Featured Isaiah 53...

Here is the difference - I say that about 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust. They were killed by evil men. But this was not outside of God's sovereignty. Some here would say "No, God killed those people!".

I'd say that almost 3,000 people were killed by terrorists on SEP. 11, but this was not outside God's sovereignty. Some would say "No! God killed those people".

My point here is that there are very different understandings of God's character expressed in this thread.

 

@DaveXR650

I need to ask -

You said that Christ dying for our sin is the same as Christ dying for our sin instead of us.

Why do you believe that?

I'm serious here. Why do you believe that "Christ died for our sins" is the same as "Christ died instead of us"?



If you need help moving and I come to help you move then I am working for you. If you believe "for" means "instead of" then please don't call me to help.


I think of the CoC who insist that being baptized for the forgiveness of sins means that baptism is what pits that forgiveness in effect

 

He gave himself as a ransom for many.

Matthew 17:27 However, so that we do not offend them, go to the sea and throw in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for you and Me.

Does it really make sense to say "Take that and give it to them instead of you and Me."?

Not, of course not. The word means on our behalf. Christ died a random on our behalf, not instead of us.

You are adding to the verse by declaring what this Ransom was in addition to Christ Himself.

I am NOT saying that the language prohibits adding "instead of" in how the Ransom is giving. It just is not in the actual text.

 

Ah....sorry. I misunderstood you. Remember I'm getting older by the day.

I think you are mixing up two things - the wages of sin (death) and the Judgment where the wicked are cast into the Lake of Fire (this is Christ-centered).
The author of death (wages of sin) is Satan through His deception (Adam sinned and through Him sin entered the world). This is the bondage from which we were redeemed.

In Christ we escape the wrath to come. This is referring to Judgment (the Father judges nobody, but all judgment has been given to the Son....that is, those who do not believe are condemned already because the Light has come into the world and they rejected this Light....at Judgment the judgment is executed (they are already condemned) and God's wrath will be poured out on the wicked.

One major difference I can see between your view and traditional Christianity is traditional Christianity views God's Word as absolute - no loopholes. All flesh must die because the wages of sin is death. Christ becomes a curse for us (shares in this fate) and gives us Life (although we die so also shall we live). And then at the Judgment all of the wicked will perish but those who have been made new creations in Christ (who are no longer wicked) will live.

Penal Substitution Theory has God looking for and finding a loophole that nullifies His Word. It assumes God acquits the wicked because the Just suffered the punishment of the guilty.

 

I'm not sure if you know this (this useless trivia...really) but the most common view before WW2 was that the Church would grow and things would continue to get better and better until Christ came. This changed as so many were disillusioned after the war.

Just some trivia....nothing to do with our discussion but I thought it interesting.


There is a problem with our individual sin. We have a Mediator in Christ and are forgiven upon repentance (provided we are forgiving to others....which is a part of repentance, I suppose).

What you are talking about is God having an obligation to what punish an action, even if not punishing the sinner. That does not make sense. It ultimately puts man in control of God. He has to experience harm or loss for our sins in order to "forgive" us.

 

lol....But that is not why one pays taxes.

I agree that we can make Scripture say all kinds of things by insisting. Jesus telling him to pay taxes instead of them rather than on their behalf is not even the oddest.

An eye instead of an eye and a tooth instead of a tooth.

you shall be silent and unable to speak until the day when these things take place, instead of you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their proper time.

Instead of whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light,

In the end I fully acknowledge that "for" can mean ",instead of". The issue is that there is no reason to assume that meaning in the passage. You do so because of your philosophy of the Cross, not because the text demands it. And doing so you make the verse meaningless (Christ died as a ransom instead of us....really...exactly which one of us was going to die as a ransom???)

 

Eye for an eye...maybe, but not quite. More like I take your eye because you took mine.

 

Yep. The problem with punishing a substitute is it negates punishing the wicked.

Think about it.

You said - It's not punishing an action as much as punishing the evildoer or having the wrath fall on a substitute.

That last part (having the wrath fall on a substitute) necessitates a demand upon God to punish the action, even if not punishing the wicked.

That isn't just.

If Jack murders Jill's sister justice doesn't demand that somebody be punished for the crime. Justice demands that Jack be punished for the crime. God, however, makes Jack a new creation (no longer guilty, no longer wicked, but requires or causes Jack to die to wicked Jack).

If a man mugged you and the judge said "we couldn't find him, so I put this innocent guy in jail so that justice would be served" you'd think him crazy.

 

I agree with a lot in your post.

Christ did bear our sin.
And it was an injustice (a point our salvation hinges upon).
And God will not acquit the wicked. But He will also not condemn the Just.

Do you believe that we are truly made new creations in Christ?
Do you believe that we must die to sin?

If so, then you have your answer about how God is just and the Justifier of sinners.

At Judgment God will separate the righteous from the wicked. The righteous were once wicked, but they had to die to sin - they were made new creations. There is no condemnation in Christ. The Christian is not wicked.

 

I understand. Many who hold to Penal Substitution Theory do not understand earlier uses of the word "substitution".

Irenaeus and Athanasius, for example, viewed Christ's death as a substitute (medical substitution) in that He died at the hands of Satan as a substitute for the human race.

I prefer "representation" because "medical substitution", "ontological substitution", and "total substitution" does not fit well in our contemporary language. We think of a substitute as something like Equal instead of sugar in tea.

That said, representation falls short. It is representative substitution. The reason is Christ takes upon Himself our curse. He shared in our infirmities. Yet they remain ours as well. He did not earn the curse, we did as a product of our own sin.