Featured Atonement theories?

The above quotation is a bunch of "bull" and contrary to all of Scripture; in fact demonstrates a total and deliberate ignorance of the teaching of Scripture! Start with Genesis 1:1 and end with Revelation 22:21: And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. [John 8:32]

 

I agree :thumbs:

 

You and Wrenn seem to be hung up on the idea that Christians do not understand the resurrection. I would simply remind you that a common sermon topic is the impact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ on the Apostles.

I would further remind you of what Paul teaches in the following:

1 Corinthians 15:12-19
12. Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13. But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14. And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
16. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17. And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
19. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

Do you really believe that God the Son laid aside His Glory, made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: if it were not necessary that He die. Are we to throw away Scripture because of the foolish ramblings of sinful man? The necessity of a blood sacrifice for sin was demonstrated in Genesis 3. However, Scripture tells us that the blood of animals was insufficient to take away sin.

Hebrews 9:18-26
18. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
19. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20. Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
21. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
22. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
23. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Hebrews 10:1-12
1. For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
6. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
8. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9. Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12. But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

So the above Scripture is to be tossed out because of the foolish ramblings of sinful man? There is heresy being taught on this Forum and it should not be tolerated!

I would disagree. Any claim that the death of jesus christ is not necessary for the forgiveness of sin is a "nut job".

 

Thanks much for the above. I was surprised by your remarks and likely did not read as carefully as I should have.

 

Just a quick note on what God "had" to do! As we know God does as He pleases, rather than being restricted to some superior requirement. Thus God keeps His promises, and behaves consistent with His revealed attributes of Love, Mercy and Justice.

We know God chose the Word to be His Lamb before creation, before the Fall, and therefore was part of God's plan of redemption. To debate whether this ransom for the sin of the world was required by God's attribute of perfect justice seems akin to debating from silence.

Speculation is the mother of false doctrine. We know what God did, He sent His Son to die for the ungodly. This provided reconciliation for the world and whoever among mankind that receives the reconciliation is justified and made righteous, without blemish or flaw.

Asking questions like why without the shedding of blood is there no forgiveness of sin, simply asks us to speculate if God could have provided a different redemption plan. Lets stick with what God has revealed until we see Him face to face.

 

Derek Flood is one of my favorite authors. Here is his bio page from the same site: http://therebelgod.com/derek-floodBio.html

Derek says this: "I've been a longtime voice in the post-conservative evangelical movement, focusing on wrestling with questions of faith and doubt, violence in the Bible, relational theology, and understanding the cross from the perspective of grace and restorative justice. This is the focus of my book Healing the Gospel which offers a major critique of penal substitution, and the corresponding idea that the gospel is about satisfying an angry God's demand for retribution and violence, instead proposing that the gospel is actually about God's demonstration of grace and enemy love in Jesus."

I am in full accord with him here. I also am in accord with him in feeling that I don't fit with the religious right or the religious left.

In no way does Christus Victor teach that Jesus did not have to die. Jesus came here to identify with us in every way; His Incarnation was the first step on His journey to death, but also to Resurrection. When He became man, he had to die.

 

Despite the fundamentalist haters' injection of their venom into this thread, it has still been a good one.

And there is still some misunderstanding of Christus Victor here. Again, to quote Flood: "I've been a longtime voice in the post-conservative evangelical movement, focusing on wrestling with questions of faith and doubt, violence in the Bible, relational theology, and understanding the cross from the perspective of grace and restorative justice. This is the focus of my book Healing the Gospel which offers a major critique of penal substitution, and the corresponding idea that the gospel is about satisfying an angry God's demand for retribution and violence, instead proposing that the gospel is actually about God's demonstration of grace and enemy love in Jesus."

 

What is the wages of sin? Death

What is spiritual death? Separation from God

What is the penalty for breaking one tiny point of the law? Same as breaking every Law on the books.

What is the penalty for sin then? Death, separation from God.

How was this problem presented in scripture. Your iniquity has caused a separation.

When the Lamb of God takes away the sin of the world, what is accomplished? Did we stop sinning?

Whatever aspect of sin that causes a separation was taken away by the blood of Christ, thus in Christ we are justified and made righteous and alive, no longer separated from God.

 

Can it be said better than this:

1 Corinthians 15:3. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

1 Corinthians 5:7. Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

Romans 3:23-26.
23. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26. To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

1 John 4:10. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Romans 5:8-10
8. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.[/]u
10. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Look how much we lose when we attempt to reduce Scripture to a "slogan" or "sound byte".

 

:thumbsup::thumbs::thumbsup::thumbs:

 

Contrary to Wrenn's venpm above I want all to know that I do not, do not, hate fundamentalists!

And there is nothing good about the stuff that Wrenn spews! It simply is not consistent with Scripture,

 

No, no, what I meant was that you are a fundamentalist who hates. Clear now?

What is not consistent with scripture is the abhorrent penal substitution theory.

Now you may continue to rip me and condemn me. Hope it makes you feel good, justified, and all-righteous.

 

I don't know of any atonement theory or any theology which believes that the death of Jesus was not necessary. When Jesus became man, that made His death necessary, if He was to identify completely with us.

The entire life of Jesus -- His Incarnation, ministry, death and resurrection -- was the basis of our reconciliation with God. Why does it matter so much to some how He died? Is it not enough that He died and rose again? If Jesus had come here as a human being and died of old age and rose again, would the at-one-ment, the reconciliation, been any less real, effective, or provided for?

Does not the human condition provide enough sorrow, agony, suffering and finally death so that Jesus going through that, in whatever manner, was enough to provide for our salvation?

Jesus died on the cross,and His death there was one of the steps in His work that provides for our reconciliation, salvation, and resurrection. The question is, what did His death mean? I steadfastly deny that it was satisfaction, penalty, and punishment to appease an angry, legalistic, vengeful, feudal God.

 

I am not sure the fundamentalists would claim me but I do believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of Scripture. As for hating; is it permissible to hate what God hates?

Proverbs 6:16-19
16. These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17. A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18. An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19. A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

You are entitled to your opinion MW!

I simply point you to my post above. Well it is so good I will simply post it again!

Even such names as "Christus Victor"! I am not sure that these folks believe that Jesus Christ was the victor over anything!

 

Thank you for posting the scripture. Now go have a look in the mirror for an example of it.

Jesus Christ was the victor over sin, suffering, death, the devil, and hell. That's what Christus Victor teaches.

The penal substitution theory sows discord among the brethren. It was a 16th century invention of Calvin which was unknown and untaught by the earliest churches and for 1500 years.

I don't care what you think of me, so continue with your thoughts, and your words, if you feel you need to.