Featured Where did the wrath of God go?

Please quote where I said there is a difference between what Scriptures teaches and what the Anabaptists teach. We can go from there.

Or....were you making a false accusation?

Please post where I confessed to being influenced by Anabaptist writings (I do not hold Anabaptist Theology).

Or....were you making false accusations?

This is a false claim. I never said that I agree or disagree with Anabaotist Theology when it comes to this topic. You are again making assumptions.

There is not one Anabaptist's view. Do you understand what the Anabaptists are and were????

So you are questioning that I (and @agedman ) are saved? You said that you once believed as we do, and now you clarify that this is belief as an unsaved person.

You are wrong. You accuse me, agedman, all Christians who lived, as holding belief "as an unsaved person". Yet all we have done was rely on Scripture. Our interpretations can be wrong, but at least we are interpreting what is written.

And, I seriously doubt that as a lost man you believed Christ bore your sins bodily, that He died for you, and that through Him you have eternal life.

Sure there was. Augustine taught that the belief Christ's death was to appease God is heresy. Justin Martyr taught that Christ suffered under the powers of evil for the whole human family. Penal Substitution Theory did mot even exist before the 16th Century.

 

Obviously you misunderstood my reply.

I am saying that I test foundational doctrines by what is written in the text of Scripture.

You do not. Many don't. There are two ideas here. You test doctrine by what you believe Scripture teaches. That is fair. It was not being smug.

 

I agree with a lot of what you call Penal Substitution. It becomes theory only when people add things like Christ being our substitute, experiencing God's wrath, dying instead of us, etc.

 

@Martin Marprelate ,

We can both point to passages that present Christ as our representative (like the "Last Adam"). You even offered an illustration of this (you speaking on behalf of other members).

Why do you believe that Christ was our substitute?

 

You know who Anabaptists were??!!!!

I do not like or dislike your posts. They have nothing to do with me but reflect your thought process.

Yes. Your posts are false claims. It goes to your ability to discern the truth of what you read.

You believed that I said the teachings of Scripture differ from Anabaptist teaching. I did not post that anywhere.

You claimed that I follow Anabaptist teachers. This is also a false claim. The only Anabaptist theologian I recall mentioning is Denny Weaver, and that not in agreement.

You then accuse me of following Reformed theology instead of Scripture. Again, a false accusation.

You backtrack to cover your errors by falsely claiming you cut and pasted my posts....you didn't. I never accused you of following Anabaptist teachers. I never said that Anabaptist teaching and Scripture were different (or the same).

Those are YOUR words, not mine.

The best you can do is say you misquoted me....or deliberately misrepresented what I posted by changing words. But then you would be a dishonest man, so that can't be right....can it?

Maybe you would do better to just stand aside and let the adults talk. I am interested in @Martin Marprelate 's understanding of substitution.

 

You know who Anabaptists were.

 

It does that when I use my phone (most of the time). Not fat fingers....just little letters.

 

I never said that you followed Roman Catholic doctrine. You are making things up now. But you have been for some time now, haven't you.

What ypu "sent back" was my words with your changes. That is not being honest at all.

 

So you have been acting like a child. I get it.

But you have also been making false accusations (like saying I said you follow RC doctrine).