Originally Posted by ampaterry
...Then let us look at Christs sacrifice.
We are told that he suffered for our sins.
This raises the question; did he suffer for a sin which I managed to not commit?
Or did he suffer too little because I commited more sins than anticipated?...
Like most logic problems, the issue is illusory - he died "for" our sins, in the original language, could have (probably should have) been translated, "he died because we are sinful". I.e., it is our sinful character that caused us to torture and kill that guy. In other words, it's not about atonement or expiation. Shame, fear, and guilt are not a part of the liberation of Christ. Instead, the crucifixion is about love: no matter what we, eaters of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, did to that guy, his only response to us was a reflection of God's unconditional love, compassion, and mercy. He's up there dying on the cross in agony, and he's got compassion for us, because "we know not what we do"!!! As Paul said, the "chierographon", journal, book of misdeeds and demerits, or whatever, has been nailed to the cross and no longer exists. Daddy is simply not keeping track of "sin" - that's Santa's job ("He sees you when you're sleeping...", and, "He's making a list, checking it twice...").
Jesus himself states his understanding of the events of that day by incorporating Psalm 22 by the use of the first line, "My God, my God, oh, why have you forsaken me?". And if you look toward the last part of that psalm, you find that he knows the purpose of his intentional act of submission to the will of man: a generation yet unborn shall hear of Your saving grace.
It worked, didn't it?