Featured How is it that Christ's death is "for our sins"?

Do you have a verse for that? I'm not saying God planned to abandon Him forever, but rather for the specific purpose for which He died. When it's all part of God's plan, is it bad?

 

This is the second time you've broken your promise to stop responding to this thread. (don't get me wrong, I don't mind!)

If a man commits a sin, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, he is accursed of God. Paul literally says in Galatians 3 that Christ became a curse, and you are trying to manipulate the scriptures to justify your prideful position that Jesus wasn't cursed. 2 Corinthians 5:21 literally says Christ "became sin" and out of your pride, you are trying to manipulate the scriptures to fit your own personal narrative of who God is. Jesus had the sin of the world laid upon him, He was put to death, and he hung on a tree. He fits all the requirements for the curse. God allowed the land to be defiled as well because the sun went dark (presumably an eclipse), thereby defiling the land of Israel as well. There is a reason the Jews were exiled for 2000 years within that generation. Isaiah 53:6 literally says GOD caused the sin of the world to fall on Christ. Therefore, what God says He has done, let no man dispute. And why? Because of your pride in a man-made theology.

I suggest in times like this when the scripture and your own feelings are in conflict, you abandon your pride and take God at His Word. Your pride and the arrogance of your heart are not against me, but against the Word of God. Look at how you contort yourself, bending over backwards to figure out how to change the straightforward meaning of the scriptures to fit your own narrative. God didn't write the scriptures for only theology professors at divinity schools to understand, but for tent makers and shepherds.

 

Gentlemen and ladies,

I've been accused of breaking my promise of not replying to this thread by Gup20; To the best of my recollection, I have not made such a promise.
My promise was to him, and to him alone, not to the thread.
For the record, when I stop replying to a thread ( and want others to know that I am finished replying ), I will do my best to phrase it as such.

For example:

" This is my final reply to this thread",
instead of,
" This is my final reply to you in this thread".

For reference' sake, I will quote part of my last statement addressed to him, and can be found in Post # 64:

Please read it carefully and let me know if I have violated my promise in any way.



Thank you all for your patience with me.

 

Psa 16:5
The LORD is the portion of my inheritance and my cup;
You support my lot.
6 The lines have fallen to me in pleasant places;
Indeed, my heritage is beautiful to me.

Psalms 16:10
For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.

Psa 22:8
“Commit yourself to the LORD; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.”

19 But You, O LORD, be not far off;
O You my help, hasten to my assistance.

23 You who fear the LORD, praise Him;
All you descendants of Jacob, glorify Him,
And stand in awe of Him, all you descendants of Israel.

24 For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted;
Nor has He hidden His face from him;
But when he cried to Him for help, He heard.

29 All the prosperous of the earth will eat and worship,
All those who go down to the dust will bow before Him,
Even he who cannot keep his soul alive.

31 They will come and will declare His righteousness
To a people who will be born, that He has performed it.​

This speaks of Christ being wholly incapable of raising himself out of hell. He sounds pretty helpless. He relies upon God to raise him up and out of hell. He waits on God to do it, because he is unable or incapable. If he was relying on his own righteousness at that point, he would be able to save himself... but he cries out to the Father for help. Note also His help is because of inheritance (Psalm 16:5-6, Psalm 22:23).

Act 13:35-37 NASB - 35 "Therefore He also says in another [Psalm,] 'YOU WILL NOT ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.' 36 "For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers and underwent decay; 37 but He whom God raised did not undergo decay.​

Heb 1:4
having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

Heb 13:20
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord,​

Jesus relied on God's covenant with Abraham to raise Him from the dead. This begs the question... which covenant is the everlasting covenant? It's a pretty important covenant seeing is how that is HOW God the Father raises Jesus from the dead.

Gal 3:13-18 NASB
13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"--
14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is [only] a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it.
16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as [referring] to many, but [rather] to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ.
17 What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise.
18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise.
19 Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made.

Gal 3:6-9 NASB
6 Even so Abraham BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. 7 Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. 8 The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, [saying,] "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU." 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer.

Gen 17:4-7 KJV -
4 As for me, behold, my covenant [is] with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. 6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. 7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
​

Notice how the covenant is made with Abraham but is really being made TO Christ. This is the everlasting covenant spoken of in Hebrews 13:20... the one God would use to raise Christ from the dead. Christ didn't raise himself... the Father raised him through the everlasting covenant.

What this means is that Christ has demonstrated the very same covenant by which we are saved actually works and is legally binding. Christ didn't waver or doubt that the Father would rescue him because he had complete faith in God's promise. We can have full assurance that our covenant by faith alone (Christ having been raised from the dead by the covenant of faith, not by The Law) works because Christ - of whom's resurrection has many witnesses - has literally demonstrated it's effectiveness.

 

While I was saying that tongue-in-cheek (hence the wink emoji), I do acknowledge I missed the "to you" part of saying it was your last reply.

 

BTW - for the Calvinists out there... if the general idea of my theory is true, it would be the end of the debate on Calvinism vs Arminianism. It would mean both sides of the debate are under a faulty assumption - the same faulty assumption, actually. This is why the debate has never ended for hundreds of years... both sides are completely wrong about how salvation works.

If we are all saved by our faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ qualifying us to inherit Christ's righteousness through adopted kinship with Abraham, then faith and righteousness are INDIRECT. Both Calvin and Arminius assumed (incorrectly in my view) that faith DIRECTLY influenced righteousness (or vice versa). The very purpose of total depravity, for example, is to say that man is just too sinful, too depraved for their depraved, human action to influence God to make them righteous. But under my theory, it's a moot point. Faith qualifies a person for human adoption into the family of Abraham (human adoption doesn't require righteousness) ... and those who are the offspring of Abraham INHERIT Christ's righteousness which was given to Abraham for his faith in the Gospel. Therefore, righteousness is an INDIRECT result of faith, not a direct result of faith. It means righteousness is a DIRECT result of God honoring His Promise to Christ that all of Abraham's spiritual descendants (of which Christ qualifies) would inherit Christ's righteousness.

Eph 1:13-14 NASB 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of [God's own] possession, to the praise of His glory.

Col 1:12
giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints in Light.

Rom 4:13
For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Rom 8:15-17 NASB 15 For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!" 16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with [Him] so that we may also be glorified with [Him.]
​

Note this last passage calls Christ an "heir" and that we are "fellow heirs." This means Christ INHERITED his salvation through the covenant of faith. He didn't raise himself from the dead by his own righteousness in The Law. Because he was cursed by The Law (being hung on tree), and because he became sin, and because God caused the sin of us all to fall on him, he couldn't resurrect by The Law. He needed another way. There is only one other way given in all of scripture. The covenant of faith.

 

He did have the authority... remember he also said he "could call legions of angels" (which, recall, he did not do) to protect him... but it isn't about what he "could do" ... it's about what he "did do." Had Jesus used his authority as a sinless man to take up his life again, it would have negated our salvation. I gave a significant number of verse (a small fraction of what was available) to show that God (the Father) raised him from the dead, and that he did not use his own authority or righteousness to resurrect himself. But he willingly gave it up for our sake. He willingly took the sin of the world and paid OUR price for our sake. Had he used his right to his own righteousness there would have been no righteousness available for anyone else... it would have been in use by it's owner.

 

If you wanted to “debate” the merits or not of either Calvinism or Arminian thinking, raise it in the appropriate thread.

You assume that human will is free to choose, yet that is not consistent with John 1.

Have you ever looked into the writing of Jonathan Edwards, “Freedom of the Will?

If you are not familiar with this exhaustive work on the subject of the human will, then you should spend some time digesting his work.

Humans in their nature as fallen have no desire for righteousness that would attain unto Godliness, but seek their own solution and satisfactory resolution to matters of both God and how to attain God’s approval.

While on this subject, there is no Scripture to support the popular scheme developed primarily by Wesley referred to as prevenient (or preceding) grace. Such is just not consistent with the clearest presentation of the work of salvation.

 

I only bring up Calvinism because it is the most consistent objection to my theory on how salvation works. Truly Calvinism is a gospel of Salvation as is Arminius’ claims. You can’t touch on HOW salvation works without touching on that debate.

Truly one can’t describe how is Christ’s death for “our sins” without touching Calvinism. You see how vehemently the Calvinists here dispute the notion that Christ was cursed, became sin, or had the sin of us all laid upon him. To the Calvinist mindset this is unacceptable.

I have written an essay of my complete theory for any to read (including a section on how this affects Calvinism). I’ll send to anyone who wants it.

 

No.
". . . And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: . . ." -- Hebrews 10:11.

 

I don’t subscribe to the notion of completely free will. As it pertains to salvation, I think God gave us a distinct, binary choice - choose life or choose death.

Deuteronomy 30:19 (NASB) "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,​

Genesis 2:9 (NASB) Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Genesis 2:16-17 (NASB) 16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."
Genesis 3:5 (NASB) 5 "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.​

God himself calls it the “tree of the knowledge of GOOD and evil." You act as though it were “the tree of the knowledge of only evil.”

Romans 2:14-15 (NASB) 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,​

How can those who have God’s law written on their hearts (those who are not saved & do not have the law) be completely depraved if they have a conscience accusing them & have the knowledge of good (along with the knowledge of evil)?

Further, how can they choose life or death without the knowledge of both?

Deuteronomy 30:11-15 (NASB) 11 "For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. 12 "It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' 13 "Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' 14 "But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it. 15 "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity;​

Deuteronomy 30 clearly says God sets the choice before us (a binary choice), and that it is not too difficult for us to choose (total depravity), and the choice is not made by God in heaven.

We know this is talking about choosing salvation because Paul quotes Deuteronomy 30:

Romans 10:5-13 (NASB) 5 For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness. 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: "DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, 'WHO WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?' (that is, to bring Christ down), 7 or 'WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THE ABYSS?' (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)." 8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"--that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED." 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."​

 

Heb 10:1-2 NASB
1 For the Law, since it has [only] a shadow of the good things to come [and] not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. 2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?​

I think the point here is to contrast the permanence of Christ in comparison.... not to say that sin wasn't transferred. It's not saying there was't a transfer, but that we know that the transfer was incomplete or imperfect... unlike Christ who is complete and perfect.. because the animals were a type and shadow for the real thing. The author uses the proof that - since those offerring still had knowledge of sin, they had obviously not been fully perfected by the animals. The implication, BTW, is that once a person has been made righteous by God, they will be restored to their pre-fall state, having no knowledge of sin. The elect, saints, christians alive on earth today obviously have not experienced this, so they have not obtained the regeneration necessary for overcoming Calvinistic depravity.

This isn't a problem for my theory as the indwelling of the Holy Spirit comes AFTER faith, not before, and is a seal of the righteousness we are credited, but haven't fully inherited yet. We don't inherit the full righteousness until the resurrection.

Eph 1:13-14 NASB
13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of [God's own] possession, to the praise of His glory.​

This is spiritual circumcision as this is exactly the role of circumcision with the first Christian, Abraham:

Rom 4:9-13 NASB -
9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.​

 

Actually many Calvinistic thinkers still cling to PST, which invites the thinking that God’s wrath was emptied upon Christ. You also have posted that which can be taken as supportive of this view. However, there are those who recognize that limit is that of belief not blood.

And there is a growing number who see the frailty and the lack of true Scripture support in the balance of PST. I left behind the extreme of PST for the understanding that the Scriptures do not support Christ suffering God’s wrath; rather, He was fulfilling the prophetic statements by God. There are abundant and long threads addressing those who hold divergent views yet are also mostly Calvinistic in their thinking.

Armanius was reactionary. Yet, even to this day there are those of that group who do embrace the total inability and even a progressive depravity, the ultimate authority of God as the author and completor of salvation, and that faith is the gift of God. That God chases those saved expressing “unmerited favor” and not choosing based on human will and desire. That those saved will both be preserved and persevere.

What you have written on this thread shows some flaws, yet as is typical of adults, there is often that intransigence in which binds one to a scheme irregardless of what others have presented in refute.

 

Forgive my ignorance of terms... what is PST?
In my view, Christ was innocent and His innocence (the fact that His righteousness exists in the world) meant that Adam's corporate, universal judgement of death was no longer sufficiently just... therefore it necessitated a repeal of Adam's corporate judgment in lieu of individual judgments. Therefore each and every human being is resurrected because of Christ's righteousness in order to face an individual judgement. In the individual judgement, all will live or die according to whether or not they qualify to inherit Christ's righteousness. Some will be righteous with Christ's righteousness and some will experience a second death. In my view, Christ accepted death, became a curse for us, became sin for us, had all of our sin laid upon him and died allowing his eternally enduring righteousness to pass to Abraham. God made a covenant with Abraham that all who shared in the faith of Abraham would qualify as Abraham's descendants and inherit that righteousness. Christ, and all who are in Christ, are made righteous by this covenant of faith (not by the Law) by inheriting that righteousness though their kinship (they are sons of Abraham and inherit the promise by having faith in God's Gospel or promise to Abraham - the gospel of Jesus Christ).

Clearly, I disagree with the notion that righteousness comes before faith, or that the "gift of God" is faith rather than righteousness by grace.

I think God has "chosen" his people as a group, and it is our choice whether or not to join that group. If you look at HOW God chooses:

Deuteronomy 7:6
For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.
7 The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples,
8 but because the LORD loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the LORD brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.
9 Know therefore that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments;

Nehemiah 9:7
You are the LORD God, Who chose Abram And brought him out from Ur of the Chaldees, And gave him the name Abraham.
8 You found his heart faithful before You, And made a covenant with him To give him the land of the Canaanite, Of the Hittite and the Amorite, Of the Perizzite, the Jebusite and the Girgashite— To give it to his descendants. And You have fulfilled Your promise, For You are righteous.
​

His chosen people are the "descendants of Abraham." He chose them A) because of Abraham's faith, and B) because He is honoring His covenant. Few Calvinists would deny that Israel are God's chosen people in the Old Testament. How were the individuals in this group selected in Old Testament times? They weren't... if they were Abraham's offspring they were the "chosen people. " Calvinists have no problem seeing Israel as a chosen group in the Old Testament, but they switch this in the New.

But when we recognize that God doesn't choose the elect based on them, but based on their kinship with Abraham, we can see that it is not faith acting directly to motivate God, but rather God's covenant with Abraham to preserve his descendants that is motivating God. Therefore, under my theory of indirect salvation through kinship with Abraham, we can see then that the covenant or oath God makes with Abraham (and CHrist) is God's primary motivation for Him causing the chosen people to be righteous, and faith is the qualifier for adoption as a descendant of Abraham and entry into the elect group.

 

"Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth." ( John 9:31 )
" The LORD [is] far from the wicked: but he heareth the prayer of the righteous." ( Proverbs 15:29 )

" And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said [it], that they may believe that thou hast sent me." ( John 11:42 )
" And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him." ( John 8:29 )

" The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright [is] his delight." ( Proverbs 15:8 )

" The eyes of the LORD [are] upon the righteous, and his ears [are open] unto their cry." ( Psalms 34:15 )




" If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love." ( John 15:10 )



Scripture states that God does not hear the prayer of the unrighteous...but that He heard His Son's prayer, always.
That, if anything, should prove that He did not give up His righteousness for one moment, as I see it.

 

Penal substitution theory.

 

He was the Sin Bearer, who assumed and took on the full wrath of God that comes in judgment against all sinners!