Divine Justice

[Martin Marprelate]

No. I know you can. I was a PSA theorist most of my life.

You keep mentioning this as if you hadn't been doing so for 15 years or more, and as if it were a badge of honour. It isn't. Galatians 1:6 applies

Until yesterday I had not read anything of those I just quoted. I have quoted others oin the past and did not want to recycle them

I quoted them because @DaveXR650 was unaware that others shared my view of the Atonement. It appears he is unaware that any other view exists, except as private interpretations.

It is a logical fallacy (a formal logical fallacy) to dismiss a belief based on where an adherent studied, works or their denomination. And you are not accurate (you cherry pick what you think will earn you "points"). I mainly referenced Rillera.

Andrew Rillera earned his PhD from Duke and his MA from Fuller. He is the Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies and Theology at Kings University.

Leonard Zee, earned his degree from Calvin Thological Seminary.

Moffitt earned his PhD from Duke.

Campbell earned His degree from the University of Toronto.

I would sooner hear from a man like Alec Motyer, who was one of Britain's greatest authorities on the O.T. "I’m not really a scholar. I’m just a man who loves the Word of God.”[

The man who first articulated your faith never earned a degree in Christianity. He studied secular law.

You are right. The Lord Jesus, Paul, John, Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Polycarp never earned degrees in Christianity. Did Paul study secular law?

AW Tozier was self taught.

Do you mean A.W. Tozer?

The standard for truth is not where one works, their education, their denomination, their gender, or the color of their skin. God's words ("what is written", the biblical text) is the standard.

Indeed. William Tyndale was educated at both Oxford and Cambridge Universities, but He gave his life, quite lierally, to bring the word of God in English to the people. He wrote, around ten years before Calvin wrote anything:
'By grace we are plucked out of Adam, the ground of all evil, and graffed into Christ, the root of all goodness. In Christ God loved us, his elect and chosen, before the world began, and reserved us unto the knowledge of his Son and of his holy gospel; and when the gospel is preached to us, openeth our hearts, and giveth us grace to believe, and putteth the Spirit of Christ in us.' William Tyndale, 'A Pathway into the Scriptures, c. 1525.
In his exposition of 1 John2:2 (written c. 1531), he wrote:
'And he is the satisfaction for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for all the world's' That I call 'satisfaction' the Greek calleth Ilasmos and the Hebrew Copar: and it is first taken for the suaging of wounds, sores and swellings, and the taking away of pain and smart of them; and thence it is borrowed for the pacifying and suaging of wrath and anger, and for an amends-making, a contenting, satisfaction, a ransom and making at one, as it is to see abundantly in the Bible. So that Christ is a full contenting, satisfaction and ransom for our sins, and not for ours only, which are apostles and disciples of Christ while he was yet here; or for ours which are Jews, or Israelites, and the seed of Abraham; or for ours that now believe at this present time, but for all men's sins, both for their sins which went before and believed the promises to come, and for ours which have seen them fulfilled, and also for all them which shall afterward believeunto the world's end, of whatsoever nation or degree they be.'

I have added this, not to contend that Tyndale is right in every particular, but that before the time of Calvin he held to the Doctrines of Free Grace and of Penal Substitutions (as did all the English Reformers) against the errors of the Church of Rome, and that he endured poverty, exile and death to bring the word of God to us.

 

[Ben1445]

I was a PSA theorist most of my life.

There are many Baptists who have converted their beliefs to Catholicism, SDA, and even Mormonism and JW.

Does changing one’s mind mean that they are on to bigger and better things?

I do wish that you would drop your appeal to your experience and expertise. It lends no merit to your beliefs. We already know what your beliefs are. That they are yours does nothing to make them right. And for those that were yours, that does nothing to prove them wrong.
There were many disciples of Christ who turned away from Jesus because of a teaching that was difficult to accept. You have to explain why Jesus being cursed for us (instead of us) and ourselves putting on His righteousness is not PSA.

 

[JonC]

I welcome you bringing in other names and wish you had done so more and earlier. I'll read more as I have time of course. I guess because I have not read these guys in any kind of detail I would ask this. We had begun discussing earlier regarding that if Jesus bore our sin in his own body on the cross, granting any interpretation you wish to give that for a moment - is it still possible to have the Father not desiring as part of a plan, that it be his will that Jesus do this. In other words, the choice still seems to be either God wanted Christ to suffer and die like this, or else it was something men did as a horrible sin and as you seem to say, God had nothing to do with it.

If the theologians address this, I will discover it. Otherwise, I wonder if we're not throwing up another deflection like when you said Torrance was against penal substitution then when I looked into it and found out it wasn't so the argument was that after all he was just another Presbyterian minister. So first, I would like to settle this issue regarding the death of Christ - was it by the Father's will or not.

I do not know why you are so hung up on Torrance. I never said I hold his view. I will say you are probably the only person I have encountered that viewed Torrance as just another Presbyterian minister holding PSA. Funny thing is Torrance himself did not view himself as holding that position. He viewed it as too much a "legal transition". Torrance was famous in his rejection that Christ's death appeased God. Sproul viewed his "participatory" atonement as different.

The only reason I mention this is you seem to see PSA everywhere. Torrance was wrong about what he actually believed (Total Atonement is the same as PSA to you). Speoul was wrong that Torrance's view was different because it looks the same to you.

I can guarantee that if you read Rillera you will somehow walk away saying "yea... but that really is PSA".

The book I ran across deals primarily with the sacrifices. It is Lamb of the Free by Andrew Remington Rillera.

You will probably find it academically lacking (per MartinM, anyway) as he earned his PhD from Duke and his MA from Fuller. I think MartinM views Duke and Fuller less a degree than whereever he went to University.

But ignore the "it was Duke...and Fuller....diploma mills!"..thinking and just consider the words against Scripture.

And try your best not to read PSA into their words.

 

[JonC]

You keep mentioning this as if you hadn't been doing so for 15 years or more, and as if it were a badge of honour. It isn't. Galatians 1:6 applies

I would sooner hear from a man like Alec Motyer, who was one of Britain's greatest authorities on the O.T. "I’m not really a scholar. I’m just a man who loves the Word of God.”[

You are right. The Lord Jesus, Paul, John, Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Polycarp never earned degrees in Christianity. Did Paul study secular law?

Do you mean A.W. Tozer?

Indeed. William Tyndale was educated at both Oxford and Cambridge Universities, but He gave his life, quite lierally, to bring the word of God in English to the people. He wrote, around ten years before Calvin wrote anything:
'By grace we are plucked out of Adam, the ground of all evil, and graffed into Christ, the root of all goodness. In Christ God loved us, his elect and chosen, before the world began, and reserved us unto the knowledge of his Son and of his holy gospel; and when the gospel is preached to us, openeth our hearts, and giveth us grace to believe, and putteth the Spirit of Christ in us.' William Tyndale, 'A Pathway into the Scriptures, c. 1525.
In his exposition of 1 John2:2 (written c. 1531), he wrote:
'And he is the satisfaction for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for all the world's' That I call 'satisfaction' the Greek calleth Ilasmos and the Hebrew Copar: and it is first taken for the suaging of wounds, sores and swellings, and the taking away of pain and smart of them; and thence it is borrowed for the pacifying and suaging of wrath and anger, and for an amends-making, a contenting, satisfaction, a ransom and making at one, as it is to see abundantly in the Bible. So that Christ is a full contenting, satisfaction and ransom for our sins, and not for ours only, which are apostles and disciples of Christ while he was yet here; or for ours which are Jews, or Israelites, and the seed of Abraham; or for ours that now believe at this present time, but for all men's sins, both for their sins which went before and believed the promises to come, and for ours which have seen them fulfilled, and also for all them which shall afterward believeunto the world's end, of whatsoever nation or degree they be.'

I have added this, not to contend that Tyndale is right in every particular, but that before the time of Calvin he held to the Doctrines of Free Grace and of Penal Substitutions (as did all the English Reformers) against the errors of the Church of Rome, and that he endured poverty, exile and death to bring the word of God to us.

Yes. I will keep mentioning it. God saved me from being carried away by that philosophy in a single day. I was not even questioning OSA (like you, I assumed it would be in the Bible and like you I was wrong).

DaveXR650 once said I was obcessed with Christ redeeming us. I ignored it as an insult at the time. But he is right. I do think of the gospel of Christ continually.


No, Paul did not study secular law. The Early Church writers were educated (the education system was different, it was one of apprenticeship).