Featured BIBLICAL atonement

So that works when comparing our enlightened age to the reformers but is not allowed when comparing the reformers to the early church fathers.

 

JonC,

Hello Jonc, lets see what you offered this time.

I believe you believe that. If a poll be taken by the members, I think we both know what the results of that poll question would be.

canadyjd

Because you are un able to understand what we offered you, does not mean we are "blowing smoke".

I do not subscribe to your understanding of doctrine, church history, your foul suggestions about the doctrines of grace, or any related issues.
Your subjective statement can be rejected out of hand, but that is another whole thread and discussion.

You once again want to suggest that somehow I cannot defend the truth.
Your thinking here is way off.
The truth when accurately presented defends itself ,against such defective views as have been presented by you and Agedman.
As I said earlier, even Rm. and SBG agree that you have not answered what was offered, and what you have offered is drifting away, not drawing near.

No.....I offered my concern about your drifting from truth, but you believe you are okay.
I only offer help with those who want it. Those defective, and incomplete ideas you two men have offered have been answered , and I do not find any of these ideas thought provoking.

I believe you believe that, but I am certain you have not done so.
You repeat this idea, but the responses tell a different story.

Such statements are highly subjective. I have had people who were apostates, carnal professors, make the same statements.
Such statement does not strengthen your claim, but sort of lumps you together with those types.
Word of faith people repeat this as they deny truth after truth.

The teaching of PSA. is the biblical teaching, not a theory as you insist on calling it.
God has given teachers as gifts to the Church. They are not "crutches" as you seek to denigrate biblical scholarship.
Eph4:11-16

I and most others have learned and grown by making use of trusted guides. They are not infallible by any means, but God has ordained to use them. In fact I believe what you and a few others offer on this is highly defective, unbiblical thought.

Now we are getting where you are going.
Some like you.
I have heard similar ideas when I researched the C.U.T. group out in Montana. They followed certain "ascended masters."
These were not like other believers, they cast off historic and proven truths and were being "led" by God.....into a more mature understandinglike you have been claiming recently.

The philosophy seems to be coming from your keyboard.
You call biblical teaching, theory, philosophy,.....You JonC as our BB ascended master have gone beyond us ..

I doubt anyone here is looking to Rome at all. You think this makes the other questions just vanish
This is an absurd claim trying to divert from plain scripture offer from everyone else on here except Agedman.

No...MM, Aaron,SBG, Canady,SG,Dave,RM, have seen right through this. Each man has offered correction, but you do not welcome it.

Again you say this as the ascended master, of BB.
Most of us confess and believe the scripture as our confessions of faith have stated.
Do you think at all, that this is a bit of excessive hubris, to suggest such a thing???

Here it is...If we agree with what you say....we can ascend out of the shallows of the faith as you have. We can achieve ascended master status.
Godly men such as line the bookshelves and pastors and believers worldwide, Puritans , Reformers, John Murray, John Owen,
BB. Warfield, JC Ryle,C.H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, Dagg, Boyce....
All are to be discarded as "useless crutches".
We just need to read the posting of the ascended master, who has matured beyond all of them, and us.
Yes... it is becoming clearer now.

 

JonC said;
Try this -

Please give passages, even one passage, stating Christ experienced God's wrath, Christ's death was to appease God, or that God punished Chriat instead of punishing us.

Then this;
JonC,

Yes you offer your ideas, but could you offer even one verse that uses the word ":trinity".

Just one....not your ideas, and the philosophy of men......one verse, just one!

 

I will present this but in a little different way. I have taken the liberty of inserting the thoughts of those contemporary to the crucifixion. And in a way even my own thoughts from a very very long dark time ago.

Again, as if this hasn't already been done we have to show Isaiah 53:

1Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

2He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no stately form or majesty to attract us,
no beauty that we should desire Him.

3He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.
Like one from whom men hide their faces,
He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
​

Why should I, He is nothing more then a trickster.
Seen plenty of them always with their hand out promising big rewards.
Why should I even look at Him, he is not even attractive, and in fact repulsive.

4Surely He took on our infirmities
and carried our sorrows;
yet we considered Him stricken by God,
struck down and afflicted.

5But He was pierced for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him,
and by His stripes we are healed.
​

God did not pierce Him - I did.
God did not crush Him - I did.
God did not punish Him - I did
God did not lash Him - I did.
The evil in my own heart long established by being a slave of sin rejoiced to bring Him pain and sorrow.

6We all like sheep have gone astray,
each one has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid upon Him
the iniquity of us all. ​

I did not ask forgiveness for what I did to Him, He ask forgiveness for me!
"Father forgive them, they are ignorant."
What kind of criminal does that!
I didn't care!
(I was bound in slavery to sin addicted the excitement of hurting the innocent.)

7He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet, He did not open His mouth.
He was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so He did not open His mouth.

8By oppression and judgment He was taken away,
and who can recount His descendants?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
He was stricken for the transgression of My people.
​

So, I desired Him to be a spectacular attraction and conjured up His quilt while I haughtily mocked.
He hung between to others, wicked murderous thieves. Hope they suffer a long time.

9He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with a rich man in His death,
although He had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in His mouth.
​

I knew He was innocent, and I knew I had done such evil against Him.
I can't understand how very meanly I was. I actually was happy doing harm to Him.

10Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush Him
and to cause Him to suffer;
and when His soul is made a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days,
and the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

11After the anguish of His soul,
He will see the light of life and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant will justify many,
and He will bear their iniquities.
​

I hear the reports. The religious rulers and those of the king's palace. They told that the very God of all heaven had deemed this all to take place. That the prophets had proclaimed it and the ordinances portrayed it.
I was nothing but a pawn in the hands of the gods, a pawn for both evil and good.
He is called "the righteous Servant" by God, and that He will justify many.
Can I be one of the many? How is that possible, what must I do?

12Therefore I will allot Him a portion with the great,
and He will divide the spoils with the strong,
because He has poured out His life unto death,
and He was numbered with the transgressors.


Yet He bore the sin of many
and made intercession for the transgressors.​

Dear friend,
There is no place in this passage that portrays PSA thinking.

 

Rather then just one verse, and because I don't like stand alone verses as if it is proof texting, I show this passage.

A display of the trinity in a first hand account:

34“How can this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
35The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the Holy One to be born will be called the Son of God.

36Look, even Elizabeth your relative has conceived a son in her old age, and she who was called barren is in her sixth month. 37For no word from God will ever fail.”
38“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May it happen to me according to your word.” Then the angel left her.
​

 

They were annulled because

1. Jesus fulfilled the law
2. Jesus took the curse of the law

Jesus suffered The curse of the law. The penalty of sin in your place.

Otherwise, your still dead in your sin

 

verse 4 reads that Jesus Christ was "smitten of God, and afflicted", both by God the Father. The words in the next verse, "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities", also belong to God the Father. As do the words in verse 10, "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief"

HOW can you and Jon argue your case that God the Father did not actively punish Jesus Christ ON BEHALF of OUR SINS, is beyond me. You are denying what the Bible is very clear on, because of your humanistic reasoning!

 

For someone that keeps saying that they know the Greek and Hebrew so well you do seem to miss a lot.

He was crushed H1792
A verb meaning to crush, to beat down, to bruise, to oppress. The Hebrew word is often used in a poetic or figurative sense.
Isaiah said that it was the Lord's will to crush the Servant (Isa_53:10). Metaphorically, this word can also be used in the same way the English word crushed is used to mean dejected or sad (Isa_19:10). WSD

Do you forget that Christ Jesus went to the cross of His own volition. He was the lamb of God that bled for the sins of the world. Christ Jesus did the same thing that the lambs slain in the OT did, He shed His blood to appease the anger of God in regard to sin. Can you not see this?

God is angry at the sin, Christ Jesus is the propitiation for those sins.
Rom_3:25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.

Jesus Christ is designated as hilastḗrion in Rom_3:25 and Heb_9:5 because He is designated not only as the place where the sinner deposits his sin, but He Himself is the means of expiation.​

Heb_2:17 ...to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

His sacrifice as the God-Man satisfied God's justice so that, instead of God rightly demonstrating His wrath toward sinful man (Rom_1:18; Rom_5:8-10), He demonstrated His mercy.​

1Jn_2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins;... also for those of the whole world.
1Jn_4:10 He [God] loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

The benefit of Christ's blood for the sinner in the acceptance by the Father. Christ was the one who not only propitiates but offers Himself as the propitiatory sacrifice.​

You say you see PSA in the text of the bible I do not. What I do see is that God loves us so much that He was willing to shed His blood so that we could live.

 

Iconoclast, this just isn't accurate considering the consistent amount of Scriptures these threads have generated. Neither @JonC or I have shied away from proper application and renderings.

What HAS been exposed is exactly what you admit. There is no textual support for PSA, rather an agenda driven reading into the text.

You and I have long communicated and agreed on so very much. So, I am not alarmed at your reaction and I do appreciate, as you mentioned in another thread, taking the time to reason through some of the posts. That is good, for a foolish person answers a matter in haste. (isn't that somewhere in proverbs? )

That is fine. We (at least me) weren't out to change folks minds, but to show that there are other thoughts and even theories that may better present the facts of the Scriptures. Those closest to the times of Christ and had first hand teaching just did not present anything close to a psa theory.

No, Iconoclast, it is a theory. Just as all theories undergo the test of evidence and must be evaluated from time to time, so does this theory.

It just so happens that under the threads presented, the PSA has been shown to be extremely weak at best and unsupportable by the Scriptures.

This may cause all the camels in the middle east to have hairy hair lips, but it is never the less true. In all the threads not a single Scripture taken in context has been able to substantiate the PSA thinking.

The hallmark of the PSA is the presentation that God poured His wrath out upon the Son. Didn't happen. Not according to Scriptures.

I have too, but am far to ancient to follow "trusted guides" because most are now dead and lived in a time in which their ideas and thinking were conformed to what is not our times.

Certainly, Sin is still sin, and grace brings salvation, but in our times a great treasury of resources is available. We have access to documents and writings that others did not have.

That does not weaken them, but just as I am not a product of the 21st century, though I am here (I think) I reflect the values and agenda of the mid-twentieth.

If my thinking is unbiblical, then show me by Scriptures.

I am not too proud to recant, but must be shown.

In all these threads not a single Scripture in context has been shown that would compel me to change my mind concerning the PSA theory.

However, I have shown over and over the Scriptures, and who then is proud when they have been shown?

What might I show you that would cause you to rethink this statement?

Historically accurate presentations have not done so, and neither has Scripture rendering, so, then what more can be offered?

Is it bad to wish the best for someone?
Is it error to ask God to give wisdom?
"excessive hubris?" Why would you consider that a motive?

Look back at your statement.
Puritans - desired to clean up the "church of England" (America's Episcopal church) which is basically an RCC church that allowed the king of England to divorce and murder his wives.

I have long rejected much of the puritan thinking in place of those who clung to the Scriptures even in the face of puritan oppression - the Separatists.

And then you mention the reformers. What was it that the reformers wanted to reform? The RCC!

And you foist them as to be our examples?

I am not saying that it is wrong to read of them, to even take head at some of what they wrote. However, it is dangerous to just accept everything written, even by my personal hero Jonathan Edwards, perhaps still the premier theologian America ever had.

Be careful, dear friend, to not place status above Scriptures. Just because someone of notoriety hung out some shingle of theological presentation does not oblige us to endorse it without very careful examination and sifting through the Scriptures.

 

This is exactly right.
If you do your child's homework for him, you do it; he doesn't. You do it instead of him.
If you pay a bill for a friend, you pay it; he doesn't. You pay it instead of him.
If you write a letter for someone, you write it; he doesn't. You write it instead of him.
If you die for someone, you die; he doesn't. You die instead of him.

You can change 'for' to 'on behalf of' in all those examples if you want. It's still the same meaning.

 

You don't get to remove me from the application and by extension all humanity of the first Adam.
I smote the Son,
I wounded the Son,
I mocked the Son,
I was the tool God approved to crush the Son, and It pleased God for such to be done.

"He was delivered up by God’s set plan and foreknowledge, and you, by the hands of the lawless, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross."​

Why do you argue with Peter's statement by attempting to bring Isaiah as if they are in conflict?

 

I don't see this as disproving the statement of JonC. Did I miss something?

 

I like all those verses, but it does not say trinity.....when you find even one verse that says....TRINITY.....POST THAT.

Same thing you two are doing.
It does not say the Holy Spirit is God, it does not identify the Most High,Then mentions the Son...but does not say the three are a trinity

 

'God is angry with sinners every day (Psalms 7:11). 'And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all' (Isaiah 53:6). 'Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief' (Isaiah 53:10). Surely even you can compare Scripture with Scripture and work that out. God anger against sin and sinners was (willingly) borne by Christ. Christ also suffered the curse of God against sin (Galatians 3:10-13). God also set Him forth as a propitiation, that is a sacrifice that turns away wrath (Romans 3:25-26). .

The word 'appease' is one that I do not care to use regardless of its dictionary meaning because of its unfortunate association with the appeasement of Hitler.. What Christ did was to provide satisfaction for the outraged justice of God, so that He may be 'just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.'

Isaiah 53:5.

 

The understanding of penal subtitiomal atonement is an understanding of the Biblical atonement in Isaiah 53:6, Isaiah 53:12. As a new Christian [in 1962] I understood a penal substitution from Romans 6:23 and Romans 5:8. To deny this understanding is untenable.

 

You are actually denying, not only the plain words of Scripture (Isaiah 53:10), but God His glory. The suffering and death of Christ was the most glorious event that ever occurred, and praise His name, It was God who did it! Indeed, in the Person of the Lord Jesus, it was God who suffered it, for us! Alleluia!

From whence this fear and unbelief?
Hath not the Father put to grief
His sinless Son for me?
And will the righteous Judge of men
Condemn me for that debt of sin
Which, Lord, was laid on Thee?

Complete atonement Thou hast made,
And to the utmost Thou hast paid
Whate'er Thy people owe.
How then can wrath on me take place,
If sheltered in Thy righteousness,
And sprinkled with Thy blood?

If Thou hast my discharge procured,
And freely in my room endured
The whole of wrath divine;
Payment God will not twice demand,
First at my bleeding Surety's hand,
And then again from me.

Turn then, my soul, unto thy rest!
The merits of thy great High Priest
have bought thy liberty;
Trust in His efficacious blood,
Nor fear thy banishment from God,
Since Jesus died for thee.
[Augustus Toplady]