Christ set forth as a Propitiation

[Martin Marprelate]

Scripture does not say the wrath of God gets propitiated.

Romans 3:25. God set Him forth as a propitiation by His blood.' What do you think that means? Do you suppose that God is not propitiated by the death of Christ? Would that not suggest a serious failure on God's part in setting Him forth to no avail, and on Christ's part if the shedding of His blood failed to propitiate God towards sinners?

God's wrath is against the wicked.
God conformes us into the image of Christ
God recreates us in Christ
God gives us a new heart and a new spirit
God will refine us as gold and silver are regined

What need therefore for the Lord Jesus to suffer and die? God has sorted it out.

We must die to the flesh and be made alive in Christ
We must repent, turn from evil and to God
We must be born of the Spirit
We must be made alive in Christ

It sounds like a lot of work. How do we accomplish these things? And if God is going to do it all for us, on what basis will He do it?

God will judge the wicked on "the Day of Wrath"
God will separate the people on that Day
God will punish the wicked on the Day of Judgmeny

Shouldn't that come before the last bit?

Christ became a life giving Spirit
In Christ there is no condemnation

If, on the day of judgment, you remain wicked then you will face condemnation

If you have been conformed into the image of Christ, been made a new creation, been born of the Spirit, been refined, died to the flesh then you will live.

So why the cross?

Christ IS the Propitiation for human sin.

How exactly? I know, and so do most of the people on this board, but I don't think you do. Why could He not be the propitiation for human sin by doing 20 press-ups or doing some more miracles or...... anything really apart from dying on a wooden cross?

God set forth Christ AS a Propitiation

Just so, but you left out the phrase that follows.

In Him we escape the wrath to come
In Him we are reconciled to God.

Again, how exactly?

 

[JonC]

Romans 3:25. God set Him forth as a propitiation by His blood.' What do you think that means? Do you suppose that God is not propitiated by the death of Christ? Would that not suggest a serious failure on God's part in setting Him forth to no avail, and on Christ's part if the shedding of His blood failed to propitiate God towards sinners?

What need therefore for the Lord Jesus to suffer and die? God has sorted it out.

It sounds like a lot of work. How do we accomplish these things? And if God is going to do it all for us, on what basis will He do it?

Shouldn't that come before the last bit?

So why the cross?

How exactly? I know, and so do most of the people on this board, but I don't think you do. Why could He not be the propitiation for human sin by doing 20 press-ups or doing some more miracles or...... anything really apart from dying on a wooden cross?

Just so, but you left out the phrase that follows.

Again, how exactly?

God set forth Jesus as a Propitiation by His blood.

It is not hard to understand.

God (here the Father as Jesus offered Himself in obedience to the Father).
Set forth (put forth, sent)
Him (Jesus, the Son)
as a (a preposition to show a role or function)
Propitiation (a noun, something that brings favor, from "propitius" which means favorable or gracious).
In His blood (points to Christ's obedience tp death, His crucifixion


Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, so that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.


In Christianity we are reconciled to God, not like the pagan sacrifices but by being recreated in Christ.

Scripture speak once of God being propiated, and this is by mediation (Christ, as our High Priest, interceding for us when we sin). But we read elsewhere that Chriat Himself is this Propitiation (we are clothed with His righteousness, being conformed into His image).


Scripture interprets Scrioture, @Martin Marprelate . No need for theories.

Christ is our propitiation.
We are reconciled to God in Christ.
We are being conformed into His image.
In Him we escape the wrath to come.
We are made new creations in Christ.

You are so focused on paganism you cannot grasp God's words right in front of you.

And early has been attacked by the "new view of Paul" gang, headlined by NT Wright and his gang

This is actually not quite true. What you mean is "the new perspective on Paul". Here there are many theories, but the general idea is only new in relation from arising within Reformed theologians.

The movement began in Lutheran theology in the early 1960's.

But it was merely a shift from Reformed tradition to seek out a more biblical view. These scholars recognized a major issue within their traditions and sought to bring their churches into a stronger standing biblically.

Ironically it has been primarily the Reformed scholars who specialize in studying the Pauline epistles that recognize the error of the Reformers. They just realized what most Christians know.

Anyway, this issue has nothing to do with Penal Substitution Theory per se. Stendahl was a Kutheran who held to Satisfaction/ Substitution. But it is a related theory (it is what Penal Substitution Theory sought to reform).


This movement, like Calvinism, carries way too much baggage and tradition.

What need therefore for the Lord Jesus to suffer and die? God has sorted it out.

It sounds like a lot of work. How do we accomplish these things? And if God is going to do it all for us, on what basis will He do it?

Shouldn't that come before the last bit?

So why the cross?

How exactly? I know, and so do most of the people on this board, but I don't think you do. Why could He not be the propitiation for human sin by doing 20 press-ups or doing some more miracles or...... anything really apart from dying on a wooden cross?

Just so, but you left out the phrase that follows.

Again, how exactly?

1. I realize that you have not use for Christ's death. We have discussed this before and again I will say you are wrong.

The Bible tells us why Jesus had to die in order to redeem us. You just reject those passages.

He had to die "so that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives."

2. Yes, God has it sorted out.

3. Why the cross? Because God used it as a symbol in Scripture. When the Isralites considered somebody guilty of a crime worthy of death they were esteemed stricken by God. But we also have history (since you seem so averse to Scripture). If Jesus was actualky cursed by God He would have been murdered under the Law (the punishment fir blasphemy is death by stoning).

But crucifixion was unmistakable - it was the ultimate punishment by the "powers of darkness" at the time (Rome). It was not a punishment prescribed for sin against God but for crimes against an evil and pagan nation.

4. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the World. There is no "how" in that verse because the word is a noun. You mean "why". The reason is in Scripture.

In Him we escape the wrath to come.
We are made new creations in Christ.
He became a life giving spirit.
We are conformed into the image of Christ.
God gives us a new heart, a new spirit, puts His Spirit in us.
There is no condemnation in Christ.
We are clothed in His righteousness.
The mind set on the Spirit is life.
Christ is the Life.
We are reconciled to God in Christ.

5. #4 answered your question.

I know that God's actual words are foolishness to you. You have made that abundantly clear. It is not what God said, in your estimation, that matters but what the men you worship have told you that the Bible teaches.

There is not a person alive who believes thar the Bible teaches "what is written" in the biblical text who will agree with you. You have not even been able to provide one verse that states Jesus suffered God's wrath. And that is just a four word sentence - think about all the other myths you believe.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

God set forth Jesus as a Propitiation by His blood.

It is not hard to understand.

God (here the Father as Jesus offered Himself in obedience to the Father).
Set forth (put forth, sent)
Him (Jesus, the Son)
as a (a preposition to show a role or function)
Propitiation (a noun, something that brings favor, from "propitius" which means favorable or gracious).
In His blood (points to Christ's obedience tp death, His crucifixion

It seems hard for you to understand. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New in Greek, but you have to resort to Latin to try (and fail) to give us the meaning. In fact, propitius is an adjective, not a noun, so in any case it cannot help us to find the meaning of hilasterion, which is a noun. As I wrote in the O.P., it refers to the “mercy seat” (Hebrews 9:5) which was the cover of the ark of the covenant which resided in the Holiest Place in the Tabernacle. It was where the Jewish High Priest went once a year on the Day of Atonement to offer sacrifices, first for himself and then for the people (Heb. 9:7). This was the most solemn of all the Jewish ceremonies. The sacrificial offering was a death in the place of the one who offered it (Leviticus 16:6). A propitiation is a sacrifice that turns away wrath. If a man were to upset his wife in some way, he might buy her a bunch of flowers as a propitiation, to satisfy her outraged sense of wrong and turn away her righteous anger. Of course, the man would not know if these flowers would be sufficient for that. His wife might hold out for a meal in a slap-up restaurant! But we know that God is satisfied by the suffering and death of Christ because it was He who set Him forth. Christ was our substitute. ‘He was pierced for our transgressions; He was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought us peace was upon Him’ (Isaiah 53:5, NIV).

Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, so that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.

Amen! Thank you for some Scripture which is grievously lacking in most of your posts. But tell me, how do you think the death of Christ destroyed the devil? How did it free anyone?

In Christianity we are reconciled to God, not like the pagan sacrifices but by being recreated in Christ.

Scripture speak once of God being propiated, and this is by mediation (Christ, as our High Priest, interceding for us when we sin). But we read elsewhere that Chriat Himself is this Propitiation (we are clothed with His righteousness, being conformed into His image).

So the Levitical sacrifices were pagan, were they? Did God not authorize, and indeed, command them? So the LORD is a pagan deity, is He?Christ is indeed our propitiation or 'mercy seat.'
Christ's session as our Great High Priest comes after His death, resurrectionand ascension.
And if the propitiation is nothing else but our clothing with righteousness and being conformed into His image, what need was there for our Lord to suffer and die? Why did He refuse the wine mixed with myrrh in Mark 15:23?

Scripture interprets Scrioture, @Martin Marprelate . No need for theories.

You should stop trotting out yours then.

Christ is our propitiation.
We are reconciled to God in Christ.
We are being conformed into His image.
In Him we escape the wrath to come.
We are made new creations in Christ.

You still can't explain how all this comes to be. 'The LORD ...... will not at all acquit the guilty' (Nahum 1:3). '...Keepimg mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgressions and sin, by no means clearing the guilty' (Exodus 34How is it possible for God to forgive iniquity, transgressions and sin and by no means to clear the guilty? Only through the Lord Jesus whom God set forth as as the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:10). 'By His wounds, we are healed.' Penal substitution in a nutshell.

You are so focused on paganism you cannot grasp God's words right in front of you.

Yeah right! You think God's a pagan; we know that already.

 

[JonC]

It seems hard for you to understand. ... already.

No. I already told you why we differ.

I believe the words of God ARE what the Bible teaches.

So I believe that God laid our dins on Him, that He was crushed for our iniquities, that it is by His stripes we are healed.

You believe what the men you have chosen to worship tell you that means.

ANE paganism did not view God as making man into a new creation.

These pagans believed that the wrath of their gods could be appeased. So they offered sacrifices to manipulate their gods.

The reason there are the pagan ideas in your faith is not because you look back to pagan Rome but is because you hold a reformed Roman Catholic faith (those ideas were within your tradition).

That is why I can provide verses stating my faith. I have not denied any passages - I have denied what those men you worship say the passages teach. Snd you declare God's words alone as paganism.

I get that. God's words to you are foolishness. You look to men, to philosophy, to theory. His words alone simply do not make sence to you. The natural cannot understand the things of the Spirit. So you have to trust in men, in your own understanding.


And we can all see that.

God's word says one thing, you believe anither thing (what you think is really taught, your understanding).

You should have trusted not in your own understanding but in every word that comes form God.

This is a very solid presentation among all who believe and Know the truth. You compare scripture with scripture to refine your understanding which is essential. Those who have turned from truth might suggest this is a theory rather than biblical teaching, it could be they do not understand what you have presented, or perhaps they have gotten lost in the theological weeds. This teaching is welcome in every church I have attended or visited, except for one little apostate methodist church. Thanks for this fine post!

The passages @Martin Marprelate present are indeed excellent and relevant.

The problem is that a few of you (you, @David Lamb , @Martin Marprelate ) seem to consider those passages alone as foolishness.

Rather than taking God's words for what they are in themselves you trust in what men have said they "realky m" teach.

This is no different from any cult (in method) who tell their disciples what God "really" teaches.
WHAT IF those passages are teaching EXACTLY "what is written"?? What is Scripture interprets Scripture?
Then you all would be wrong.

Instead of picking a sect of men to believe, why not just believe God? The difficult oassages will be ime less difficult the more you rest in His words. Don't pick men. Choose God.

Notice how John posts partial verse not even in dispute, the rewords others to try and justify his nonsense. You see this in post 48..he lists things no one is asking about! he then changes the concept that Paul gave us in Romans 1:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
he has been asked dozens of times , what happens to the wrath that was upon all of us? he skips over it and says...the wicked will be punished, ignoring the wrath that was upon us also.LOL We are not supposed to notice how he skips past it, look at all his posts. he has the same M.O. ship the real question, then offer verses no one is asking about, then claim you only go by scripture, sad and laughable at the same time.

Yes, you cannot dispute my belief without disputing God's word. But you do anyway.

You ask nonsense questions (like "what happens to God's wrath?" as if wrath were a material thing God keeps in His pocket).

The wicked store up wrath for themselves for the day of wrath. (Yes, that is a verse in the Bible...God's words).

Where do the wicked put this wrath while they are waiting for that Day? Why don't they just flush it down the toilet?

Why does God put it that way - that the wicked are the ones storing up this wrath?

Evidence would be when JonC keeps repeating god will not judge another for anothers sins, will not bring to blame someone not guilty of the sin, so woudl not be any way to have the sinless lamb of god per him get that wrath of God, yet if the atonement of the Cross was not Pst, then again, where and how did that deserved wrath towards us get propiated?

I just quoted those passages. I did not defend them. My defence is they ate God's actual words (verbatim, the words that God said).

I do not believe that i need to defend the words of God other than by pointing out that they are His words and not mine.

Now....you keep asking "what happens to that wrath". Have you noticed that this wrath is the wrath that "the wicked store up for themselves for the day of wrath:?

The Bible tells us what happens to this wrath the "wicked are storing up for themselves for the day of wrath".
God will punish them.

Your conclusion comes from believing that the righteouss are also storing up wrath for themselves, that they are never made new creations in Christ, that they will not be conformed into tthe image of Christ.

But the Bible tells us even what happens to the wrath we had been storing up for the day of wrath. We die to sin, we die to the flesh, we put to death the flesh, we are refined as gold and silver is refined.

On the day of wrath if you are one of the wicked who have been storing up wrath for yourself then you will perish. BUT if you have been conformed into the image of Christ you will live.


Trust not in your understanding (or understanding you borrowed from others) but on every word tgat comes from God.

Notice how John posts partial verse not even in dispute, the rewords others to try and justify his nonsense. You see this in post 48..he lists things no one is asking about! he then changes the concept that Paul gave us in Romans 1:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
he has been asked dozens of times , what happens to the wrath that was upon all of us? he skips over it and says...the wicked will be punished, ignoring the wrath that was upon us also.LOL We are not supposed to notice how he skips past it, look at all his posts. he has the same M.O. ship the real question, then offer verses no one is asking about, then claim you only go by scripture, sad and laughable at the same time.

God's wrath remains on the wicked, on all unrighteousness. The wicked are storing up wrath for themselves for the day of wrath.

This does not change. If you trust in the philosophy of men, the wisdom of men, and reject God and the words that come from God then you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath. If this is the case and you are never conformed into the image of Christ but remain wicked then you will perish.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

God's wrath remains on the wicked, on all unrighteousness. The wicked are storing up wrath for themselves for the day of wrath.

This does not change. If you trust in the philosophy of men, the wisdom of men, and reject God and the words that come from God then you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath. If this is the case and you are never conformed into the image of Christ but remain wicked then you will perish.

Well that's it then. We're all doomed. 'The LORD ...... will not at all acquit the guilty' (Nahum 1:3). There is is; the plain words of God. End of story, so far as @JonC is concerned.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The Bible tells us why Jesus had to die in order to redeem us. You just reject those passages.

One of us rejects them, but I think you'll find (if God gives you eyes to see) that it's actually you.

He had to die "so that through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives."

That is, of course, Hebrews 2:14-15. So how has Christ destroyed the devil and his works (1 John 3:8)? I don't think you know.

3. Why the cross? Because God used it as a symbol in Scripture. When the Isralites considered somebody guilty of a crime worthy of death they were esteemed stricken by God. But we also have history (since you seem so averse to Scripture). If Jesus was actualky cursed by God He would have been murdered under the Law (the punishment fir blasphemy is death by stoning).

But crucifixion was unmistakable - it was the ultimate punishment by the "powers of darkness" at the time (Rome). It was not a punishment prescribed for sin against God but for crimes against an evil and pagan nation.

This is your philosophy, but it is not what Scripture says. Peter says, 'He Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree' (1 Peter 2:14). Why does he use the word 'tree' (Gk. xulon) instead of 'cross' (Gk. stauron)? Because Christ was not only bearing our sins (Isaiah 53:6) but also the curse attached to them. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us [penal substitution again!] for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs upon a tree"' (Galatians 3:13). Why the cross. Scripture tells us. Christ had to hang upon something made of wood to expiate the curse of Deut. 21:23. That is what the Bible says.

 

[JonC]

One of us rejects them, but I think you'll find (if God gives you eyes to see) that it's actually you.

That is, of course, Hebrews 2:14-15. So how has Christ destroyed the devil and his works (1 John 3:8)? I don't think you know.

This is your philosophy, but it is not what Scripture says. Peter says, 'He Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree' (1 Peter 2:14). Why does he use the word 'tree' (Gk. xulon) instead of 'cross' (Gk. stauron)? Because Christ was not only bearing our sins (Isaiah 53:6) but also the curse attached to them. 'Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us [penal substitution again!] for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs upon a tree"' (Galatians 3:13). Why the cross. Scripture tells us. Christ had to hang upon something made of wood to expiate the curse of Deut. 21:23. That is what the Bible says.

I once held your theory, so I have "seen" what you "see".

ξύλου actually means "wood". It is translated "tree" my extention. Cross or pole would work as well, so long as it is made of wood...like witches are made of wood.

The Hebrew הָעֵ֗ץ carries the same meaning (wood, staff, pole, tree).

But that is not relevant to our disagreement because I believe that He became a curse for us, and I belueve the passage in Deuteronomy is very relevant. They thought of Jesus as a blasphemer because they, like you, rejected God's words for their own understanding.

What I am doing is simply pointing to God's Word as opposed to your philosophy.

It is obvious that a lot of your theories are foreign to the text of Scripture. My hope is thst others (I believe you have already been "carried away" by your understanding) will open their Bibles and text their beliefs against "what is written" and devide not to lean on their understanding but on every word that comes from God.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I once held your theory, so I have "seen" what you "see".

Clearly you haven't or you would not be wriggling and turning in a desperate attempt to avoid the truth.

ξύλου actually means "wood". It is translated "tree" my extention. Cross or pole would work as well, so long as it is made of wood...like witches are made of wood.

So what are you saying here? That our Lord was bearing our sins on a witch? Really?

The Hebrew הָעֵ֗ץ carries the same meaning (wood, staff, pole, tree).

But that is not relevant to our disagreement

If you are trying to pretend that xulon does not mean a tree, it is very relevant. Look at Luke 23:31; Rev. 2:7 or Rev. 22:2 (twice) where xulon is used each time and tell me that it does not mean 'tree.' How many reputable Bible versions translate xulon in Gal. 3:13 as anything else but 'tree'?

because I believe that He became a curse for us, and I belueve the passage in Deuteronomy is very relevant. They thought of Jesus as a blasphemer because they, like you, rejected God's words for their own understanding.

You mean, I suppose, Deut. 21:22-23. But who are 'they'? What have 'they' got to do with the word of God? You don't say. But is not Galatians as much part of the Bible as Deut 21:22f? Is not Paul giving God's own commentary on the Deuteronomy text? The 'curse' is the curse of God's law and it is that from which the Lord Jesus has delivered us by hanging on that wooden cross.

What I am doing is simply pointing to God's Word as opposed to your philosophy.

You are getting very boring. You cannot defend your false understanding from Scripture, so again and again you resort to insult and abuse. You should be ashamed of yourself, but I don't think you know how to blush.

It is obvious that a lot of your theories are foreign to the text of Scripture.

More mindless insults. You have certainly not shown that it is so.

My hope is thst others (I believe you have already been "carried away" by your understanding) will open their Bibles and text their beliefs against "what is written" and devide not to lean on their understanding but on every word that comes from God.

I am very happy for anyone to compare what I have written on this board with the word of God and to draw their own conclusions. I hope that they will also do the same with what you write.

 

[JonC]

Clearly you haven't or you would not be wriggling and turning in a desperate attempt to avoid the truth.

So what are you saying here? That our Lord was bearing our sins on a witch? Really?

If you are trying to pretend that xulon does not mean a tree, it is very relevant. Look at Luke 23:31; Rev. 2:7 or Rev. 22:2 (twice) where xulon is used each time and tell me that it does not mean 'tree.' How many reputable Bible versions translate xulon in Gal. 3:13 as anything else but 'tree'?

You mean, I suppose, Deut. 21:22-23. But who are 'they'? What have 'they' got to do with the word of God? You don't say. But is not Galatians as much part of the Bible as Deut 21:22f? Is not Paul giving God's own commentary on the Deuteronomy text? The 'curse' is the curse of God's law and it is that from which the Lord Jesus has delivered us by hanging on that wooden cross.

You are getting very boring. You cannot defend your false understanding from Scripture, so again and again you resort to insult and abuse. You should be ashamed of yourself, but I don't think you know how to blush.

More mindless insults. You have certainly not shown that it is so.

I am very happy for anyone to compare what I have written on this board with the word of God and to draw their own conclusions. I hope that they will also do the same with what you write.

No, I have and you have no right (you lack the capacity) to determine what I believe or have believed.

The difference between our faiths is that I believe God's Word teaches God's words. You believe the men you choose to follow are correct when they reinforce your philosophy.

I can defend my belief using God's words. You cannot.

For example, I believe that we are made new creations in Christ, are born of the Spirit, die to the flesh, are being conformed into the image of Christ.

You will affirm those passages but reject their legitimacy (you will deny we are actually made new creations in Christ, will be made into His image, etc. but instead insist if God foes not punish our sins on Christ we would retain the guilt of the "old man").


I would love for members to compare what you believe with "what is written" in God's Word and determine if you lean on your own understanding or every word that comes from God.

They can look up where God's words actually say Jesus suffered God's wrath.
They can look up where God's words actually say God separated from Jesus.
They can look up where God's words actually say God cannot forgive sins.
They can look up where God's words actually say there are lost "elect".

Not only will they see your faith is unbiblical but they will find many passages you deny by changing the meaning of words or by finding verses you think negates them.

But my main point is that we all need to test our understanding against the Word of God and hold on to every word that comes from God.

 

[David Lamb]

a willow?
ξύλου actually means "wood". It is translated "tree" my extention. Cross or pole would work as well, so long as it is made of wood...like witches are made of wood.

Am I right in assuming that your "witches" was a typo for "withes", the plural of "withy", a tough, flexible branch of? I have never heard of a witch made of wood.

 

[JonC]

Am I right in assuming that your "witches" was a typo for "withes", the plural of "withy", a tough, flexible branch of? I have never heard of a witch made of wood.

Nope. It is from a movie (just having fun).

Witches burn because they are made of wood.

 

[JonC]

@JesusFan

The answer to your question (one I think you will understand) - where does the wrath we were storing up for ourselves go when we are saved?

The wrath, the punishment, is propitiated.

If Jesus experienced God's wrath - If God punished Jesus for our sins - then Jesus is not the propitiation for our sins.

A propitiation is never the object of wrath or punishment. It is what is desired from the offended party.

For example, God desires obedience. Jesus was obedient even ti death on a cross.

Calvin's atonement theory rejects the idea that Jesus is the propitiation for sin in favor of the idea that Jesus is our substitute experiencing our punishment in our place.


If you are angry with me I may apologize and buy your lunch.
The lunch is a propitiation for your anger.
You do not transfer your anger from me to the lunch.
Your anger towards me ceases to exist. It is propitiated.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

No, I have and you have no right (you lack the capacity) to determine what I believe or have believed.

OK; so you have the right to determine what I believe, and throw silly insults at me, but I do not have the right to do likewise/ Is that how it works when one debates with a staff member? Is that why @Zaatar71 has been prevented from posting on this thread?

The difference between our faiths is that I believe God's Word teaches God's words.

If you believe it, you don't understand it. As I have said, just about every heretic in history has said that he "just believes God's word."

You believe the men you choose to follow are correct when they reinforce your philosophy.

As you know perfectly well, I almost never quote from anything but the Bible. But I am not ashamed of the people who share my beliefs. I can give you a list of them but it will be a long one.

I can defend my belief using God's words. You cannot.

Again, as you know perfectly well, I constantly defend my belief using God's word. It is you who cannot, or at least, do not.

For example, I believe that we are made new creations in Christ, are born of the Spirit, die to the flesh, are being conformed into the image of Christ.

You will affirm those passages but reject their legitimacy (you will deny we are actually made new creations in Christ, will be made into His image, etc. but instead insist if God foes not punish our sins on Christ we would retain the guilt of the "old man").

I affirm both the passages and (of course) their legitimacy. What I do not accept is that you can determine doctrine on one verse of Scripture. That is the deception of the devil (Matt. 4:3-4). Otherwise, why are you not a Roman Catholic? 'As they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to His disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body"' (Matt. 26:26; cf. Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24).
So why do you not accept the doctrine of Transubstantiation?

I would love for members to compare what you believe with "what is written" in God's Word and determine if you lean on your own understanding or every word that comes from God.

They can look up where God's words actually say Jesus suffered God's wrath.

Psalm 7:11; Isaiah 53:5.

They can look up where God's words actually say God separated from Jesus.

Psalm 22:1-2.

They can look up where God's words actually say God cannot forgive sins.

God can do whatever He likes (Psalm 115:3), but there are texts that say that He will not forgive sins. eg. Nahum 1:3. Praise God, Isaiah 53:6 and 1 Peter 2:24 apply.

They can look up where God's words actually say there are lost "elect".

Eph. 2:3-5.

Not only will they see your faith is unbiblical but they will find many passages you deny by changing the meaning of words or by finding verses you think negates them.

I leave that to the others on this board, but I will take no lessons from you on what is or isn't unbiblical.

But my main point is that we all need to test our understanding against the Word of God and hold on to every word that comes from God.

Amen! You should try it.
Now, I will make you an offer: you stop the cheap sneers, and so will I.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Nope. It is from a movie (just having fun).

Witches burn because they are made of wood.

You may be interested to know that 'witches' were frequently drowned rather than burned.

Swimming a Witch: Evidence in 17th-century English Witchcraft Trials | In Custodia Legis

Nathan discusses the use of the swimming test in 17th-century witch trials

blogs.loc.gov

 

[Martin Marprelate]

f you are angry with me I may apologize and buy your lunch.
The lunch is a propitiation for your anger.
You do not transfer your anger from me to the lunch.
Your anger towards me ceases to exist. It is propitiated.

This is an example of you relying on nothing but Scripture, is it?

The lunch is an offering to turn away wrath, aka propitiation.
But God is not to be propitiated by a free lunch (Hebrews 9:22), and in fact even the levitical sacrifices could not take away sins (Hebrews 10:4). They did however, by being offered constantly, allow God to pass over the sins of His people until the time that Christ should offer the one true perfect sacrifice for sins, of Himself (Hebrews 10:11-14; Romans 3:25).

 

[JonC]

This is an example of you relying on nothing but Scripture, is it?

The lunch is an offering to turn away wrath, aka propitiation.
But God is not to be propitiated by a free lunch (Hebrews 9:22), and in fact even the levitical sacrifices could not take away sins (Hebrews 10:4). They did however, by being offered constantly, allow God to pass over the sins of His people until the time that Christ should offer the one true perfect sacrifice for sins, of Himself (Hebrews 10:11-14; Romans 3:25).

Yes. It is an illustration.

You do not believe that God is propiated. You use the word, but what you mean is God's wrath was exercised against sin (the opposite of His wrath being propiated).

Here are ways you deny God's words by using your philosophy to change meaning.

Propitiation - used as a translation 3 times to point ro Christ AS the Propitiation.

Propitiation is something that propitiates. It is used once as "propitiates" speaking 9f Jesus as the High Priest intercepting for believers if they sin.

It is reconciling two parties, focusing on the offended.

But you reject that God's wrath and punishment can actually be propitiated. Instead you believe God's wrath and punishment must be exercised (either on sins laid on Christ or on the sinner).

Forgiveness- you reject that God is even able to forgive sins. Instead your philosophy teaches you that God must punish sins and to allow the guilty to go free He must punish those sins on somebody else. Forgiveness, to you, is impossible. God punishes the innocent sp that the guilty can escape punishment. That is not forgiveness.

Forsaken - Psalm 22 deals with God's righteousness servant suffering under evil
. The psalm begins with the servant asking why he is forsaken, continues with him trusting God will never abandon him as God never abandoned his forefathers through their suffering, and concludes with God delivering the servant not from suffering but through suffering. He was forsaken to suffer and die but God never abandoned him

Your philosophy teaches you that God separated from Jesus on the cross, that the relationship ("I and My Father are One") ceased on the cross.



Ypir faith is not only foreign to God's words, it also stands in opposition to God's Word. It is anti-Christian


I know you jave been carried away from the faith by your philosophy. That is what often happens when men determine to lean on their own understanding rather than every word that comes from God
So I do not post for your benefit

I post for others to evaluate your teachings against "what is written" (every word that comes from God) so they, unlike you, may be delivered from the deception that has carried you away

 

[JonC]

@Martin Marprelate

The question for you is why you deny that Jesus is the propitiation for sin, that God set Him forth as a Propitiation in His blood.

You do not believe that God's wrath or punishment even CAN BE propiated.

Instead you believe that our sins were transferred to Christ and punished there. Thar IS NOT sins propitiated (by the very definition of the word).


God's wrath cannot be propiated and expressed. It is one or the other.
God cannot punish sins and still forgive thise sins once punished.

Stop riding the fence eith your "double-speak".

 

[JesusFan]

Yes. It is an illustration.

You do not believe that God is propiated. You use the word, but what you mean is God's wrath was exercised against sin (the opposite of His wrath being propiated).

Here are ways you deny God's words by using your philosophy to change meaning.

Propitiation - used as a translation 3 times to point ro Christ AS the Propitiation.

Propitiation is something that propitiates. It is used once as "propitiates" speaking 9f Jesus as the High Priest intercepting for believers if they sin.

It is reconciling two parties, focusing on the offended.

But you reject that God's wrath and punishment can actually be propitiated. Instead you believe God's wrath and punishment must be exercised (either on sins laid on Christ or on the sinner).

Forgiveness- you reject that God is even able to forgive sins. Instead your philosophy teaches you that God must punish sins and to allow the guilty to go free He must punish those sins on somebody else. Forgiveness, to you, is impossible. God punishes the innocent sp that the guilty can escape punishment. That is not forgiveness.

Forsaken - Psalm 22 deals with God's righteousness servant suffering under evil
. The psalm begins with the servant asking why he is forsaken, continues with him trusting God will never abandon him as God never abandoned his forefathers through their suffering, and concludes with God delivering the servant not from suffering but through suffering. He was forsaken to suffer and die but God never abandoned him

Your philosophy teaches you that God separated from Jesus on the cross, that the relationship ("I and My Father are One") ceased on the cross.



Ypir faith is not only foreign to God's words, it also stands in opposition to God's Word. It is anti-Christian


I know you jave been carried away from the faith by your philosophy. That is what often happens when men determine to lean on their own understanding rather than every word that comes from God
So I do not post for your benefit

I post for others to evaluate your teachings against "what is written" (every word that comes from God) so they, unlike you, may be delivered from the deception that has carried you away

The wrath of God is piled up towards ALL until either they pay for it directly themselves, or someone else willing to bear it
God cannot just forgive sins without there be a basis for it, as Jesus atonement provides for that very basis, NOT sinner repenting
Jesus quoted that messianic Psalm as the One who endured that very act of seperation for our sake, as THAT was ewhat he dreaded the most about taking upon Himself our die wrath, that when he was sin bearing, woudl face seperation as every lost sinner in hell will have to endure

We stand in the line of the reformers and fellow Baptists who for centuries found delight in psa, as that alone grants us assurance of forgiveness of our sins

And ask yourself this, should fellow Christians be belittling others here?

@Martin Marprelate

The question for you is why you deny that Jesus is the propitiation for sin, that God set Him forth as a Propitiation in His blood.

You do not believe that God's wrath or punishment even CAN BE propiated.

Instead you believe that our sins were transferred to Christ and punished there. Thar IS NOT sins propitiated (by the very definition of the word).


God's wrath cannot be propiated and expressed. It is one or the other.
God cannot punish sins and still forgive thise sins once punished.

Stop riding the fence eith your "double-speak".

The wrath of God is appeased/satisfied thru the shed blood of Jesus upon that Cross, as we who are the saved in Him do a transaction with Him at that Cross, as he received my earned and due wrath and judgement, while in exghange I receive His sinless Righteous to to keeping fully the Law of God

@Martin Marprelate

The question for you is why you deny that Jesus is the propitiation for sin, that God set Him forth as a Propitiation in His blood.

You do not believe that God's wrath or punishment even CAN BE propiated.

Instead you believe that our sins were transferred to Christ and punished there. Thar IS NOT sins propitiated (by the very definition of the word).


God's wrath cannot be propiated and expressed. It is one or the other.
God cannot punish sins and still forgive thise sins once punished.

Stop riding the fence eith your "double-speak".

The act you are describing is the laying on of hands in ancient Israelite sacrificial rituals, where a worshiper would place their hand on the head of a sacrificial animal, like a sheep or goat. This ritual symbolized the transfer of sins from the person to the animal, which was seen as a substitute that would die in their place.

• Symbolism:
  The gesture signified a confession of sin and an acceptance of the animal as a substitutionary atonement for the sin. It showed the worshiper's identification with the sacrifice and their dependence on it to cover their guilt.
  
  
• Sin Offering:
  This was a central part of the sin offering described in the Book of Leviticus. By pressing their hand on the animal's head, the individual was, in a symbolic sense, "leaning" or "pressing" their guilt onto the victim.
  
  
• Foreshadowing the future:
  This Old Testament practice is understood by some Christians to foreshadow the work of Jesus Christ, who is described as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world by bearing them on the cross.

 

[JonC]

The wrath of God is piled up towards ALL until either they pay for it directly themselves, or someone else willing to bear it
God cannot just forgive sins without there be a basis for it, as Jesus atonement provides for that very basis, NOT sinner repenting
Jesus quoted that messianic Psalm as the One who endured that very act of seperation for our sake, as THAT was ewhat he dreaded the most about taking upon Himself our die wrath, that when he was sin bearing, woudl face seperation as every lost sinner in hell will have to endure

We stand in the line of the reformers and fellow Baptists who for centuries found delight in psa, as that alone grants us assurance of forgiveness of our sins

And ask yourself this, should fellow Christians be belittling others here?

Do you believe that Jesus propitiated that wrath or do you believe He suffered that wrath?

I also stand in the line of Baotists for centuries (a bit longer than your line goes back).
You do not stand in line with "the regormers" (you do not stand in line with Luther, Huss, Grumbach, Melanchthon, Wycliffe, Savonarola, or Tyndale, for example). You stand in the line of Calvin and those who followed his philosophy.


Look....it is EASY -

Either Christ is the Propitiation for our sins OR Christ suffered the punishment for our sins. You cannot have it both ways.

Which is it? Sins punished or propitiated?

 

[JonC]

The wrath of God is appeased/satisfied thru the shed blood of Jesus upon that Cross, as we who are the saved in Him do a transaction with Him at that Cross, as he received my earned and due wrath and judgement, while in exghange I receive His sinless Righteous to to keeping fully the Law of God

Either Christ is the propitiation for our sins or God punished our sins laid on Chrust.

Either God set forth Christ as a propitiation in His blood or God punished Jesus for our sins as a substitute.

Either our salvation is God's righteousness manifested APART FROM the Law or we receive His sinless keeping of the Law.

You cannot have it both ways, @JesusFan . Had you chosen to believe a theory in ignorance then maybe. But it has been pointed out to you. You engaged the topic. You asked the questions snd were given God's words. You have to make a choice of what is before you.

Regardless of your response, you will choose who it is you will serve. And that will make all the difference, either way. (When two paths lay before you you cannot help but choose one).