Atonemet (Not PSA....my position)

[JonC]

that view doers NOT still explain just how and why the very wrath of God has been propiated?

Yes, it does.

God set forth Jesus as a propitiation through His blood to be received by faith; He is the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world, and He now propitiates on behalf of those who who believe. Jesus is the Firstborn of many brethren. This is necessary because God will not... He will never... clear the guilty.

You just disagree because you believe a specific philosophy should be applied to Scripture.

 

[JonC]

You are thinking of the Mosaic covenant. Abel, Noah and Abraham did not have the luxury of a priest.

I am. Prior to the Law Scripture does not describe sacrifices being offered in order that atonement be made with the animal's blood. And Jesus speaks of the New Covenantin His blood in relation to the Old Covenant.

Adam, Abel, Abraham and Noah did not offer sacrifices to cleans them of sin. They offered sacrifices more akin to the burnt offerings (thanksgiving, praise, etc.).

 

[JonC]

So far the only complaint about my view is that it does not address the concerns Penal Substitution theorists have (like "where does God's wrath go").

That is fair, as I believe PSA theorists are approaching Scripture from an errant philosophy (I find their questions nonsensical in the light of Scripture).

 

[Ben1445]

No. It is not (literally) "instead of".

God did not tell them to break the animal's neck or break their child's neck.

You are arguing the example instead of the true sacrifice.

It really doesn’t matter what happens to the animal if you learned nothing. Are you saying that if Christ had not died we could go on living? Or is it necessary that a life be laid down to save life?

You are talking about Pidyon Haben. The idea was one of buying back the child. Because of the Passover the child os consecrated for God's service. The child is bought back.


Provide an authority source on PSA?? I have. I have provided multiple theologians (many Calvinists), several academic and popular systematic theologies, and several pastors who hold the position.

I don’t care if they are Calvinist or not. Penal substitution is not Calvinist and neither am I.

Can you provide an authority who denies PSA includes Jesus e periencing punishment for God instead of us being punished??

I don’t have a problem with Jesus taking my place. I don’t have to find sources to prove your point. That is your job in the discussion.

All I am saying is that you have failed to provide good reason to throw out penal substitution.

 

[Ben1445]

No one asked the animals if they were suffering!

The animals are all okay. Nothing happened to them. They didn’t lose their lives?!?!?

I don’t understand the direction this is going. Is not the main idea that Christ gave his life and the life is in the blood. The picture (and PICTURE ONLY) of animal sacrifice is that life is the payment for sin and Jesus provided His life as payment to give eternal life, to restore life to fallen men.

Sometimes I don’t know if everyone is talking about the same thing through the entire thread. But I can’t get any good clarification, just denial and vague statements that don’t make any difference to the discussion.
Have I missed something? Is there something significant that I am overlooking?

 

[Ben1445]

Ummm..... yes. PSA holds that Jesus experienced God's punishment for our sins instead of us.

And it does prevent the necessity of my punishment so there is no stretch to say the chastisement Jesus experienced was instead of what I would.

 

[Ben1445]

@JonC

I am still waiting for an answer for the example of Isaac when an animal was literally sacrificed instead of Isaac.

 

[JonC]

@JonC

I am still waiting for an answer for the example of Isaac when an animal was literally sacrificed instead of Isaac.

Sorry. In Sedona.

Read your Bible. Isaac was not sacrificed.

But the point was Abraham's obedience to God and his faithfulness in God's promises.

 

[JonC]

And it does prevent the necessity of my punishment so there is no stretch to say the chastisement Jesus experienced was instead of what I would.

Not biblically.

Biblically what allows you to escape the wrath to come is the Propitiation through Christ's blood received by faith.

If Christ died instead of you then you would not die.

You assume that what Christ experienced was not the wages of sin, the death produced by sin, but instead the judgment of God against the wicked (us when we were numbered among the wicked).

But instead it is appointed man once to die and then the judgment.

 

[JonC]

@JesusFan

This thread was to explain my belief to @Armchair Apologist .

It is not a place for you to defend your belief. It is definitely not a place for you to misrepresent my belief and make false statements.

If you have a question about what I believe then please ask. I am in no way asking that you adopt my view. Believe as you please.

 

[Ben1445]

Sorry. In Sedona.

Read your Bible. Isaac was not sacrificed.

You are catching up. The ram was sacrificed instead of Isaac. Literally sacrificed in the place where Isaac was about to be. He was already bound. If that is not instead of enough for you, there is nothing I can say to help you see it. You are as dedicated to your theories as you claim everyone else is.

But the point was Abraham's obedience to God and his faithfulness in God's promises.

And Isaac was not the sacrifice pictured. But he was a picture of the Sacrificed son. There are several pictures in view.

 

[Ben1445]

Not biblically.

Biblically what allows you to escape the wrath to come is the Propitiation through Christ's blood received by faith.

If Christ died instead of you then you would not die.

Correct. That is why I have eternal life. I have only yet to put off this corruption called flesh.

You assume that what Christ experienced was not the wages of sin, the death produced by sin, but instead the judgment of God against the wicked (us when we were numbered among the wicked).

Genesis 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

That is the very truth. The judgment dot the disobedience of men is death. Jesus died so that we don’t have to. And no I don’t mean like the JWs mean. I mean when the incorruptible puts off corruption.

But instead

I disagree with your previous opinions so I separate the above because I agree with the statement below.

it is appointed man once to die and then the judgment.

correct

Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Revelation 2:11
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

Revelation 20:6
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Revelation 20:14
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Revelation 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

So there is no second death because Jesus tasted death for us, the just for the unjust.

Not that Jesus is spending eternity in the lake of fire instead of us, but that Jesus suffered and died, laid down His life and died for us so that we don’t have to have any part in the second death.

That is Jesus taking the punishment of our peace instead of us.

 

[Ben1445]

And it does prevent the necessity of my punishment so there is no stretch to say the chastisement Jesus experienced was instead of what I would.

Not biblically

So it does not prevent the necessity of my punishment? the chastisement Jesus experienced was not instead of what I would?

I must also suffer punishment for my sin?

 

[JonC]

You are catching up. The ram was sacrificed instead of Isaac. Literally sacrificed in the place where Isaac was about to be. He was already bound. If that is not instead of enough for you, there is nothing I can say to help you see it. You are as dedicated to your theories as you claim everyone else is.



And Isaac was not the sacrifice pictured. But he was a picture of the Sacrificed son. There are several pictures in view.

Abraham did sacrifice the ram instead of Isaac (he had planned on sacrificing Isaac). But why? Sacrificing Isaac was not the point.

This was a burnt offering.

Scripture gives us that the verse is anout Abraham's obedience in faith (he believed in a resurrection). Isaac was obedient to his father, this is true. But also because Isaac realized it was God's command.

It is also a picture of God setting forth His Son as a propitiation through His blood, offering His Son.

 

[JonC]

So it does not prevent the necessity of my punishment? the chastisement Jesus experienced was not instead of what I would?

I must also suffer punishment for my sin?

Christ's death?? Absolutely not. It does reconcile mankind to God but the blood must be applied to you in order for atonement to be achieved.

God set forth His Son as a propitiation through His blood to be recieved by faith.

The atonement model is the same as the OT sacrifices (which was the point - the OT foreshadows the work of Christ).

 

[JonC]

I must also suffer punishment for my sin?

Sorry. I missed this one.

It depends on whether you are talking about the wages of sin (the death produced by sin) as a "punishment" or the judgment of God on the wicked which comes afterwards.

PSA theorists typically merge these two into one, although Scripture constantly keeps them separate (Christ suffered the wages of our sin, was judged righteous by God).

You will suffer the wages of your sin, but if the blood of Christ has been applied - received by faith - then you are reconciled to God in Him. You will die with Christ but be raised in righteousness.


The difference is easy to see.

Christus Victor holds that

1. Jesus suffered the death and suffering produced by our sin as a power of Satan. This is the death that is all men are appointed to die.

2. Jesus was judged righteous by God, given a name above every name, exalted to the glory He once had. This is the judgment of God.

We suffer the wages of our sin, but if we are in Him although we die yet shall we live. He shared in our curse, our death, so that we will share in His life.

PSA holds that the wages of sin, this death, is one with God's judgment. The problem of sin was paying a debt of sin owed to God. The solution is to have somebody else pay it.

 

[Ben1445]

Christ's death?? Absolutely not. It does reconcile mankind to God but the blood must be applied to you in order for atonement to be achieved.

But I must also be punished? I must also suffer the chastisement of my peace?

God set forth His Son as a propitiation through His blood to be recieved by faith.

How was His blood obtained?

The atonement model is the same as the OT sacrifices (which was the point - the OT foreshadows the work of Christ).

 

[Ben1445]

Sorry. I missed this one.

It depends on whether you are talking about the wages of sin (the death produced by sin) as a "punishment" or the judgment of God on the wicked which comes afterwards.

PSA theorists typically merge these two into one,

Well I am not your typical PSA theorist. I don’t even claim to be a PSA doctrine person. But I haven’t seen anything to say it is unscriptural so I don’t deny that it is true. I’m open to any problem with it. I’m still looking for one.

although Scripture constantly keeps them separate (Christ suffered the wages of our sin, was judged righteous by God).

Romans 5:21
That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.


This looks like both sides in one sentence to me.

You will suffer the wages of your sin, but if the blood of Christ has been applied - received by faith - then you are reconciled to God in Him. You will die with Christ but be raised in righteousness.

You are splitting hairs. And your split ends are dead ends.
If Jesus died and that means the second death has no effect on me, that sounds like He gave His life to redeem my life. In your nuanced way, no, Jesus is not spending eternity in Hell instead of me. But Jesus lived a perfect life and suffered the curse that He did not deserve for our sakes. And since propitiation sees Christ’s righteousness instead of my sin, and Jesus paid for my sin instead of me, I think you are the outlier in the conversation.


Enjoy your vacation.

 

[JonC]

But I must also be punished? I must also suffer the chastisement of my peace?


How was His blood obtained?

It is appointed man once to die and then the judgment. We will all suffer the wages of sin (death). But the judgment is different.

If you remain wicked, if you remain guilty of sin then you will suffer eternal punishment.

If you have recieved Christ as the propitiation God set forth through His blood by faith then you will be conformed into the image of Christ, made a new creation, been cleansed, the old you passed and a new come, then you will be righteous.

To borrow from the Early Church, Christ shared in our curse so that we will share in His righteousness. Not "instead of".


You cannot suffer the penaltyfor your own peace. That is a nonsense question (like "where does God's wrath go?".

Christ suffered and died (the penalty your sin produces) for your peace (although you die yet shall you live, death no longer carries a sting).


His blood is not obtained. He is the High Priest who enters the Most Holy Place not made with human hands through His own blood to make atonement for us. This we recieve by faith.

 

[Ben1445]

It is appointed man once to die and then the judgment. We will all suffer the wages of sin (death). But the judgment is different.

That is the second death.

If you remain wicked, if you remain guilty of sin then you will suffer eternal punishment.

If you have recieved Christ as the propitiation God set forth through His blood by faith then you will be conformed into the image of Christ, made a new creation, been cleansed, the old you passed and a new come, then you will be righteous.

To borrow from the Early Church, Christ shared in our curse so that we will share in His righteousness. Not "instead of".


You cannot suffer the penaltyfor your own peace. That is a nonsense question (like "where does God's wrath go?".

It is just a thought provoking question. All I did was reverse the thought that you denied.

I’m glad you don’t think so.

Christ suffered and died (the penalty your sin produces) for your peace (although you die yet shall you live, death no longer carries a sting).

His blood is not obtained. He is the High Priest who enters the Most Holy Place not made with human hands through His own blood to make atonement for us. This we recieve by faith.

But his blood is obtained for an atonement by death. He gave His life to redeem ours.