Those are my beliefs and my understanding of the Scriptures; they are not my traditions.
Penal Substitution and the Trinity
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Martin Marprelate, Mar 18, 2018.
Page 6 of 8
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Firstly, hamartia, the Greek word translated ‘sin’ never means ‘sin offering’ in the New Testament, though it sometimes does elsewhere.
Secondly, hamartia occurs twice in the verse, and it would be strange if it had two meanings in one sentence; but to say, “God made Him who knew no sin offering to be a sin offering for us” makes no sense.
Thirdly, in John 3:14, the Lord Jesus declares, “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so the Son of man must be lifted up……” The reference is, of course, to Numbers 21:8-9, where Moses made a ‘fiery serpent,’ lifted it up on a pole, and everyone who looked upon it was cured of snake-bite. The serpent is clearly some sort of type of the Lord Jesus, but what sort? Well where do we see in Scripture a red, fiery serpent? Well in Revelation 12:3, we are introduced to ‘A great fiery red dragon’ who, in verse 9, is seen to be the serpent, alias Satan himself. So how is Satan a type of Christ? He is a type of Christ made sin for us. The Lord Jesus manifested to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 2:8). The primary satanic work was the luring of mankind into sin. Christ was made the very epitome of sin for us, figured by the brazen serpent, and paid the penalty of His people’s sin in full, so that ‘the accuser of our brethren…..has been cast down’ (Revelation 12:10). Satan can no longer accuse Christians of sin because Christ has taken away their sin debt, nailing it to the cross (Colossians 2:14) marked tetelestai, ‘Paid in Full’ (John 19:20; c.f. Matthew 17:24). Therefore ‘Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies; who is he who condemns?’ (Romans 8:33-34). -
People, we don't know each other. There is no need to wear your feelings on your sleeve. There is no need to report every time someone does not agree with something you said, or they view your theory as foreign to Scripture. This is a debate forum and we are adults, so we need to act as adults even when tempted to devolve in childishness.
People are going to disagree with you, sometimes things can get heated, and if you cannot walk away without feeling injured or feeling a need to retaliate then this really is not the place for you - at least not while you are feeling that way. There is no need for grown men and women to get their feelings hurt over a comment on an online forum by someone they do not really know. There is no need for people to continue to report that they do not like a word someone uses, or they don't like people thinking their view is not biblical. I know that this board does not host formal debates, but this is also not a romper room.
We all get carried away at times and say things we shouldn't. But my goodness, some are starting to get out of hand sensitive and downright childish. Nothing here is that important. Nothing here is worth giving in to mendacity to make a point. Don't give away your integrity to "win" an argument. If needed, simply walk away and cool off. Live to fight another day with your integrity intact. -
-
The Archangel Well-Known Member
[3] Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? [4] Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? [5] You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (Matthew 7:3–5 ESV)
Fact: You said:
This contradiction is not open to interpretation. Even though you said
But, pushing your "logic" a bit further... You insist on being able to define your terms (such as "unbiblical," etc.) in your own way and on your own terms. However, you patently refuse to let anyone define his or her usage of a term (ie. @Martin Marprelate's use of the word "Reformed"). So, the privilege you afford to your self you absolutely refuse to afford to others.
This is not theory; this has been demonstrated.
Then, you launch into statements (such as the post at the top of this reply) which accuses everyone else of being childish. You know, a wise man said, "When you reach the bottom of the hole, you should stop digging." You would be wise to heed the wise man.
The Archangel -
I do believe that your tradition is unbiblical (just as @Martin Marprelate believes my tradition that holds to OSAS is "unbiblical"). Neither is an insult or a cheap shot. -
The Archangel Well-Known Member
The Archangel -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
My 'traditions' are agnosticism leavened with a small amount of High Church Anglicanism. My only religious family connection was my grandfather, who died before I was born, being a Sunday School teacher in a Unitarian church. I never entered any church that was not C of E until I was in my mid-thirties and never a Baptist Church until I was in my forties.
I never knew that there was any such thing as 'Reformed Theology' until I was past 40. That is why I take the strongest possible exception to being told I come from a 'Reformed Tradition.' I don't, and I'll thank people to stop suggesting that I do. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
It's a story about a boy who would cry "wolf" and of the villagers would rush out. But there was no wolf. Until one day the wolf came and the boy cried, but no one believed him. And the wolf ate him. -
The Archangel Well-Known Member
The Archangel -
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
But you have achieved your objective; I quit! I'm finished on this board so long as you're involved with it. -
-
www.baptistboard.com/threads/particular-that-is-reformed-baptists.106888/#post-2368067
www.baptistboard.com/threads/calvin-god-is-the-author-of-sin.103073/page-12#post-2280485
Penal Substitution - Did Jesus Experience Our Punishment?
Calvin: God is the Author of Sin
://www.baptistboard.com/threads/sola-scriptura-the-sufficiency-of-scripture.99648/page-4#post-2230452
-
Here is an example - look in Job 23. There you will read (NASB)
1 Then Job replied,
2 "Even today my complaint is rebellion; His hand is heavy despite my groaning.
3 "Oh that I knew where I might find Him, That I might come to His seat!
Now, look at the lexicon definition for meri (מְרִי). Mine has "rebellion, rebellion, rebellious one, etc.". If you explore a little deeper (look at the root) you'll find the word "bitter". So the word could be translated as rebellion or as bitter. The context favors "bitter" - Job's complaint has become bitter.
Likewise, look at who's hand is heavy. The NASB capitalizes this, indicating that it is God's hand. But this is dependent on the context, not the lexicon. Literally, we could translate this as "my hand is heavy on me in my groaning" (definitely if we use the MT).
The lexicon is a tool that helps us understand the meaning of words, but it is context that will always dictate translation.
And you don't have to stick with the simple terms, you can give me the hard ones - I can take it. :Biggrin
Page 6 of 8