The Pst seems to much better fit though the main way to view the atonement of Christ as per the scriptures themselves!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Christus Victor
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
God anger and wrath was to be directed towards those who have sinned, so either Jesus takes that head on for us, or else we do ourselves!
I hope each person believes their theory to be the better fit.
Again, how is the wrath of God towards sins committed appeased and satisfied by this theory?
The individual is "reborn", i.e., they die to sin, and are made alive "in Christ".
If one's sins are forgiven because they have been punished in full to pay a "sin debt" then "rebirth" is obsolete. This theory focuses on men being made new creations in Christ.
How is the wrath of God towards sin and sinners get appeased?
The sinner dies to sin and is made alive or "born again" in Christ.
On the contrary, God forgiveness is free, but not cheap. There are certain things that God cannot do. One of those is that He cannot deny Himself (2 Timothy 2:13). He cannot justify the wicked.(Exodus 23:7 etc.). But on the cross, 'God made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him' (2 Corinthians 5:21). On the cross, all, the sins of God's people were laid upon Christ's sinless shoulders and His perfect righteousness credited to them (Isaiah 53:6).
I don't need to go anywhere near Ephesians. That the Father gave to the Son a people to redeem, of whom He will not lose one, is clear from John 6:40; 10:27-29; 17:2, 6.
In the providence of God, His people were given to Christ from eternity past. Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. You need to understand that while God may do a new thing, He never makes a new plan, for if He did, the new one would be either better or worse than the old one, and God would either improve or decline, both of which are impossible (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8). All God's plans, therefore, are made in eternity, but come to fruition in time (c.f. 1 Peter 1:20; Titus 1:2).
God's plan of salvation was indeed made in eternity, but it came to fruition in time. Now, in Christ Jesus, I who was once far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. Christ's blood availed for me because God gave me to Christ Jesus to redeem.
Before I was saved.
One of us does, but it isn't me.
Christians are not justified from eternity past-- we are justified when we repent and trust in Jesus. But we were given to Christ to redeem before time began (Jeremiah 31:3; Ephesians 1:4-5).
"On the contrary, God forgiveness is free, but not cheap. "
Well what comes tough for your God is a piece of cake for mine. You have yet to provide a verse that says God poured out his wrath on Jesus.
"That the Father gave to the Son a people to redeem"
Your reading in too much to the text rather then let it speak for itself.
John 17
12“While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.
He lost Judas. So what guarantee is being given for you?
Jesus Christ does the drawing.
Nothing you quote is about you being elect and chosen before eternity past.
Sorry God is not pagan with a sadist hunger for blood. And nor did he elect you with any special Gnostic understanding.
That does not answer Yeshua1's question. He asked how is the wrath of God towards sin and sinner [get] appeased? The sinner dying to sin and being born again is not an act of appeasement. I do not want to derail the OP too much, but appeasement is a hallmark of penal substitution. Perhaps a better word is propitiation or satisfaction. I will not advocate for penal substitution in this thread, but I do want to make the point that appeasement is not something we do. It is something Christ did.
The issue is that where Penal Substitution Theory has God's wrath against men being satisfied by the expenditure of punishment (God punishing sin to satisfy the demands of retributive justice) Christus Victor views this wrath as as being propitiated through Christ Himself suffering under the curse (becoming man, bearing our sin in His flesh, taking on our "sickness", suffering and dying as a representative of mankind, and gaining victory over the bonds that held man captive).
Wrath is propitiated as men die to sin and are made alive (reborn or recreated) in Christ through His precious blood shed for us. God is satisfied through the obedience of Christ.
I guess simply put, where Penal Substitution Theory views God as having to exercise punishment on man to meet the demands of divine justice in order to redeem mankind, Christus Victor looks more to Christ Himself becoming man (the second Adam) and taking on our nature, entering our world under the curse and considers divine justice satisfied because Jesus is God.
The biggest difference, IMHO, between the theories is that Christus Victor presents men as dying to sin and are reborn in Christ (rather than that sin being punished) as redemptive. Not only is the principle of divine justice satisfied, but God Himself is satisfied as Christ renders Himself an offering for mankind.
Consider the difference. Our sins being paid (under Penal Substitution Theory) we are forgiven (essentially "sinles"). Rebirth is an afterthought. With Christus Victor one must be born again, born from above (remade in Christ). This re-creation through the blood of Christ is itself redemptive and satisfied any charge held against man.
Another point is rather than understanding God's righteousness in redemption as a righteousness manifested through the law to satisfy divine justice, Christus Victor sees redemption as the righteousness of God apart from the law. The "solution" is not, in this view, God punishing Jesus to pay our sin debt but God recreating men in Christ free from the bondage of sin and death. Men must (in this view) die to sin through the blood shed for us to be made alive (reborn) in Christ.
37818
Well-Known Member
God's justice calls for:
". . . For the wages of sin is death; . . ." -- Romans 6:23.
". . . the soul that sinneth, it shall die. . . ." -- Ezekiel 18;4.
". . . But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. . . ." -- Revelation 21:8.
Yes, the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus. If you repent and turn to God He is faithful to forgive.
@Reformed made a good point concerning appeasement.
The Penal Substitution Theory is unique in that God's wrath itself is not appeased or propitiated but is expended by being diverted to a Substitute Who bears our sins and suffers God's wrath in our place.
Christus Victor holds that God's wrath itself is appeased, propitiated by Christ Who - bearing our sins, is the Propitiation for the sins of mankind.
Just because I say don't drink a bottle of poison because the day you do you will die does not mean that if you drink a bottle of poison I will kill you.
It could very well be scribble in that all mankind end up in hell, period. That does not equate to divine judgement that "all mankind deserves hell" Nor does it means God poured out his wrath on Jesus Christ.
Rather than going by what the bible says, people are starting with their own beliefs and trying to fit their teaching into scripture.
The entire core of this erroneous gospel is summed up in "God poured out his wrath on Jesus Christ". Jesus doesn't teach it, the apostles don't, the early church doesn't teach it. I'm sure there was enough bible space for 8 words that is the "most important message" to clearly be made.
This spiritual mechanic that has dominance over God that is a pagan construct. No body tells God what to do. The laws had good purpose in helping mankind. Man is not in service of law niether is God in service of some pagan gods of retribution.
37818
Well-Known Member
". . . the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. . . ." -- Isaiah 53:6.
I mentioned Zechariah 3 in post #21. Also important is Colossians 2:14-15.
'.....Having wiped out the certificate of debt [NKJV margin] with its requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us,. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.'
These verses connect Christ's triumph to the cross, and precisely to the bond of our debt, as defined by the ordinances of the law. when He was crucified. It is then and there that the principalities and powers, the chief of whom is Satan, were 'disarmed.'
This concerns judicial claims. Since God is expected to uphold the rules that He has set, we can also expect that the cancellation of the claims was obtained by the payment of the legal debt. This is confirmed by the many 'ransom' sayings that declare that the life or blood of Christ was the price paid to free human beings from bondage.
What is the image presented of a certificate of debt being nailed to the cross? It is that of a bill being nailed there, marked tetelestai-- 'paid in full.'
Revelation 12 reflects the same understanding. How have the brethren overcome the devil and hid forces? Not by superior power, but 'by the blood of the Lamb' (v.11). Satan was the accuser of the brethren (v.10), and he could prevail as long as he could point to their (the brethren's) sins. But the blood of the Lamb was the price paid for the cancellation of their debt. Christ's suffering and death wiped out the guilt of their sins forever, and the devil has been disarmed.
Similarly, Hebrews 2:14 stresses that the Lord Jesus has deprived Satan of his power through His death and we are told that 'He is the Mediator of the new covenant , by means of [His] death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first [Mosaic] covenant , that those who are called may receive the promised inheritance' (Hebrews 9:15), His blood obtaining the remission of their sins (Hebrews 9:22, 27-28).
So Christ is indeed victorious; He has disarmed Satan and his forces, but He has done so by satisfying the demands of God's justice, thereby depriving Satan of his power to accuse the brethren.
Irenaeus seems to have understood this when he wrote, 'He who was powerful Word and also truly man redeemed us by His own blood.......and gave Himself as a ransom for those who had been taken into captivity.........The Lord redeemed us by His blood and gave His life for our life, His flesh for our flesh.....' It is a pity that Irenaeus' followers of recent times, like Gustav Aulen, did not have his perception.
Edited - I'm willing to let Irenaeus' beliefs be Penal Substitution Theory to those who want to claim his beliefs on the Atonement as representative of their Penal Substitution Theory.
I hold neither view (Penal Substitution Theory or Irenaeus Recapitulation Theory) so combining them is no skin off my back. Plus it could make for a very interesting hybrid.
"also of that deception being done away with, by which that virgin Eve, who was already espoused to a man, was unhappily misled,-- was happily announced, through means of the truth [spoken] by the angel to the Virgin Mary, who was [also espoused] to a man. For just as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had transgressed His word; so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should sustain (portaret) God, being obedient to His word. And if the former did disobey God, yet the latter was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the patroness (advocata) of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. "
(From the same reference @Martin Marprelate offers as proof Irenaeus held Penal Substitution Theory).
I hold neither view (Penal Substitution Theory or Irenaeus Recapitulation Theory) so combining them is no skin off my back. Plus it could make for a very interesting hybrid.
"also of that deception being done away with, by which that virgin Eve, who was already espoused to a man, was unhappily misled,-- was happily announced, through means of the truth [spoken] by the angel to the Virgin Mary, who was [also espoused] to a man. For just as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had transgressed His word; so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should sustain (portaret) God, being obedient to His word. And if the former did disobey God, yet the latter was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the patroness (advocata) of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. "
(From the same reference @Martin Marprelate offers as proof Irenaeus held Penal Substitution Theory).
Of course, if it were reversed and Irenaeus was looking to the Penal Substitution Theory perhaps he'd say "hey....those folks also believe that He who was powerful Word and also truly man redeemed us by His own blood.......and gave Himself as a ransom for those who had been taken into captivity.........The Lord redeemed us by His blood and gave His life for our life, His flesh for our flesh......they must hold Recapitulation!!" Then we might have the Recapitulation Substitution Theory. 
'Cause you know if we use the same words we essentially believe the same thing.
Christus Victor, Recapitulation, Ransom Theory, Government Theory, Moral Influence Theory, Satisfaction Theory, Ontological Substitution, Penal Substitution Theory. .... "Latin view", "Classic view"..... it's all the same - a difference without distinction.
Protestants believe Christ died and was raised on the third day. So do Catholics. You say "Catholic", I say "Protestant"....tomato, tomahto. A difference without distinction.... arguing about how many angel's can sit on the head of a pin.
Then we might have the Recapitulation Substitution Theory. 'Cause you know if we use the same words we essentially believe the same thing.
Christus Victor, Recapitulation, Ransom Theory, Government Theory, Moral Influence Theory, Satisfaction Theory, Ontological Substitution, Penal Substitution Theory. .... "Latin view", "Classic view"..... it's all the same - a difference without distinction.
Protestants believe Christ died and was raised on the third day. So do Catholics. You say "Catholic", I say "Protestant"....tomato, tomahto. A difference without distinction.... arguing about how many angel's can sit on the head of a pin.
Last edited:
37818
Well-Known Member
". . . And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. . . ." -- 1 John 2:2.
". . . Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . ." -- 1 John 5:1.
EXACTLY!!!!! You get it (or, at least you said/ typed it). Those verses deny Penal Substitution while affirming Christus Victor (the subject of this thread).
Under Christus Victor God's wrath IS Propitiated. Not so under Penal Substitution Theory (under which God's wrath is still directed at our sin as it is poured out on Christ).
Christ has wiped out the certificate of debt with its requirements that was against us. He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.
- Status