PSA as defined in "Pierced for My Trangressions"

You say "plainly" because that is what your theology teaches - NOT because the text dictates the meaning. A man can lay down his life for a friend in that persons behalf, for that person, to that person's benefit. I have a friend who lay down his life for his country (killed by a landmine while we were in Bosnia). He did not lay down his life instead of his country.

You are pushing the meaning of that passage. The result can be to spare the life of another person but it does not mean instead of the other person. There is a difference between a shepherd dying to protect the sheep, or a soldier dying to protect his country, and the way PSA corrupts Scripture to develop a theory whereby God punishes Jesus instead of punishing us.

 

I'm leaving for awhile - I actually get to dress and go to work (go to a government building and interview someone for a record, anyway). It feels strange after so long working by phone and fax.

 

True.

Hebrews 9:27-28
And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

 

The only problem is that this aggred upon plan does not exist in Scripture.

I have no problem with PSA. I have no problem with Greek Mythology either (I actually enjoy reading Greek Mythology). But I understand that while both can convey philosophical truths in the end neither are true.

 

Aaron was the high priest and represented Israel. The sacrifices were acts of obedience covering the sins of Israel.

Yes, I still deny that Christ died instead of me because that is not in the Bible (I have a high standard when it comes to essential doctrines). But I do believe Christ died for my sins and the chastening for my well being fell upon Him, we are redeemed by His precious blood and freed from the bondage of sin and death AND in Him we escape the wrath to come.

 

I understand the case laid out, but yes, I did simply ignore it in my response.

The reason is that I believe the Atonement is a foundational doctrine. I personally stick very close to Scripture when it comes to foundational doctrines. If Scripture makes sense without having to add theories then I don't add theories. That said, the OT system highlighted our sin, foretold Christ and the Cross, but redemption would come as God's righteousness manifested apart form the law, not through it. The sacrifices were not a model for Christ to follow but a foretelling or shadow of the greater Priest and Sacrifice to come.

People get too caught up in their theologies and theories that they often miss Scripture. It sounds strange but it is true. As there are no passages that say God punished Christ instead of punishing us I have no interest in expounding on ideas that could illustrate this unstated idea.

 

I agree. Jesus died in behalf of the nation, for the nation, so that the nation would not perish.

We can be united in the truth that Jesus died for Israel (and the part you snipped as well, that He died to gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad) so that they would not perish. And Jesus died so that we would have life (so that we would not perish).

This does not, obviously, mean that God was punishing Jesus instead of punishing Israel. That is where PSA becomes a false doctrine emptying the cross of meaning. Christ died instead of Israel perishing to gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad. There is no need to add your theory to Scripture as we can agree on what is written.

 

That does not make sense. "Wrath" is not something that is contained in a place and "sin" is not something upon which wrath can be directed. God's wrath is against unrighteousness in the context that it is against the sinner (the one who sins). Change the sinner there is no wrath. God is not a child who has to be appeased to do right.

 

Where did God keep it? A wrath cabinet? You are misrepresenting Scripture, Brother.