The Meanings of 'For'

[Martin Marprelate]

The word 'for' appears rather a lot in the New Testament, well over 1,000 times in the KJV and equally often, I think in many other versions.
I was interested to discover that there are 21 Greek words which the KJV translates as 'for.' Just in case anyone is interested, they are:
anti
apo
achri
gar
dia (a few times with the genitive, several times with the accusative)
dioti
de
eis
ek
en
heneka
epeide
epi (sometimes with the accusative, sometimes with the dative)
kai
kai gar
kata
hoti
peri
pros
huper
hos
touto charin 'For this cause'
[Taken from Young's Analytical Concordance]

Sometimes 'for' means 'because' or maybe 'you see....' as in Romans 1:18; 'For the wrath of God is revealed.....' Sometimes it means 'until' (Luke 4:13). Sometimes it means 'therefore,' sometimes 'with a view to' or 'concerning' (eg. Matthew 6:34); sometimes 'in consideration of' (Mark 10:5), and sometimes 'on behalf of (eg. Matthew 5:44).

When we look at 1 Peter 3:18, we find the word 'for' three times, translating three different Greek words. 'For [Gk. hoti] Christ also suffered once for [Gk. peri] sins, the just for [Gk. huper] the unjust, that He might bring us to God.'
Hoti means simply 'because' (eg. Mark 12:32; Luke 1:45). Peri often means 'concerning' or 'in respect of' (eg. Matthew 6:28; 1 Thessalonians 1:2), but it seems also to have the sense of 'on behalf of' (eg. Luke 22:32; Hebrews 2:9). Huper seems almost invariably to mean 'on behalf of' (eg. Matthew 5:44; John 11:50-52; Romans 5:7-8). Eight times it is translated 'for the sake of' (eg. John 13:37-38).

So my initial point is that it would be better to translate 1 Peter 3:18, 'Because Christ also suffered once concerning sins, the just on behalf of the unjust.' I'm not aware of any translation that does this. I wonder why not.

My second point concerns an exchange I had with @JonC on the 'Penal Substitution Reprised' thread.
I wrote:

1 Peter 3:18. 'For Christ also suffered once for sins [peri hamartion].........' Peri with the genitive case means 'Concerning' or 'in respect of.' See Matthew 2:8; 6:29; 22:16 etc. So what does it mean that Christ suffered in respect of our sins? The rest of the verse can help us. '........The Just for the unjust [huper adikon] that He might bring us to God.' Huper with the genitive case means 'on behalf of' as I wrote earlier. See Matthew 5:44; Luke 22:19-20; John 10:11 etc.

So we're back where we started.
If I write a letter for someone, I write it on his behalf. I write it, he doesn't. I write it instead of him.
If I pay a debt for someone, I pay it on his behalf. I pay it, he doesn't. I pay it instead of him.
If I die for someone, I die on his behalf. I die, he doesn't. I die instead of him.

But if we ask how Christ the Just One suffered in respect of sins, Peter has already explained it to us: 'Who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree' (1 Peter 2:24). So He, the just One, bore the sins of us, the unjust, on our behalf. Where is He bearing them? On the 'tree.' So when Peter says bearing our sins and 'suffering,' he means suffering crucifixion 'in respect' of them. He is bearing them 'on our behalf.'

If I bear sins for someone, I bear them on his behalf. I bear them, he doesn't, I bear them instead of him.

Finally, why does Peter say that Christ bore our sins 'on the tree' [epi to xulov] instead of 'on the cross' [epi to staurion]? Because he has Deuteronomy 21:23 in mind. 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.' mankind is under a curse because of sin (Galatians 3:10), but 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us' [huper hemon] Huper with the genitive again. Christ became a curse on our behalf.

If I become a curse for someone, I become a curse on his behalf. I am cursed, he isn't. I suffer the curse instead of him.

'By His wounds we are healed.' Christ has borne the penalty of sin on our behalf. Penal Substitution. He has suffered instead of us the penalty in respect of sin. 'God is angry with sinners every day,' but He is no more angry with His people because Christ has redeemed them, by paying the penalty on their behalf so that God can be 'just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.'

To which @JonC replied

Jesus became a curse for us - "on our behalf", NOT on "the behalf" but "because of" our sins - pointing to our sinful condition (our nature "in Adam").

I'm not quite sure what he means by saying that it is "on our behalf," but not on "the behalf." My question is, does huper in 1 Peter 3:18 have the meaning 'on behalf of' or can it equally well mean 'because of'? And if 'because of' was the Spirit's meaning, why didn't He use dia or heneka which have that meaning?

I have some knowledge of Greek, but I don't count myself an expert, so I'll be happy to receive correction from one of the Greek scholars here.

 

[JonC]

The word 'for' appears rather a lot in the New Testament, well over 1,000 times in the KJV and equally often, I think in many other versions.
I was interested to discover that there are 21 Greek words which the KJV translates as 'for.' Just in case anyone is interested, they are:
anti
apo
achri
gar
dia (a few times with the genitive, several times with the accusative)
dioti
de
eis
ek
en
heneka
epeide
epi (sometimes with the accusative, sometimes with the dative)
kai
kai gar
kata
hoti
peri
pros
huper
hos
touto charin 'For this cause'
[Taken from Young's Analytical Concordance]

Sometimes 'for' means 'because' or maybe 'you see....' as in Romans 1:18; 'For the wrath of God is revealed.....' Sometimes it means 'until' (Luke 4:13). Sometimes it means 'therefore,' sometimes 'with a view to' or 'concerning' (eg. Matthew 6:34); sometimes 'in consideration of' (Mark 10:5), and sometimes 'on behalf of (eg. Matthew 5:44).

When we look at 1 Peter 3:18, we find the word 'for' three times, translating three different Greek words. 'For [Gk. hoti] Christ also suffered once for [Gk. peri] sins, the just for [Gk. huper] the unjust, that He might bring us to God.'
Hoti means simply 'because' (eg. Mark 12:32; Luke 1:45). Peri often means 'concerning' or 'in respect of' (eg. Matthew 6:28; 1 Thessalonians 1:2), but it seems also to have the sense of 'on behalf of' (eg. Luke 22:32; Hebrews 2:9). Huper seems almost invariably to mean 'on behalf of' (eg. Matthew 5:44; John 11:50-52; Romans 5:7-8). Eight times it is translated 'for the sake of' (eg. John 13:37-38).

So my initial point is that it would be better to translate 1 Peter 3:18, 'Because Christ also suffered once concerning sins, the just on behalf of the unjust.' I'm not aware of any translation that does this. I wonder why not.

My second point concerns an exchange I had with @JonC on the 'Penal Substitution Reprised' thread.
I wrote:

1 Peter 3:18. 'For Christ also suffered once for sins [peri hamartion].........' Peri with the genitive case means 'Concerning' or 'in respect of.' See Matthew 2:8; 6:29; 22:16 etc. So what does it mean that Christ suffered in respect of our sins? The rest of the verse can help us. '........The Just for the unjust [huper adikon] that He might bring us to God.' Huper with the genitive case means 'on behalf of' as I wrote earlier. See Matthew 5:44; Luke 22:19-20; John 10:11 etc.

So we're back where we started.
If I write a letter for someone, I write it on his behalf. I write it, he doesn't. I write it instead of him.
If I pay a debt for someone, I pay it on his behalf. I pay it, he doesn't. I pay it instead of him.
If I die for someone, I die on his behalf. I die, he doesn't. I die instead of him.

But if we ask how Christ the Just One suffered in respect of sins, Peter has already explained it to us: 'Who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree' (1 Peter 2:24). So He, the just One, bore the sins of us, the unjust, on our behalf. Where is He bearing them? On the 'tree.' So when Peter says bearing our sins and 'suffering,' he means suffering crucifixion 'in respect' of them. He is bearing them 'on our behalf.'

If I bear sins for someone, I bear them

This may make your reference to my point easier:

ὃς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον, ἵνα, ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἀπογενόμενοι, τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ ζήσωμεν· οὗ τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἰάθητε

Who the sins of us himself bore in the body. ἡμῶν identifies these sins as belonging not to Christ to men.

χριστὸς ἅπαξ περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἔπαθεν

My view is that περὶ here points to “concerning” and means “because of”. Christ died “for” or “because of” sins. These sins were ours. Christ died for our sins. Christ died for us.

But the problem with your interpretation is what you bring into δίκαιος ὑπὲρ ἀδίκων. You assume a context that is not necessarily implied.

I was a solider. If I died on the battlefield it would have been for those I love. But it would not have been in their place. If I write a letter suggesting that an employer hire you for a position, I write it for you but not instead of you. You assume a specific context without justifying its use.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

This may make your reference to my point easier:

ὃς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον, ἵνα, ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἀπογενόμενοι, τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ ζήσωμεν· οὗ τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἰάθητε

Who the sins of us himself bore in the body. ἡμῶν identifies these sins as belonging not to Christ to men.

The sins certainly belong to 'us,' but He bore them in His body (ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ). 'The LORD has laid on Him the iniquities of us all.'

χριστὸς ἅπαξ περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἔπαθεν

My view is that περὶ here points to “concerning” and means “because of”. Christ died “for” or “because of” sins. These sins were ours. Christ died for our sins. Christ died for us.

But you are taking no account of ἅπαξ. Christ has died once and for all concerning our sins, which must surely mean that we bear them no longer. He has suffered in respect of our sins; we don't have to.

But the problem with your interpretation is what you bring into δίκαιος ὑπὲρ ἀδίκων. You assume a context that is not necessarily implied.

I was a solider. If I died on the battlefield it would have been for those I love. But it would not have been in their place. If I write a letter suggesting that an employer hire you for a position, I write it for you but not instead of you. You assume a specific context without justifying its use.

Your loved ones are not with you in the battle; you are fighting it on their behalf. I do not have to write the exact same letter that you have written because you have done so on my behalf.

But again, you are missing out the context of the ἅπαξ. 'By His wounds we are healed.' It is a done deal. If you die on the battlefield, the battle may still be lost; your loved ones may still have to fight and die. If you write that letter, I still have to write one in order to apply and I may still not get the job. This is not the case in the context of 1 Peter 3:18. He, the just one, has borne our sins; we don't have to. 'There is no therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.' Christ has become a curse ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. He became sin ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He became sin; we (believers) have become perfect righteousness through our union with Him.

He has borne our sins on our behalf; we no longer bear them. He bore them instead of us.

 

[JonC]

The sins certainly belong to 'us,' but He bore them in His body (ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ). 'The LORD has laid on Him the iniquities of us all.'

But you are taking no account of ἅπαξ. Christ has died once and for all concerning our sins, which must surely mean that we bear them no longer. He has suffered in respect of our sins; we don't have to.

Your loved ones are not with you in the battle; you are fighting it on their behalf. I do not have to write the exact same letter that you have written because you have done so on my behalf.

But again, you are missing out the context of the ἅπαξ. 'By His wounds we are healed.' It is a done deal. If you die on the battlefield, the battle may still be lost; your loved ones may still have to fight and die. If you write that letter, I still have to write one in order to apply and I may still not get the job. This is not the case in the context of 1 Peter 3:18. He, the just one, has borne our sins; we don't have to. 'There is no therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.' Christ has become a curse ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. He became sin ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He became sin; we (believers) have become perfect righteousness through our union with Him.

He has borne our sins on our behalf; we no longer bear them. He bore them instead of us.

Jesus bore our sins for us (on our behalf because we, not he, were the sinners). But not in our place so that we would not suffer the wages of sin....because we do suffer the wages of sin, but the gift of God is life in Christ Jesus.

 

[Van]

Once again, buried under much boilerplate concerning "for" we find an effort to claim Christ died "for" the specific sins of the elect, and not "for" the sins of the whole world. Since not all of the world are saved or will be saved, Christ died for the sins of those lost and never to be saved.

When is our body of flesh (sin burden) removed? When Christ died, or when we undergo the circumcision of Christ?

Christ died for the whole world, a ransom for all, but only those transferred into Christ have there sins removed resulting in righteousness, therefore only those transferred into Christ were healed by His stripes (substitutionary sacrifice on the cross.)

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Jesus bore our sins for us (on our behalf because we, not he, were the sinners). But not in our place so that we would not suffer the wages of sin....because we do suffer the wages of sin, but the gift of God is life in Christ Jesus.

I don't recall having mentioned the wages of sin; you may be suffering them, but my sins are already forgiven (cf. Mark 2:5) and I already have eternal life (1 John 5:11-13). In fact, I am already seated in the heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6) and to live is Christ and to die is gain. Because Christ actually has taken my place. He has borne my sins so that I do not have to. He was made sin-- 'numbered with the transgressors'-- so that I may become the righteousness of God in Him. This is an exchange; He receives my sin and pays the penalty for it and I receive His perfect righteousness (1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Peter 1:1). Penal Substitution.

But I am depressed that you have not addressed my last post in any way. I want to see you deal effectively with.....anything really , but you could start with Galatians 3:13. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse-- for whom? For us: ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, on our behalf. He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. That is what redemption means. Penal Substitution.

 

[JonC]

I don't recall having mentioned the wages of sin; you may be suffering them, but my sins are already forgiven (cf. Mark 2:5) and I already have eternal life (1 John 5:11-13). In fact, I am already seated in the heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6) and to live is Christ and to die is gain. Because Christ actually has taken my place. He has borne my sins so that I do not have to. He was made sin-- 'numbered with the transgressors'-- so that I may become the righteousness of God in Him. This is an exchange; He receives my sin and pays the penalty for it and I receive His perfect righteousness (1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Peter 1:1). Penal Substitution.

But I am depressed that you have not addressed my last post in any way. I want to see you deal effectively with.....anything really , but you could start with Galatians 3:13. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse-- for whom? For us: ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, on our behalf. He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. That is what redemption means. Penal Substitution.

Christ did redeem us from the curse of the Law. But not in the way you seem to think. The wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life. Scripture points to a physical death resulting from sin and afterwards a judgment. The final judgment is Christ centered (which in itself denounces your theory).

More importantly, you and I will experience death. We experience it here as we bear our crosses and die to sin. We will experience it physically. But our hope is in the Resurrection - not in escaping death but in being made alive in Christ.

Like I indicated, brother, I understand your objections because they were once mine. There is a depth of truth you are missing.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Christ did redeem us from the curse of the Law. But not in the way you seem to think. The wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life. Scripture points to a physical death resulting from sin and afterwards a judgment. The final judgment is Christ centered (which in itself denounces your theory).

Really? I suggest you read Romans 8:3, and then do a search on 'Inaugurated Eschatology.'

More importantly, you and I will experience death. We experience it here as we bear our crosses and die to sin. We will experience it physically. But our hope is in the Resurrection - not in escaping death but in being made alive in Christ.

I'm delighted to tell you that I am already alive in Christ (Ephesians 2:4-6). I have already died with Christ and been raised with Him, and now my life is hidden with him in God (Colossians 3:1-4).

Like I indicated, brother, I understand your objections because they were once mine. There is a depth of truth you are missing.

'You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?' Unfortunately, you have been imposed on by someone who has foisted a false set of presuppositions upon you, which you urgently need to shake off.

However, all this is a rabbit-trail. Why don't you make a proper comment on my posts #1 and #3?[/QUOTE]

 

[JonC]

Really? I suggest you read Romans 8:3, and then do a search on 'Inaugurated Eschatology.'

I'm delighted to tell you that I am already alive in Christ (Ephesians 2:4-6). I have already died with Christ and been raised with Him, and now my life is hidden with him in God (Colossians 3:1-4).

'You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?' Unfortunately, you have been imposed on by someone who has foisted a false set of presuppositions upon you, which you urgently need to shake off.

However, all this is a rabbit-trail. Why don't you make a proper comment on my posts #1 and #3?

[/QUOTE]
I hate to break this to you, but one day you and I will physically die, which is a direct consequence of sin. Not only that, but Scripture commands us to take up our crosses daily. Paul teaches us to die to the flesh (an ongoing activity in the life of the believer). John Owen put it this way - "be killing sin or sin will be killing you". The "old man" with whom we struggle must die as a consequence of sin.

I understand the belief in "sinless perfection", that we cease dying to ourselves daily as we reach that perfect state in this life. But I believe it is an error. We are to take up our crosses daily.

The belief we do not truly experience physical death as a penalty of sin is, however, more troubling. I have heard of this belief in other faiths (JW's??) but as far as I know it is foreign to Christianity.

This is one failure in your theory. If Christ died physically so that you would not die physically then you wouldn't physically die as a result of sin. Are you denying that the wages of sin is death, that this at least includes a physical death?

Another issue is Scripture teaches the corrupt spirit in us must also die. People get lost sometimes in the idea if spiritual life that they forget Scripture presents those as being "spiritually dead" as also being spiritually active (in a negative sense). We must kill (destroy) the "old man", "beat" the flesh in submission. What is left of him (the "old man") will be destroyed. Thus is a result of sin. Our old spirit dies and we are made alive in Christ.

And another failure of your theory is the fact all judgment is given to Christ. You look to all things be judged in Him and given to the Father as occurring at the Cross. Scripture does not.

I suggest you read Romans in full, not just let verses. Read slowly and apart from your presuppositions, if you are able. You will see something and Someone very differently than you do now as you consider the Cross.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I hate to break this to you, but one day you and I will physically die, which is a direct consequence of sin. Not only that, but Scripture commands us to take up our crosses daily. Paul teaches us to die to the flesh (an ongoing activity in the life of the believer). John Owen put it this way - "be killing sin or sin will be killing you". The "old man" with whom we struggle must die as a consequence of sin.

I understand the belief in "sinless perfection", that we cease dying to ourselves daily as we reach that perfect state in this life. But I believe it is an error. We are to take up our crosses daily.

The belief we do not truly experience physical death as a penalty of sin is, however, more troubling. I have heard of this belief in other faiths (JW's??) but as far as I know it is foreign to Christianity.

This is one failure in your theory. If Christ died physically so that you would not die physically then you wouldn't physically die as a result of sin. Are you denying that the wages of sin is death, that this at least includes a physical death?

Another issue is Scripture teaches the corrupt spirit in us must also die. People get lost sometimes in the idea if spiritual life that they forget Scripture presents those as being "spiritually dead" as also being spiritually active (in a negative sense). We must kill (destroy) the "old man", "beat" the flesh in submission. What is left of him (the "old man") will be destroyed. Thus is a result of sin. Our old spirit dies and we are made alive in Christ.

And another failure of your theory is the fact all judgment is given to Christ. You look to all things be judged in Him and given to the Father as occurring at the Cross. Scripture does not.

I suggest you read Romans in full, not just let verses. Read slowly and apart from your presuppositions, if you are able. You will see something and Someone very differently than you do now as you consider the Cross.

I'm not really arguing with you, I'm just quoting Scripture to you, none of which you are referencing.

However, you have gone down this rabbit-trail to avoid dealing with the OP. Either do so or stop posting and let someone else have a go. If you want to debate inaugurated eschatology, start another thread.

 

[JonC]

I'm not really arguing with you, I'm just quoting Scripture to you, none of which you are referencing.

However, you have gone down this rabbit-trail to avoid dealing with the OP. Either do so or stop posting and let someone else have a go. If you want to debate inaugurated eschatology, start another thread.

I've already quoted the exact same Scripture to you, over and over again. @agedman has offered the same passages to you as well. The issue is not Scripture but the contextual framework that you apply to Scripture in order to interpret it a specific way. That's what I've been trying to get you to understand.

If I say "Christ bore our sins" and give you Scripture stating this you will agree, but then add "because God was wrathful to Him and treated Him as if He were a vile sinner". Can't you see that there is an element you are adding (whether true or not) that is absent from Scripture????? That is what we need to address before we can even begin to move forward. You have to either prove your presuppositions correct or lose them all together.

 

[Yeshua1]

Jesus bore our sins for us (on our behalf because we, not he, were the sinners). But not in our place so that we would not suffer the wages of sin....because we do suffer the wages of sin, but the gift of God is life in Christ Jesus.

Jesus became at that time in the eyes of the father very sin, so he was bearing the divine wrath due to all who are law breakers!

 

[JonC]

Jesus became at that time in the eyes of the father very sin, so he was bearing the divine wrath due to all who are law breakers!

Again, (and again and again) we all know this is what you believe because you have told us for what seems an eternity. Is this what you mean when you say that in addition to the physical suffering and anguish Jesus also experienced something like Hell?

In other words - across time and space, spanning what must be eons, you have offered your opinion without lifting a finger towards Scripture to validate the context you choose to lay upon God's Word. Why do you believe we should just take your word for it?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Again, (and again and again) we all know this is what you believe because you have told us for what seems an eternity. Is this what you mean when you say that in addition to the physical suffering and anguish Jesus also experienced something like Hell?

In other words - across time and space, spanning what must be eons, you have offered your opinion without lifting a finger towards Scripture to validate the context you choose to lay upon God's Word. Why do you believe we should just take your word for it?

So you have no reply to my OP and post #3. Thank you for tacitly admitting such.
FYI, I referenced 27 verses or pericopes of Scripture in my OP. and some more in post #3. Just saying.

 

[JonC]

The sins certainly belong to 'us,' but He bore them in His body (ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ). 'The LORD has laid on Him the iniquities of us all.'

But you are taking no account of ἅπαξ. Christ has died once and for all concerning our sins, which must surely mean that we bear them no longer. He has suffered in respect of our sins; we don't have to.

Your loved ones are not with you in the battle; you are fighting it on their behalf. I do not have to write the exact same letter that you have written because you have done so on my behalf.

But again, you are missing out the context of the ἅπαξ. 'By His wounds we are healed.' It is a done deal. If you die on the battlefield, the battle may still be lost; your loved ones may still have to fight and die. If you write that letter, I still have to write one in order to apply and I may still not get the job. This is not the case in the context of 1 Peter 3:18. He, the just one, has borne our sins; we don't have to. 'There is no therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.' Christ has become a curse ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. He became sin ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He became sin; we (believers) have become perfect righteousness through our union with Him.

He has borne our sins on our behalf; we no longer bear them. He bore them instead of us.

I already addressed post# 3.

There is a difference between fighting for a loved one (on their behalf) and fighting for a loved one (in their place).

But again you are taking one verse out of context, applying your own context to it, and ascribing to Scripture a meaning foreign to the text itself.

Let Scripture provide its own context.

1 Peter 2:21-25 For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; and 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. For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.

On the Cross Jesus was entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously. 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. For you have returned to the Guardian of your souls.

Where does the passage state that we will not also bear the consequences of sin? Where does the text claim that we will not die physically? Where does Peter proclaim that we do not have to bear our crosses daily?

You are wrong, brother. I wish that you could see beyond the lens of your own theory and just once view the passage without any additions. I don't think, since we are arguing the issue, that it is possible for it to happen here. But perhaps in the future, in some quiet time, you may reflect on a few of the truths of Scripture and decide what is stated is sufficient without what some men believe to be implied.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I already addressed post# 3.

There is a difference between fighting for a loved one (on their behalf) and fighting for a loved one (in their place).

Rather than deal with my reply, you have re-posted your argument with a slight twist. You are no longer dying for your loved one, merely fighting for her. But here is my reply again. See if you can deal with it.

Your loved ones are not with you in the battle; you are fighting it on their behalf. I do not have to write the exact same letter that you have written because you have done so on my behalf.

But again, you are missing out the context of the ἅπαξ. 'By His wounds we are healed.' It is a done deal. If you die on the battlefield, the battle may still be lost; your loved ones may still have to fight and die. If you write that letter, I still have to write one in order to apply and I may still not get the job. This is not the case in the context of 1 Peter 3:18. He, the just one, has borne our sins; we don't have to. 'There is no therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.' Christ has become a curse ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. He became sin ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He became sin; we (believers) have become perfect righteousness through our union with Him.

He has borne our sins on our behalf; we no longer bear them. He bore them instead of us.

But again you are taking one verse out of context, applying your own context to it, and ascribing to Scripture a meaning foreign to the text itself.

Let Scripture provide its own context.

1 Peter 2:21-25 For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; and 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. For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.

On the Cross Jesus was entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously. 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. For you have returned to the Guardian of your souls.

Where does the passage state that we will not also bear the consequences of sin? Where does the text claim that we will not die physically? Where does Peter proclaim that we do not have to bear our crosses daily?

The consequences of sin are death and hell. Fortunately we have now died to sin or is Romans 6:2 not in your Bible? Unless Christ comes beforehand we shall certainly 'sleep in Christ' until His return, but death has lost its sting for Christians (1 Corinthians 15:55). Of course 'everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself,' and certainly we are likely to 'have been grieved by various trials' but 'believing, [we] rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory.'

Your problem seems to be that you have an under-inaugurated eschatology which is limiting the joy of your salvation. I really hope you can get over that. In the meantime encourage yourself with verses like Galatians 3:13. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse-- for whom? For us: ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, on our behalf. He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. That is what redemption means. Penal Substitution. Wonderful!

You are wrong, brother. I wish that you could see beyond the lens of your own theory and just once view the passage without any additions. I don't think, since we are arguing the issue, that it is possible for it to happen here. But perhaps in the future, in some quiet time, you may reflect on a few of the truths of Scripture and decide what is stated is sufficient without what some men believe to be implied.

You are wrong, brother. I wish that you could see beyond the lens of your own theory and just once view the passages in all their fullness and see both the necessity and the glory of Penal Substitution. . I don't think, since we are arguing the issue, that it is possible for it to happen here. But perhaps in the future, in some quiet time, you may reflect on a few of the truths of Scripture and decide what is stated is sufficient if you take Scripture with Scripture and look outside of your own presuppositions.[/QUOTE]

 

[JonC]

Rather than deal with my reply, you have re-posted your argument with a slight twist. You are no longer dying for your loved one, merely fighting for her. But here is my reply again. See if you can deal with it.

Your loved ones are not with you in the battle; you are fighting it on their behalf. I do not have to write the exact same letter that you have written because you have done so on my behalf.

But again, you are missing out the context of the ἅπαξ. 'By His wounds we are healed.' It is a done deal. If you die on the battlefield, the battle may still be lost; your loved ones may still have to fight and die. If you write that letter, I still have to write one in order to apply and I may still not get the job. This is not the case in the context of 1 Peter 3:18. He, the just one, has borne our sins; we don't have to. 'There is no therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.' Christ has become a curse ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. He became sin ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He became sin; we (believers) have become perfect righteousness through our union with Him.

He has borne our sins on our behalf; we no longer bear them. He bore them instead of us.

Your illustration proves your error. If I died while fighting for my wife she would not have to fight in my stead. I fought for her, not instead of her but on her behalf.

 

[Yeshua1]

I already addressed post# 3.

There is a difference between fighting for a loved one (on their behalf) and fighting for a loved one (in their place).

But again you are taking one verse out of context, applying your own context to it, and ascribing to Scripture a meaning foreign to the text itself.

Let Scripture provide its own context.

1 Peter 2:21-25 For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; and 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. For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.

On the Cross Jesus was entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously. 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. For you have returned to the Guardian of your souls.

Where does the passage state that we will not also bear the consequences of sin? Where does the text claim that we will not die physically? Where does Peter proclaim that we do not have to bear our crosses daily?

You are wrong, brother. I wish that you could see beyond the lens of your own theory and just once view the passage without any additions. I don't think, since we are arguing the issue, that it is possible for it to happen here. But perhaps in the future, in some quiet time, you may reflect on a few of the truths of Scripture and decide what is stated is sufficient without what some men believe to be implied.

God received Jesus as the perfect Lamb of Gin, as the sin bearer for his own people, and His perfect life allowed Him to substitute in my stead, but his death by judgement and wrath of God for my sins allows Him to state that it is now accomplished!

 

[Yeshua1]

Rather than deal with my reply, you have re-posted your argument with a slight twist. You are no longer dying for your loved one, merely fighting for her. But here is my reply again. See if you can deal with it.

Your loved ones are not with you in the battle; you are fighting it on their behalf. I do not have to write the exact same letter that you have written because you have done so on my behalf.

But again, you are missing out the context of the ἅπαξ. 'By His wounds we are healed.' It is a done deal. If you die on the battlefield, the battle may still be lost; your loved ones may still have to fight and die. If you write that letter, I still have to write one in order to apply and I may still not get the job. This is not the case in the context of 1 Peter 3:18. He, the just one, has borne our sins; we don't have to. 'There is no therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.' Christ has become a curse ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. He became sin ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He became sin; we (believers) have become perfect righteousness through our union with Him.

He has borne our sins on our behalf; we no longer bear them. He bore them instead of us.


The consequences of sin are death and hell. Fortunately we have now died to sin or is Romans 6:2 not in your Bible? Unless Christ comes beforehand we shall certainly 'sleep in Christ' until His return, but death has lost its sting for Christians (1 Corinthians 15:55). Of course 'everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself,' and certainly we are likely to 'have been grieved by various trials' but 'believing, [we] rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory.'

Your problem seems to be that you have an under-inaugurated eschatology which is limiting the joy of your salvation. I really hope you can get over that. In the meantime encourage yourself with verses like Galatians 3:13. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.' He has redeemed us; He became a curse-- for whom? For us: ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, on our behalf. He became a curse; we are no longer cursed. That is what redemption means. Penal Substitution. Wonderful!

You are wrong, brother. I wish that you could see beyond the lens of your own theory and just once view the passages in all their fullness and see both the necessity and the glory of Penal Substitution. . I don't think, since we are arguing the issue, that it is possible for it to happen here. But perhaps in the future, in some quiet time, you may reflect on a few of the truths of Scripture and decide what is stated is sufficient if you take Scripture with Scripture and look outside of your own presuppositions.

[/QUOTE]
Guess that it just boils down to we see the Cross in the motiff of it being PST, and others see it as mainly Christ is Victor mode.

 

[JonC]

God received Jesus as the perfect Lamb of Gin, as the sin bearer for his own people, and His perfect life allowed Him to substitute in my stead, but his death by judgement and wrath of God for my sins allows Him to state that it is now accomplished!

Guess that it just boils down to we see the Cross in the motiff of it being PST, and others see it as mainly Christ is Victor mode.[/QUOTE]I think I have been clear where I believe you and @Martin Marprelate are wrong. If you wish to challenge my view, it is on another thread.

But I do agree that people often focus on different aspects of Scripture - sometimes at the expense of others.