Well this is really killing my first hypothesis. Not only is there no evidence that God can’t be in the presence of sin, now there’s physical evidence that God never left Jesus and was actually close by the whole time. Don said it’s possible that the human aspect of Jesus just felt distant from God and isolated. Is it possible that God didn’t change at all, but maybe the application of the world’s sin changed Jesus, or caused him to lose his ability to commune with God so it appeared to Jesus that God had turned away? I started to pray heavily to better understand what Jesus experienced when sin was placed on him. Was there something about his God-man nature that fundamentally changed? I developed a new hypothesis and potential closing:
Jesus …show more content…
Genesis 3 does not describe the origin of sin, but it does describe the entrance of sin into the realm of humanity. Genesis 3 describes a historical event; Adam and Eve were historical people who sinned against God in time and space. The historicity of this event is essential if an analogy is to be seen in Romans 5:12–21. If Adam was not a real creature who brought sin into the human race at one point in history, then there is no point to Jesus’ redeeming humanity at another point in history. Christ’s own testimony, however, confirms Genesis 3 as a historical event (Matt. 19:3–5). Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned. (Rom. 5:12) The Doctrine of Sin defines sin as 1) a transgression of the law of God, 2) a failure to conform to the standard of God, 3) a principle within man, 4) rebellion against God, 5) wrongful acts toward God and man. Original sin may be defined as “the sinful state and condition in which men are born.” It is so designated because: (1) “it is derived from the original root of the human race (Adam), (2) it is present in the life of every individual from the time of his/her birth, and (3) it is the inward root of all the actual sins that defile the life of man.” Simply stated, it refers to “the corruption of our whole nature.” Our sins are committed against God. God defined what sin is and we chose sin over God. The consequence of our choice is …show more content…
From Hebrews 9:22 we learn that “Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” In the Old Testament the “Azazel” or scapegoat from Leviticus 16 was part of the Day of Atonement. After making sacrifices for himself the high priest would [v6] take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering. He would sacrifice one goat for the sins of the nation. Then he would take the second live goat and while laying his hands on this scapegoat he would confess over it all the sins of the Israelites and put them on the goat’s head. Then they would drive the scapegoat out into the wilderness. Symbolically, the scapegoat removed all their sins even though the other goat had already been sacrificed for the same sins. This is a foreshadowing of Christ taking on all our sins. The difference being that in the Old Testament, one goat carried away all the sins and another goat was sacrificed for atonement of those sins. Also, the Old Testament sacrifices for sin were temporary. As soon as sins were atoned new sins were committed and animal sacrifice doesn’t even come close to the requirements for true, complete, everlasting atonement. In the New Testament, Jesus fulfilled all three roles on the cross as the complete and everlasting atonement for our sins. In Hebrews 4:14 Jesus