A Biblical Based view of Penal Substitutionary Atonement

[The Biblicist]

There can be no question, no doubt whatsoever that John the Baptist identified Christ with the levitical sacrificial lamb (Jn. 1:29) with regard to his mission to deal with sin.

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

Therefore, it cannot be disputed successfully that the Levitical sacrifice was typical of Christ's death "for the sin of the world."

The substitutionary basis of the sacrificial lamb's death is repeatedly said to be "for our sins" as the sacrificial lamb had to be "without spot or blemish" which is a type of sinlessness just as the lamb is a type of Christ and therefore the death of the lamb could not be for his own sins. Hence, the substitutionary element of the atonement is clearly demonstrated by scripture.

Nor can it be gainsaid that "death" is the penalty (thus PENAL condemnation) for violating the law of God (Gen. 2:17; Rom.5:12-19; 1 Jn. 3:6) and since Christ had no sins of his own then on the cross he is the LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE for those who do have sins and therefore the PENALTY of the law is being satisfied in his own death as there is no other cause for his death apart from satisfaction of God's PENAL consequences for violation of his law.

I make no claim that Jesus suffered death due to his own sins nor do I make any claim that God's penal consequences against sins which necessitated the death of Christ as the representative head for his people was directed toward Christ in any kind of PERSONAL manner but only as the LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE for his people who were born into this world by nature as "children OF WRATH" (Eph. 2:3) and thus God's penal wrath against sin was satisfied in the death of Christ as a LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE PERSON for those who are children "of wrath."

I believe any rejection of either the "substitutionary" or "penal" aspect of the atonement is complete and absolute heresy to the worst extent in so much it is a repudiation of the "truth" of the gospel.

 

[The Biblicist]

Some attempt to distinguish between the terms "substitute" and "representative" when it comes to the atonment. First, neither word is Biblical with regard to being used by Biblical writers with regard to the atonement. Both words are an attempt to explain "FOR" in such phrases where Christ is depicted as dying "FOR our sins" or taking upon himself our iniquitristies.

Romans 5:12-19 and 1 Corinthians 15:44-48 do present Adam and Christ in contrasting roles as representative heads of those who are "in" them. All "IN" Adam die as all "IN" Christ are made alive. All mankind are "in Adam" by natural creation but not all of mankind are "in Christ" by supernatural creation (Eph. 2:10). Each represent those "IN" them. The person and actions by Adam and Christ have a direct impact upon all who are "IN" each of them. They are legal representatives for all those whom they represent and the consequences prove that (Rom. 5:12-19).

However, their representative capacity includes a substitutionary value as God regards their persons and actions as substitutionary with regard to the Law's demands against those they represent. By one man's disobedience death entered the world and by that one man's action the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES are "passed" to all who are "in" him, thus, Adam acts as their legal substitute before the law. Likewise, with regard to Christ. The LEGAL CONSEQUENCES against all those "in Christ' due to the legal substitutionary role of Adam must be legally satisfied by Christ's death as there is no other grounds to justify the death of Christ other than "for our sins" meaning for the legal just condemnation against us because of our sins.

However, the debate must begin with the Levitical atonement sacrifice as John the Baptist clearly identifies Christ's role with regard to dealing with sin directly with the Levitical sacrificial lamb (Jn. 1:29). In the Old Testament, the nation of Israel was a type of the people of God and they were the only NATION that God called His people. The Levitical system as provided in the book of Leviticus deals with the sacrificial atonement nature of the lamb.

 

[The Biblicist]

Is God a God of wrath? If so, what would be the object of His wrath and what would be the just basis for exercising that wrath against that object if it is not sin? Is death the legal satisfaction for appeasing God's wrath against sin? If not, then why must the blood of a man be shed for killing another man if that is not just satisfation?

Is death a "condemnation" due to sin? Is death therefore the "penalty" of sin (thus Penal consequence of sin)? - If death is a natural part of creation than what value is threat of death in Genesis 2:17? How could sin be the factor that gave death entrance into the world according to Romans 5:12 if death was part of natural creation prior to sin?

Can a lamb sin? Why then must a lamb suffer death "for sin" if a lamb cannot sin? Does not this demand at least in type a substitutionary death in behalf of those who can and do sin? Here is an innocent victim being penalized for the sin of others. Jesus is explicitly identified with this sacrificial lamb (Jn. 1:29) "for the sin of the world."

 

[Iconoclast]

AW.Pink...The Atonement its Prerequisites;

Relationship of nature to those for whom Atonement was made is an essential element in its validity. Christ was required to be real and proper man , as well as true God. To qualify Him for the work of redemption, He needed to possess opposite attributes: a frail and mortal nature, combined with ineffable dignity of person. Humanity was requisite to fit the Messiah for suffering, to render Him susceptible of pain and death, to make it possible for Him to offer Himself as a sacrifice. Equally so was the possession of human nature required in order to impart validity to what He did , to give to His obedience and sufferings an essential value in the estimation of God’s law. The workof our redemption being a moral satisfaction to the law of God for the sins of men, there existed a moral fitness that the satisfaction should be made by one in the nature of those who had sinned. It is striking to note in the types how that redemption had to be effected by a near kinsman ( Leviticus 25:25-27; Ruth 4:7).

Unless the Redeemer Himself possesses the nature of those to be redeemed the moral government of God had not been vindicated, nor the glory of the Divine Lawgiver been maintained, nor the principles of the law been upheld. The law in its precept was suited to man, and in its curse had a claim upon man. Its requirements were such as man only could fulfill; its penalty such as one possessing the nature of man only could bear. The penalty was suffering unto death; and no angel could die ( Luke 20:36).

The death only of a man could possess a moral and legal congruity to the cause of a law given to man and broken by man. Thus, it was not only to qualify Him for suffering that the Messiah took upon Him the nature of man, but to qualify Him for such sufferings as should possess validity in the eye of the Divine law. “For both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified, are all of one... Wherefore in all things it behooved Him to be made like unto His brethren... to make propitiation for the sins of the people” ( Hebrews 2:11,17). “Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead” ( 1 Corinthians 15:21).

The law required that its subject should love God with all his soul and serve Him with all the members of his body, seeing both are God’s. Now none can do this but man, who consists of soul and body. Again; the law required the love of our neighbor, but none is our neighbor but man, who is of the same blood with us: hence the force of those words — “that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh” ( Isaiah 58:7). Hence our Surety must cherish us, as one does his own flesh, and consequently we have to be “members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones” ( Ephesians 4:30).

Therefore has the Holy Spirit joined together these two things about Christ: “made of a woman, made under the law” ( Galatians 4:4), intimating that the principal end of his incarnation was that He might be subject to the law. “It is not without reason that Paul, when asked to exhibit Christ in the character of a Mediator, expressly speaks of Him as a man: ‘There is one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus’ ( 1 Timothy 2:5). He might have called Him God, or might indeed have omitted the appellation of man, as well as that of God; but because the Spirit, who spake by him knew our infirmity, He has provided a very suitable remedy against it, by placing the Son of God familiarly amongst us (Christians, A.W.P.) as though He were one of us. Therefore, that no one may distress himself where he is to seek the Mediator or in what way he may approach Him, the apostle, by denominating Him a man, apprizes us that He is near, and even close to us, since He is our own flesh. He certainly intends the same in Hebrews 4:15” (J. Calvin). 2. THE MEDIATOR MUST BE SINLESS He who makes atonement for others must himself be entirely free from that which renders the atonement necessary. That which made atonement necessary was sin. The redeemer must be sinless, otherwise he would require redeeming. A sinner cannot expiate his own sins, still less can he be a savior of others. Thus it was a prime prerequisite that the substitutionary victim should himself be undefiled, pure. This was plainly foreshadowed in the types. The lamb used in sacrifice must be “without blemish.” The red heifer must not only be flawless, but also one “upon which never came yoke” ( Numbers 19:2). The levitical high priest was required to possess a high degree of ceremonial purity. “Legal obligation to the curse may arise from one or both of two things: either from being born under the curse, that is to say, from original sin; or from becoming exposed to the penalty in consequence of a personal breach of its requirements, that is by actual transgression. Infants of the human family are under it in the former way; adults in both; but Jesus was neither the one nor the other” (Dr. W. Symington on The Atonement , 1854).

 

[Van]

Christ died as the sin sacrifice for the sin of the world. Anyone given to Christ and therefore transferred into Christ spiritually, undergoes the circumcision of Christ and the washing of regeneration (being born anew in Christ). This results both in the removal of our sin burden (what God holds against us) and being made righteous in Christ. Thus Christ died for all mankind, those saved or to be saved, and those never to be saved. Therefore anyone given to Christ is covered by the blood, made blameless and perfect in Christ.

 

[The Biblicist]

Christ died as the sin sacrifice for the sin of the world. Anyone given to Christ and therefore transferred into Christ spiritually, undergoes the circumcision of Christ and the washing of regeneration (being born anew in Christ). This results both in the removal of our sin burden (what God holds against us) and being made righteous in Christ. Thus Christ died for all mankind, those saved or to be saved, and those never to be saved. Therefore anyone given to Christ is covered by the blood, made blameless and perfect in Christ.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion of universal atonement. But this thread has nothing to do with whether the atonement is definite or universal. This thread has to do with the penal and substitutionary character of the atonement. It seems that you admit it is both penal and substitutionary at least in application to all you admit are "given" to Christ.

 

[Van]

You are certainly welcome to your opinion of universal atonement. But this thread has nothing to do with whether the atonement is definite or universal. This thread has to do with the penal and substitutionary character of the atonement. It seems that you admit it is both penal and substitutionary at least in application to all you admit are "given" to Christ.

PSA is a Trojan Horse for "definite" atonement. If Christ died only to take away the penalty for the specific sins of those supposedly chosen individually before creation, then we were saved or damned from all eternity for all eternity. But since Christ died to take away the sin of the world, whoever is given to Him (transferred into Him spiritually) then salvation is possible for whoever believes in Him, and God has not predetermined who can believe in Him.

In summary, Christ's substitutionary sacrifice on the cross provides the price of redemption for everyone transferred into Christ, thus Christ died for all mankind, although only those put into Christ receive that reconciliation, when the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

@The Biblicist ,
Thank you for those helpful posts, which are right on the mark
I wonder if you have some thoughts on Christ as Mediator and Surety.?

We must be very careful in saying that God cannot do something, but the Scriptures tell us that God ‘cannot deny Himself’ (2 Timothy 2:13). In the light of Proverbs 17:15, God surely cannot become an abomination to Himself by justifying guilty sinners without a penalty for sin! To be sure God is under no obligation to show mercy to sinful humans; the angels who sinned had no Redeemer but were ‘cast down to hell and delivered into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgement’ (2 Peter 2:4). But if God, ‘according to the good pleasure of His will’ (Ephesians 1:5), has decreed mercy and salvation for certain sinful men and women, it surely cannot be at the expense of His justice. Someone must pay the price and satisfy God’s justice and His righteous anger against sin.

In the Scriptures we have the concept of the mediator, one who might fill up the gap between the outraged holiness of God and rebellious man (Isaiah 59:2). Job complained, “For He is not a man, as I am, that I should answer Him, and that we should go to court together. Nor is there any mediator between us who may lay his hand on us both.” But mediation requires a satisfaction to be made to the offended party. We see this is the book of Philemon. Here we have an offended party, Philemon, whose servant has run away from him, perhaps stealing some goods as he went; an offending party, Onesimus, and Paul who is attempting to mediate between them. Onesimus needs to return to his master, but fears the sanctions that may be imposed upon him if he does so. Paul takes these sanctions upon himself: ‘But if he has wronged you or owes anything, put that on my account. I, Paul, am writing with my own hand. I will repay…..’ (Philemon 18-19). Whatever is wanting to propitiate Philemon’s anger against his servant and to effect reconciliation, Paul the mediator willingly agrees to provide. In the same way, the Lord Jesus has become a Mediator between men and God (1 Timothy 2:5).

In 2 Corinthians 5:19, we learn that God does not impute trespasses against His people; in Christ; He has reconciled the world [believing Jew and Gentile alike] to Himself. How has He done this? Through the Mediator Jesus Christ. ‘For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us….’ (v.21). The Lord Jesus has taken our sins upon Himself and made satisfaction to God for them. Therefore the message of reconciliation can be preached to all.

God’s law makes two inexorable demands: ‘Do this and live’ (Leviticus 18:5; Galatians 3:12), and ‘The soul that sins shall die’ (Ezekiel 18:4). The first demand our Lord has met in His perfect obedience. He was made ‘under the law’ (Galatians 4:4) and fulfilled it (Matthew 5:17). His obedience has been placed to the credit of His people (Romans 5:19) and they are now made ‘the righteousness of God in Him’ (2 Corinthians 5:21).

For the second demand, we need to look at Hebrews 7:22: ‘By so much more Jesus has become a surety of a better covenant.’ Christ is specifically designated in Scripture as ‘the last Adam’ (1 Corinthians 15:45) and we are told that the first Adam was a ‘type [or ‘figure’] of Him who was to come’ (Romans 5:14). ‘For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive’ (1 Corinthians 15:22). All those in Adam perish in their sins; all those in Christ are united to Him in His perfect righteousness.

Who are those ‘in Christ’? Those He came to save; those who were given to Him by the Father before time began. “Christ came not to strangers but to ‘brethren’ (Hebrews 2:11-13). He came here not to procure a people for Himself, but to secure a people already His” (A.W. Pink). There are many supporting texts for this, e.g. Matthew 1:21; John 6:39; 10:27-29; 17:2, 6; Ephesians 1:4. Christ is united federally to His people. They are ‘chosen in Christ’ (Ephesians 1:4), ‘Created in Christ’ (Ephesians 2:10); ‘circumcised in Him’ (Colossians 2:11) and ‘made the righteousness of God in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21). But as Surety, the Lord Jesus must also pay the debt of His people, and if they are to be freed from their debt, He must pay the very last penny (Matthew 5:26).

So we come to the concept of the cup of God’s wrath. In Gethsemane, our Lord prayed, “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will” (Matthew 26:39). What was this cup which the Lord Jesus dreaded so much to drink? It is the cup of God’s wrath. ‘For in the hand of the LORD there is a cup, and the wine is red. It is fully mixed and He pours it out; surely its dregs shall all the wicked of the earth drink’ (Psalm 75:8; c.f. Isaiah 51:17, 22; Jeremiah 13:13; 25:15; Ezekiel 23:32-34; Revelation 14:9-10 etc.). It represents God’s righteous judgement against a wicked world. This cup the Lord Jesus must drink down to the very dregs. All the wrath and punishment due to those whom He came to save was poured out on Him. ‘And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all’ (Isaiah 53:6). ‘Who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree….’ (1 Peter 2:24). ‘It pleased the LORD to crush Him; He has put Him to grief’ (Isaiah 53:10). Why would it please the Father to bruise or crush His beloved (Luke 3:22 etc. ) Son? Because by His suffering, the Son magnified God’s law and made it honourable. Sin was punished in full, so that God ‘might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus’ (Romans 3:26).

 

[Iconoclast]

PSA is a Trojan Horse for "definite" atonement. If Christ died only to take away the penalty for the specific sins of those supposedly chosen individually before creation, then we were saved or damned from all eternity for all eternity. But since Christ died to take away the sin of the world, whoever is given to Him (transferred into Him spiritually) then salvation is possible for whoever believes in Him, and God has not predetermined who can believe in Him.

In summary, Christ's substitutionary sacrifice on the cross provides the price of redemption for everyone transferred into Christ, thus Christ died for all mankind, although only those put into Christ receive that reconciliation, when the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.

Psalm is bible truth.It is right out in the open. That's why it has been welcomed by bible believers since the printing press.
No one is transferred anywhere. They were already considered as fallen yet in the redeemer before the world was.

 

[Van]

Psalm is bible truth.It is right out in the open. That's why it has been welcomed by bible believers since the printing press.
No one is transferred anywhere. They were already considered as fallen yet in the redeemer before the world was.

Psalms supports my view and conflicts with your view, and it is right out in the open.
You posted "no one is transferred" before and I cited the verse that says we are transferred. Just repeating falsehoods is obfuscation and not discussion.
Corporately we were "chosen in Him" before creation, but individually we are chosen during our lifetime, after we were not a chosen people, after we had not yet received mercy. Your view as has been shown many times, is unbiblical.

In summary, Christ's substitutionary sacrifice on the cross provides the price of redemption for everyone transferred into Christ, thus Christ died for all mankind, although only those put into Christ receive that reconciliation, when the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.

Col 1:13 - For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,

 

[Iconoclast]

"Van,

Psalms supports my view and conflicts with your view, and it is right out in the open.

Autocorrect on my phone changed it to Psalms... I was speaking of penal substitutionary atonement

You posted "no one is transferred"

They are not transferred anywhere. God selected each and every individual who were to receive His saving grace before the world was. It was individual election...one living stone at a time..

before and I cited the verse that says we are transferred.

We are not transferred but rather translated in Col.113 who did rescue us out of the authority of the darkness, and did translate [us] into the reign of the Son of His love,

 

[Iconoclast]

@The Biblicist ,
Thank you for those helpful posts, which are right on the mark
I wonder if you have some thoughts on Christ as Mediator and Surety.?

AW.Pink Hebrews;

Third , that the old covenant had a “surety”. Many have erred at this point through failing to distinguish between a “mediator” and a “surety”. Moses was the typical mediator; Aaron, the typical surety, for he it was who offered solemn sacrifices in the name and on behalf of the people, making atonement for them according to the terms of the covenant. “By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant.” Here for the first time in this chapter the apostle expressly names the person who had been referred to and described. Declaration had been made of the nature of the priesthood of Him who was to fill the office according to the Melchizedek type, but now definite application of the whole is made unto the Savior. Two questions had long engaged the attention of the Jews: the nature of the Messiah’s office, and who that person should be. The apostle had demonstrated from their own Scriptures that the Messiah was to be a Priest, yet not of the Levitical stock; as he had also shown the necessary consequences of this. Now he asserts that it was Jesus who is this Priest, for He alone has fulfilled the type and discharged the principal duty of that office. Concerning “Jesus” it is here affirmed that He was “made a Surety”.

He was “made so” or appointed so by the will and act of God the Father: compare 1:4, 3:2, 5:5 and our comments thereon for the force of this term “made”. The whole undertaking of Christ, and the efficacy for the discharge of His office, depended entirely upon the appointment of God the Father. “The Greek word for ‘surety’ properly means a bondsman: one who pledges his name, property or influence, that a certain thing shall be done. When a contract is made, a debt contracted, or a note given, a friend often becomes the surety in the case, and is himself responsible if the terms of the contract are not complied with” (A. Barnes).

A “surety” is one who agrees to undertake for another who is lacking in ability to discharge his own obligations. Whatever undertaking the surety makes, whether in words of promise, or in the depositing of real security in the hands of the arbitrator, or by any other personal engagement of life of body, it implies the deject of the person for whom any one becomes surety.

The surety is sponsor for another, standing in the room of and acting for one who is incompetent to act for himself: he represents that other person, and pledges to make good his engagements. Thus, Christ was not a Surety for God, for He needed none; but for His own poor, failing and deficient people, who were unable to meet their obligations, incapable of discharging their liabilities. In view of this, Christ agreed to undertake for them, fully pay all their debts, and completely satisfied every demand which God had against them.

A beautiful illustration of the “surety” is found in Genesis 43:8,9, “And Judah said unto Israel his father, send the lad with me, and we will arise and go; that we may live, and not die, both me and thou, and also our little ones. I will be surety for him; of my hand shalt thou require him: if I bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame forever”.

Blessed is it to find how faithful Judah was to his agreement. Later, Joseph’s cup was found in Benjamin’s sack ( Genesis 44:12), and on their return into Egypt and re-appearance before Joseph the governor, we hear him saying, “For thy servant became surety for the lad unto my father, saying, If I bring him not unto thee, then I shall bear the blame, to my father forever. Now therefore, I pray thee, let thy servant abide instead of the lad, a bondman to my lord; and let the lad go with his brethren” ( Genesis 44:32,33).

 

[Iconoclast]

pt2

A blessed New Testament example is found in the case of Paul who volunteered to be surety for Onesimus: “If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account; I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay” ( Philemon 18, 19).

In like manner Christ engaged Himself unto the Father for His elect, saying, Charge to My account whatsoever My people owe Thee, and I will fully discharge their debts. This is an office in which Christ sustains a representative character in relation to those sinners for whom He interposed. It was Christ pledging Himself, or making Himself responsible, for the fulfillment of all that the Everlasting Covenant required on the part of those who are to share its provisions. It is as the Surety of the Covenant that Christ is called the “Second Man”, the “Last Adam” ( 1 Corinthians 15:47). This title, then, views Christ as identifying Himself with those whom the Father gave to Him, and on whose behalf He accomplished the great work assigned Him (see John 6:38,39, etc.) in their room and stead, making full satisfaction to God.

Let us now observe that Jesus was made “a Surety of a better testament”, or “covenant”, as the term should be rendered, for the word denotes an arrangement or constitution, a dispensation or economy. It signifies that order of things introduced by Christ, in contrast from the order of things which obtained under the Mosaic regime. The Mosaic covenant was administered by the instrumentality of the Levitical priesthood, but the better covenant by Jesus, the Son of God: that was transitory and changing; this is permanent and eternal. It is so because those who enjoy its blessings receive an enablement to comply with its terms, fulfill its conditions, and yield the obedience which God requires therein. For by the ordination of God, our Surety merited and procured for them the Holy Spirit, and all the needed supplies of grace to make them new creatures, and empower to yield obedience to God from a new principle of spiritual life, and that, faithfully to the end.

It is the Surety by the Divine oath which gives stability unto the covenant.

God entered into a covenant with the first Adam (see Hosea 6:6 margin), but it had no “surety”! And therefore though our first parent had all the tremendous advantages of a sinless nature filled with holy inclinations, and free from all evil imaginations, desires and habits, yet he broke the covenant and forfeited all the benefits thereof. God made a covenant with Israel at Sinai (Exodus 19 and 24), and appointed the high priest to act as the typical surety of it; yet, as we have seen, that covenant and that surety, made nothing perfect. The purpose of that covenant was to demonstrate the need of another and better one. In contradistinction from these God has made with His elect, in Christ, a covenant “ordered in all things and sure”, “for He laid help upon One that is mighty” ( Psalm 89:19).

And what is the practical application to God’s children today of what has been before us? Surely this, that just so far as the new covenant surpasses the old, are we under greater obligations unto God, “for unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required” ( Luke 12:48).

That just so far as the Surety of the better covenant exceeds in dignity and glory the surety under the old regime, are we under higher obligation of rendering to Him more complete submission, deeper devotion, fuller obedience. O my brethren, what is due unto that blessed One who left heaven’s glory and came here to this sincurst world to discharge our obligations, pay our debts, suffer and die in our room and stead! May His love truly “constrain” us to gladsome and whole-hearted surrender to Him, no longer seeking to please ourselves, but living to and for His honor and praise. If we do not, that is certain proof that we are yet in our sins, strangers to the Surety of the better covenant. “And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death” (verse 23).

 

[Iconoclast]

pt3;
In this and the following verse the apostle advances his last argument from the consideration of Christ’s priesthood as represented by that of Melchizedek. His design is to present further proof of the excellency of it above the Levitical, and of His person above theirs. That Paul is still looking back to Melchizedek as a type of Christ, is evident from the description which he had given of him in the earlier verses, namely, that he “abideth a priest continually” (verse 3), and that “it is witnessed that he liveth” (verse 8), for his priesthood did not terminate at the age of fifty as did that of the Levitical. This is the particular detail of the type which is here seized and improved upon, for it was that which gives virtue and efficacy to everything else he had insisted upon. Set this aside and all the other advantages and excellencies he had named would be quite ineffectual to secure “perfection”. What lasting profit could it be to the Church to have so glorious a Priest for a season, and then be deprived of Him by the expiration of His office?

Just as what the apostle declares of Christ in verse 24 hath respect to what he had before observed concerning Melchizedek, so what he affirms in verse 23 of the Levitical priests looks back to what he had before declared about them, namely, that they were all mortal men, and nothing more, for they actually died in their successive generations: see verse 8. The apostle expresses himself very emphatically “and truly”. It was not a dubious point he was now handling, but one which was well known and could not be controverted. “They truly were many priests”. It is of the high priest’s only, Aaron and his successors, of whom he speaks. Jewish records inform us that there were no fewer than eighty-three high priests from Aaron, the first, to Phinehas, who perished with the temple. Thirteen lived under the tabernacle prior to Solomon, eighteen under the first temple before its destruction by the Babylonians, the remainder under the second temple till A.D. 70.

The reason for this multiplication of priests was “because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death”. Notwithstanding the great dignity of their office, and the solemnities with which they were installed in it, they were but men, subject to infirmity and dissolution, like those for whom they ministered. Mortality suffered them not to continue in the execution of their office. It forbade them so to do in the name of the great sovereign Lord of life and death. A signal instance of this was given in Aaron himself, the first of them. God, to show the nature of that priesthood unto the people, and to manifest that the everlasting Priest was yet to come, commanded Aaron to die in the sight of all the congregation: Numbers 20:25-29! In like manner, death seized upon each of his successors.

Thereby did God intimate unto Israel that imperfection attached to that office which was so frequently interrupted in its administration. “But this man, because He continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood” (verse 24).

This is the final proof in our present passage for the immeasurable superiority of our great High Priest over the Levitical priests. The Surety of the better covenant has an unchanging priesthood. The reason for and the ground on which this rests is here stated: “because He continueth ever”. The apostle is not here proving the absolute perpetuity of Christ’s sacerdotal office, but the continuous and uninterrupted administration of it.t2

 

[Van]

"Van,
Autocorrect on my phone changed it to Psalms... I was speaking of penal substitutionary atonement

PSA is a Trojan Horse for Limited Atonement, thus not openly but deceptively.

They are not transferred anywhere. God selected each and every individual who were to receive His saving grace before the world was. It was individual election...one living stone at a time..

Out of the realm of darkness and into the kingdom of His Son. A change in spiritual location, from being separated from God (in Adam) to being together with God (in Christ.) This transfer results in our being made alive (our rebirth in Christ.)

We are not transferred but rather translated in Col.113 who did rescue us out of the authority of the darkness, and did translate [us] into the reign of the Son of His love,

NIV - brought us
NLT - transferred
ESV - transferred
NASB - transferred
CSB - transferred
CEV - brought us
GNT - brought us
ISV - brought us
NET - transferred

Several other translations such as the KJV family have translate, which means: "move from one place or condition to another."

Therefore the denial of transferred is obfuscation and not discussion.

In summary, Christ's substitutionary sacrifice on the cross provides the price of redemption for everyone transferred into Christ, thus Christ died for all mankind, although only those put into Christ receive that reconciliation, when the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.

 

[Iconoclast]

PSA is a Trojan Horse for Limited Atonement, thus not openly but deceptively.

Out of the realm of darkness and into the kingdom of His Son. A change in spiritual location, from being separated from God (in Adam) to being together with God (in Christ.) This transfer results in our being made alive (our rebirth in Christ.)



NIV - brought us
NLT - transferred
ESV - transferred
NASB - transferred
CSB - transferred
CEV - brought us
GNT - brought us
ISV - brought us
NET - transferred

Several other translations such as the KJV family have translate, which means: "move from one place or condition to another."

Therefore the denial of transferred is obfuscation and not discussion.

In summary, Christ's substitutionary sacrifice on the cross provides the price of redemption for everyone transferred into Christ, thus Christ died for all mankind, although only those put into Christ receive that reconciliation, when the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.

yes they move from one [realm ] to another.
Their individual election was before the world was, not after.. The translation is of the realm .

 

[Van]

Now you deny we are transferred out of the realm of darkness (in Adam) and put in Christ, 1 Cor. 1:30.

And then you ignore that we lived as not a people, therefore not chosen. I think you do not address the scriptures provided because you have no rebuttal. 1 Peter 2:9-10

9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

This passage precludes individual election before creation. Find a better doctrine.

 

[Iconoclast]

Now you deny we are transferred out of the realm of darkness (in Adam) and put in Christ, 1 Cor. 1:30.

And then you ignore that we lived as not a people, therefore not chosen. I think you do not address the scriptures provided because you have no rebuttal. 1 Peter 2:9-10

9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

This passage precludes individual election before creation. Find a better doctrine.

This shows an apparent ignorance of the flow of redemptive history, both from the language of the First Exodus, as well as Hosea...
ex19
4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

hos1
6 And she conceived again, and bare a daughter. And God said unto him, Call her name Loruhamah: for I will no more have mercy upon the house of Israel; but I will utterly take them away.

7 But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen.

8 Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son.

9 Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God.

10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

 

[Van]

You know the opponent has nothing to support his or her view when they start out claiming the other side is ignorant. Arguments against the person rather than addressing the issue are logical fallacies.

Then two OT passages were quoted which did not address the issue. The issue is the bogus claim God's chosen people under the New Covenant in His blood, were chosen individually before creation. This is not true because once we were not a people and once we had not obtained mercy. Therefore we lived before we were chosen. This is inescapable.

1 Peter 2:9-10
9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You know the opponent has nothing to support his or her view when they start out claiming the other side is ignorant. Arguments against the person rather than addressing the issue are logical fallacies.

I can't help noticing that you would sooner call foul than address @Iconoclast's points.

The issue is the bogus claim God's chosen people under the New Covenant in His blood, were chosen individually before creation. This is not true because once we were not a people and once we had not obtained mercy. Therefore we lived before we were chosen. This is inescapable.

No it isn't. It is clear that the elect are chosen in eternity past (Ephesians 1:4-5 etc.). However, they are not justified until they trust in Christ. To give an analogy, a father may be displeased with his son and send him to his room, but even before he does so, he knows he is going to forgive him. However, forgiveness has not yet taken place; the child is still in disgrace. The decision to forgive takes place before forgiveness.

1 Peter 2:9-10
9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

Exactly so. 'Known to God from eternity are all His works' (Acts 15:18). They had not received mercy until they trusted in Christ for salvation, but they were predestined for salvation before the foundation of the world