When one recognizes that during the creation of the world God embedded prophetically the message that He would come during the fourth "day" (representing a millennium), it makes perfect sense that He was slated to be slain from the foundation of the world. When God sees the future as if it were history, the use of past tense is not troublesome for even a future event. However, in John the Revelator's case, it was already a past event, and so from his vantage point the past tense was to be expected, for the prophecy had already been fulfilled.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

dedication - what is your definition of forgive?

Do note, there are two Greek words in the NT that are translated forgive, and they do not mean the same thing. 1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." The Greek word translated "forgive" in this verse is ἀφίημι, Aphiemi. And the "forgiveness" in this case does not happen in the offended (God), but in the offender - us, sinners. Confessing our sins to God does not change God in any way! The "forgiveness" God offers is something that happens in us. And it is not a legal transaction.

dedication - what is your definition of forgive?

Do note, there are two Greek words in the NT that are translated forgive, and they do not mean the same thing. 1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." The Greek word translated "forgive" in this verse is ἀφίημι, Aphiemi. And the "forgiveness" in this case does not happen in the offended (God), but in the offender - us, sinners. Confessing our sins to God does not change God in any way! The "forgiveness" God offers is something that happens in us. And it is not a legal transaction.

The "aphiemi" forgiveness is also for those whom God has reserved unto Himself, and is the word used for those "left" in the so-called "rapture" texts. We want to be "left" (forgiven) not "taken." That's probably leaning toward , but aphiemi is an interesting word just the same.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

PS--I can post HTML here, but am not able to edit others' posts in threads I don't moderate. Sorry. One of the other mods will have to fix the HTML...too bad HTML-entities cannot be always converted automatically. -- GC

Did Abraham understand this as a legal transaction? Galatians speaks of justification as forgiveness.

I did, but they don't answer my questions. If someone like me, who sees much truth in the theory, cannot get a simple and straight answer from you, a proponent who learned it directly from its most prominent teacher, it is no wonder that people are confused about it. Is it really so convoluted that two simple questions - Was Enoch healed? Did Jesus have to die on the cross? - cannot be answered with a simple Yes or No? If this is the Gospel, what hope have you of teaching it to your children?

Galatians 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Is justification a legal transaction? Or is it a trust(faith)/healing process?

Dear APL,

you may have been a student of Dr Bacchiocchi but he was my friend and I knew him very well. We corresponded up until my last vision of Jesus sweating blood in Gethsemane, just before he died, so don't give me your condescending attitude please. I Cried when my friend Barb told me he died. His last email to me must have taken him days to write, illustrating all of the positive elements to the Spirit of Prophecy that he knew that corresponded with my vision. Stopping short of saying my dreams and visions were inspired.

He did not agree with me about the 7 kings of Rev 17 until later before he died, when he seemed to make concessions, but he did agree with me on the Red Heifer.

By reading your response, I just cannot fathom how anyone in the Spirit of Christ would even attempt to take on our faith on such basic levels, as do men who camp out on websites like this thinking they have more truth than our own prophet.

There are several words that are translated 'forgive' or forgiven.

'nasa' means to carry the sin. Like the high priest carried the sins of Israel into the most Holy Place.

'calach' means to absolve or pardon without demanding justice.

'kaphar' means to cover over or propitiate.

The one used in conjunction with forgiveness of sins committed against God is 'aphieemi' which means 'to send away' to blot them out, which is direct reference to Atonement and the Scapegoat.

The next is 'apolyo' which means to 'let go of'.

And the last is 'charizomai' which means to freely bestow.

So which 'forgive' do you want to talk about?

The 10 commandment law demands the death of the sinner, Jesus had the authority to die in our place, and He did so we could be forgiven for our sins, which means, so the record of sin could be expunged. Mercy met justice in Christ.

It is not the same kind of forgiveness that we exercise against people who have sinned against us.

We do not have the authority to demand death for something done against us unless we died in the act.

The law does have the right, and will condemn anyone who has not claimed the faith of Jesus.

If someone sins against us, we are commanded as faithful servants to 'Calach' the sinner. This is on the personal level, showing our love for God in contrast to the wickedness of the world.

The law DEMANDS justice. The record is immovable, if there is any un-forgiven sins on our record, then death is mandatory. Non negotiable. Jesus came to show this to us by dying on the cross, so He could forgive us individually if we come to Him and claim His gift.

So to answer your question, true forgiveness is conditional.

"While the soldiers were doing their fearful work, Jesus prayed for His enemies, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” His mind passed from His own suffering to the sin of His persecutors, and the terrible retribution that would be theirs. No curses were called down upon the soldiers who were handling Him so roughly. No vengeance was invoked upon the priests and rulers, who were gloating over the accomplishment of their purpose. Christ pitied them in their ignorance and guilt. He breathed only a plea for their forgiveness,—“for they know not what they do.” {DA 744.2}
Had they known that they were putting to torture One who had come to save the sinful race from eternal ruin, they would have been seized with remorse and horror. But their ignorance did not remove their guilt; for it was their privilege to know and accept Jesus as their Saviour. Some of them would yet see their sin, and repent, and be converted. Some by their impenitence would make it an impossibility for the prayer of Christ to be answered for them. Yet, just the same, God’s purpose was reaching its fulfillment. Jesus was earning the right to become the advocate of men in the Father’s presence. {DA 744.3}

You need to be very careful how you fold this idea into our faith and claim it to from God. You seem to get further and further from the foundation of our faith every time we talk.

True, merely forgiving sinners cannot cause the radical transformation that occurs when people experience rebirth in God's appointed way. Knowing that Jesus loves them and is very willing to pardon and save them certainly serves to motivate them to confess and repent. However, law and justice demand death for sin.

Does confessing and repenting satisfy the demands of law and justice? Is confession and repentance the cause, source of salvation? Is being genuinely sorry sufficient? Or, does law and justice demand being genuinely sorry and never sinning again?

You wrote, "The death of Christ is not for mere forgiveness". Ellen White wrote, "Mere forgiveness of sin is not the sole result of the death of Jesus. He made the infinite sacrifice not only that sin might be removed". In other words, forgiveness and removal of sin is one of the reasons Jesus lived and died the perfect life and death. The question is - Why was it a reason? Why did He have to live and die?

1. “By His word God has bound Himself to execute the penalty of the law on all transgressors.” (6BC 1095)

2. “In the plan of redemption there must be the shedding of blood, for death must come in consequence of man’s sin.” (CON 22)

3. “Justice demands that sin be not merely pardoned, but the death penalty must be executed. God, in the gift of His only-begotten Son, met both these requirements. By dying in man’s stead, Christ exhausted the penalty and provided a pardon.” (1SM 340)

Read the next few paragraphs!!Is this describing a legal process? No. It is a trust/healing process.Was this a legal requirement? Read the context.Is the impassable barrier a "legal" barrier? I don't think so. It is a real barrier. God is a consuming fire. The sinful could not come into the presence of God and live. Was that because of a legal requirement? Or is there a real problem that must be solved? I see it as the latter!

Yes, the death of Christ was not "merely" for forgiveness of sin, there was a far greater reason.