Atonement sparks discussion at NOBTS forum

These are all wonderful, but did you blend them into the same event? I wasn't sure.

Isaiah, as all the prophets of the OT views two events, the suffering messiah and the victorious messiah. As such, they also often use terms and identities familiar with the times they live.

Isaiah 13 is a wonderful picture of the return of the victorious messiah. The gathering of all world armies, the continue of conflicts building and raging, and ultimately the complete destruction of all evil throughout the world by the Second Coming.

This is the ONLY time (as in the period of time indicated not the place) in Scriptures that God is actually physically involved in the utter decimation of evil people and evil itself. The Scriptures indicate that by the very sword of the word He speaks the devastation is complete. The hosts returning with Him actually follow Him and He is the fighter, the warrior, the devastator, the "terminator."

Isaiah 53 of course is about the first advent and the goal of the suffering messiah, seen in John 3.

He did not suffer from the "wrath of God" as some suppose in retribution, rather, He took upon Himself that which was appointed for Him. The Father was pleased to offer the Son. The Father prepared the offering of the Son. The Father was totally involved in the offering of the son.

It makes no sense for the Father to suddenly be angered and hostile at what He was Himself determined to give to redeem the creation.

There is not the slightest indication either in the earthly crucifixion nor that presented in the heavens (Rev. 5) as God raging against the Son.

What IS seen is the natural order and human events that follow anytime God withdraws His hand of protection. Throughout the OT the natural order revolts in all manners of earthquakes, fire, floods, famine..., the humankind take on the perversions of excess, the conquests, the barbarousness of the ungodly, ...

For why, then, was the Son of God treated so meanly?

For identification.

Singling Him out above any who might claim, bearing in His body the identification tags that none mistake who He is.

That which Thomas used to identify Him (John 20:25), that which Peter used to identify Him (Acts 2:23), and that which John used to identify Him (Revelation 5:6), and believers are to not refuse when placed in circumstances (Galatians 6:17) is the reason for the suffering.

The other reason, for the blood.

"Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin."


Only God would plan so thoroughly and completely all aspects of redemption and ultimate victory.

 

I disagree, in contemplation of the scripture we are able to see the depth of the scripture (not add to it) with the help of the Spirit of God.

Personally, from my scripture contemplation and prayer life I believe Jesus Christ received BEYOND what we would have received - Somehow in a limited time frame the Son of God, the Logos made flesh endured an eternity's worth of separation from and retribution of God, He (Jesus Christ) being almighty God come down from heaven as well as a human being born of woman.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for every one.

taste - geuomai 01140 Friberg (HEB 2:9), UBS eat, partake, experience

2 Corinthians 1:10 who delivered us from so great a death, and does deliver us; in whom we trust that He will still deliver us,

so great a death - i.e. past, present and future death - eternal death.

HankD

 

Yes these are all universal in fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant.

"There is not the slightest indication either in the earthly crucifixion nor that presented in the heavens (Rev. 5) as God raging against the Son".

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

One cannot easily escape from this our LORD's cry to heaven, so recoiling in horror we attempt to minimize it.

But dear brother it was the price.
As our high priest He knew full well Adam and Eve's horror of eternal death and eternal separation from God - yet in the time frame reference of the crucifixion.

HankD

 

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

HankD

 

Perhaps, in the exuberance of those who would make much of the suffering,the facts have been lost.

ALL the conditions Christ suffered previous to the Cross were typical service to all who were to undergo Roman execution. There was nothing unusual or out of bounds, and commonly done to any and all as part of the Roman view of both interrogation and justice.

ALL the condition Christ suffered on the Cross were typical service to all who were to undergo Roman execution. There was no special preparation needed, no bucket of antiseptic water and bucket of juice. No need to send to the hardware store for nails. All was typical and typically used.

The only exception was the breaking of the legs which was done to the others to hasten death but not to the Christ. Rather a spear confirmed He was certainly already dead.

This is important, because history itself assigns to rubbish that proclamation insisting that Christ's suffering was in some manner a statement of God's wrath or in payment for some sin debt.

 

It is a difficult concept to contemplate/accept, however His death being an experience of death for every man was by no means "typical".

HankD

 

I assume you take the word "forsake" as abandon.

Christ would not speak a question to someone who abandoned Him (MY God).

Rather, the word "forsake" is to be taken as one who withholds support.

See, these words come from Psalm 22.

Throughout the Psalm, the plight is one who desires rescue and support, not one who is left alone.

The psalmist is comparing his own plight to that of how the Father rescued others, but he is without such support.

By the end of this most wonderful psalm there is that great section of victory.

Such victory statements are not from one in which forsake means abandoned. Rather, such may certainly come from one who has experienced a withholding of support and realizing that the end result is glorious.

 

The death was "the wages of sin."

The death would mean nothing without the blood being shed.

The shedding of blood started in the trial, just as Isaiah states,
Wounded...
Bruised ...
Chastised ...
Whipped ...

 

1 Peter 2,

21For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, 22Who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; 23and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. 25For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.
​

Peter is clearly rephrasing Isaiah's statements.

What I wanted the reader to notice is that the physical suffering is compared to the blood letting.

Each physical suffering was met be a lack of sinful outburst. This is how the believers should also conduct the suffering they experience.

The blood letting ("by His wounds you were healed") is how he bore our sins in His body on the cross.

Also, see the bold part in the midst?

Christ did not cry out to one who abandoned Him, but one who withheld support yet was worthy to be entrusted with the keeping of His spirit, for He knew by first hand fellowship the one who "judges righteously."

The question each believer should pursue, it to attain to such ability to trust even in the times of finding themselves unsupported.

 

Not puzzled. but amazed/astonished/ Him to the point that He cried out as any human discovering his depth of sin and his estrangement to God because of that sin howbeit He had no sin Himself but the entirety of the sin of humanity infused into His sinless being.

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Jesus is His human capacity limited by His kenosis could marvel and be astonished:

NIV Matthew 8:10 When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.

HankD

 

We have a model type in Abraham/Isaac who would have (and had to be kept from the deed) sacrificed his son Isaac whom he loved and cherished yet nonetheless would have watched him suffer, die and be reduced to ashes in order to obey the will of God.

Then followed the Abrahamic Covenant

Genesis 22
16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

HankD

 

Probably not but he was not the one who required propitiation.

HankD

 

That sounds logical to human reasoning.

HankD