How is the justice of God satisfied by Christ's sacrifice?

>how does that work?
He took death on him by dying. It's akin to placing a perfect young bull on a sacrificial altar and killing it.

Agnosticism and agnosticism are rational positions, how could you "empirically" be a deist? that's a philosophical statement.

>inverse m'lady

It isn't.
The biblical Jesus is not the true Yeshua.
The gnostic Yeshua is the true one.

Irk sacrifice and shit

>agnosticism and agnosticism

Were you dropped as a child?

But that goes against God's justice, since the sacrificial victim was perfect.

Well, scapegoats worked for 16th century nobility, should be good enough for God, right?

Jesus was both Man and God.
On behalf of men, he sacrificed so his Father, God, would absolve our sins and spare Humanity when the day comes.

He represents a New Covenant between God and his people.

Is it really a sacrifice if you just wake up a few days later and get to go chill in paradise?

If heaven actually existed, I'd crucify myself today.

God does not follow human morals but is inherently just in whatever it does.

God is perfectly just (according to God)

God had to exchange commodities in order to produce a proper salvation. Do you think the heavenly economy is run by the state like a bunch of goddamn angelic reds? You can't pervert the incentives like that.

>It's akin to placing a perfect young bull on a sacrificial altar and killing it.
So it's akin to retarded savagery?

How does anything work?
Do you spend as much time wondering why water boils at 212 degrees at sea level, or does your autism only kick in when it comes to religious traditions?

Stop being the annoying little kid that asks why to every answer he is given

The code doesn't get to question the coder.

Erm no I do.

You are broken now but faith can heal you
Just do everything I tell you to do

He who knew no sin, became sin.

1 Peter 2:24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed.

Isaiah 53:5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.

thou fool

Do it

To expand on this.

Jesus took all of the sins of mankind onto himself, suffered the full wrath of God on each and every single one of those sins, and then died, paying the ultimate price for sin.

You can keep the law two ways. You can obey it perfectly, and you can pay the price for breaking it. Both keep the law.

Jesus did both. He kept the Law perfectly, and he paid the price for each and every crime committed by mankind.

That's your sins too, user. Jesus took your sins onto himself and paid the ultimate price of them.

Christ is God, and God didn't punish Christ.
It's about God carrying the weight of the sins, so humans have an option.

uwu

You also have to understand the sacrificial system God put in place with the Hebrews to understand the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, Jesus, for the sins of the world.

When a Hebrew brought a lamb to the priest as a sacrifice, it had to be perfect, without spot or blemish. Then the man placed his hand on the lamb's head and the priest slit its throat. The blood was the price of the atonement; the innocence of the lamb was exchanged for the sins of the man with his hand on the lamb's head.

Innocence goes one way, and sin goes the other, and without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.

When Jesus, the perfect Lamb of God, was sacrificed on our behalf, he was examined from Nisan 10 to Nisan 12, 32 AD, three days, and was found to be without spot or blemish.

On the Passover, Nisan 14, 32 AD, the Son of Man became the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

And on the third day, Nisan 17, 32 AD, he rose from the dead promising eternal life to all who believe.

user, if you were drowning and someone threw you a rope, would you ask how the rope was made, or would you just grab it?

And under the OT, the animals had to be slaughtered every year, and the sins of that year were atoned for, or covered up, for that year.

However, with Jesus, it was once and for all. He achieved not atonement, the covering over of sins, but propitiation. He died in our place, and our sins are forgiven, and forgotten. Love keeps no list of wrongs.

>How is the justice of God satisfied by Christ's sacrifice?

Listening to the church for theological advice...

Have they ever in 2000 years produced one minute scrap of evidence they work for any gods?

1. God is not "perfectly just."

2. Jesus was murdered, not punished by God.

3. The Hebrew text is mostly a terrorist manifesto written by terrorists, not a divine document, hence the gospel teachings are more or less acceptable to bring someone in line with that which is God.

4. God has never stopped any murderers from murdering or liars from lying and never will. Natural law permits man to murder and lie, souls are governed by divine law. So, if you have a psycho-killer book written by liars in God's name which tells you "it's ok to murder" then you are walking into your own trap if you choose to act on it.

youtube.com/watch?v=QcEqhrxN_rU

Objection 1. It would seem that Christ's Passion did not operate by way of sacrifice. For the truth should correspond with the figure. But human flesh was never offered up in the sacrifices of the Old Law, which were figures of Christ: nay, such sacrifices were reputed as impious, according to Psalm 105:38: "And they shed innocent blood: the blood of their sons and of their daughters, which they sacrificed to the idols of Chanaan." It seems therefore that Christ's Passion cannot be called a sacrifice.

Objection 2. Further, Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x) that "a visible sacrifice is a sacrament—that is, a sacred sign—of an invisible sacrifice." Now Christ's Passion is not a sign, but rather the thing signified by other signs. Therefore it seems that Christ's Passion is not a sacrifice.

Objection 3. Further, whoever offers sacrifice performs some sacred rite, as the very word "sacrifice" shows. But those men who slew Christ did not perform any sacred act, but rather wrought a great wrong. Therefore Christ's Passion was rather a malefice than a sacrifice.

On the contrary, The Apostle says (Ephesians 5:2): "He delivered Himself up for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness."

I answer that, A sacrifice properly so called is something done for that honor which is properly due to God, in order to appease Him: and hence it is that Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x): "A true sacrifice is every good work done in order that we may cling to God in holy fellowship, yet referred to that consummation of happiness wherein we can be truly blessed." But, as is added in the same place, "Christ offered Himself up for us in the Passion": and this voluntary enduring of the Passion was most acceptable to God, as coming from charity. Therefore it is manifest that Christ's Passion was a true sacrifice.

Moreover, as Augustine says farther on in the same book, "the primitive sacrifices of the holy Fathers were many and various signs of this true sacrifice, one being prefigured by many, in the same way as a single concept of thought is expressed in many words, in order to commend it without tediousness": and, as Augustine observes, (De Trin. iv), "since there are four things to be noted in every sacrifice—to wit, to whom it is offered, by whom it is offered, what is offered, and for whom it is offered—that the same one true Mediator reconciling us with God through the peace-sacrifice might continue to be one with Him to whom He offered it, might be one with them for whom He offered it, and might Himself be the offerer and what He offered."

Reply to Objection 1. Although the truth answers to the figure in some respects, yet it does not in all, since the truth must go beyond the figure. Therefore the figure of this sacrifice, in which Christ's flesh is offered, was flesh right fittingly, not the flesh of men, but of animals, as denoting Christ's. And this is a most perfect sacrifice. First of all, since being flesh of human nature, it is fittingly offered for men, and is partaken of by them under the Sacrament. Secondly, because being passible and mortal, it was fit for immolation. Thirdly, because, being sinless, it had virtue to cleanse from sins. Fourthly, because, being the offerer's own flesh, it was acceptable to God on account of His charity in offering up His own flesh. Hence it is that Augustine says (De Trin. iv): "What else could be so fittingly partaken of by men, or offered up for men, as human flesh? What else could be so appropriate for this immolation as mortal flesh? What else is there so clean for cleansing mortals as the flesh born in the womb without fleshly concupiscence, and coming from a virginal womb? What could be so favorably offered and accepted as the flesh of our sacrifice, which was made the body of our Priest?"

Reply to Objection 2. Augustine is speaking there of visible figurative sacrifices: and even Christ's Passion, although denoted by other figurative sacrifices, is yet a sign of something to be observed by us, according to 1 Peter 4:1: "Christ therefore, having suffered in the flesh, be you also armed with the same thought: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sins: that now he may live the rest of his time in the flesh, not after the desires of men, but according to the will of God."

Reply to Objection 3. Christ's Passion was indeed a malefice on His slayers' part; but on His own it was the sacrifice of one suffering out of charity. Hence it is Christ who is said to have offered this sacrifice, and not the executioners.