While it is true that all men are judicially guilty before God; that is, we are all unrighteous, some men sin more than others. Surely Hitler must be guilty of as many individual acts of sin as anyone who has ever lived. His sin was not simply a matter of the heart, it was a matter of his deeds.
So, who pays for Hitler’s sins? That is, who recompenses a righteous God for the sins of Adolf Hitler?
Someone may answer; Hitler has God’s wrath abiding upon him. He is in hell for eternity. So, Hitler pays. But Hitler cannot pay for his own sins. No one can do that. Yes, God is perfectly just in sending Hitler to hell, but, just as a murderer is justly put to death by the state for his murder, his death does not recompense his victim, for his victim remains dead. Additionally, God is not recompensed for the murder by the murderer’s just punishment in hell.
So, who recompenses God for the sins of Hitler? Herein lies the scandal of the cross: Jesus paid for the sins of Hitler! Jesus’ death is a perfect sacrifice for sin that completely satisfied God’s just and righteous anger against sin. Jesus recompensed the Father for all sin. Otherwise, God is never recompensed for sin throughout all eternity. That simply cannot be.
2 comments:
Hey Jody!
I was flipping through random blogs and came on yours and since we seem to share some similar interests, I've been reading through yours posts some. I was interested in clarification as I don't have formal education in theology and maybe you learned things there I haven't considered yet.
I may have read this wrong, but where does the Bible say that God has to be (or wants to be) compensated for our sinfulness? Saying that God has to be compensated seems like we're suggesting that we can take away from Him (by our sins) or add something to Him (Christ compensating God with his sacrifice). That thought process kind of takes away from the "I am" that God is.
You seem to be careful with your words, so I think you wrote what you meant; but I can't seem to follow the train of thought and where it's coming from.
From your other post, I also read the examples you gave as faith coming before regeneration - similar to Paul telling us that "if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." The step of faith here seems to precede the salvation.
Love the blog.
Hi Brock,
Thanks for reading my blog and taking the time to comment. Sorry I did not respond quickly. The system usually e-mails me to say that someone has commented, but it did not do so for your comment. Not sure why.
Hebrews 2:2-3 says: For if the message spoken through angels proved to be so firm that every violation or disobedience received its just penalty, how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?
I understand this verse to mean that, under the law (the message spoken through angels), every sin had to be payed for.
God is certainly unchangeable and does not need man to be complete. He is "I am", as you say. Yet our sin is an offense to Him and he demands to be recompensed for it. Also, Paul describes God as angry over our sin.
To think about it alternately, if our sin is of no consequence to God, why did he give the law? Why does he condemn man? Why did he send his son? Why does it matter to God what we do?
On the comments about the order of faith and regeneration, the stories I listed do put faith first. Some may protest that the regenerative acts in the story were not salvific, however, in at least one case (the blind man) Jesus uses the healing as a picture of salvation. I therefore take the faith preceding regeneration scenario that occurs in the story to apply to salvation. At a minimum, faith and regeneration are simultaneous. However, I see no example in which regeneration precedes faith.
I hope I have been clear and helpful.
Post a Comment