Hebrews 2:16-17 PSA.

[Iconoclast]

According to Romans 5:7 we are justified by His blood; according to Ephesians 1:7 we have our redemption through His blood; according to Colossians 1:20 God has made peace through the blood of His cross and thereby reconciled all things to Himself; according to Ephesians 2:13 those that were once far off have been made nigh in the blood of Christ. It is scarcely possible to believe that in this association between the blood of Christ and His saving activity no reference should be intended to the ritual of sacrifice in which the blood plays so prominent a part.


It is scarcely possible to believe that in this association between the blood of Christ and His saving activity no reference should be intended to the ritual of sacrifice in which the blood plays so prominent a part. It has been asserted indeed by Weiss that the effusion of blood figures in these statements simply as the sign of a violent death, so that wherever the blood is mentioned this must be understood as ascribing the saving character of Christ's death to its violent nature and not to its sacrificial import.

This seems to us untenable for three reasons. In the first place, Romans 3:25 and 1 Corinthians 11:25 show that Paul actually associated the blood of Christ with the idea of sacrificial propitiation.

Secondly, elsewhere in the New Testament this association is so plain on the surface as to be recognized by everybody. If Peter and John conceive of the blood of Christ as sacrificial blood, it would be strange if the same or similar expressions, when occurring in Paul, possessed nothing of this association.

And, thirdly, if the reference to the blood of Christ were to be understood from the point of view of the violent character of His death, this would be out of harmony with the apostle's general mode of viewing the death of Christ. Where the violent character of the death is made prominent, emphasis is placed upon its having been inflicted by others, so that Christ appears as sustaining to it a passive rather than an active attitude. But Paul usually emphasizes the very opposite, viz., that Christ voluntarily took upon Himself this death, that it was the culminating act of His obedience, a representation obviously much more in harmony with the sacrificial idea than with that of the blood as the exponent of a violent death.

 

[Iconoclast]

We must gather the apostle's view through an independent study of his own words. In Romans 3:25 he says that God set forth Christ ιλαστηριον through faith in His blood. The first thing to observe is that these words are introduced to explain in what sense there is "redemption," απολυτρωσις, in Christ: "being justified freely by divine grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth, etc."

Now this proves how closely Paul associated the two ideas of redemption and sacrifice. Sacrifice was to him the very essence of the redemptive transaction, the very basis of redemption as an accomplished result. As to the meaning of the statement itself, this depends largely on the rendering of the word ιλαστηριον and on the mutual construction of the various clauses. There are four views in regard to the rendering of ιλαστηριον.

The first takes it as designating the mercy seat, the cover of the ark of the covenant. This is the only sense in which the word occurs in biblical Greek, where it is the usual translation for the Hebrew כפרת, a consideration strongly commending the view in question.

Others propose to retain for the word its original force as an adjective signifying "propitiatory." This may be done in two ways, either by supplying θυμα "sacrifice," so that the thought results, "God set forth Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice," or by construing ιλαστηριον as a predicative adjective with the preceding relative pronoun, which yields the rendering, "whom God set forth as a propitiatory person."

The word ιλαστηριον, thus interpreted, bears witness to the fact that Paul regarded the sacrificial aspect of our Lord's death not as a secondary or figurative mode of viewing it, but as pertaining to its very essence, as most literally expressing its central significance. That propitiatory rite and that propitiatory place in which all Old Testament sacrificial functions culminated find their higher, their ideal counterpart in the crucified Savior

 

[Iconoclast]

In a previous article the sacrificial import of the passage in Romans 3:25, 26 was pointed out by us. We must now inquire what light these words of the apostle shed on his philosophy of sacrifice in connection with the death of Christ. It will be observed that Paul bases the necessity of the propitiatory exhibition of Christ on the principle of the divine righteousness. God set Him forth as a ιλαστηριον "to show his righteousness."

This manifestation of divine righteousness was rendered necessary "because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime," and this "passing over" had been possible only because it was done "with a view to the showing of his righteousness at this present season."


Obviously then, there is in the sacrifice of Christ, before all other things, an exercise of the righteousness of God. The question arises, how is this to be understood? The most natural answer would seem to be that the apostle has in mind the retributive penal δικαιοσυνη of which he speaks elsewhere, that he views the Savior's death as a penal infliction due to this righteousness, that he represents it as historically made necessary, because the long-suffering of God and His passing over of sin in the time before Christ had seemed to place in doubt the enforcement of this principle, whereas in reality such passing over had been possible only because God had constantly in view the future occasion on which in the sacrifice of Christ He would signally manifest and vindicate His righteousness.

 

[Iconoclast]

Lesson 18: God the Just and the Justifier (Romans 3:25-26) | Bible.org

Again, liberals do not like the emphasis on Christ’s blood as the means of propitiation. This seems crude and primitive. We may wonder why the New Testament puts such an emphasis on Christ’s blood. Why doesn’t it just refer to His death, which is clearly what His blood symbolizes (John Stott, The Cross of Christ [IVP], p. 180, citing Alan Stibbs’ Meaning of the Word ‘Blood’ in Scripture)? Why does Paul say that God displayed Christ as “a propitiation in His blood”? He did so to connect what Christ did with the Old Testament sacrificial system (Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Romans: Atonement and Justification [Zondervan], p. 83).

But why did God require blood sacrifices in the Old Testament? The Lord explains to Moses (Lev. 17:11), “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.” God told Adam and Eve that the punishment for their sins was death. This referred both to physical death and to spiritual death, or separation from God. When God killed an animal, perhaps a lamb, and clothed them with its skin, He was indicating that the way of reconciliation with Him was through shedding the blood of an acceptable substitute.

In the Old Testament sacrificial system, God provided a temporary way for sinners to have their sins atoned for so that they could be reconciled to Him. He required that they kill a male firstborn lamb or goat without blemish and use its blood as the propitiation or atoning sacrifice for their sins. It pictured the substitutionary death of the victim in place of the sinner. It pointed ahead to Jesus, the Lamb of God, the ultimate and all-sufficient sacrifice for our sins. Thus Jesus, just before going to the cross, as He celebrated the Passover with His disciples, took the cup and said (1 Cor. 11:25), “This cup is the new covenant in My blood.”

So Paul’s point when he says that God publicly displayed Christ “as a propitiation in His blood,” is that Jesus’ sacrificial death satisfied God’s wrath against sin. All of this is foundational to understand the issue that Paul goes on to address: How can God be just when He forgives our sins?

2. Jesus’ sacrificial death displays God’s justice in passing over sins before the cross and in justifying sinners after the cross who have faith in Jesus.

 

[Iconoclast]

A. JESUS’ SACRIFICIAL DEATH DISPLAYS GOD’S JUSTICE IN PATIENTLY PASSING OVER THE SINS COMMITTED BEFORE THE CROSS (3:25B).
“This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed.” Paul is answering the charge that if atonement and forgiveness come only through Christ’s death on the cross, then God was either unjust or terribly sloppy about sin to let go all of the sins committed before the cross. As Hebrews (9:9; 10:1-4) makes clear, those Old Testament sacrifices of animals could never make perfect or cleanse the consciences of the worshipers who offered them. The fact that people in the Old Testament era could be forgiven without the full satisfaction of Christ’s death implies that God is unjust or not righteous.

But Paul, like the author of Hebrews, argues that God’s forbearance in passing over sins in that era did not undermine His righteousness because that sacrificial system would find its fulfillment in the death of Jesus. Douglas Moo explains (The Epistle to the Romans [Eerdmans], p. 240)

 

[Iconoclast]

As we saw last week, to justify is to declare the accused to be righteous. But if the accused is actually guilty and the judge declares him to be righteous, isn’t the judge unjust?

Paul answers, “No, the cross where Jesus shed His blood to satisfy God’s wrath against our sin actually displays God’s righteousness.” Here righteousness does not refer to God’s declaring sinners righteous (as it does in 3:21-22), but rather to God’s justice. The death of Jesus demonstrates that justice has been served. God didn’t just shrug off our sin. “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). Jesus, who was innocent of all sin, paid the penalty that we deserved. He bore the awful wrath of God when He cried out on the cross (Matt. 27:46), “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”

On the cross, God’s justice was satisfied so that His mercy could flow to every sinner who trusts in Jesus. The propitiation that God set forth in Jesus’ blood means that “He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.” Paul uses the name Jesus alone to emphasize His identification with us as a man. Because He was fully human, His death may be applied to the sins of humans. Because He is the eternal Son of God, His death has infinite merit. Jesus’ death vindicates God against any charge of injustice or unrighteousness.

But, note carefully that the benefits of Jesus’ death do not apply to everyone. God only justifies “the one who has faith in Jesus” (3:26). Paul emphasizes faith in verses 21-31. It’s in verses 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30 (twice), and 31, plus believe is in verse 22. Faith is not a work on our part that contributes toward our salvation. It is a gift from God and not something that we originate, or we would boast in our faith (Eph. 2:8-9; Phil. 1:29). Faith is the hand that receives the gift of justification that God provides through the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ.

 

[Iconoclast]

Conclusion
I conclude with some practical applications:

First, these verses show us that God takes sin very seriously. His grace does not mean that He is sloppy about sin. God does not just shrug and say, “Oh well, let’s not worry about your sins. After all, everyone makes mistakes.” No, His grace is grounded in His justice. God takes sin so seriously that He made Jesus, who knew no sin, to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him (2 Cor. 5:21). Either you trust in Christ as your sin-bearer, or you’ll face God’s wrath throughout eternity.

Second, because God takes sin so seriously, so should we. It was our sin that put Jesus on the cross. That means that we should hate our sin and fight to kill it every day, especially on the thought level. C. H. Spurgeon said (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit [Pilgrim Publications], 53:225), “Shall I spare the sins, then, that nailed my Savior to the tree? O Christian, how you ought to hate the very thought of sin! We are very severe upon the sins of others, sometimes; how much more severe ought we to be upon our own!”

Finally, if Christ offered Himself as the satisfaction of God’s wrath against sinners, then any sinner can come to Him and find mercy. William Cowper was an 18th century English poet who suffered greatly from depression. His mother died when he was six and he was sent to a boarding school where the older boys mercilessly bullied and beat him. In his late twenties, he tried to commit suicide and was finally admitted to an insane asylum. Cowper struggled with his guilt and often cried out, “My sin! My sin! Oh, for some fountain open for my cleansing!” The main doctor there was a committed Christian, who gently guided Cowper to the only fountain that can wash away our sin and guilt.

One day Cowper opened a Bible and saw Romans 3:24-25: “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God has set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to manifest his righteousness.” Cowper said, “Immediately I received strength to believe, and the full beams of the Sun of Righteousness shone on me. I saw the sufficiency of the atonement he had made, my pardon in his blood, and the fullness and completeness of his justification. In a moment I believed and received the gospel.” (I took this account from James Boice, Romans [Baker], pp. 371-372. For more, see John Piper, The Hidden Smile of God [Crossway], pp. 81-119).

Cowper struggled with severe depression for the rest of his life, but God used him to write many beloved hymns, including “There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Immanuel’s veins, and sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains.”

Cowper’s experience of knowing that his sins were forgiven the instant that he believed in the shed blood of Jesus can be your experience. Trust in Jesus and God’s wrath is satisfied. He declares you not guilty both now and forever.

 

[Iconoclast]

John Brown of Haddington; Systematic Theology;

Of the Mediatorial Person of Christ. The agency, manifold stations, and relations of the Son of God, in the making, fulfilment, and administration of the covenant of grace, plainly manifest him the mediator of it;—to which three things were necessary:

1. A mediatorial constitution of person, that, having the nature of both parties, he might be a middle person between God and men, and qualified to lay his hand on both, in order to their reconcilement, 1 Tim 2:5-6; Job 9:33.

2. A mediatorial office, authorizing and qualifying him to manage for us toward God,—and from God toward us, every thing necessary to make up the breach, Prov 8:23; Heb 9:15; Heb 8:6.

3. A mediatorial state, in which his condition might correspond with that which was necessary for purchasing or preserving the reconciliation between God and us, Luke 24:26; Phil 1:7-11; Heb 2:9-10.
If God had not intended to redeem a part of lost mankind, his Son had never become man.
1. Without this gracious design, God had no end worthy of such a marvellous work as the incarnation of his Son.
2. The Scripture alway represents the love of God to fallen men as the cause of the mission and incarnation of his Son, John 3:16; Rom 5:6- 18; 1 John 4:9-10.
3. It never mentions any other end of Christ's incarnation, but to glorify God in the salvation of men. Nor, till man had ruined himself, did the least appearance of it take place, Gen 3:15; Matt 1:21; Luke 1:67; Luke 2:34; John 1:29; Matt 9:12-13; Matt 18:11; Matt 20:28; Gal 4:4-5; 1 Tim 1:15; Heb 2:14; 1 John 2:1-2; 1 John 3:5,8.
4. All his offices of Mediator, Redeemer, Surety, Prophet,
Priest, and King, respect men as fallen. Such only he instructs and calls to repentance, Isa 61:1-3; Matt 9:13; Heb 5:2. For such only he offers sacrifice, and intercedes with God, 1 Tim 2:5; Isa 53:4-12; 1 John 2:12; John 17; Heb 7:7,25; Rom 8:33-34. Such only he subdues, governs, and protects, Ps 110:3; Rom 8:2; John 10:27-28; Ezek 34,36.—The natural goodness of God no more required his Son to assume our nature, than it required him to assume the angelic.— Innocent creatures would have had a proper head in God himself.— Christ is not called the first begotten of every creature, because men were made after his image as incarnate, but because he is the only Son of God, begotten from all eternity, before any creature was formed; and because of his superior excellence and dominion over every creature, Col 1:15.—But, if God intended to redeem fallen men, it was necessary that a divine person should become man.

1. God's justice and other perfections required, that no sinner should be saved, unless an infinite ransom were paid for them,—the law fulfilled, and sin punished in that very nature which had sinned, Heb 9:22; Acts 20:28; Matt 20:28; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14-15; Ezek 18:4.

2. If any lower mean could have effected our redemption, God's infinite wisdom and goodness could not have exposed his own Son to such debased obedience and tremendous suffering, Heb 2:10; Lam 3:33.

 

[Iconoclast]

It was not till about the four thousandth year from the creation of the world, that in the fulness of time fixed in the purpose of God, and marked in his inspired predictions, and when the world was in the most proper condition for it, that the Son of God came in the flesh. But preparations had all along been making for it.
1. The necessary occasion of it, through Adam's fall and his ruining all mankind, was foreseen by God from all eternity, Acts 15:18; Ps 136:23.

2. In the most astonishing and sovereign love, God purposed to recover part of mankind from that sinful and miserable estate into which, he foresaw, they would reduce themselves, 1 Thess 5:9; 2 Thess 2:12-13; Eph 1:4.

3. The Son of God was set up from eternity as their Mediator, and multitudes of men chosen in him to everlasting life, Ps 89:19-20; Prov 8:23-30; 1 Pet 1:20; Eph 1:4-5; 2 Tim 1:9, Titus 1:2.

4. Hereupon ensued his entrance into mediatorial glory suited to the then state of things, and a peculiar delight in the sons of men and in the habitable parts of the earth, in which he and they were to have their abode, and hold mutual fellowship, John 17:4-6; Prov 8:31. That delight in his future manhood, and connections with men, perhaps resembled, while it infinitely transcended, that regard which glorified souls have to their dead bodies, and desire of reunion with them, in the resurrection.

5. It was indeed proper, that his coming in the flesh should be deferred,—till the necessity of such a mean of reforming the world should be fully manifested,—ignorance and learning, want of ceremonies, and a multitude of them in religion,— external mercies and judgments, all proving ineffectual;—till sufficient marks for examining his character should be leisurely preexhibited,—till men's longings for him should be exceedingly awakened, and so his incarnation more honourable;—till there should be a sufficient number of hell-hardened professors of the true religion to persecute and murder him,—and of friends and enemies to attest his labours, death, and resurrection;—and of men to experience his benevolent miracles, and the conquering power of his gospel. But no sooner had Adam sinned, and ruined himself and all his posterity, than the Son of God, as one eager to discover his mercy and love, intimated his purpose to become man, and suffer for our redemption, Gen 3:8-15.

6. His heart being exceedingly set upon his mediatorial work, he, in a multitude of predictory promises, publicly intimated his incarnation, sufferings, resurrection, and gathering of a numerous people to himself, insomuch, that not one important circumstance relative to his appearances, work, or success, was left unforetold, Luke 24:25,27,44-47; John 1:45; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:27; Acts 26:22; Rom 3:21; 1 Pet 1:11-12; 1 Cor 15:3-4.

7. Men being dull of hearing, and slow of heart to conceive or believe that which was merely hinted in words, he, in a multitude of personal and real prefigurations of himself and his concerns, addressed the very senses of his peculiar people, Col 2:17; Heb 10:1; Heb 9:9-10.

8. To mark his delightful intention, and earnest desire to assume our nature, he often appeared as a man, and conversed with his favourites Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joshua, the Israelites at Bochim, Gideon, Manoah and his wife, Daniel, Zechariah, etc. Gen 18:2; Gen 26:2,24;

Gen 32:24; Josh 5:13; Judg 2:1-4; Judg 6:11-22; Judg 13:2-19; Dan 10:5; Zech 1:8. And perhaps the frequent ascription of human members and affections to God under the Old Testament, was intended to keep men in constant remembrance of the future incarnation of his Son.

9. Multitudes of the persons represented by him were, with his Father's consent, admitted to fellowship with God, not only on earth, but in heaven, and two of them soul and body,—not merely as firstfruits of his chosen people, but as an earnest of his future sitting in the midst of the throne, as the Man God's fellow, and the Firstborn among many brethren, Heb 11:13; Gen 5:24; Heb 11:5; 2 Kings 2:11.

 

[Iconoclast]

3. Communion in all mediatorial qualities, offices, and acts,—that, notwithstanding a particular nature be the immediate agent or sufferer,—the person God-man is reputed to have acted or suffered these things; He is reputed to obey the law, satisfy God's justice, rise from the dead, return to judge the world, Matt 5:17; 2 Cor 5:21; Rom 1:3-4; 1 Thess 4:14,16.

4. The properties of both natures are ascribed to his person, God-man,—and even the properties or pertinents of the one nature are ascribed to him, when he is named from the other.—Thus we say, the blood of God, and that the Son of God was born, died, rose again; that the Lord of glory was crucified, Acts 20:28; Rom 8:3; 1 Cor 2:8; and that the man Christ is God's equal, knows all things, is every where, and almighty, Zech 13:7; John 21:17; John 3:13; Isa 9:6.—For, though these things do not agree to the whole of Christ, or both his natures,—they agree to his whole person, God-man.
—It was necessary to his being our Redeemer, that he might have full property in us and relation to us,—might be able to pay a suitable and all-sufficient ransom for us,—and might have proper sympathy with us, sufficient dignity and power to purchase and apply our redemption.—It was necessary to his being our Surety and sacrificing Priest,—that, as God, he might lawfully undertake for us, being absolute lord of his own person, obedience, and life;— might fully secure the payment of all that we owed to God's law and justice;—might do the world no injury by his voluntary death;— might willingly do all that law and justice required of him in our stead;—might add infinite value to his obedience and suffering;— might know every particular person for whom he satisfied, and every circumstance relating to each of them;—and might, by his own power, conquer death, and rise from its prison:—and that, as man, the broken law, under which we stood, might, in all its demands of obedience, love to God and to men,—and of sufferings, take fast hold of him, and be exactly fulfilled by him, in the very substance and kind in which we owed them;—and that, in paying our debt, he might contract an experimental feeling of our infirmities, and set before us a perfect pattern of holy obedience and patient suffering.—It was necessary to his being our Advocate or interceding Priest,—that, as God, he might remove himself from his debased state of atonement to that of his honorary intercession;—might, with proper dignity and confidence, appear in the presence of God for us;—might for ever sit with him on his throne, as the all-sufficient pledge of our everlasting peace and friendship with him, and take infeftment of the heavenly inheritance in our name;—might know all the necessities and inward desires of his people;—and might, in his intercession for them, counterbalance all their unworthiness, guilt, and want of earnestness in prayer, with his own dignity of person, fulness of merit, and efficacy of desire:—and that, as man, he might present our nature before God, as a complete fulfiller of all righteousness,—and might intercede for us as our compassionate brother, who feels our infirmities.—This conjunction of the divine and human natures in the person of Christ, is also necessary to his execution of his prophetical office,—that, as God, he might be equally present with all his disciples, in every age, Matt 28:20;—might have a comprehensive view of all divine truths, and of our need of instruction, John 1:13; Col 2:3;—might give full and comfortable evidence of the holiness,

 

[Iconoclast]

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/martin/The Atonement - Hugh Martin.pdf

 

[agedman]

Have you finished, yet?

I'm waiting until you are so as not to distract you when we actually engage over the Scriptures and not what others say of them.

Let me know.

 

[Iconoclast]

Have you finished, yet?

I'm waiting until you are so as not to distract you when we actually engage over the Scriptures and not what others say of them.

Let me know.

Let me know when you gain an understanding of the words used in these key verses.then you might actually understand what is at issue.
Looks like you cannot interact with any of the links offered.
Maybe you will never quite see it, but others already have.
What all of "these guys" say in any of the links say more than you two in 7 threads of trying.

 

[agedman]

Let me know when you gain an understanding of the words used in these key verses.then you might actually understand what is at issue.
Looks like you cannot interact with any of the links offered.
Maybe you will never quite see it, but others already have.
What all of "these guys" say in any of the links say more than you two in 7 threads of trying.

Well, what more can be said than what is in the Scriptures?

For example: "Crush" in Isaiah 53 does not indicate wrath, but bruising, and humiliation... Do you accept that?

It was all planned by the God (unity of the trinity) that one member would be bruised and humiliated. God didn't do it, but pronounced it would be done.

What other "messiah" of the Jews would behave like the Christ in the midst of Roman interrogation never say a word, make a complaint, but submit to the vileness of the human heart?

It was not only for our redemption, but a sign. "For when they shall see Him, they shall morn." They will recognize Him as the one they rejected.

What more than what Scriptures declare do you desire?

The wrath of God is specifically appointed to the ungodly. NOT the godly. Christ was never ungodly. And this is confirmed by reading Romans and Hebrews. Verses you have quoted, posted, and declared to mean something that they do not.

I make it plain that I do not like the word "substitution" for it does not ever occur when the atonement sacrifice is found in the Scripture, nor is it found in the NT.

Rather, satisfaction is found. And a satisfied God has no wrath.

No wrath was shown in the OT atonement sacrifice when brought by a worthy High Priest and the blood was worthy. Was Christ not (according to Hebrews) even a greater sacrifice, a greater High Priest?

Do you really rely upon what others declare of the Scriptures, or what the Scriptures actually declare.

I have ask for Scriptures, yet you produce tombs of writing from others that you would parrot.

In this one post, I have referred to Scriptures in nearly every sentence, I would expect nothing less of your writing. Now, I will depart from that principle for the rest of the post.

So, yes, I will wait until you are finished quoting others and you and I take the Scriptures for exactly what they are presented without the inferences, the modifications and the assumptions that are obliged to conform them into some scheme.

Let me know when you are ready.

We will not debate, but discuss.

We will share ideas and comfortably draw conclusions based upon Scriptures, alone.

I am not your enemy, I am your brother in Christ who cares and prays for your safety. We already agree on much, and one thing we both agree upon is that all matters of faith and practice must meet the test of Scripture. That is what we will do.

When you are ready.

 

[Iconoclast]

[
agedman,
[Do you really rely upon what others declare of the Scriptures, or what the Scriptures actually declare.

I have ask for Scriptures, yet you produce tombs of writing from others that you would parrot.

In this one post, I have referred to Scriptures in nearly every sentence, I would expect nothing less of your writing. Now, I will depart from that principle for the rest of the post.

So, yes, I will wait until you are finished quoting others and you and I take the Scriptures for exactly what they are presented without the inferences, the modifications and the assumptions that are obliged to conform them into some scheme.

Let me know when you are ready.

We will not debate, but discuss.

We will share ideas and comfortably draw conclusions based upon Scriptures, alone.

I am not your enemy, I am your brother in Christ who cares and prays for your safety. We already agree on much, and one thing we both agree upon is that all matters of faith and practice must meet the test of Scripture. That is what we will do.

When you are ready.]

Such a discussion is not necessary. You have ignored all the links offered to just repeat these false ideas.
I do not feel any need to try and convince you two.
Your minds are set against godly wisdom being expressed in these links.
I will supply more of the same as they support the teaching of Heb 2:9-17.
You are not interested in the writing of dead saints who live eternally.
I enjoy as much teaching as I can go over. I think others enjoy and learn from these links.

 

[Iconoclast]

Turretin;
I. The vindicatory justice of God. That such an attribute is natural and essential to God, has been proved at large elsewhere. This avenging justice belongs to God as a judge, and he can no more dispense with it than he can cease to be a judge or deny himself — though, at the same time, he exercises it freely. It does not consist in the exercise of a gratuitous power, like mercy, by which injustice is done to no one whether it is exercised or not. It is that attribute by which God gives to everyone his due, and from its exercise, when proper objects are presented, he can no more abstain than he can do what is unjust. This justice is the constant will of punishing sinners, which in God cannot be inefficient, as his majesty is supreme and his power infinite. And hence, the infliction of punishment upon the transgressor or his surety is inevitable. No objection to this can be drawn from the liberty of God; for that is exercised only in matters of positive enactment, not in those matters of natural right: nor can it be drawn from his mercy, because, while it may free the sinner from punishment, it does not demand that sin shall not be punished. II. The nature of sin, which is a moral evil and essentially opposed to holiness, forms another argument. The connection between it and physical evil is natural and necessary. As physical or penal evil cannot exist without moral evil, either personal or imputed, so there cannot be moral evil without producing natural evil. Moral and physical good, or holiness and happiness, are united together by the wisdom of God, as well as by His goodness and justice: so that a good man must be happy, for goodness is a part of the divine image. The wicked must be miserable because God is just: and rather more, because when God gives blessings to the righteous, he does it of his own bounty, without any merit on their part; but when he punishes the sinner, he renders to him precisely what he has merited by his sins. III. The sanction of the Law, which threatens death to the sinner.

1 Since God is true and cannot lie, these threatenings must necessarily be executed either upon the sinner, or upon someone in his stead. Our opponents reply in vain, that the threatening is hypothetical, not absolute, and may be relaxed by repentance. This is a gratuitous supposition. That such a condition is either expressed or understood, neither has been nor can be proved. Indeed, as the penal sanction of the law is a part of the law itself, which is natural and indispensable, this sanction must also be immutable. With the judicial threatenings of the law, we must not confound particular and economical comminations,

2 or those which are paternal and evangelical, which are declared against men to call them to repentance. Such threatening's may be recalled in case of penitence. Of this kind were those declared against Hezekiah (Isaiah 38), and against Nineveh (Jonah 3). IV. The Preaching of the Gospel, which announces the violent and painful death of the Mediator and Surety on the cross, is another argument which powerfully confirms the necessity of that event. For we cannot believe that God would multiply sufferings unnecessarily. His goodness and wisdom do not permit us to harbour an idea that the Father could expose his most innocent and beloved Son to an excruciating and ignominious death, without a necessity which allows no relaxation. The only necessity which can be possibly imagined here, is that of making an atonement to the divine justice for our sins. Everyone must perceive that it was absolutely
necessary.

I know that our opponents affect to produce various other reasons for the accursed death of the cross, such as to confirm Christ's doctrine, and to set an example of all kinds of virtue, especially of charity and constancy!

But since Christ had confirmed his doctrines by numerous stupendous miracles, and through his life had given the most illustrious examples of every human virtue, who could believe that God, for that one cause alone, would expose his only begotten Son to such dire torments? Therefore, without any doubt, there was another cause for that dispensation, namely: a regard for the honour of his justice. The Holy Spirit bears witness to this by the Apostle Paul, who affirms that "God has set forth Christ to be a propitiation for our sins to declare his righteousness," Rom 3:25 — this was inexorable, and it did not allow our sins to be pardoned on any other terms than by the intervention of the death of Christ.

1 Deut. 27:29, Gen. 2:17, Ez. 18:20, Rom 1:18, 32, and 6:23

 

[Iconoclast]

Again: if God was able and willing by his word alone, to pardon our sins without any atonement, then why does the Apostle Paul so often and emphatically refer our justification and salvation to the blood of Christ?

"We are justified by the redemption which is in his blood," Rom 3:24.

"We have redemption through his blood: the remission of sins," Eph. 1:7.

"He has reconciled all things to himself by the blood of Christ," Col. 1:20. Now there was no need for his blood to be shed if remission depended solely upon the divine will.

 

[Iconoclast]

VI. Finally, our opinion relative to the necessity of an atonement does not in the least derogate from any of the Divine Perfections.
 Not from God's absolute Power, because he can neither deny himself nor any of his attributes; nor can he act in such a way as to give the appearance of delighting in sin by holding communion with the sinner.
 Not from the Freedom of his Will, because he can will nothing contrary to his justice and holiness, which would be injured if sin were to go unpunished.
 Not from his boundless Mercy, for this is exercised towards the sinner though punishment is inflicted on the Surety. On the contrary, it makes a glorious display of the most illustrious of the divine perfections:
 Of his Holiness, on account of which he can have no communion with the sinner until, by an atonement, his guilt is removed and his pollution purged;
 Of his Justice, which inexorably demands punishment of sin;
 Of his Wisdom, in reconciling the respective claims of justice and mercy; and
 Of his Love, in not sparing his own Son in order that he might spare us.

 

[Iconoclast]

But we inquire whether the satisfaction made by Christ was strictly penal, and not only fulfilled the will of God, but also satisfied his justice — Christ having taken our sins upon himself. Our opponents deny it; we affirm it.

The controversy does not respect a metaphorical satisfaction which is effected by a nominal remission of sin — a satisfaction which by supplication obtains some favour through the mere indulgence of God. This is admitted and often spoken of by our adversaries to deceive the simple. But they pertinaciously deny that Christ has made a true and proper satisfaction by paying a full price, and by obtaining through his merits, the acquittal of the sinner on the ground of justice. We maintain that this is the true scriptural atonement.

 

[Iconoclast]

2. If reconciliation were nothing but conversion, then it should be said to proceed from Christ's holy life, rather than from his bloody death. On this ground, no reason can be offered why the Apostle should propose sanctification as the end of our reconciliation, Col 1:22; for nothing can be the medium and end of itself. This would be like saying that the end of reconciliation is reconciliation.

3. It is such a reconciliation that it is effected by not imputing to us our sins, on account of their having been imputed to Christ who was made sin for us, 2Cor 5:18, 21. It is a reconciliation effected by the substitution of Christ in our place, so that he might die for us — as we gather from the comparison made between him and the man who would dare to die for a good man, Rom 5:7. This implies a proper satisfaction, and not a simple conversion.

4. This reconciliation is effected "by making peace through the blood of his cross," Col 1:20, and by an atoning sacrifice, hilasmos (G2434), 1John 2:2. All these denote not mere conversion, but primarily the appeasing of the divine wrath, which is effected by the death of a victim.