Penal Substitution Reprised

[Van]

Van,
I think you may have missed that the post was on redemption of believers and how the three Greek words translated as redemption in the NT impact the believer.
It was NOT on the blood shed for all for the forgiveness of sin.
The post was the three aspects used for redeeming, from the all to whom forgiveness is given, those in whom God chooses to adopt.

More denial of the obvious, I showed your first premise was false and unbiblical, I did not waste my time on the other two.

 

[JonC]

Does sin create a debt?

Debt is taken as an accounting term. That one accrues a debt when the surplus of cash is not available to draw from and credit by the lender is granted.

Also, the matter of borrowing out of desire and need one is considered a debtor until that borrowed is returned.

So, in this way, does sin create a debt, or are folks debtors to sin?

Penal Substitution Theory must also contain that element of Satisfaction, the question is, satisfaction for what?

If it is a debt of sin, then where in the Scriptures does Sin appear in that light?

What did humankind borrow or purchase on credit to go into debt?

Much is made by some presenting the cross as paying a debt for sin.

Should such not have at least one Scripture for support?

This error is throughout the arguments presented on this forum.

For example, when dealing with wrath and forgiveness, the example was given of an accounting debt. If you forgive me a debt of $100 then you take that debt or injury upon yourself (you experience the loss of $100).

BUT Scripture looks at forgiveness as turning the other cheek, as forgiving a wrong. If you slap me on the cheek and I forgive you I do not suffer loss. I do not have to slap another person in order to forgive you.

The problem here is with the contextual framework that those on this forum are assuming.

 

[Van]

It was not a debt of sin but a debt consisting of the decrees against against us. Christ has fulfilled the Law, which no longer testifies against us for we are in Him.

You are slicing the baloney too thin my friend. When we trespass the Law, we sin or miss the mark. And how do you know the degrees were contained in the Law of Moses? What about Adam's sin, the degrees again Him are found in scripture. Too thin my friend, too thin.

 

[Van]

This error is throughout the arguments presented on this forum.
For example, when dealing with wrath and forgiveness, the example was given of an accounting debt. If you forgive me a debt of $100 then you take that debt or injury upon yourself (you experience the loss of $100).
BUT Scripture looks at forgiveness as turning the other cheek, as forgiving a wrong. If you slap me on the cheek and I forgive you I do not suffer loss. I do not have to slap another person in order to forgive you.
The problem here is with the contextual framework that those on this forum are assuming.

JonC, I have not been following your discussion with Agedman, but I do need to point out the debt created by sin is to God. The ransom paid (the blood of Christ) allows God to forgive and forget the sins of any person transferred into Christ. How do those unsaved pay that debt? (1) They remain separated from God forever, and (2) they are punished for their sins in the afterlife. But when God transfers an individual into Christ, (1) they undergo the circumcision of Christ which removes their debt, no matter how incurred, and (2) they are united with Christ, made alive, born anew, and arise in Christ a new creation. Then having been made firm in Christ, they are indwelt with the Holy Spirit forever.

 

[JonC]

You are slicing the baloney too thin my friend. When we trespass the Law, we sin or miss the mark. And how do you know the degrees were contained in the Law of Moses? What about Adam's sin, the degrees again Him are found in scripture. Too thin my friend, too thin.

Hey Van,

Scripture tells us that the Law testifies to our sin. Adam transgressed the Law. Moses transgressed the Law. But those between Adam and Moses, while not being transgressors of the Law by sinning like Adam still sinned. And they still died.

What I am suggesting is that Christ delivered us from the bondage of sin and death because He is the Righteousness to which the Law testified. He is the fulfillment, taking away the negative implications for those who are "in Him".

And I like my baloney thick, with mayo. If fried I like it burnt on the outside. I'm getting hungry.

 

[agedman]

I "keep clinging" to it, due to the fact that the scriptures themselves teach it.

WHERE?????

Quote scripture support, please.

 

[JonC]

JonC, I have not been following your discussion with Agedman, but I do need to point out the debt created by sin is to God. The ransom paid (the blood of Christ) allows God to forgive and forget the sins of any person transferred into Christ. How do those unsaved pay that debt? (1) They remain separated from God forever, and (2) they are punished for their sins in the afterlife. But when God transfers an individual into Christ, (1) they undergo the circumcision of Christ which removes their debt, no matter how incurred, and (2) they are united with Christ, made alive, born anew, and arise in Christ a new creation. Then having been made firm in Christ, they are indwelt with the Holy Spirit forever.

If we look at this in terms of a debt, I could say it is "paid to God" in a way (maybe as an illustration). More than this, however, I think of death as the wages of sin, the debt being a deficiency in us which is "paid" in Christ. The unsaved cannot pay the debt. Even as the lost are judged and condemned to Hell they are not paying this debt because they are not fulfilling all righteousness.

 

[agedman]

Yet another straight-up denial of scripture. And note folks the number of completely bogus assertions. Did those who died before Moses gave the Law have access to the Father? Of course not.

Has God forgiven your sins and remembers them no more forever? Pay no attention to this poster who posts obvious falsehoods, one after another.

Van,
Perhaps before you make such assertions, you need to work through the word Redemption as used in the NT and see for your self how the three Greek words (each translated as ONE word in English) are actually used in context.

I made no "bogus assertions" or "straight-up denial of scripture."

I presented the statements of Scriptures:

Here are the three words in Greek that the NT uses for redemption.

Agorazo - that which is as a slave purchased in the market

Exagorazo - that which is once a slave but no longer because of being taken out of or off market by adoption

Lutroo - that which was once a slave who is set free by adoption and belongs to a family as one having the rights and privileges as any natural born child in the matter of sustaining and heritage.​

Sometimes I don't know why I bother to respond to your outlandish claims.

I suppose it is so that the casual readers of the BB might not be mislead.

 

[agedman]

Jesus took upon himself the sins of the elect to get saved by His death, paid their sin debt in full, and appeased/propitiated the wrath of God towards us...

Certainly, and there is support for Christ, who "knew no sin" taking on our sin.

That is not a matter of confrontation.

The question is:
Do you actually have Scripture support that Christ ONLY took on the sins of the elect, ONLY?

For, unless you can show such thinking in Scriptures, it remains extra-biblical in the sense of human thinking added to and not actually foundationally found in Scriptures.

 

[agedman]

JonC, I have not been following your discussion with Agedman, but I do need to point out the debt created by sin is to God. The ransom paid (the blood of Christ) allows God to forgive and forget the sins of any person transferred into Christ. How do those unsaved pay that debt? (1) They remain separated from God forever, and (2) they are punished for their sins in the afterlife. But when God transfers an individual into Christ, (1) they undergo the circumcision of Christ which removes their debt, no matter how incurred, and (2) they are united with Christ, made alive, born anew, and arise in Christ a new creation. Then having been made firm in Christ, they are indwelt with the Holy Spirit forever.

I realize this post was made to JonC, but there are some issues that need addressed more fully.

1) there is NO Scriptures that relates sin as a debt needing to be paid either to Satan or God.

2) "The ransom paid" is the exchange demand. As one who travels to a foreign land exchanges currency and pays the "exchange rate," so to Christ paid the exchange rate that the adopted children of God may actually be adopted.

I'll leave the rest of the post unattended at this time.

 

[agedman]

More denial of the obvious, I showed your first premise was false and unbiblical, I did not waste my time on the other two.

Then it is YOU who are in denial of the truth. You don't even put in the effort to actually discover and uncover what is the truth.

You are as one of the many in the stadium watching from the stands, boisterously blustering bias.

Spouting off on the efforts of others without being in the game itself, and knowing little about the game.

You have nothing of substance to offer from the stands other then biased opinions.

Perhaps you should actually get down from your heights, look at the play book, and actually contribute what is truly factual.

 

[Yeshua1]

If we look at this in terms of a debt, I could say it is "paid to God" in a way (maybe as an illustration). More than this, however, I think of death as the wages of sin, the debt being a deficiency in us which is "paid" in Christ. The unsaved cannot pay the debt. Even as the lost are judged and condemned to Hell they are not paying this debt because they are not fulfilling all righteousness.

God is Holy, and any sin that break His law bring divine wrath and judgement against it, correct?
he does not judge all sinners right then and there, nor nations, but the bible does state that He is allowing that Cup to keep on piling up.

 

[Yeshua1]

WHERE?????

Quote scripture support, please.

Does God ever have wrath upon sin then?

 

[agedman]

Does God ever have wrath upon sin then?

That isn't answering the basis of the question, but avoidance.

You stated, "I "keep clinging" to it, due to the fact that the scriptures themselves teach it."

So, again, Where?

 

[agedman]

God is Holy, and any sin that break His law bring divine wrath and judgement against it, correct?
he does not judge all sinners right then and there, nor nations, but the bible does state that He is allowing that Cup to keep on piling up.

The law is a decree of prevention, not allowing unbelievers to be holy of their own merit.

All are under such a decree of prevention until the direct act of God in redemption. Redemption is (as a post either on this thread or elsewhere involves three things: 1) purchase of the "slave to this world." 2) Removal of "slave" from the authority and ability to again sell the "slave" on the world market of slaves. 3) adoption of the slave as the child of the owner.

For believers:
There is the fact that "all have sinned," that all are slaved to the world and god of the world.

Redemption does is not serve as a payment for sin, but a re-title from slave to adopted child of God.

Basically, one cannot rest upon the Romans, "There is, therefore, no condemnation..." IF sin is still a factor for believers. John states, "If we have no sin we make God a liar ..."

So what of the unbeliever?

Again, the condemnation is not upon sin (John 3) but upon the lack of belief.

The wrath (according to Romans) is that which unbelievers store up bringing judgment upon them self. They (so to speak) get what's coming to them. God gives them up and over... to what that person desires - slavery.

What of God's wrath?

It is found in "condemned already."

The judge has passed sentence. The outcome already established. God doesn't need to be enraged for He has already predetermined the condemned final estate.

So, why do the Scriptures present wrath of God?

Because some would take themes such as love, mercy, forgiveness... and be so enamored and to such inappropriate schemes that they neglect that God is also just, revealing His wrath,... that the world be warned of the doom it faces, that there is an eternal lake of fire.

The displays of God's wrath in Scriptures is always a matter of instruction, not mere persecution for sin, but instruction in righteousness and holiness, and not taking for granted that authority of God.

In no manner is the wrath of God diminished by unbelievers, but each will suffer in eternal torment.

 

[Yeshua1]

That isn't answering the basis of the question, but avoidance.

You stated, "I "keep clinging" to it, due to the fact that the scriptures themselves teach it."

So, again, Where?

Jesus was forsaken by God, jesus was the sin bearer, Jesus experienced the Cup/Bowl of wrath....

 

[Yeshua1]

The law is a decree of prevention, not allowing unbelievers to be holy of their own merit.

All are under such a decree of prevention until the direct act of God in redemption. Redemption is (as a post either on this thread or elsewhere involves three things: 1) purchase of the "slave to this world." 2) Removal of "slave" from the authority and ability to again sell the "slave" on the world market of slaves. 3) adoption of the slave as the child of the owner.

For believers:
There is the fact that "all have sinned," that all are slaved to the world and god of the world.

Redemption does is not serve as a payment for sin, but a re-title from slave to adopted child of God.

Basically, one cannot rest upon the Romans, "There is, therefore, no condemnation..." IF sin is still a factor for believers. John states, "If we have no sin we make God a liar ..."

So what of the unbeliever?

Again, the condemnation is not upon sin (John 3) but upon the lack of belief.

The wrath (according to Romans) is that which unbelievers store up bringing judgment upon them self. They (so to speak) get what's coming to them. God gives them up and over... to what that person desires - slavery.

What of God's wrath?

It is found in "condemned already."

The judge has passed sentence. The outcome already established. God doesn't need to be enraged for He has already predetermined the condemned final estate.

So, why do the Scriptures present wrath of God?

Because some would take themes such as love, mercy, forgiveness... and be so enamored and to such inappropriate schemes that they neglect that God is also just, revealing His wrath,... that the world be warned of the doom it faces, that there is an eternal lake of fire.

The displays of God's wrath in Scriptures is always a matter of instruction, not mere persecution for sin, but instruction in righteousness and holiness, and not taking for granted that authority of God.

In no manner is the wrath of God diminished by unbelievers, but each will suffer in eternal torment.

God the Father is due a sin penalty, and either you and me or jesus pays that bill!

 

[agedman]

Jesus was forsaken by God, jesus was the sin bearer, Jesus experienced the Cup/Bowl of wrath....

I would greatly agree, IF there were Scripture to support the cup/bowl of wrath thinking.

Why would God pour wrath out upon one accomplishing what He purposed, what He put in the prophets writing, and what He commissioned the Son?

The reformers desiring to reform rather then truly separate clung to the RCC thinking of retribution for sin even after one becomes a believer - hence penitence, purgatory, last rites ... So they also clung to the idea that God cannot look upon sin - mentioned in Habbakkuk.

However, It isn't that God cannot look upon sin.
For Habakkuk states, " 13Your eyes are too pure to approve evil, and You can not look on wickedness with favor."

God withheld Himself from supporting the Son, as the Son bore the sin(s) God was directly involved.

Look at the statement from 2 Corinthians 5:21:

"He (God) made Him (Jesus Christ) who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."​

Why would God pour wrath out on what HE made to be sin on our behalf?

Also, look at the statement of Hebrews (1) as to the positional aspects of the crucifixion - again no wrath indicated.

The Lord Jesus Christ certainly is the "purification of sins." That is the Scriptures of Hebrews 1:

"And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,..."
​

There is a complete lack of "wrath poured out upon the Son" found in the Scriptures.

It is a human contrivance left over from a system that desired to subjugate the people.

 

[Yeshua1]

I would greatly agree, IF there were Scripture to support the cup/bowl of wrath thinking.

Why would God pour wrath out upon one accomplishing what He purposed, what He put in the prophets writing, and what He commissioned the Son?

The reformers desiring to reform rather then truly separate clung to the RCC thinking of retribution for sin even after one becomes a believer - hence penitence, purgatory, last rites ... So they also clung to the idea that God cannot look upon sin - mentioned in Habbakkuk.

However, It isn't that God cannot look upon sin.
For Habakkuk states, " 13Your eyes are too pure to approve evil, and You can not look on wickedness with favor."

God withheld Himself from supporting the Son, as the Son bore the sin(s) God was directly involved.

Look at the statement from 2 Corinthians 5:21:

"He (God) made Him (Jesus Christ) who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."​

Why would God pour wrath out on what HE made to be sin on our behalf?

Also, look at the statement of Hebrews (1) as to the positional aspects of the crucifixion - again no wrath indicated.

The Lord Jesus Christ certainly is the "purification of sins." That is the Scriptures of Hebrews 1:

"And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,..."
​

There is a complete lack of "wrath poured out upon the Son" found in the Scriptures.

It is a human contrivance left over from a system that desired to subjugate the people.

From the very beginning, an innocent was slain to provide covering, and Jesus as lamb of God would provide the ultimate sacrifice for sins, as His shed blood provided the covering for the Grace of God. Was it His sinless life, or the nature of His death that brought salvation to us?

 

[agedman]

God the Father is due a sin penalty, and either you and me or jesus pays that bill!

This is far more accurate (imo).

This is what part the OT sacrificial system was based upon, that the aspect of penalty.

But, again, there was no "wrath" involved or associated in the remuneration of that penalty

A judgment is already made upon the unbeliever - guilty, wages paid = death, condemned to eternal Lake of Fire - second death.

A judgment is already made upon the believer - "2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death." (Romans 8)