This thread has been opened to keep another thread from going off topic.

The discussion so far:















)

The problem with this discussion is that some want to separate two essential aspects of salvation (the need to have our sins forgiven, and the need for our hearts and minds to be brought in tune with God's righteous ways) and pit them against each other.

While the truth is that both are essential.

Salvation IS a legal process. Jesus came to fulfill the law, so that we don't have to die. He took our death, according to the law, so that He would have legal authority to grant us pardon. Remember the question in Revelation 5:2 "Who is worthy to open the book?" Christ made Himself worthy by living a perfect life as one of us, and then becoming our Sacrifice. Only Christ is worthy to open that book on our behalf.



"Forensic" may not be the best word choice, on account of its typical usage and connotations. I think there are better options. However, I agree with the fact that salvation involves "legal action."



Wanderer,

With all due respect, you have not been here very long. They are not saying the same thing at all, but you lack awareness of what APL is promoting. He is too indirect in what he has said here for you to grasp fully his position. This forum has literally borne the weight of thousands of posts on this topic, and yet the debate continues.



Alchemy,

Well said--but "alter" should be "altar."



APL, Physicians are not judges. Your analogy breaks down because physicians do not occupy a position anywhere near that of God. In fact, it might be reasonably said that virtually every good and necessary occupation here on earth reflects a portion of God's character. God is a study in contrasts and diversity. God is a judge, an advocate/lawyer, a teacher, a physician, a janitor, a mechanic, a general, a counselor, an executioner (cf. Exd. 12:12; Num. 33:4), a King, a servant, a shepherd and a Lamb, a Creator and a destroyer (cf. Gen. 6:7,13; Lev. 26:30; Jer. 15:7; 46:8; Eze. 6:3; 25:7; 28:16; 32:3; 34:16; Amos 9:8; Mic. 5:10; Hag. 2:22).



Amen.



APL, the very definition of sin involves "transgression of the law". . .


By trying to make sin "not a 'legal' problem," you effectively deny the authority of God through the Bible and Ellen White both.

Sin IS a legal problem--very much so. God's LAW was broken. You may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, however, in trying to advocate against religion being only a legal matter--it is not. As Dedication already implied, it requires both the letter and the spirit of the law. Ellen White speaks to this.





Indeed, his views on this matter are nonsense. Unfortunately, the nonsense is spreading, and I wonder if we do right by allowing its continued representation on this forum. There must be a balance between justice and mercy.



What you see as "laws of nature" ARE God's laws. We can break those laws--and it is sin.





Yes, both of those are essential, but the underlying philosophies parroted here by APL and several others in the past go beyond the surface appearance of this simple dichotomy. What APL is actually teaching is that God's law cannot be law because it would be unfair, and since God is not unfair, His law is just an "intrinsic" thing that has nothing to do with legality. Looked at more closely, the argument morphs into saying simply: "God's law is unfair." This is Satan's argument, and has been his argument since the beginning of the Great Controversy.



To illustrate how important every part of the law is, notice the exactitude of the following:

That sentence did not consider the context in which I used the word.

The word "forensic" in my earlier post was used in explaining the definition of the word "cleansed" in Daniel 8:14 --
"Then shall the sanctuary be cleansed" (tsadaq)


tsadaq #H6663 means to "justify", "just" "justice"
Only once (in Daniel 8:14) is it translated as "cleansed".

The word "tsadaq" has a "forensic" or legal meaning when we consider its use in these verses:


Gen 44:16
And Judah said, What shall we say unto my lord? what shall we speak? or how shall we clear ourselves? H6663

Ex. 23:7 "I will not justify H6663 the wicked.


Deut 25:1
If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify H6663 the righteous, and condemn the wicked.


2Sa 15:4
Absalom said moreover, Oh that I were made judge in the land, that every man which hath any suit or cause might come unto me, and I would do him justice! H6663


1Ki 8:32
Then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his head; and justifying H6663 the righteous


Job 9:20
If I justify H6663 myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me: if I say, I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse

Prov. 17:15

He that justifieth H6663 the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the LORD.

What does the Bible say about sin?





The word "imputed" comes from the Greek word ellogeo. Strong's interprets it as follows:


In other words, sin is not attributed to us where there is no law. This makes sin and the guilt we have for breaking the law inseparable from the law. If the law did not exist we would not be guilty. This is a legal definition of sin and guilt.



The word from which "transgressions" is transalated means the following as per Strong's:


Transgressions are a revolt, or in other words a rebellion. What is a rebellion?


In other words, rebellion is intent to overthrow a lawful ruler. This is, once again, a legally defined action. Rebellion against God is an action that seeks to overthrow legal authority. Thus we cannot separate sin from rebellion against legal authority. This makes sin a legal matter.

God's government is run by the rule of law. The rule of law is, very simply put, described in Matthew 7;


The rule of law is that set of, easily understood by all, laws by which a person can so order his behavior that he can do as he pleases so long as he does not injure or do any harm to another. This points to the fact that God's law is the perfect set of laws for they are easily understood by everyone, and if followed all mankind would live at peace with his fellow man in every aspect of his life. What I have given here is Friederich Hayek's definition of the rule of law, and it is also, very obviously, Jesus' definition of the rule of law. Interestingly enough, Hayek, in his definition of the rule of law, uses the same Greek word Matthew 7:12 uses that is translated as "law".

God's law is love. And, God's love is law. They cannot be separated. When we violate His law we violate His love. When we violate His love, we violate His law.

Time and time again, and I have shown only a few examples, the Bible defines sin in legal terms. But is it only a legal matter? No. It is also a moral matter. It is also a matter of love. All of these things are combined in sin. They cannot be separated without destroying the Biblical concept of sin.

Thanks Green,

You're correct. Alter is the wrong word altogether. I did mean to spell altar.

The program is that some do not understand "forgiveness" and treat it like a legal issue. 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 word translated "forgive" is Aphiemi, which has to do with the offender rather than the offended. It is a sending away, a causing to go into remission in the offender. It is not legal issue.

Salvation is a HEALING process, not a legal process.

God's LAW is a design law, not a legal law. Just as gravity is not a legal law. The laws of nature are just as much God's law as the moral law. And as such, the penalty of transgression of the law is INTRINSIC, not imposed.

That conclusion is pretty much disputable. When a person is pardoned for a crime everything you just stated is true for them. They have their legal rights restored. They are once again in the good graces of the lawful government. They are once again at peace with the lawful government. All of their legal issues are sent into remission. There is a healing of the relationship between them and the lawful government.

In other words, the meaning of the word applies just as much to legal issues as it does to relationship issues.

This is what you do on many subjects. You grasp onto one detail and ignore all evidence to the contrary. And Luke 6:37 is at odds with your point of view. In it the are the terms: judge, condemn and forgive. Each and every instance is a legal term.



Judge:


condemn:


forgive:


You do the same violence to scripture that Sequira does. He ignores vast areas of scripture that contradict what he says. He redefines words to mean only what he wants them to mean--private interpretation. You do exactly the same.

LOL. I guess, apl, that when God set the punishment for crimes in Israel those were intrinsic punishment. You know, stoning someone to death for breaking God's law. A very intrinsic punishment. The stones just leapt up off the ground and hit the guilty person. No one even touched them. No one actually imposed those punishments.

And just because the laws of the physical world were created by God does not make them the equivalent of His moral law. There is no right or wrong, no morality nor immorality, involved in the physical laws by which the universe operates. In other words they do not give us the knowledge of sin. The distinction of being moral law is held alone by the 10 commandments.

God's moral law is a prescriptive law for it defines both acceptable and unacceptable behavior, and applies the same way to our thoughts and ideas as well. It discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. And it is by the law that we come to the knowledge of what sin is.



Your conclusion, so called, is nothing more than a conflating of physical and moral law. You confuse the differences between them by attempting to make them one and the same in nature. They are not now, and never have been, the same in nature. This is actually the false analogy fallacy.