so an need for a Ransom. Note that this is present in C.S. Lewis' fiction The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. It isn't completely 'void' in Protestant circles.
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 20, 2010, 10:21:25 PM »


But I agree, historicaly the finger was pointed at the devil, but in modern times, you will see us looking down on the idea. I really don't understand why our scholars no longer like the idea, maybe it's because it seems embarrassing, and we want to look good in front of western christian scholars.

I really don't know. I just know that we tend to shun it now, or at least not speak about it. But it is part of our heritage, and I'm actually proud of it, for it is a wonderful alternative to the Reformed Protestant satisfaction theory.

Alot of us converts, and maybe nonconverts get blasted or bombarded by evangelical and Reformed protestants when it comes to the topic of the Atonement. And so, I am proud of our history and what was tought long long ago.......in regards to this issue.

If we are to imagine that the original sin sold us over to bondage to the devil because of submission to his word rather than God's, I think it makes perfect sense that the devil is the personage that Jesus would have been paying the ransom to to buy our souls back.

But Jesus didn't owe the devil anything, for that would make Him subservient to satan. And Jesus didn't owe God anything either, since He is God. And certainly He didn't owe humanity anything, since He is Lord of humanity.

So, I admit, I'm still a bit confused here. Huh


Selam

No, God didn't owe Satan anything.

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.

Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2010, 10:23:03 PM »

Clarifying my earlier post.

Maybe the curse of death (which comes from sin, which comes from the devil) was on humans thanks to the devil and he had every right to do with our weak souls whatever he wants. When one dies, the demons (kind of those toll houses) have the power to take him with them in Hades; probably because that man has no Grace in order to fight.
So, I suppose that the same thing happened to our Lord. But, when He was taken down in Hades, instead of remaining locked up like the rest souls, He stormed its gates. Many souls followed Him, while He was making His way up. Now, the righteous and the faithful can fight over those demons, for they have God's Grace with them; they know Who to call, how to call Him, they know His Name.

What do you think? Does this sound heretical to you?

The only problem is that it makes it sounds like Jesus was subject to the ancestral curse and under the power of Satan.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Cleopas
Bible Thumping, Tongue Talking, Faith Walking Christian
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Charismatic Evangelical
Posts: 445


If I'm my own Pope then I claim infalliablity. Ha!

perfecthart
WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 02, 2010, 07:19:44 PM »

Love and justice go hand in hand. God loves us, but God is also just. The human tendency is to think that love and justice are somehow at odds, which is incorrect thinking. God requires that we love mercy and do justice. [Micah 6:8] I think the Cross of Our Lord demonstrated the epitomy of the interconnectedness of love, mercy, and justice. Christ died for our sins because He loves us. He died in our place because of His mercy towards us. And He died so that if we trust in Him we will be spared from divine wrath. These are all components of one redeeming act that occurred on Calvary. I think we err when we compartmentalize these various components, or when we emphasize one aspect to the exclusion of the others.

But this is only my humble opinion. Perhaps I am still too influenced by my past Protestant soteriology.

Selam

I sincerely appreciate, and completely agree with your comments above. I marvel at the vast greatness, complexity, and unity of God, who in Christ loved us and gave Himself for us. Truly His ways, though revealed, are yet past finding out.

Thank you for sharing.
Logged

Cleopas
Christopher Hart

"Every one, though born of God in an instant, yet undoubtedly grows by slow degrees” -- John Wesley
Mivac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 247


« Reply #30 on: February 02, 2010, 10:01:29 PM »

I'm not sure that the idea of justice should be completely eradicated from our understanding of the purpose of the atonement. I agree that the Protestant Calvinist idea of the Cross being necessary to appease the wrath of God goes too far in one direction. But perhaps we shouldn't over-compensate by negating the idea of justice as it relates to the Cross altogether.

Love and justice go hand in hand. God loves us, but God is also just. The human tendency is to think that love and justice are somehow at odds, which is incorrect thinking. God requires that we love mercy and do justice. [Micah 6:8] I think the Cross of Our Lord demonstrated the epitomy of the interconnectedness of love, mercy, and justice. Christ died for our sins because He loves us. He died in our place because of His mercy towards us. And He died so that if we trust in Him we will be spared from divine wrath. These are all components of one redeeming act that occurred on Calvary. I think we err when we compartmentalize these various components, or when we emphasize one aspect to the exclusion of the others.

But this is only my humble opinion. Perhaps I am still too influenced by my past Protestant soteriology.

Selam

Kalomiris (1980) The River of Fire, Pg 31.

The Greek word diakosuni "justice", is a translatioin of the Hebrew word tsedaka.  The word means "the divine energy which accomplishes man's salvation."  It is parallel and almost synonymous with the word hesed which means "mercy", "compassion","love", and to the word emeth which means "fidelity", "truth".  This is entirely different from the juridical understanding of "justice."
Logged
GammaRay
The Awful Preacher
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


Alexandros Papadiamantis


« Reply #31 on: February 06, 2010, 08:13:34 AM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Logged

Though I've walked the valley of the shadow of the death, I've fallen not. Not completely. Not yet.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #32 on: February 06, 2010, 11:36:40 AM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Oh?  What debt did we owe Satan?  Where in Scripture or Tradition does it say we owe Satan anything?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #33 on: February 06, 2010, 12:06:01 PM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Oh?  What debt did we owe Satan?  Where in Scripture or Tradition does it say we owe Satan anything?

Here is some fuel you requested. Wink Cheesy

 Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
 1 Tim. 2:5-6 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom...
 Heb. 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2010, 01:24:59 PM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Oh?  What debt did we owe Satan?  Where in Scripture or Tradition does it say we owe Satan anything?

Here is some fuel you requested. Wink Cheesy

 Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
 1 Tim. 2:5-6 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom...
 Heb. 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
Where does Satan come in?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ms.hoorah
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 866


« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2010, 02:13:27 PM »

Christ didn’t have to “die for us” as our ransom.  He could have called upon legions of angels to save Himself.  Christ chose to “die for us” to show us that we cannot save ourselves from the sin that we have deliberately committed against God.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 02:13:57 PM by ms.hoorah » Logged
Cleopas
Bible Thumping, Tongue Talking, Faith Walking Christian
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Charismatic Evangelical
Posts: 445


If I'm my own Pope then I claim infalliablity. Ha!

perfecthart
WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 06, 2010, 04:53:12 PM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Oh?  What debt did we owe Satan?  Where in Scripture or Tradition does it say we owe Satan anything?

The debt of purchasing our freedom from slavery to sin itself. Jesus said whoever sins is the servant of sin (John 8:34, see also Romans 6:16-18), and we know that Satan is the source of sin, and the master of those so enslaved (John 8:44, see also 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, Ephesians 2:2, Ephesians 6:12). It is in that sense that the imagery of redemption and ransom has merit. We, mankind, sold ourselves under sin, and found we were unable to free ourselves. So, God became a man, in Christ, to pay the price needed to provide mankind the possibility of redemption and atonement.
Logged

Cleopas
Christopher Hart

"Every one, though born of God in an instant, yet undoubtedly grows by slow degrees” -- John Wesley
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #37 on: February 06, 2010, 05:05:12 PM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Oh?  What debt did we owe Satan?  Where in Scripture or Tradition does it say we owe Satan anything?

The debt of purchasing our freedom from slavery to sin itself. Jesus said whoever sins is the servant of sin (John 8:34, see also Romans 6:16-18), and we know that Satan is the source of sin, and the master of those so enslaved (John 8:44, see also 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, Ephesians 2:2, Ephesians 6:12). It is in that sense that the imagery of redemption and ransom has merit. We, mankind, sold ourselves under sin, and found we were unable to free ourselves. So, God became a man, in Christ, to pay the price needed to provide mankind the possibility of redemption and atonement.
Sin has no independent existance of its own.  And paying Satan off still doesn't make any sense.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Cleopas
Bible Thumping, Tongue Talking, Faith Walking Christian
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Charismatic Evangelical
Posts: 445


If I'm my own Pope then I claim infalliablity. Ha!

perfecthart
WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 06, 2010, 05:26:30 PM »

Sin has no independent existance of its own.  And paying Satan off still doesn't make any sense.

And yet Scriptures speaks of it as such, saying we are (outside of Christ) servants of sin. As for Satan, I don't think Christ paid him anything, I think the terminology is analogous to point to the truth of man's inability to save himself, and Christ's taking on human nature to do what we could not. In principle that invalidated sin's claim as it were, what could be seen a Satan's claim on the souls' of sinful men, and releases those who will believe into life eternal (both now and ever) and life everlasting (in the resurrection) by Christ's offering himself a ransom of redemption.

« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 05:26:45 PM by Cleopas » Logged

Cleopas
Christopher Hart

"Every one, though born of God in an instant, yet undoubtedly grows by slow degrees” -- John Wesley
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #39 on: February 06, 2010, 05:30:23 PM »

Sin has no independent existance of its own.  And paying Satan off still doesn't make any sense.

And yet Scriptures speaks of it as such, saying we are (outside of Christ) servants of sin.

How so?



Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Cleopas
Bible Thumping, Tongue Talking, Faith Walking Christian
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Charismatic Evangelical
Posts: 445


If I'm my own Pope then I claim infalliablity. Ha!

perfecthart
WWW
« Reply #40 on: February 06, 2010, 05:33:29 PM »

Sin has no independent existance of its own.  And paying Satan off still doesn't make any sense.

And yet Scriptures speaks of it as such, saying we are (outside of Christ) servants of sin.

How so?


In saying we are servant's of sin. The imagery employed is we, as sinners, are slaves and sin is our Master.



Logged

Cleopas
Christopher Hart

"Every one, though born of God in an instant, yet undoubtedly grows by slow degrees” -- John Wesley
ms.hoorah
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 866


« Reply #41 on: February 06, 2010, 05:36:25 PM »

I know it wasn't because the Father was angry and He had to calm down (which could be done only by sacrificing His Son) and that it was just a move of unconditional love, not justice.

In fact, I already know in what sense Jesus died for our sins, but I can't exactly express it. Can anyone help?
I am frequently wrong, but I don't believe that the Orthodox Church believes in substitutionary atonement.   Rather Christ’s death is seen as a triumphant march into Satan’s domain of death.  Christ’s death overcame Satan’s hold; death was overcome and life was restored.

Christ is risen from the dead,
trampling down death by death,
and on those in the tombs bestowing life!

Logged
GammaRay
The Awful Preacher
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


Alexandros Papadiamantis


« Reply #42 on: February 13, 2010, 01:17:15 PM »

Here is some fuel you requested. Wink Cheesy

 Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
 1 Tim. 2:5-6 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom...
 Heb. 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
Where does Satan come in?
To whom was the ransom given then? Huh
Logged

Though I've walked the valley of the shadow of the death, I've fallen not. Not completely. Not yet.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #43 on: February 19, 2010, 07:01:03 PM »

It's more like humanity owed something to Satan and the Logos became human so that He could represent us and pay back what we owed Satan through His divine power.

God wanted to buy back humanity to Himself, but the only way He could rightfully do that was to ransom Himself to pay back the debt that we owed Satan. Because God does not require humanity, He was in no way required to do this and thus was not naturally subservient to Satan.
I like this one a lot.
Oh?  What debt did we owe Satan?  Where in Scripture or Tradition does it say we owe Satan anything?

Many acceptable Atonement theories are speculations with no explicit basis in Scripture or Tradition. But anyway, the Bible does refer to Satan as the prince of this world. That would seem to imply that he has ownership over us as a result of the Fall.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 19, 2010, 07:05:06 PM »

I know it wasn't because the Father was angry and He had to calm down (which could be done only by sacrificing His Son) and that it was just a move of unconditional love, not justice.

In fact, I already know in what sense Jesus died for our sins, but I can't exactly express it. Can anyone help?
I am frequently wrong, but I don't believe that the Orthodox Church believes in substitutionary atonement.   Rather Christ’s death is seen as a triumphant march into Satan’s domain of death.  Christ’s death overcame Satan’s hold; death was overcome and life was restored.

Christ is risen from the dead,
trampling down death by death,
and on those in the tombs bestowing life!



Penal substitution is not the only form of substitutionary atonement. I think what you're talking about is particular penal substitution. There are certain other understandings of substitution that could be orthodox.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Tags: salvation crucifixion 
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.16 seconds with 71 queries.