The OP tells you exactly how Christ had the victory over Satan. I could copy and paste it again if you like, but that wouldn't help. Why don't you read it again and tell me what it is you don't understand.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Christ's victory over Satan
- Thread starter Martin Marprelate
- Start date
- Status
Thank you for this; it is very helpful. Although I have dealt with some of these things in the past, it's good to have them down in black and white.
I am going on holiday for a week first thing tomorrow (UK time), and although I will have a laptop and wi-fi, I intend to use them as little as possible on my holiday.
I will deal with the above when I get back.
atpollard
Well-Known Member
Enjoy your family … this has waited 2000 years, it will wait another week.
It is difficult for us as we were raised in a specific tradition.
But it was not difficult for most of Christianity. That should lead us to ask why. They said and used, say and use, the exact same passages but walk away with a very different understanding.
For example, you find my view that God did not separate from Jesus on the cross as difficulty. But the idea that God did separate from Christ is a minority view and one even rejected by many Reformed Christians.
The passage you provide is not relevant because even traditional Christianity believes that God forsake Christ to suffer and die on a Roman cross. Even traditional Christianity holds that God withheld immediate deliverance.
Why equate God forsaking Christ to the cross as God separating from Christ?
Enjoy your vacation. I'm just coming back from mine.
I appreciate you dealing with that. I find it is best to discuss differences rather than what we have in common when examining contrasting views.
I am not looking for a defence of those positions (I held them far longer than I rejected them, so I already understand your beliefs).
But I think it good to look at the arguments (the pros and cons) side by side.
It didn't take a lot of time for me to abandon the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement (it took God's conviction). But it was difficult for me to read Scripture without using a Reformed lens. That took time, and when I did I was pleasantly surprised to find I was in agreement with the traditional Christianity Reformed theologians reject as ignorant of a fuller theological history. And it opened up a depth of understanding Reformed Theology replaces.
37818
Well-Known Member
Ok, that is how you see this. My view is not a commonly understood view. God is omnipresent. Ezekiel 18:32.
The scriptures does say, "great is the mystery of godliness," and indeed it is a great mystery and probably no one will figure God out on this side of glory. However, saying that does bring up a question. If Jesus Christ our substitute died on the cross and paid the penalty of our sins there, what does that mean? I think it means that everything he suffered on the cross during those last three hours is what any unsaved person can expect to receive and suffer for eternity. Certainly God is not present in his suffering because it was the man Christ Jesus who suffered in our place. God is a tripartite being and all during the material life of Jesus the holy Spirit had indwelt him and gave him spiritual life so he could communicate intimately with the Father who was in heaven. Indeed, that is what he said he did in John 12, among other places.
If the Spirit had not departed the body of Jesus then it would have been Jesus and the Spirit of God who would have died for us. But the Spirit cannot die because he is life. He is the life of God. Jesus was going to die like the first Adam died. Adam died when he sinned and sin was in him and upon him. God departed but he was still alive physically. Sin was the cause of death. Adam died physically after he died spiritually, when he was 930 years old. The wages of sin is death. Sin was never in Jesus but it was upon him and he suffered the justice and the wrath of God for all sin in one act on the tree and Jesus died at 12 o'clock. He died spiritually. The Spirit departed his body and Jesus was left alone, soul and body, to suffer. The proof of that is the lights went out and darkness replaced it.
John said about Jesus, the WORD, "in him was life and the life was the light of men." Unsaved sinners will be alone in the lake of fire for eternity and forgotten even by God and Jesus would cry out "my God, my God, why hath thou forsaken me." Jude said they are wandering stars in whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever. There are other things that are important that I will not name now. The hands and feet are tied in the lake of fire. Just as the hands and feet of Jesus were bound by the nails. God and all men forsook Jesus while he suffered on that tree.
It was the Spirit of God that raised up the body of Jesus from the dead. How ever anyone chooses to define being dead, Jesus really was dead for three days, not because I say it but because God says it. Spiritual death is the body without the Spirit of God. Eternal life is the physical body with the divine occupant, the Holy Spirit in it, along with the human soul, the identity of the person.
I must at least prove one thing but I am not taking the time to prove everything I have said in this post. But I could prove it with scripture in context if asked.
1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
Jesus was dead until his body was raised up, quickened by the Spirit. Obviously, his soul had come up from paradise where it had been for the three days, and entered his body at the same time and Jesus was glorified in his body.
These are wonderful truths and God is a gracious and kind and wonderful savior to sacrifice himself for me and for you. All it takes for anyone to be saved from their sins is to repent of their sins and trust that God will give us the righteousness of Christ because he gave Christ the punishment for our sins and then raised him to life, never to die again. It is his life that he will give us if we will receive it by faith. He emptied himself of this life on the cross.
If the Spirit had not departed the body of Jesus then it would have been Jesus and the Spirit of God who would have died for us. But the Spirit cannot die because he is life. He is the life of God. Jesus was going to die like the first Adam died. Adam died when he sinned and sin was in him and upon him. God departed but he was still alive physically. Sin was the cause of death. Adam died physically after he died spiritually, when he was 930 years old. The wages of sin is death. Sin was never in Jesus but it was upon him and he suffered the justice and the wrath of God for all sin in one act on the tree and Jesus died at 12 o'clock. He died spiritually. The Spirit departed his body and Jesus was left alone, soul and body, to suffer. The proof of that is the lights went out and darkness replaced it.
John said about Jesus, the WORD, "in him was life and the life was the light of men." Unsaved sinners will be alone in the lake of fire for eternity and forgotten even by God and Jesus would cry out "my God, my God, why hath thou forsaken me." Jude said they are wandering stars in whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever. There are other things that are important that I will not name now. The hands and feet are tied in the lake of fire. Just as the hands and feet of Jesus were bound by the nails. God and all men forsook Jesus while he suffered on that tree.
It was the Spirit of God that raised up the body of Jesus from the dead. How ever anyone chooses to define being dead, Jesus really was dead for three days, not because I say it but because God says it. Spiritual death is the body without the Spirit of God. Eternal life is the physical body with the divine occupant, the Holy Spirit in it, along with the human soul, the identity of the person.
I must at least prove one thing but I am not taking the time to prove everything I have said in this post. But I could prove it with scripture in context if asked.
1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
Jesus was dead until his body was raised up, quickened by the Spirit. Obviously, his soul had come up from paradise where it had been for the three days, and entered his body at the same time and Jesus was glorified in his body.
These are wonderful truths and God is a gracious and kind and wonderful savior to sacrifice himself for me and for you. All it takes for anyone to be saved from their sins is to repent of their sins and trust that God will give us the righteousness of Christ because he gave Christ the punishment for our sins and then raised him to life, never to die again. It is his life that he will give us if we will receive it by faith. He emptied himself of this life on the cross.
There is a problem with your reasoning.
It is appointed men once to die and then the Judgment.
Our spirits do not die with the body. Even the spirits of the wicked exist after physical death and is judged.
God did experience physical death on the Cross. Nothing in Scripture requires that God withdraw from Jesus. In fact, the idea that God could withdraw from Jesus is a heresy (declared as such in 325 AD).
You are not agreeing with God on how he defines death. There is a problem with heretics being trusted to define heresy.
37818
Well-Known Member
Vain rhetoric. You really need to specify points of issue. Otherwise you are only saying nonsense.
Your one liners often makes little or no sense to me either.
Last edited:
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
That's my point. It seems to bother you if it's reformers who disagree with your view of the atonement but it doesn't seem to bother you if it's early church fathers who disagree with you on the same subject. Your standard shifts based on how you perceive they align with your own views. We all do it I guess.
No I don't. But the idea of a Ransom is mentioned a couple of times in scripture and is therefore true. I do think the ECF's and even up into the Puritan era there was a much more vivid cosmic battle going on between God and Satan in the minds of people. And I think it may me to our loss that we have lost some of that awareness. Remember in Pilgrims Progress when Christian meets Apollyon on the road and Apollyon says "Aren't you one of my subjects?" Then he promises Christian greater wages and success if he will turn around and go back into his proper kingdom. Much of Jesus own ministry involved teaching about his coming kingdom and I noticed G. Campbell Morgan had a lot about how that itself related to the crucifixion and the atonement. Allistair Begg has a sermon on the idea of a ransom and he relates it to the idea of the Old Testament teaching on if you had an ox that was known to be dangerous and you did not restrain it and it killed someone you would, as the owner, be subject to death but there was mention of a way to ransom out of the penalty. You could go on and on and to be honest - that's exactly what we should do over such an important subject.
In fact. Listing all the aspects of the atonement you can think of is a far better way than by saying that it has to be this or that "theory". In post #39 those things listed are excellent. I would say your second list has some overlap into the first list though.
I am agreeing with God insofar as Scripture. I cannot go beyond His Word so whatever "special revelation" you believe God has given you Id suggest caution because you are putting your "secret knowledge" against God's Word.
IMHO Scripture wins every time.
It doesn't bother me if anybody disagrees with my view. I believe the Latin View is wrong, whether Reformed Theology, or the RCC.
Given the topic, why would I argue against a belief I think is wrong but nobody here holds?. BUT what I am talking about is Christ's victory over Satan.
I explained how this victory is our redemption as it pertains to traditional Christianity (it is HOW Christ redeemed us).
You reject this in favor of a newer form of our faith. Yet this far you have failed to articulate your belief in regards to Christ defeating Satan. You just try to change the topic.
I have repeatedly asked you to explain how Christ's victory over Satan plays into redemption.
You seem confused about your own faith when it comes to this topic, as thus far you have been unable to answer.
So I'll ask again - In what way, do you believe, did Christ have victory over Satan, and what role did it play, in your opinion, in our redemption?
37818
Well-Known Member
The redeemed are redeemed from the Devil's hell, Matthew 25:41.
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
Between post #1 and the MLJ sermon and my post 33 I don't know what else to tell you. I thought I had explained it in post 33.
Maybe this will help. In your list points 2,4,5,6 and 8 for instance. Can you give me one single theologian or an active or past pastor who believes those points that you have listed - and yet denies penal substitution.
And from the bondage of sin and death.
No, you haven't. The sermon expands on the theme of Christ's Victory but does not narrow this victory to redemption.
In other words, what part of our Redemption was Christ achieving this victory?
I have jammed several who believes the points I have provided and disagrees with the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement. Granted, most were pre-Reformation writings (as that is the easiest since your view is a relatively new one).
But I also listed several current pastors, theologians, and even two systematic theologies
I already mentioned Torrance.
Other contemporary theologians would include David Ausburger, Chris Huebner,John Meyendorff, Mike Garde, Gordon Kaufman, Jam s Reimer, and Georges Florovsky.
I could provide pages, but why. It looks sca logical fallacy to base truth on popularity.
I'll ask again - In what way, do you believe, did Christ have victory over Satan, and what role did it play, in your opinion, in our redemption?
I ask because this is the easiest way to see where Reformed Theology departed from Traditional Christianity.
@DaveXR650
Here is one example of how the classic view differs from your understanding:
' . . . it was not the death of Jesus that constituted atonement, but Jesus Christ the Son of God offering Himself in sacrifice for us. Everything depends on who He was, for the significance of His acts in life and death depends on the nature of His person. It was He who died for us. He who made atonement through his one self-offering in life and death. Hence we must allow the Person of Christ to determine for us the nature of His saving work, rather than the other way round." (Torrance in God and Rationality, p. 64)
Here is one example of how the classic view differs from your understanding:
' . . . it was not the death of Jesus that constituted atonement, but Jesus Christ the Son of God offering Himself in sacrifice for us. Everything depends on who He was, for the significance of His acts in life and death depends on the nature of His person. It was He who died for us. He who made atonement through his one self-offering in life and death. Hence we must allow the Person of Christ to determine for us the nature of His saving work, rather than the other way round." (Torrance in God and Rationality, p. 64)
- Status