Ellen White wrote:



So you're telling me that if you ask me to show something I believe is true from the teachings of Christ, that you would accept a quote from Jones or Waggoner? (she was referring specifically to Jones and Waggoner in her quote here)

It seems to me you're running a smoke screen here. The simple fact is that Jesus did not teach your idea, that He had to die in order for God to be able to legally pardon. Rather than admit this, you try quotes from other people. However, the fact still remains that Jesus did not teach what you are suggesting.

In fact, no one did until Anselm. Can you quote anyone, inspired or not, who stated the idea that God could not legally forgive sin unless Christ died before Calvin?

I'm saying Calving instead of Anselm, because Anselm's theory was slightly different, and I was being a bit inaccurate. So to be more accurate, I'll use Calvin's name, as I believe he was the first to formulate the legal expression you use (Anselm spoke of satisfaction).

So I'd be very interested if you could quote anyone who suggested this before Calving, either inspired or not.

TE: One can understand that Christ had to die in order for our sins to be forgiven. But why? That's the whole question.

MM: Obviously because law and justice required it. Law and justice requires death for sin. The plan of salvation is all about restoring law and order. Yes, it includes motivating sinners to love and obey God. But it also includes vindicating the honor and integrity of law and justice. The whole thing is a legal matter.

---

TE: How does the parable of the prodigal son teach that sins are pardoned because of merit? The point of the story is the exact opposite of this. The son's father forgave his sins because of his love for his son, not because of any merit.

MM: Had Jesus not already paid the price to redeem us from foundation of the world, the human race would have ended with the immediate death of A&E. The prodigal son story would have never happened. There would have been no one for God to freely forgive.

It is the eternal atoning sacrifice of Jesus that made probation and the plan of salvation possible. God is not free to forgive impenitent sinners. The scapegoat principle teaches the truth about merit.

Which came first - the substitutionary death of Jesus or pardon and salvation?

It was not conceived as a legal matter for millenia, not until the 16th century. Neither Abraham nor Moses nor David nor Paul conceived of it as such. Most of all, Jesus did not conceive of it as such, as there is nothing in His teaching which suggests that He did, which you seem to admit by your lack of response on this point.

My view of things agrees with what EGW wrote, that the "whole purpose of Christ's mission was the revelation of God." You can cite anything from Jesus' life and teachings to support this. John says that no one has seen God at any time, but the only begotten Son, who knew Him best, has shown us what God is really like. The synoptic Gospels speak of the "kingdom of God," which Jesus says is "within you." The essence of Jesus' teaching is expressed here:



What a beautiful verse! The issue is one of character. We are God's children when we are like God is. How is that? "Love your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again ... and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil."

God is kind to the unthankful and the evil. Thank goodness for that, because our salvation lies in this very thing! We are His children when we are like Him.

EGW said that the whole purpose of Christ's mission was the revelation of God, to set men right with Him. When we see what God is really like, our desire to be like Him sprouts. His goodness leads us to repentance.

Nowhere do we see that God loves His enemies more clearly than on the cross. Nowhere do we see that He is kind to the unthankful and the evil more clearly than here.

I could give hundreds of examples from Jesus' life and teachings to support my theory, but you can't give one to support yours. That should be something to think about.

---



You didn't answer my question. How does the parable of the prodigal son teach that sins are forgiven because of merit? None of the things you mentioned are found in that story.

TE: EGW said that the whole purpose of Christ's mission was the revelation of God, to set men right with Him. When we see what God is really like, our desire to be like Him sprouts. His goodness leads us to repentance.

MM: Before He suffered and died on cross, Jesus said He had accomplished His goal to fully reveal what God is like. He didn't have to suffer and die to reveal the love of God - He had already done it. Obviously He was accomplishing something else by suffering and dying on the cross.

---

TE: Nowhere do we see that God loves His enemies more clearly than on the cross. Nowhere do we see that He is kind to the unthankful and the evil more clearly than here.

MM: Yes, Jesus handled His torture and crucifixion with love and kindness. But the love of God had already been fully revealed. He already cleared up the misconceptions about the kingdom and character of God. Obviously He was accomplishing something else by suffering and dying on the cross.

---

TE: You didn't answer my question. How does the parable of the prodigal son teach that sins are forgiven because of merit? None of the things you mentioned are found in that story.

MM: Tom, the atoning death of Jesus predates the story of the prodigal son. Obviously God is able to freely pardon and save sinners because Jesus is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. This truth is inherent in the story of the prodigal son. Jesus earned the right to freely pardon and save penitent sinners by satisfying the just and loving demands of law and justice.

Which came first - the substitutionary death of Jesus or pardon and salvation? You and I both know the answer to this question. Obviously Jesus' atoning death is what makes pardon and salvation possible. Without it the human race would not have survived the immediate execution of A&E.

The story of the prodigal son is a beautiful portrayal of God's earnest desire to receive us back into the fold. He is not willing that any should be lost. He lovingly longs for us to respond to His tender entreaties to come home and accept Jesus as our personal Savior and friend.

In the midst of the story of the prodigal son the fatted calf is slain, perhaps symbolizing the death of Jesus that makes it possible for God to forgive the sins of the returning, repentant sinner.

Here's a comment by Sister White about the parable of the prodigal son. Please note that she includes the atoning death of Jesus as an integral part of the story.

COL 205
Do not listen to the enemy's suggestion to stay away from Christ until you have made yourself better; until you are good enough to come to God. If you wait until then, you will never come. When Satan points to your filthy garments, repeat the promise of Jesus, "Him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out." John 6:37. Tell the enemy that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses from all sin. Make the prayer of David your own, "Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." Ps. 51:7. {COL 205.2}

From "It Is Finished" we read:



Satan had been so clever that the cross was necessary to reveal what was really going on.



His death accomplished a great deal. I've never claimed that He did only to reveal God's love. That being said, wouldn't you agree that Christ's death on the cross is the clearest revelation of God's love?



You claim here seems entirely without merit. No one hearing the story would interpret it as having anything to do with merit. The story teaches the opposite of what you asserting.

You are simply asserting what you already believe, and are not considering evidence that is contrary to it. With such a mind set, how can you ever change your mind about anything you believe?

TE: Satan had been so clever that the cross was necessary to reveal what was really going on.

MM: We're not talking about Satan, though. Jesus fully revealed the love of God before He suffered and died on the cross. That's the point. He didn't have to suffer and die to reveal the love of God. Obviously He was accomplishing something else by suffering and dying on the cross.

---

TE: His death accomplished a great deal. I've never claimed that He did only to reveal God's love. That being said, wouldn't you agree that Christ's death on the cross is the clearest revelation of God's love?

MM: Again, Jesus clearly revealed the love of God before He suffered and died on the cross. and, yes, this love was demonstrated in an unparalleled way on the cross. here is how it is described:


But the main reason Jesus suffered and died on the cross was to satisfy the just and loving demands of law and justice. It is explained here:

Yes we are. Satan's the whole reason there's a controversy. The controversy is over God's character. Satan has misrepresented God as being like himself. This is how he has won converts to his side. In order to resolve the controversy, the distinction between Satan and God must be made clear.

Now you might think that no one could possibly confuse the two, but the fact of the matter is that Satan has been so successful at misrepresenting God's character with his own, that many believe God to have Satan's attributes, such as being harsh and severe, desiring that we be afraid of him, resorting to force in order to get His way, and so forth. So successful has Satan been with this that when he impersonates Christ, most will believe that he is Christ.



I think you mean something "in addition."



Good! I'm glad you see that this is the case.

It stands to reason that some will see God's love by means of some revelations, and some will see His love revealed by others. Not everyone will see God's love revealed in the same way.

Now if the cross is the clearest revelation of all, it stands to reason that some might see God's love by this means that might not see it by other means. God, being God, would leave no stone unturned in His desire to save.

The following is from George Fifield:

Tom, to whom or what did Jesus "pay the price" for our redemption? I have no problem with your Fifield quote, except to say it doesn't address the reason why Jesus had to suffer and die on the cross. No one, that I know of, is suggesting it had anything to do with making God love sinners.

Most of the reasons people give as to why Jesus had to suffer and die on the cross have nothing to do with the atonement. Instead, their reasons explain why He had to live a sinless life, namely, to prove obeying the law in sinful flesh is perfectly doable.

Jesus did not suffer and die on the cross primarily to prove God is loving and worthy of worship. Yes, it serves that purpose, too. The primary reason why Jesus had to suffer and die on the cross was to satisfy the just and loving demands of law and justice. The following quotes make this point clear:

AG 139
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. {AG 139.2}

1BC 1086
In the plan of redemption there must be the shedding of blood, for death must come in consequence of man's sin. The beasts for sacrificial offerings were to prefigure Christ. In the slain victim, man was to see the fulfillment for the time being of God's word, "Ye shall surely die" {1BC 1086.7}

I guessed you missed the point then. You'll notice that the topic of the discussion is "the atonement."



This seems like an off the wall comment. Something must have motivated it. What?



???



What reasons? What are you talking about? The reason most people give that Christ had to die is what? Why is this important? What point are you wanting to make?



There's nothing in the quote that would rank this reason as being higher or lower than any other reason. According to the SOP, the cross safeguarded the universe, and without it, the situation would have been as unstable as it was when Satan first made his accusations. That seems like a pretty important reason.

According to the SOP, the "whole purpose" of Christ's mission was the revelation of God. If that's the "whole purpose," then the purpose for His death must be encapsulated in that. That's pretty simple to see.

Another Fifield quote:



This is how I see things as well.

I agree that Christ's death was necessary to satisfy justice, that it was not enough for God simply to pardon man.

The following quote, from Fifield, addresses this issue. I'm assuming this may not be clear to you, so I'll comment on how it does this.

If pardon does not lead to obedience to the law, then it would serve to promote sin, rather than bring it to an end. This would not be satisfaction of justice, but of injustice. Such pardon would be worse than nothing. It would further the cause of Satan.

True pardon results in obedience to the law because it brings the law breaker into harmony with the Lawgiver. When the law is written in the heart, justice is served, because rebellion ceases.