The Bearer of Sin and Guilt

[Aaron]

The heart of the Gospel is that Jesus bore our sins in His own body on the cross, and healed us by His stripes. 1 Peter 2:24 .

It isn't that Christ was a sinner himself. Our sins were not in His heart. They were imputed to Him, and He bore them for us in His body.

Having taken our sins, He then took our guilt and incured our judgement, and was hanged on a tree, and took our curse, as it is written, for he that is hanged is accursed of God. Deuteronomy 21:22-23 .

That our guilt was imputed to Him is plain from the fact that He took our curse, but it is also plain in the law of the offerings. In addition to the sin offering, there was its associated trespass, or guilt offering. In the sin offerings, sin itself is being atoned for. In the trespass offerings, amends are being made for the particular act. Damages are being paid.

and he shall make amends for the harm that he hath done Leviticus 5:15-16
​

Christ took our sins upon Himself, confessed them as His own (He is also the offerer in the law of the offerings), took our punishment in that He was accursed of God, and paid the cost.

 

[Iconoclast]

The heart of the Gospel is that Jesus bore our sins in His own body on the cross, and healed us by His stripes. 1 Peter 2:24 .

It isn't that Christ was a sinner himself. Our sins were not in His heart. They were imputed to Him, and He bore them for us in His body.

Having taken our sins, He then took our guilt and incured our judgement, and was hanged on a tree, and took our curse, as it is written, for he that is hanged is accursed of God. Deuteronomy 21:22-23 .

That our guilt was imputed to Him is plain from the fact that He took our curse, but it is also plain in the law of the offerings. In addition to the sin offering, there was its associated trespass, or guilt offering. In the sin offerings, sin itself is being atoned for. In the trespass offerings, amends are being made for the particular act. Damages are being paid.

and he shall make amends for the harm that he hath done Leviticus 5:15-16
​

Christ took our sins upon Himself, confessed them as His own (He is also the offerer in the law of the offerings), took our punishment in that He was accursed of God, and paid the cost.

Of course.To deny the O.T.sacrificial system laid out in detail the work of the Lamb of God and the Great High Priest is to miss the cross.To claim to rely only on scripture without understanding it, as we can see happening in recent threads, is just foolish double speak.
When people say they believe the verses but deny the meaning of the verses by speaking in vague generalities is not to have scripture at all.We see this in several threads now.
MM.lists several versesteaching these truths.
This is met by a denial and complaints about negative emojis...perhaps because they received many of them indicating rejection of posted falsehoods.

 

[agedman]

Of course.To deny the O.T.sacrificial system laid out in detail the work of the Lamb of God and the Great High Priest is to miss the cross.To claim to rely only on scripture without understanding it, as we can see happening in recent threads, is just foolish double speak.
When people say they believe the verses but deny the meaning of the verses by speaking in vague generalities is not to have scripture at all.We see this in several threads now.
MM.lists several versesteaching these truths.
This is met by a denial and complaints about negative emojis...perhaps because they received many of them indicating rejection of posted falsehoods.

Actually, there are NO one on the BB that has denied that the Saviour did not suffer, nor was cursed for hanging on a tree.

What IS the topic is the HOW and WHY of such.

Was God reaching out and smiting, wounding, brutalizing the Son, or were Humans?

Scriptures teach that it was humans, and that God both prophesied and was pleased (satisfied) by the action of both the humans and His Son.

That you who cling to PSA cannot distinguish the error when shown repeatedly and patiently through the threads is incredibly startling.

God is a trinity. The trinity was never in conflict. The trinity is and always was and will be in total unity.

Yet, PSA presents a breach of the trinity, and demands the trinity be dissolved.

It is unscriptural and why good biblically sound folks like yourself have yet to come to terms with this is truly a puzzle.

 

[Iconoclast]

Actually, there are NO one on the BB that has denied that the Saviour did not suffer, nor was cursed for hanging on a tree.

What IS the topic is the HOW and WHY of such.

Was God reaching out and smiting, wounding, brutalizing the Son, or were Humans?

Scriptures teach that it was humans, and that God both prophesied and was pleased (satisfied) by the action of both the humans and His Son.

That you who cling to PSA cannot distinguish the error when shown repeatedly and patiently through the threads is incredibly startling.

God is a trinity. The trinity was never in conflict. The trinity is and always was and will be in total unity.

Yet, PSA presents a breach of the trinity, and demands the trinity be dissolved.

It is unscriptural and why good biblically sound folks like yourself have yet to come to terms with this is truly a puzzle.

ffff
Nothing was dissolved...thinking about the hypostatic union.
So...you do not believe all sin is punished.....?
You offer parts of verses,without the meaning.Why did He suffer?
For whom?
Was it purposeful suffering?
Was the broken law of God being propitiated, the wrath against sin of the elect being turned away.Gal4 :4
why did the elect need to be redeemed?
Had they sinned,and were facing the just judgement of God.
Stop dancing around it.Answer this...not half statements...Jesus died,
Jesus ascended....we know this.Answer the real issues.

 

[JesusFan]

Actually, there are NO one on the BB that has denied that the Saviour did not suffer, nor was cursed for hanging on a tree.

What IS the topic is the HOW and WHY of such.

Was God reaching out and smiting, wounding, brutalizing the Son, or were Humans?

Scriptures teach that it was humans, and that God both prophesied and was pleased (satisfied) by the action of both the humans and His Son.

That you who cling to PSA cannot distinguish the error when shown repeatedly and patiently through the threads is incredibly startling.

God is a trinity. The trinity was never in conflict. The trinity is and always was and will be in total unity.

Yet, PSA presents a breach of the trinity, and demands the trinity be dissolved.

It is unscriptural and why good biblically sound folks like yourself have yet to come to terms with this is truly a puzzle.

was Jesus forsaken by the father while bearing our sins?

 

[agedman]

ffff
Nothing was dissolved...thinking about the hypostatic union.
So...you do not believe all sin is punished.....?At what
You offer parts of verses,without the meaning.Why did He suffer?
For whom?
Was it purposeful suffering?
Was the broken law of God being propitiated, the wrath against sin of the elect being turned away.Gal4 :4
why did the elect need to be redeemed?
Had they sinned,and were facing the just judgement of God.
Stop dancing around it.Answer this...not half statements...Jesus died,
Jesus ascended....we know this.Answer the real issues.

Iconoclast, I have offered great amount of passages and contextual quoting of Scriptures on these threads. You know that I am careful to not quote out of context of a passage. You and I are both known to place the meanings of verses within the context of which they come.

Now, concerning your specific statements:
Why did He Suffer. Because the prophets stated that He would. That is one of the signs of the messiah. The Jews of this day think that perhaps there will be two - one who suffers and one who becomes the ruling kind. Fits right in with the prophetic statements concerning their agreement with the antichrist of the last days.
He also came to suffer for that was the Father's will, "For this I came into the world" is His own words.

Was it purposeful? Of course. He being totally innocent, purer that any sacrifice, and both the Great High Priest and the Sacrifice fulfilled all that was appointed by the Father for Him to say and do.

Galatians 4:

3So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world.
4But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,
5to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons.
6And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”
7So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.​

At what point was I to read that this was done by God reigning divine justice in vengeance filled wrath upon the Son for our benefit?

God is not obligated to redeem any, but He chooses to redeem those "under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons" to His purpose and for His work.

So the real issue isn't that Christ suffered, nor that He gave His blood and died.

The REAL issue that PSA cannot answer for is the part concerning the divine wrath.

At no place in Scripture is a proper sacrifice met with divine wrath. Judgement, yes. If the priest or the blood was unworthy, judgement fell upon them. But Christ was not unworthy, nor the blood polluted (which is why He refused an intoxicant when offered).

My problem with the WORD substitution is as I expressed to JonC, most consider a substitute as a temporary replacement or some quid pro quo exchange. Two problems with this thinking.

1) Christ was not a substitute but a permanent replacement for the OT sacrifice. If such satisfied temporarily in the OT, then the Christ as Hebrews points out certainly satisfied permanently.
2) Christ did not exchange anything, because He is divine. He redeemed the lost, not by payment to God or the Devil but by His own authority. He in effect as the owner of all chooses of His good pleasure. He had no need to substitute as PSA sometimes portrays.​

This is shown in the previous passage I shared from Colossians:

15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

18And He is the head of the body, the church; He is the beginning and firstborn from among the dead, so that in all things He may have preeminence.

19For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, 20and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.

21Once you were alienated from God and were hostile in your minds, engaging in evil deeds. 22But now He has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy, unblemished, and blameless in His presence— 23if indeed you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope of the gospel you heard, which has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.​

Not that Paul states how the reconciliation takes place: by the physical body of Christ through death.

Again, where is the demand by PSA for divine justice obliging the wrath of God to be poured out upon the Son?

It isn't there! It is not found in the Scriptures, which is the point of rejecting PSA as unscriptural.

 

[agedman]

was Jesus forsaken by the father while bearing our sins?

Forsaken but never abandoned, for the trinity cannot ever be disunioned. (that isn't a word, but you get the idea.)

 

[JesusFan]

Iconoclast, I have offered great amount of passages and contextual quoting of Scriptures on these threads. You know that I am careful to not quote out of context of a passage. You and I are both known to place the meanings of verses within the context of which they come.

Now, concerning your specific statements:
Why did He Suffer. Because the prophets stated that He would. That is one of the signs of the messiah. The Jews of this day think that perhaps there will be two - one who suffers and one who becomes the ruling kind. Fits right in with the prophetic statements concerning their agreement with the antichrist of the last days.
He also came to suffer for that was the Father's will, "For this I came into the world" is His own words.

Was it purposeful? Of course. He being totally innocent, purer that any sacrifice, and both the Great High Priest and the Sacrifice fulfilled all that was appointed by the Father for Him to say and do.

Galatians 4:

3So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world.
4But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,
5to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons.
6And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”
7So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.​

At what point was I to read that this was done by God reigning divine justice in vengeance filled wrath upon the Son for our benefit?

God is not obligated to redeem any, but He chooses to redeem those "under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons" to His purpose and for His work.

So the real issue isn't that Christ suffered, nor that He gave His blood and died.

The REAL issue that PSA cannot answer for is the part concerning the divine wrath.

At no place in Scripture is a proper sacrifice met with divine wrath. Judgement, yes. If the priest or the blood was unworthy, judgement fell upon them. But Christ was not unworthy, nor the blood polluted (which is why He refused an intoxicant when offered).

My problem with the WORD substitution is as I expressed to JonC, most consider a substitute as a temporary replacement or some quid pro quo exchange. Two problems with this thinking.

1) Christ was not a substitute but a permanent replacement for the OT sacrifice. If such satisfied temporarily in the OT, then the Christ as Hebrews points out certainly satisfied permanently.
2) Christ did not exchange anything, because He is divine. He redeemed the lost, not by payment to God or the Devil but by His own authority. He in effect as the owner of all chooses of His good pleasure. He had no need to substitute as PSA sometimes portrays.​

This is shown in the previous passage I shared from Colossians:

15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

18And He is the head of the body, the church; He is the beginning and firstborn from among the dead, so that in all things He may have preeminence.

19For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, 20and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.

21Once you were alienated from God and were hostile in your minds, engaging in evil deeds. 22But now He has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy, unblemished, and blameless in His presence— 23if indeed you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope of the gospel you heard, which has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.​

Not that Paul states how the reconciliation takes place: by the physical body of Christ through death.

Again, where is the demand by PSA for divine justice obliging the wrath of God to be poured out upon the Son?

It isn't there! It is not found in the Scriptures, which is the point of rejecting PSA as unscriptural.

Does God have active wrath towards sin and sinners in Judgement and in hell then?

 

[JesusFan]

Forsaken but never abandoned, for the trinity cannot ever be disunioned. (that isn't a word, but you get the idea.)

Treated by the father while upon that Cross as if he was sin

 

[agedman]

Does God have active wrath towards sin and sinners in Judgement and in hell then?

Those who die in unbelief die "in their sins."

The revelation shows us what happens. It goes along these lines:
The dead are all raised to stand in the last judgement.
Death and hell are cast into the lake of fire which is called the second death.

Those who are not believers stand before God and are judged according to what they did, said, and motives during their days of the flesh. This are not to condemn, but (imo) to determine the level of torment. Please remember that those that do not believe are "condemned already." I base the thinking of level of torment upon our Lord saying that certain cities will find it more tolerable then others.

After that, a search is made for their names in the book of life.

Those without are cast into the lake of fire - the second death.

Now about specifically God's wrath.
The Revelation shows the total of God's wrath poured out as great buckets in the very last judgements upon the creation. Therefore, it could not be poured out upon the Son at the crucifixion.

 

[agedman]

Treated by the father while upon that Cross as if he was sin

That isn't found in the Scriptures.

The forsaking is the withdrawal of support. Remember just hours before, the angels came to minister to the Lord's needs. No one attended to His needs on the Cross other then soldiers who gave him a bit of liquid just prior to "it is finished."

 

[Mikey]

Iconoclast, I have offered great amount of passages and contextual quoting of Scriptures on these threads. You know that I am careful to not quote out of context of a passage. You and I are both known to place the meanings of verses within the context of which they come.

Now, concerning your specific statements:
Why did He Suffer. Because the prophets stated that He would. That is one of the signs of the messiah. The Jews of this day think that perhaps there will be two - one who suffers and one who becomes the ruling kind. Fits right in with the prophetic statements concerning their agreement with the antichrist of the last days.
He also came to suffer for that was the Father's will, "For this I came into the world" is His own words.

Was it purposeful? Of course. He being totally innocent, purer that any sacrifice, and both the Great High Priest and the Sacrifice fulfilled all that was appointed by the Father for Him to say and do.

Galatians 4:

3So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world.
4But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,
5to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons.
6And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”
7So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.​

At what point was I to read that this was done by God reigning divine justice in vengeance filled wrath upon the Son for our benefit?

God is not obligated to redeem any, but He chooses to redeem those "under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons" to His purpose and for His work.

So the real issue isn't that Christ suffered, nor that He gave His blood and died.

The REAL issue that PSA cannot answer for is the part concerning the divine wrath.

At no place in Scripture is a proper sacrifice met with divine wrath. Judgement, yes. If the priest or the blood was unworthy, judgement fell upon them. But Christ was not unworthy, nor the blood polluted (which is why He refused an intoxicant when offered).

My problem with the WORD substitution is as I expressed to JonC, most consider a substitute as a temporary replacement or some quid pro quo exchange. Two problems with this thinking.

1) Christ was not a substitute but a permanent replacement for the OT sacrifice. If such satisfied temporarily in the OT, then the Christ as Hebrews points out certainly satisfied permanently.
2) Christ did not exchange anything, because He is divine. He redeemed the lost, not by payment to God or the Devil but by His own authority. He in effect as the owner of all chooses of His good pleasure. He had no need to substitute as PSA sometimes portrays.​

.

can you explain further WHY Christ needed to suffer and die? i don't really understand you're position.

 

[Aaron]

Actually, there are NO one on the BB that has denied that the Saviour did not suffer, nor was cursed for hanging on a tree.

What IS the topic is the HOW and WHY of such.

Was God reaching out and smiting, wounding, brutalizing the Son, or were Humans?

Scriptures teach that it was humans, and that God both prophesied and was pleased (satisfied) by the action of both the humans and His Son.

That you who cling to PSA cannot distinguish the error when shown repeatedly and patiently through the threads is incredibly startling.

God is a trinity. The trinity was never in conflict. The trinity is and always was and will be in total unity.

Yet, PSA presents a breach of the trinity, and demands the trinity be dissolved.

It is unscriptural and why good biblically sound folks like yourself have yet to come to terms with this is truly a puzzle.

As if the straightforward confessions of the Apostles aren't plain enough, the types and shadows of the law clearly show us a victim taking the penalty of the penitent Israelite's sin.

The tree itself was the penalty for one guilty of a sin worthy of death Deuteronomy 21:22-23 .

As far as the brutality is concerned, it is God repaying our sins in the body of His Son. Stripes are a judgement upon a wicked man. Deuteronomy 25:1-3 .

And so there can be no mistake as to Whom is acting, God gives us a picture of this too in the rending of the veil of the temple from top to bottom. The veil represents Christ's body. Hebrews 10:20 .

 

[Aaron]

I forgot to add, that we show this in every Lord's Supper. "This is my body, which is broken for you." Do we celebrate an act of wicked men in the Supper, or do we celebrate the act of a Just and Righteous God?

 

[agedman]

can you explain further WHY Christ needed to suffer and die? i don't really understand you're position.

The Lord Jesus Christ suffered at human hands just as any other prisoner interrogated and executed by the Romans. But, what made such all the more appalling was all the authorities knew He was innocent. This is why Peter spoke as he did about the crucifixion, saying, "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."

Now that was not the only suffering our Lord experienced, for the physical aspects are but a portion.

The Lord also experienced the lack of support that He had always enjoyed. He was unsupported on purpose so that He might physically die.

This is actually unimaginable.

The psalmist records the day in a wonderfully revealing manner of displaying the thoughts of the Lord.
"Why are You so far from saving me, so far from my words of groaning?"

Look further at the psalm:

6But I am a worm and not a man,
scorned by men and despised by the people.
7All who see me mock me;
they sneer and shake their heads:
8“He trusts in the LORD,
let the LORD deliver him;
let the LORD rescue him,
since He delights in him.”
​

Do those words sound familiar, are they not some of the mocking from the crowd?

Take time to read through Psalms 22 while you picture the Lord on the Cross, and let His thoughts permeate your heart.

God did not abandon Him, did not torture Him, did not pour out wrath upon Him as some are so wanting to portray.

But the end of what was going on behind the scenes:

24For He has not despised or detested
the torment of the afflicted.
He has not hidden His face from him,
but has attended to his cry for help.
​

See the father did not abandon the Son. "He has not hidden His face from Him, but has attended to His cry for Help."

So, our suffering Savior died, "for man, the creatures, sins."

This probably doesn't answer your question, but for a time I needed to write of my Dear Savior's giving for me that which I so do not deserve.

 

[Revmitchell]

God is a trinity. The trinity was never in conflict. The trinity is and always was and will be in total unity.

Yet, PSA presents a breach of the trinity, and demands the trinity be dissolved.

It is unscriptural and why good biblically sound folks like yourself have yet to come to terms with this is truly a puzzle.

You guys keep making up weird stuff like this. I try to keep these things to myself but things like this are just ridiculous. There is nothing true about this, You havent made a biblical case for it, and it is inane at best.

 

[agedman]

As if the straightforward confessions of the Apostles aren't plain enough, the types and shadows of the law clearly show us a victim taking the penalty of the penitent Israelite's sin.

The tree itself was the penalty for one guilty of a sin worthy of death Deuteronomy 21:22-23 .

As far as the brutality is concerned, it is God repaying our sins in the body of His Son. Stripes are a judgement upon a wicked man. Deuteronomy 25:1-3 .

And so there can be no mistake as to Whom is acting, God gives us a picture of this too in the rending of the veil of the temple from top to bottom. The veil represents Christ's body. Hebrews 10:20 .

The veil does NOT represent Christ's body but the lack of reconciliation that existed between humankind and God.

As far as the rest of the post lets look and see:

What victim took the penalty of the penitent Israelite's sin? The lamb?

The slaying of the lamb was a result of needing the blood and disposal of the body. Had the priest or blood not been acceptable, then not satisfaction of reconciliation would be found until the next year's time of sacrifice. So, I'm not certain what you are getting at with the confessions of the Apostles statements. Maybe show a bit more Scripture reference will help me.

The tree isn't a problem, for the curse of one hung on a tree was not that they hung on a tree but that they died.

Why would God need to repay for anything? He has not need of such. The wages of sin is death, not torture.

Besides, the Scriptures death that unlike your Deuteronomy passage, the Lord Jesus was without sin.

The Lord is not as clumsy as I am. If I carry a plate of food to the table it will mostly be all over me and the floor. The Lord can very well have taken on all the sins of the world and it not make him sinful.

For God to punish the Lord would then assume the Lord had become sinful, and therefore a part of the trinity was unholy.

That is unscriptural.

 

[Revmitchell]

I forgot to add, that we show this in every Lord's Supper. "This is my body, which is broken for you." Do we celebrate an act of wicked men in the Supper, or do we celebrate the act of a Just and Righteous God?

Of all the posts made supporting PSA none of them have been refuted. None of them have been dealt with. All we get is "no its not". Sorry their so called refutations are not intelligent nor good enough.

 

[agedman]

You guys keep making up weird stuff like this. I try to keep these things to myself but things like this are just ridiculous. There is nothing true about this, You havent made a biblical case for it, and it is inane at best.

So good of you to drop in on a conversation and let your opinion be read.

So, I take it that you think that the Lord Jesus became polluted by him bearing our sins, and had to be punished?

How exactly does that work out? Did a part of the trinity become suddenly unholy?

You want inane, try to present that God poured His wrath out upon part of the God head?

Really, talk about inane, would you present how God the Father abandoned God the Son?

Or if you really want inane, would you attempt to present that Psalms 22 shows the slightest indication that God at any point was unaware of exactly what was happening?

If you want to read ridiculous, then let's examine some of your posts on the topic.

Oh, wait, were are they?

You can go back to keeping to yourself if you like, or you can enjoy contributing without sounding as if you have some exalted vantage point.

Throughout these threads I have consistently and clearly presented the Scriptures. Were is your own contribution?

Yet, you would would claim that I lied!

 

[agedman]

Of all the posts made supporting PSA none of them have been refuted. None of them have been dealt with. All we get is "no its not". Sorry their so called refutations are not intelligent nor good enough.

Frankly, you just don't know what you are posting about.

You want to engage, then do so.

But taking pot shots with no proof is just "inane."