Featured The Wrath of God

When the blood was brought by the priest, if it was unsatisfactory, or the priest was unworthy, what happened?

None of the other matters, if the blood were not the satisfaction.

The rest speak not of substitution, but of transferring and victory.

"Wilderness" is an unfortunate translation. The scapegoat was lead outside the camp to a field and turned loose, never to be used again.

When our Lord died, outside the city walls (whether He had to climb a hill or was placed at the bottom along the roadway has long been discussed it is all the place of Golgotha) the blood was shed, the death and burial were to take place. Again, it is a place of victory, not substitution. A place of satisfaction, not substitution.

 

When the faithful Israelite brought a burnt offering, it was "accepted for him" to make atonement. In other words, the dedication he lacked was made up for in the substitute he brought. This was signified by the offerer laying his hands on the head of the offering. He was identifying with it. He was saying, this is me.

When the penitent Israelite brought a sin offering, he too placed his hands on the head of the offering. The judgement that was due him was administered to the substitute he brought.

Like the ram that was offered "in the stead" of Abraham's son.

If you miss Christ our substitute, you have missed the Gospel. You need to be taught again those things that are the first principles of the doctrines of Christ.

 

It was not the blood that had to be 'without blemish' but the animal itself; the physical perfections of the creature speaking of the moral perfection of the Lord Jesus.(1 Peter 1:19).

It speaks absolutely of substitution. The guilt of the people was 'transferred' to a 'substitute.'

The Israelites were in a desert, a wilderness. Where do you find a field in a desert?

It is certainly a place of victory, but I'll be interested if you will tell me, before yet another thread closes, in what you believe that victory consisted. And whom and what did our Lord satisfy?
But I can tell you now for whom He substituted. Me,

 

I'm sure @Aaron can answer for himself, but nowhere in his post did he suggest that God's glory is manifested through the law. The words 'glory,' 'manifested' or law did not appear. Nor did he suggest that the Father is our high priest. The words priest' and 'Father' do not appear in his post.
As a moderator you have a duty to set higher standards of debate than this.

 

The atonement is a penal substitution. 2 Corinthians 11:3-4, Romans 6:23, Romans 5:8. For me to believe otherwise would be a false gospel. I am not going to do that.

 

Christ is revealed in the law. Moses wrote of Him. John 5:46

Now go learn of Him.

 

From Scripture God's justice must be satisfied, and He Himself, in the Person of the Lord Jesus has satisfied that justice (Romans 3:26).

So Adam died for your sins, did he? How interesting.

You keep claiming this about Augustine, but you never post anything by him. I gave a quotation from Augustine. Why can't you do the same? Here another one for you: ''Christ has no sin in the sense of deserving death, but He bore for our sakes sin in the sense of death as brought on human nature by sin' ['Against Faustus', bk 14, sect.3]

This is a particularly snide and supercilious thing to say. However, it is reversible.
I encourage you to read Scripture without the lens of your theory. Once you are able to understand Scripture without that lens, you will be able to compare the views and only then legitimately say which is biblical.