It is the dominant position among both Reformed and Calvinistic Baptists...
-
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!
A Biblical Based view of Penal Substitutionary Atonement
- Thread starter The Biblicist
- Start date
- Status
Did Y1 answer the question? Nope, so more deflection, more obfuscation and no enlightenment.
We are saved by grace through faith. Therefore we had faith before we were saved. We are chosen through faith in the truth, therefore we had faith in Christ even before we were chosen for salvation.
God credits our faith as righteousness, not instills His righteous faith in us. If He did, He would not credit it as righteousness.
About a dozen verses uses the term "your faith" and none say or suggest your God instilled faith.
PSA is a bogus unbiblical assertion.
1) Did Christ die only for the elect chosen individually before creation? PSA says yes, but scripture precludes any individual chosen before they lived not as a people chosen by God.
2) Some claim 2 Thessalonians 2:13 does not say we were chosen through faith in the truth. Just read it folks.
3) 1 Peter 2:9-10 does say we were chosen after we lived not as chosen people. Therefore the election of Ephesians 1:4 must be corporate and cannot be individual.
4) Next, PSA is a Trojan horse for Limited atonement, but since Christ died for the sin of the world (John 1:29) the PSA claim Christ died only for the sins of the individuals chosen before creation is mistaken. (See point #3.) This is where the corporate election of Ephesians 1:4 repudiates PSA's basic assumption.
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, because the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.
We are saved by grace through faith. Therefore we had faith before we were saved. We are chosen through faith in the truth, therefore we had faith in Christ even before we were chosen for salvation.
God credits our faith as righteousness, not instills His righteous faith in us. If He did, He would not credit it as righteousness.
About a dozen verses uses the term "your faith" and none say or suggest your God instilled faith.
PSA is a bogus unbiblical assertion.
1) Did Christ die only for the elect chosen individually before creation? PSA says yes, but scripture precludes any individual chosen before they lived not as a people chosen by God.
2) Some claim 2 Thessalonians 2:13 does not say we were chosen through faith in the truth. Just read it folks.
3) 1 Peter 2:9-10 does say we were chosen after we lived not as chosen people. Therefore the election of Ephesians 1:4 must be corporate and cannot be individual.
4) Next, PSA is a Trojan horse for Limited atonement, but since Christ died for the sin of the world (John 1:29) the PSA claim Christ died only for the sins of the individuals chosen before creation is mistaken. (See point #3.) This is where the corporate election of Ephesians 1:4 repudiates PSA's basic assumption.
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, because the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.
Yes. It is a Calvinistic belief.
Due to it being the only viewpoint that can really explain just how a holy and perfect God can remain true to His own nature and yet still be able to freely forgive lost imperfect sinners!
More correctly - it is the only viewpoint that you understand to explain how a holy and perfect God can remain true to His own nature and yet still be able to freely forgive lost imperfect sinners. You view God as being just and the justifier of sinners as a dichotomy solved on the Cross rather than descriptive of divine justice.
God intended to save those He chose corporately before creation, each and everyone redeemed based on faith credited as righteousness by His chosen Redeemer, thus He chose us (those redeemed) 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, because the penalty for their individual sins is removed by the circumcision of Christ.
If you are waiting for Y1 to answer the question, why did God credit our faith as righteousness, if He instilled righteous faith, don't hold your breath.
Someone has to pay for our sin that we have done against God, correct?
No. Someone has to redeem man. Our sins do not create a need on the part of God.
If I punch you, and you want to forgive me, you do not have to punch someone else. It is a failed philosophy of justice.
Another deflection, with no answer to the question. Why are you not answering the question? Answer, his viewpoint is unbiblical.
Why does God credit our faith in Christ as righteousness, if He instilled His righteous faith? Tick tock
I am sorry jon but you simply have a very corrupt and flawed view of the atonement. Your view comes from traditions of men while the Bible is so clear and so simple. The Bible is so clear that it is penal (Gen. 2:17; 5:12; 1 Jn. 3:6) in nature. This is so indisputably clear that one has to close their eyes, and close their minds to the simplest and clearest statements of Scripture. The Substitionary nature is as equally simple and clear and explicit. The Levtical sacrificial system was devised by God to present a clear type of the atonement and in no aspect is substitionary character more clearly seen in the day of atonement and in the daily sacrifice of the Lamb that John the Baptist identifies with Jesus Christ with regard to our sins. The scriptures repeatably say that Christ died "for" our sins suffering the condemnation of sin in our stead. There is simply no excuse for denying the explicit, clear and simple statements of Scripture. One must come to the scriptures with an agenda formed outside of Scripture to deny the simplicity of scripture on these points.
In my estimation, if you really believe this illustration supports your view, then in my estimation you have rejected the truth of the gospel and have embraced "another gospel" entirely as you have completely emptied Biblical words of their true meaning.
Leviticus 16:15 ¶ Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat:
16 And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.
17 And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel........21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
These animals had no physical flaws which is a type of spiritual flaws but were chosen because they were without blemish. They were not put to death because anything found in them but they were put to death as SUBSTITUTES "for the people" and "because of the uncleaness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." This is a clear explicit type of Substitutionary atonement. This is a clear and explicit type of penal atonement.
Remember, it is God that devised the sacricial system as a TYPE of the atonement of Christ as Hebrews makes cyrstal clear. All that you fellows can do is EXPLAIN AWAY the obvious and clear type. When you are forced to explain away the obvious you have a very weak and flawed position.
16 And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.
17 And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel........21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
These animals had no physical flaws which is a type of spiritual flaws but were chosen because they were without blemish. They were not put to death because anything found in them but they were put to death as SUBSTITUTES "for the people" and "because of the uncleaness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." This is a clear explicit type of Substitutionary atonement. This is a clear and explicit type of penal atonement.
Remember, it is God that devised the sacricial system as a TYPE of the atonement of Christ as Hebrews makes cyrstal clear. All that you fellows can do is EXPLAIN AWAY the obvious and clear type. When you are forced to explain away the obvious you have a very weak and flawed position.
No, the illustration does not support my view. The illustration supports a flaw in the way another member's argument.
When it comes to Scripture I do believe that those who view God as separating from Jesus, God as punishing Jesus in our place to satisfy the demands of divine justice in order to be able to forgive mankind, and Jesus literally becoming "sin" in such a way as God treated Jesus as unholy do, in fact, believe and teach a false doctrine and will be considered responsible for the sin.
We will not agree here (if you will recall my rejection of your illustration that the priest was punishing the sacrificial animal). So there is no need to continue down this line of thinking.
Either you can prove the basis of Penal Substitution Theory - that is, a retributive mode of justice as divine justice AND that divine justice is what must be satisfied by God punishing sin in order for God to forgive sin AND that it is just to punish one person for the sins of another (and clear the guilty as long as another has been punished) - or you can't.
The problem here is that I am not interested in a philosophical argument. The way I see it, our views of the Atonement is vitally important. I do not think that Scripture left this to be something implied (as some have suggested). Scripture actually states what is vital that we understand.
Can you provide a passage stating what you assume? No, of course you cannot otherwise you would have long ago. So there isn't any point in continuing.
Sin is the violation of the law and death is the "condemnation" for breaking the law. That demands we are all under the PENALTY of condemnation and that requires the satisfication of all legal demands against sin. Hence, any atonement that is not penal in its satisfaction is NO ATONEMENT AT ALL BUT A FALSE AND FAKE ATONEMENT AND any gospel preached on that kind of atonement belief system is "another gospel."
All these terms are set in a forensic backdrop. To deny this is legal court backdrop is simply false and easy to prove to be false. The Great White Seat Judgement is a court and it is directly related to sin and its consequences. Law is a forensic aspect. The judicial system of Israel is joined to the law of God and is forensic in nature. The atonement symoblized in the Levitical sacrificial system is entrenced in a forensic backdrop as it is joined to the Law of God and the penalty for violating that law.
The righteousness of God is manifested/revealed in the Law of God and it is not another kind of righteousness but the same kind manifested in the Law. However, the righteousness of the Law cannot convey life or righteousness to sinners. It takes the righteous LIFE of Christ secured by a penal substitionary atonement to obtain life and convey the righteousness of God.
Where there is no penal substitutionary atonement there is no true gospel, no true justification by faith, and no true salvation of any kind.
All these terms are set in a forensic backdrop. To deny this is legal court backdrop is simply false and easy to prove to be false. The Great White Seat Judgement is a court and it is directly related to sin and its consequences. Law is a forensic aspect. The judicial system of Israel is joined to the law of God and is forensic in nature. The atonement symoblized in the Levitical sacrificial system is entrenced in a forensic backdrop as it is joined to the Law of God and the penalty for violating that law.
The righteousness of God is manifested/revealed in the Law of God and it is not another kind of righteousness but the same kind manifested in the Law. However, the righteousness of the Law cannot convey life or righteousness to sinners. It takes the righteous LIFE of Christ secured by a penal substitionary atonement to obtain life and convey the righteousness of God.
Where there is no penal substitutionary atonement there is no true gospel, no true justification by faith, and no true salvation of any kind.
I read his post! You illustration seems to be directed squarely at the doctrine of penal substitionary atonement. Your illustration seems to me to be your characterization of what you beleive is the primary flaw of penal substitutionary atonement.
It seems to be suggesting, if not demanding that penal substitonary atonement is flawed because it requires God punching Jesus for you punching God? If that is what you are saying then you view is repugnant to God and the Bible and is "another gospel" clear and simple in my estimation.
Any sunday school kid knows that "death" is the punishment for sin. The animal is being put to "death" and that is precisely why it provides an "atonement" as blood must be shed unto death. The text explicitly and clearly states the animal is being put to death "FOR" the people and "BECAUSE" of their sins.
So, yes, we do need to continue down this line of thinking because it completley repudiates what you are teaching. You have no answer for it but to ignore it or pervert the language!
I like you jon as a person but what you are saying is a complete repudiaton of the gospel of Jesus Christ and is "another gospel" and is accursed. The atonement is set in a JUDICIAL setting and a judicial setting is about justice with regard to violation of law. The Great White Seat judgment is the consequence for all who are not atoned and that is a PENAL judicial application of divine retribution that no one can deny. The text above explicitly states that the sacrifice for atonement is "because" of their sins and it is that atonement that satisfies God's wrath or else the High Priest himself dies if he enters without it. This is easy as abc and home made apple pie.
Another false straw man argument as I have placed clear and explicit scripture right before you eyes. What you are doing is called "projection" as you are the one guilty of using philosophy to defend your position. Indeed, you always retreat to "traditions" of men and their speculative philosophy to defend your view. I NEVER do, I have placed the plain, explicit language of Scripture without reverting to skintilla of philsophical argumentation. The Biblical context is clearly a forensic context and the overall Biblical view of sin, condemnation, law, justification, atonement are forensic in nature and the Great White judgement throne proves this without dispute as it is the consequence of being outside of the atonement of Christ.
I have not seen ANY scripture provided by you to prove anything you are asserting. All I have seen from you is philosophical based arguements from traditions of men.
Just did, plain, clear, obvious, explicit biblical language which you want to ignore and for good reason. You can't deal with the plain language in its immediate and overall context because it is set in the context of divine wrath against sin and satisfaction of that wrath against sin inseparably connected with sinners committing that sin.
The scripture above anihilates non-penal non-substitonary atonement theories. To claim that God's wrath against sinners due to sin is not retributive in its scope are forced to deny the Great White Seat Judgment is retributive wrath against sinners due to sin and such a denial is absurd! The Great White Seat Judgement is irrefutable proof that satisfaction of divine wrath is the design of the atonement.
- Status