Why did God need to sacrifice Jesus to forgive sin?

This is pointless. You were caught out in your argument about the scales of justice, and you well know it. You refuse to acknowledge your error by trying to draw me into a personal attack.

I wish you well, but your path isn't mine.

 

You might be surprised at what my understanding may cause me to speak and you are just oblivious. Did you understand what I said?

 

I have a friendly curiosity as to what your interest is in this discussion.

 

Straight and balanced means the same thing?

I think I already answered this one.

What are my sins? What are you my father confessor?

What in the world are you talking about?

What in the world are you talking about?

What in the world are you talking about?

What in the world are you talking about?

What in the world are you talking about?

Like I said; "Because Satan’s system is still in existence".

I don't believe I said anything of the sort.

No, I think death is an enemy that can be done away with.

Actually I believe very little is preordained.

Actually I believe there is a good chance I may never have to die.

Was what written?

What?

What in the world are you talking about.

Okay.

So you believe the inner qualities of a person are the same as having a lot of material possessions. Good luck with that.

No, just an observer.

Okay?

Thanks for the "correction", so are you saying that you don't want anything to fix things and you want things to continue as they are?

It must be the "new" math because it doesn't make any sense.

Most of what you have said in this post doesn't doesn't relate to the quotes you have directed them at and even trying to relate to them as free standing comments, they don't make a lot of sense, maybe you should wait till you are in a better frame of mind before you continue this conversation.

 

I can attest to his sense and have no trouble understanding him.

 

Actually much of what you had to say was double talk and had very little to do with the actual gist of what was being discussed. I was trying to be nice and make light of it but you got bent and tried to get Heavy about the whole thing. That is your privilege to do so if you wish but it just makes you look bad trying to force me to tell you what I actually thought of your comment.

I didn't expect it to be. Fair thee well.

 

Just like you understood what I was saying.

 

No, I am saying who one is is what one has.

It's strange how you think I somehow find the discussion upsetting. I'm admittedly more bored by it than I might be were it a conversation, but that's forgivable, isn't it?

 

Doesn't assessing "relative" weight imply balance? Why did you use the word relative?

 

Like I said, I understood what you said, I understood what Dejavu said.
You seem to be the one perplexed. Did you understand what I said?

Balancing accounts is not justice, it is accounting.

 

Perhaps if you pay the penance.

 

Thanx.

In your opinion?

Perhaps to show that they need to be balanced?

A scale can be used for any number of things. Using it for one thing and not another does not that use incorrect. I fact you, yourself later point out in this very post, that it can be used for that very purpose and so it is not so "self-evidently incorrect" to use it that way.

Yes that is true and is one of the uses for a scale.

Interestingly it is called, as you point out, a "balance-beam scale".

I don't believe I asserted that was its only usage.

There you go, is that better?

 

I was wondering.

No, I was not now indicating in any way that I thought you were upset, quite honestly your post was so scattered that I thought you had taken drugs and I was trying to avoid saying so.

Perhaps as you say it was just plain boredom and I just mistook it for drugs.

Then maybe you should take my advice and "wait till you are in a better frame of mind before you continue this conversation".

 

No, you didn't understand what I was saying or you wouldn't have said that you could do it.

 

No, I'm saying 'one for one' does not apply by subtraction, by accounting for a loss with another loss.

You're saying adams loss of innocence, and consequently everyone elses, save gods, needed to be reckoned for by the human sacrifice of a perfect life, that of jesus'.

I say you're out of your miserable mind, or quite in it, at least its miserable aspect.

On the bright side, you seem now to be saying we don't have to die, or at least there are ones alive on earth you think don't have to.

lol

 

thedope:

:-D Pay the interest?

 

It is truly odd that you feel closer to my motives than I do.
I will say it again, knowing full well what the conversation was ad nauseam, I can put the exact same weight on both sides of the scale at the same time. I am telling you the truth. I said what I said to make my point, using the stand alone remark that putting the exact same weight on both sides at the same time was not possible. I was pointing out how it is possible, by definition, to put the exact same weight on both sides of the scale at the same time.

You always attempt to limit contributions to these discussions to fit your parameters instead of leaning toward comprehension of things that might take you by surprise. When I say I understood the conversation, I mean I understood the conversation. If you object to my testimony at this point, that is tantamount to calling me a liar.

 

I'm not sure how you're getting that what Jesus did was a loss.

If someone has a million dollars and no children and he decides to spend it to feed other people's starving children, how is that a loss?

Adam, our father, give up prefect life through sin, leaving his children in sin and death. Jesus who was sinless had a sinless perfect life that was not forfeit through sin, so he had the right to apply that perfect life anyway he chose. He chose to use it to buy us back from sin and death. Perfect life was the price and that is what Jesus paid.

That's probably not the way I would say it but that is kind of the idea.

Once again, you can say almost anything you want, don't make it so.

I'm not just now saying it, those that have talked with me know that is what I've been saying all along.

Back at ya.

 

This is pointless, you still have no idea what was said and prove that every time you try and prove otherwise.

You keep talking about using the same "amount" of weight or a duplicate that weighs the same, like that was what I was talking about, when I was talking about the exact same weight, I was talking about the exact same object and the same object cannot be in two different places at the same time, so the exact same object cannot be used to balance itself, no matter what you try to say.

So okay if that is what you want, if you keep saying that you understood, then yes you are a liar.

 

OWB:

Again, we're talking about a life, not money. You think death is not the loss of life? Jesus died. If you're not joking, you are confused to say the least. Many would say you're mentally ill.

"Us"?! I wasn't alive when Jesus was murdered, not that anything of my life would have been "bought back" had I been.

If Adam is our father, is god our grandfather? If one can make neither head nor tail of a particular theology, I don't think it matters. You really seem to. lol

So who is it on earth you think doesn't have to die? You don't seem to think it's everyone, so just a few? Who?