Christ our Substitute - How?

[Jewjitzu]

He did, that is why they had him crucified for blaspheme LOL. His teaching went from law to Spirit and the Jews said that is against their laws.

The spirit is in the law.

Can you really not see that?

He was born under the law, circumcised, etc. Can't you see ? that?

Not to you who doesnt understand what it is to be free from the law.

Since Adam there's always been law.

Nope, it is fulfilled in you by God Himself.

No, He wouldn't have given the law then.

Sure I was same way Jesus was in Matt 3:16, Abraham was by the same Spirit, Moses was by the same Spirit. Yioujust havent recoieved Gods Spirit in you to know what it is to be born of the Spirit He is, is all.

One with the spirit follows the law as God requires. His spirit is the law.

Perhaps I do know more then you know. You cant be in a certain condition that you never have been in.

I've never been dead.

That exactly right, and the Jews falsely accuse Jesus of being God, some in this very forum have falsley accuse me of being God saying this man thinks he is God just as they did Jesus for the very same reason, ignorance for who the God of Love is.

They accused him of not being the son of God.

it is better for me to keep the laws of God and be in His same image that he creates man to be spiritually instead of worshiping some tassel.

But God gave the law of the tassel. You're carnal mind struggles with it.

God says to live it.

Then do all of the commandments.

Me to. Here is what Jesus himself said about that.
John 16:23. And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.

Do you understand the name? God is salvation. Not that the man is salvation.

I will but you won't receive it.

James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

I knew this was your answer. It isn't supported in Tanakh. In fact the opposite is taught. Each commandment is credited with righteousness. Even Jesus said as an example to return a cloak before nightfall was righteousness. One commandment.

Amen' and His will is to be in His same image, perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect Matt 5:48, walk as He walks in it with the same signs following you.

Then follow the commandments which are His will.

Only to you who cant relate to actually loving the other as yourself.

That has nothing to do with it. I'm pointing out how your wrong and opening lying about a basic commandment of tassels. That's just the tip of the iceberg ?.

 

[Gary Mac]

The spirit is in the law.

The spirit is who we are, it is life. Law is what we are supposed to be.

He was born under the law, circumcised, etc. Can't you see ? that?

Oh yes, he was made of a woman born under the law just as you and I were. If he was circumcised that is mans religious rituals. Now the military circumcise soldiers for hygiene purpose to keep from infection because they could not bathe very often.

Since Adam there's always been law.

Yes agree. And Eden was the first place for laws for do's and dont's, but when Adam gained knowledge from God Himself and became like Him to know the difference from the law for the flesh and the law for spirit, the laws for both was fulfilled in that man and he became like Hod to know this difference. Jesus experienced the same in Matt 3:16 from Hod Himself.

No, He wouldn't have given the law then.

The law for flesh is completely different for law for Spirit.

Law for the flesh is do this and dont do that.

Law for Spirit is be this and be that. Be ye therefore perfect, walk as He walks, be one in the Father, He in you and you in Him as one.

You haven't been introduced to the laws for Spirit have you, all that you know is there laws for flesh regulated by the jewish belief system. You have not been introduced to God Himself where all of Gods heaven is opened in you and who He is that you may be exactly perfect as He is perfect. Ands Law such as the kingdom of God doesnt come with observation but is within you Luke 17:20-21. Or the law in 1 John 3, that states when you see Him as He is ye shall be like Him. Adam was the first to recognize Him.

One with the spirit follows the law as God requires. His spirit is the law.

No one with God Spirit are what the law states we should be. God requires you to be in His same image, and God is a Spirit not flesh.

I've never been dead.

I have.

They accused him of not being the son of God.

Yes and falsely accuse him of being God just as the same today do. They said because he claimed to be Gods son made him equal with Goid, that is what they accuse him of blaspheme for.

But God gave the law of the tassel. You're carnal mind struggles with it.

God could care less about a tassel, what He cares about is the hears and mind of people to be of His same Spirit that is Love. Baptisms, communion, sabbaths, tassels, washing of feet, etc, doesnt men one thing to God, what matters to him is who are you in Him? Are you perfect even as He is perfect. That his what He is concerned with.

Then do all of the commandments.

We who are born of God live them, they are who we became. And that is what they are for, a tutorial for what you are supposed to be not try and be.

Do you understand the name? God is salvation. Not that the man is salvation.

Do you? Salvation it to be like the Father of it and in His same spiritual image and walk as He walks He walks in it, Salvation is of the law to be what it says you shoiuld, perfect even as He is perfect.

I knew this was your answer. It isn't supported in Tanakh.

Not catholics, nor Mormons, nor JWs, Baptists, etc, these has their own laws for tradition dont they?

In fact the opposite is taught.

Only by the traditions of the creed that you are of.

Each commandment is credited with righteousness.

And either you are the righteousness of God in His anointing, which would be Christ in you, or you are not.

Even Jesus said as an example to return a cloak before nightfall was righteousness. One commandment.

Here is what he said about that.

Matt 24:18. and the one in the field, do not let him return back to take his cloak. Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Then follow the commandments which are His will.

I dont have to follow them they are who I became, they did their job, they are fulfilled in me. but obviously not you. you are still trying to do what they say. . .

The law is only instructions for a finished product, that is all that it is for. Noting more. The KJV says schoolmaster, otherwise a tutorial.

That has nothing to do with it. I'm pointing out how your wrong and opening lying about a basic commandment of tassels.

Yes 'you are point out how wrong you think the law is designed for -- I agree totally with you in that.

Tassels is not my God it is yours.

That's just the tip of the iceberg ?.

I agree totally! There is so much you need to learn from God Himself instead of the creed of man that you are of.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I get what you are requesting. My point is that it would be a waste of my time to debate someone that has their mind made up already. And yes, I understand it works both ways. The phrase 'agree to disagree' comes to mind.

I think I can speak for @preacher4truth that even though we "already have our minds made up" that does not mean we are closed doors. We are open to correction as we are humans with finite minds, and are subject to error as any other person is. FYI, if we weren't objective, we wouldn't have become reformed/Calvinists.

Now, what I mean is that if you can provide a biblically based argument that refutes our beliefs, we will gladly admit we are wrong. Up to this point, we have not heard one that is biblical enough to change our minds.

 

[preacher4truth]

I think I can speak for @preacher4truth that even though we "already have our minds made up" that does not mean we are closed doors. We are open to correction as we are humans with finite minds, and are subject to error as any other person is. FYI, if we weren't objective, we wouldn't have become reformed/Calvinists.

Now, what I mean is that if you can provide a biblically based argument that refutes our beliefs, we will gladly admit we are wrong. Up to this point, we have not heard one that is biblical enough to change our minds.

Yep.

The whole premise is absurd "I have my mind made up, and accuse you of having yours made up as well, so, I won't talk to you." "And, you're a Calvinist too...so..."

This is how Christians react to other Christians?

That premise needs to be thought through to its end: It is silly, insulting, unChristian, and irresponsible.

 

[preacher4truth]

It is remarkable to me how many professing believers reject the truth of the Substitutionary Atonement/PSA. This is plainly taught in Isaiah 53, Romans 8:3, 1 Peter 2:24, John 10:15,18 &c.

The OT sacrificial system in itself attests to this truth: It was the sacrifice that was punished in the stead of the person. This, of course, all pointed to Christ.

Several of us have personally witnessed a few people in recent history deny these truths, then watched "them" spiral out of control and go on to attack other Biblical truths along with the persons who believe them. It has gone to such an extent that they have started their own sect elsewhere to accommodate those who have been led astray by these errors.

Why anyone would fight these truths, especially when they *claim* to be Christian is something to ponder.

 

[Gary Mac]

Yep.

The whole premise is absurd "I have my mind made up, and accuse you of having yours made up as well, so, I won't talk to you." "And, you're a Calvinist too...so..."

This is how Christians react to other Christians?

That premise needs to be thought through to its end: It is silly, insulting, unChristian, and irresponsible.

The truth is if ones mind is made up, (lest use this as example, a man is God), but then you come along and say God is a Spirit and you Arte supposed to be like Him and perfect even as God in heaven is perfect, and reject it to be, then it is very insulting to your belief system.

A Christian is Christ like, anointed of Gods same Spirit of mind just as Jesus was of Christ, anointed of God.

The problem in Christendom is that most refuse to receive in themselves Gods perfection which simply is Love, Holy Love, or Holy Spirit that Love is, for God is Love, God is a Spirit of Love. And His kingdom resides sin man, Luke17:20-21. So simple yet man in his beliefs about a god has made it so complicated, even to the point of hating thy brother, and call it christianity -- that is insulting to be that simple Spirit of Love.

In that Gods ultimate purpose is that -- He who is Love may be manifest in your mortal man that you may be perfect as He is. That is so simple yet insulting to religious minds.

 

[Gary Mac]

It is remarkable to me how many professing believers reject the truth of the Substitutionary Atonement/PSA.

believers in what is the real issue. Everyone here seems to have a belief instead of the reality of GHod Himself manifest in you no different from Him manifesting Himself in Jesus in Matt 3;16. Jesus had a belief about god and taught those beliefs as rabbi in the jewish temple, but when God Himself came and open in Jesus who He really is and all of His heaven in that man, only then was atonement made for Jesus.

This is plainly taught in Isaiah 53, Romans 8:3, 1 Peter 2:24, John 10:15,18 &c.

The OT sacrificial system in itself attests to this truth: It was the sacrifice that was punished in the stead of the person. This, of course, all pointed to Christ.

Yes and that sacrifice is to self beliefs, dying to self, unlearning everything you have been taught my mans beliefs and letting God Himself renew your mind to think in His terms that's simply is Love and walk in it as He walks in it.

Several of us have personally witnessed a few people in recent history deny these truths, then watched "them" spiral out of control and go on to attack other Biblical truths along with the persons who believe them.

SO true, and even when those who believe Jesus was God read what Jesus Said of himself and his God who sent him as in this in what Jesus Said in that it is very clear he said he was not God, these actually are accusing Jesus of blaspheme, a liar, and against their rules for a man as a god.

John 12:49: For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

John 12:44-45. who believes in me, does not believe in me but in Him who sent me. He who sees me sees Him who sent me.
John

7:16. Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

John 5 :17 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

John 5:19. “Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.”

John 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

Joihn 17:2-21, the kingdom of God doesnt come withj observation, it is withn you

John 16:23. And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.

John 14:16. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Matt 11:25. At that time Jesus declared, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because You have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.

It has gone to such an extent that they have started their own sect elsewhere to accommodate those who have been led astray by these errors.

There are over some 35,000 known different beliefs systems called denominations who has their own beliefs for a god.

Why anyone would fight these truths, especially when they *claim* to be Christian is something to ponder.

Yes and you know there is no criminal who is half bad, in actuality as you know yourself to be in possibility.

In the flesh is no good thing, the good comes through when you see yourself as you see others.

 

[Stephen]

It is remarkable to me how many professing believers reject the truth of the Substitutionary Atonement/PSA. This is plainly taught in Isaiah 53, Romans 8:3, 1 Peter 2:24, John 10:15,18 &c.

I would say it is more remarkable that people deny the idea that we are saved by grace, but rather affirm and insist that we are saved by payment. They portray God as some bloodthirsty monster demanding a blood sacrifice as payment.

If we actually read the passages presented to affirm such a monstrous doctrine, the actual idea of substitution is missing from those very passages. It is almost as if somebody fantasized something into the text.

For example:

In Isaiah 53 it says Jesus was wounded for our transgressions, but nowhere does it say that we should have been there being wounded.

1 Peter 2:24 actually rejects the idea of Christ doing something in our place as it says we have to do the very same thing:

24 “He himself bore our sins” in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed.”​

In Roman 8:3 the word "in our place" or something to that effect is missing.

3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.​

And John 10:18 is totally devoid of the idea of Christ taking our place, it goes even further and positively contradicts the idea of substitution by Christ being given the authority to take up his life again.

18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”​

The OT sacrificial system in itself attests to this truth: It was the sacrifice that was punished in the stead of the person. This, of course, all pointed to Christ.

As if penal substitution wasn't in itself made up out of thin air, we have this.

In reality, very few of the sacrifices were actually related to sin. The sacrifices open with a "burnt" offering in Leviticus 1, which was a completely voluntary sacrifice offered simply because you love God, and that was the sacrifice called the "daily" sacrifice and where a lamb was constantly on the altar. It wasn't a punishment, it was an expression of love for God by his people. Leviticus 2, 3, is the same idea describing different types of sacrifices that are all purely voluntary and unrelated to sin.

It isn't until Leviticus 4-5 that you have a "sin" offerings, and the only cover UNINTENTIONAL sins. All other sins are covered by the sacrifices in Leviticus 16 where 1 animal covered all of Israel (the dead goat) and nowhere does it say that animal died in the place of Israel. And note, sins were carried away by the animal not killed (v 20-22).

So no, the sacrificial system doesn't teach the sacrifice "was punished in the stead of the person", that is simply a made up idea. Those animals weren't afflicted and tortured, they were killed mercifully and their deaths pointed forward to the greater sacrifice.

Why anyone would fight these truths, especially when they *claim* to be Christian is something to ponder.

I suspect it is because the read their bible.


But I suppose if you have fantasized a doctrine into the bible, nobody will ever talk you out of it.

 

[preacher4truth]

After looking at your sig, I am assuming you are Calvinist?

... it would be a waste of my time to debate someone that has their mind made up already.

So, in other words you're looking for easy prey. Got it.

 

[utilyan]

One of the theories bandied about is that Christ is our substitute, in a nutshell the belief is stated as:

"Penal Substitutionary Atonement is the view that Christ was a legal substitute for us on the cross and that he bore the penalty for our sins that is due to us." link​

​

First, we should define the word "Substitute": a person or thing that takes the place or function of another

This idea begs a few questions.

The first question is what penalty for sins did Jesus bear that is due us? He died on the cross. We will also die. Can Christ be said to have born the penalty for our sins if we also bear the penalty for our sins? Christ's comments on our relationship to the cross seem to directly contradict the doctrine. He said:

”Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.”-Matthew 16:24​

Christ teaches that we should take up our cross and follow him, not that he should carry it in our place.


The second question is: What does this theory predict? If Christ is our substitute and paid the penalty for sin, then shouldn't his tomb be occupied and the graveyards be full? The exact opposite is true, Christ’s tomb is empty and the graveyards are full.


The next question is: Aren't we to present ourselves as sacrifices? Paul teaches:

Romans 12:1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. 2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.​

If Christ was a sacrifice in our place, there would be no need for us to be a sacrifice.



So, the ultimate question is, what is this doctrine teaching? In what way did Jesus do something in our place?

All PENAL SUB teaches that teaches is God never forgives.

Its also built on a FALSE JUDGEMENT that everyone in the world "DESERVES hell".

A judgement that has never been stated in scriptures.

 

[Our Lord's God]

It is remarkable to me how many professing believers reject the truth of the Substitutionary Atonement/PSA. This is plainly taught in Isaiah 53, Romans 8:3, 1 Peter 2:24, John 10:15,18 &c.

How often do you see things which are not there?

 

[Roger Thornhill]

One of the theories bandied about is that Christ is our substitute, in a nutshell the belief is stated as:

"Penal Substitutionary Atonement is the view that Christ was a legal substitute for us on the cross and that he bore the penalty for our sins that is due to us." link​

​

First, we should define the word "Substitute": a person or thing that takes the place or function of another

This idea begs a few questions.

The first question is what penalty for sins did Jesus bear that is due us? He died on the cross. We will also die. Can Christ be said to have born the penalty for our sins if we also bear the penalty for our sins? Christ's comments on our relationship to the cross seem to directly contradict the doctrine. He said:

”Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.”-Matthew 16:24​

Christ teaches that we should take up our cross and follow him, not that he should carry it in our place.


The second question is: What does this theory predict? If Christ is our substitute and paid the penalty for sin, then shouldn't his tomb be occupied and the graveyards be full? The exact opposite is true, Christ’s tomb is empty and the graveyards are full.


The next question is: Aren't we to present ourselves as sacrifices? Paul teaches:

Romans 12:1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. 2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.​

If Christ was a sacrifice in our place, there would be no need for us to be a sacrifice.



So, the ultimate question is, what is this doctrine teaching? In what way did Jesus do something in our place?

You try hard to make Jesus' death as having no effect.

One thing the ransom provides is a reconciliation between God and men.

Colossians 1:20 through him to reconcile all things unto himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross

So it means peace with God and not enemies of God, see verse 21. Verse 22 says its NOW that we have this reconciliation.

American Standard VersionColossians 1:22

Yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and without blemish and unreproveable before him:

As a result of being friends with God now we can be resurrected if we die and remain God's friends.

As for your misapplication of the scriptures you presented, I'm not interested in unraveling that mess ?

 

[Roger Thornhill]

One of the theories bandied about is that Christ is our substitute, in a nutshell the belief is stated as:

"Penal Substitutionary Atonement is the view that Christ was a legal substitute for us on the cross and that he bore the penalty for our sins that is due to us." link​

​

First, we should define the word "Substitute": a person or thing that takes the place or function of another

This idea begs a few questions.

The first question is what penalty for sins did Jesus bear that is due us? He died on the cross. We will also die. Can Christ be said to have born the penalty for our sins if we also bear the penalty for our sins? Christ's comments on our relationship to the cross seem to directly contradict the doctrine. He said:

”Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.”-Matthew 16:24​

Christ teaches that we should take up our cross and follow him, not that he should carry it in our place.


The second question is: What does this theory predict? If Christ is our substitute and paid the penalty for sin, then shouldn't his tomb be occupied and the graveyards be full? The exact opposite is true, Christ’s tomb is empty and the graveyards are full.


The next question is: Aren't we to present ourselves as sacrifices? Paul teaches:

Romans 12:1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. 2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.​

If Christ was a sacrifice in our place, there would be no need for us to be a sacrifice.



So, the ultimate question is, what is this doctrine teaching? In what way did Jesus do something in our place?

One problem with your analysis is that you ask about substitute and not ransom.

American Standard VersionMark 10:45
For the Son of man also came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

 

[Stephen]

You try hard to make Jesus' death as having no effect.

False. My claim was limited to the idea that the effect of Christ's death was or was not substitutionary.

Other effects like cleansing our consciousnesses, bringing peace with God, and redeeming us from sin were not addressed. These effects are clearly laid out in the bible. They are also in direct contradiction to the idea of Christ being our substitute.

One thing the ransom provides is a reconciliation between God and men.

Colossians 1:20 through him to reconcile all things unto himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross

So it means peace with God and not enemies of God, see verse 21. Verse 22 says its NOW that we have this reconciliation.

American Standard VersionColossians 1:22

Yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and without blemish and unreproveable before him:

As a result of being friends with God now we can be resurrected if we die and remain God's friends.

Yes.

But this has nothing to do with the idea of "substitution". So I am at a loss as to why it is in the conversation.

As for your misapplication of the scriptures you presented, I'm not interested in unraveling that mess ?

Thus far, my supposed misapplication of scripture hasn't been addressed.

 

[Stephen]

One problem with your analysis is that you ask about substitute and not ransom.

10:45[/URL]
For the Son of man also came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

That is a feature, not a bug.

Christ is our ransom as the bible says many times and you cited one here. In contrast he is not our substitute, and the bible calls him our substitute exactly zero times.

• In the Penal Substitution model, Christ paid off our sin debt to God. I.e. God did not forgive sins, but rather was fully paid off. That means that we no longer owe a debt to God and are free from him. (and oddly enough saved by payment rather than grace)
• In contrast, Christ as our ransom freed us from slavery to sin, so we can serve the living God. (Romans 6). God bought us. He made payment, he didn't receive payment.

The scriptural idea of Christ redeeming us sits in direct contradiction to the man-made idea of Christ being our substitute.

 

[Roger Thornhill]

That is a feature, not a bug.

Christ is our ransom as the bible says many times and you cited one here. In contrast he is not our substitute, and the bible calls him our substitute exactly zero times.

• In the Penal Substitution model, Christ paid off our sin debt to God. I.e. God did not forgive sins, but rather was fully paid off. That means that we no longer owe a debt to God and are free from him. (and oddly enough saved by payment rather than grace)
• In contrast, Christ as our ransom freed us from slavery to sin, so we can serve the living God. (Romans 6). God bought us. He made payment, he didn't receive payment.

Ps 49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, Nor give to God a ransom for him; 8 (For the redemption of their life is costly, And it faileth for ever 9 That he should still live alway, That he should not see corruption ASV

The scriptural idea of Christ redeeming us sits in direct contradiction to the man-made idea of Christ being our substitute.

I don't use the term substitute. I use ransom. Sorry if I intruded but I like the subject matter.

 

[Our Lord's God]

Ps 49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, Nor give to God a ransom for him; 8 (For the redemption of their life is costly, And it faileth for ever 9 That he should still live alway, That he should not see corruption ASV

The often abusede passage is about redeeming a soul with worldly riches such as silver and good. No amount of worldly wealth will ever be enough.

Why should I fear when evil days come,
when wicked deceivers surround me—
6 those who trust in their wealth
and boast of their great riches?
7 No one can redeem the life of another
or give to God a ransom for them—
8 the ransom for a life is costly,
no payment is ever enough—
so that they should live on forever
and not see decay.
10 For all can see that the wise die,
that the foolish and the senseless also perish,
leaving their wealth to others.
11 Their tombs will remain their houses forever,
their dwellings for endless generations,
though they had named lands after themselves.
12 People, despite their wealth, do not endure;
they are like the beasts that perish.

 

[rod.ney]

If someone else paid off your debt, the bank still didn't forgive your loan. The bank got paid in full.






I accept one, and I am asking about the other.




I'm not sure how explaining Christ being raised to everlasting life like the saints will be has to do with the idea.

The claim of Christ being our substitute is that Christ died in our place. As such nobody should die. If that isn't the case, then please muster the courage to explain why people still die.





If you don't know what that means, I can't help you.




You seem to be fantasizing something here. How does the resurrection play into your explanation. Resurrection by definition means that somebody died. If Christ died in your place, then by definition you won't die and there is no need for resurrection.

If you can't explain it, then that's fine.

FYI, those born again Christians who are STILL Alive when 1 Thess.4:17 happens do in FACT not die. Their still alive mortal ( flesh & Blood ) bodies get TRANSFORMED ( Philippians 3:21 ) into their new Immortal flesh & bone bodies just like Jesus' glorious Flesh & Bone resurrection body ( see Luke 24:39 )! Why flesh & bones instead flesh & blood ------- because flesh & blood can not enter Heaven ( 1 Cor.15:50 )! Christ shed His blood ( to pay for our Sins ) and it was NOT replaced in His body when He rose from the dead on the 3rd day!