Thank you. That's been the general consensus of Christianity for centuries. "Bruising", as opposed to 'crushing', leaves room to include the resurrection (the grave could not hold Him).
-
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!
Thoughts on John 19:30
- Thread starter Martin Marprelate
- Start date
Thank you. That's been the general consensus of Christianity for centuries. "Bruising", as opposed to 'crushing', leaves room to include the resurrection (the grave could not hold Him).
Like I said to Kyredneck, I like what I have seen him post, and have not seen things that worry me. martin as we all are, are only one person. he offers what he can , with a view to help. His posts have helped me grow, in understanding. I have learned from most all the Cals on here, and from time to time, those who do not identify with that label. A person does not have to have come to those truths to learn of many other portions of the Christian life, that they can help people grow,
This is a forum where we can only express small portions of teaching. deacon said to me I should not post larger links, because no one is going to read them. he is probably correct, but I do read them. When the poster Alan puts up Links of John Gill i read them. Is it work, yes, but it pays off.
No. this is yet another dishonest post on your part. Do not switch around what I said, to make it say what i did not. I have seen Martin and others ask you not to do this, yet you persist as if you cannot help yourself. This turns into slander. offer direct quotes that we have posted. Do not make up your own ideas of what we ourselves posted. We will stick by our own words. Not your version or imagined ideas. You say I insulted you, but in reality , you say that by twisting what i said, to justify your slanderous ,condescending insults, which are not a fruit of the Spirit.
Your posts and drifting speak for themselves. I do not need to do anything but post some truth next to it/
37818
Well-Known Member
@Martin Marprelate reminds me of a kid I grew up with that would argue that a black cow is white and wouldn't admit that he was wrong even if he knew he was going to take a beating for not admitting he was wrong.
Don't become a Martinite.
Like I told you, you've not been around here long enough to 'see' some things.
@Martin Marprelate supposedly holds to TULIP yet believes that 'slacking soul winners' will be responsible for some going to hell.
Figure that one out.
Yet you have not been able to find even one part of my belief that is not in God's Word.
All you have been able to do is lift insults in my direction because I disagree with your philosophy and your understandings that are not in the Bible.
And you have yourself to blame because you have not been able to explain how you get from God's Word to your understanding.
I think most here (those who are not hyper Calvinists) recognize that you insult as an attempt to cover up the fact that you do not understand your own "beliefs". You cannot defend them because you have absolutely no idea how the men you gollow got from the Bible to their conclusions.
OK.
It refers to finishing the work that the Father gave Him to do (John 17:4), particularly, in context, of providing propitiation - satisfaction to the outraged justice of God - by His sacrificial death upon the cross.
It would be helpful to me if you would show clearly where you disagree with me.
You are assuming that kosmos means every single person in the world, but God is not propitiated towards every single person in the world. What you are saying is that God is indifferent towards every single person in the world until he believes; then He assesses whether his faith is 'righteous' enough; then He loves him enough to save him. That is salvation by works.
I think perhaps you don't quite understand. The people given to Christ to redeem were unredeemed QED. They had not indeed yet received mercy, but God had decided (in eternity) that they should. As far as a 'general' call is concerned, think Mark 1:15. For an 'efficacious' call, think Luke 5:27-28.
Genesis 15:6. 'And he [Abraham] believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness.' It was not a test to see if Abe's faith was righteousness enough to pass God's scrutiny. Like all of us, he had no righteousness of his own, but he believed and it was credited. Read Romans 10:9-13. There is no special test of righeousness, otherwise it would be justification by works.
Clearly they did not believe in Christ because, 'For whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.' The current Archbishop of Canterbury is a likely case to be considered. She plainly does not believe in Christ because she rejects His words. She may be astonished by this on the last day, but she really shouldn't be.
I rather think you did.
And other people He doesn't. Therefore their faith is not righteous enough.
Nor is any saved person. Faith is faith. A saved person's faith is credited to a sinner as righteousness, not as righteous faith.
No straw men, and I've addressed your issues several times.
Not sure what you mean by this.
Again, I think you don't understand the Calvinist position - or at least, you don't understand my position, and I think I am a standard common or garden Calvinist. God has given, in eternity, a people to Christ to redeem, and on the cross He has redeemed them all. But they are not justified, saved, until they believe (John 6:39; Acts 16:31).
Everyone who believes has his sins forgiven and is transferred into the kingdom of God's beloved Son.10) You finally got something right, everyone transferred into Christ then has their sin burden removed!
I think you are right. Martin gives us verses and then says they really teach whatever tickles his ears. When asked how he came to that conclusion he simply says it is the biblical text.
But he knows it isn't. He has been cornered and simply cannot come to terms with facts.
While most of us would be appreciative of being shown where we depart from the Bible (those of us who hold God's Word as the authority for our faith), Martin just digs in.
Hi @Zaatar71. What you need to understand is that although the Scripture says that no one took our Lord's life from Him and He laid it down at the command of His Father (John 10:18); although it pleased the Father to bruise Him and put Him to grief (Isaiah 53:10); although Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles, the Israelites, Uncle Tom Cobley and all were doing what God had decided should be done (Acts 4:27-28); although the devil is found trying to persuade our Lord NOT to go to the cross (Matt. 4:1-10; 16:21-23); nevertheless is is a well known fact that having one's heel bruised is invariably fatal, and therefore Satan must have killed Christ.
This is a good point.
The imagery of man being fatally wounded by being bitten in the heel by a snake is very common, and perhaps one reason snakes are feared. This is especially true when speaking of cultures that work the ground.
So yes, the striking (or "crushing") of the heel is an image of death. You are correct. BUT crushing the head of the snake (another common image) is perhaps a more definitive death.
What makes your case even more is Scripture speaking of Christ tasting death for every man. The reason us that this is immediately followed by naming Satan as the one who holds the power of death.
So that passage directly mirrors Genesis (Christ tasted death for every man and destroyed the one who has power over death, namely the devil).
This is why Christians know that Christ died (the power of Satan) to defeat the one who holds the power of death (Satan).
I grant that there are some cults that believe otherwise, but that is what they are....cults. Mormons may call themselves "Christians" but in denying the gospel of Jesus Christ they are not Christian.
My point? Who cares that men who call themselves "Christians" but deny that Christ suffered death (the power of Satan)?
We are told that there will be false teachers, so we should not be shocked that men who say they are saved have abandoned "the faith once delivered".
Those people are not Christians. We should dust off our feet and continue our lives.
Last edited:
Perhaps Joel Beeke explained Genesis 3:15 best, in an accurate and concise way. He referred to it as the first gospel (the first account if the gospel). While Jesus would suffer and die by Satan's hand, Christ crushing Satan's head would be "definitive" as this would bring victory over sin and death. Satan "crushing" the heel is death, but Jesus crushing the head is complete victory over that death and the one who holds the power of death. (Beeke 2012 sermons).
R.C. Sproul said that the promise of the woman's seed crushing the serpent's head is the ultimate triumph of Christ over sin and death, though it comes at the cost of the serpent bruising his heel, the crucifixion, where Satan has a momentary and short lived victory. (Sproul, 1994 Q&A from Surprised by Suffering).
R.C. Sproul said that the promise of the woman's seed crushing the serpent's head is the ultimate triumph of Christ over sin and death, though it comes at the cost of the serpent bruising his heel, the crucifixion, where Satan has a momentary and short lived victory. (Sproul, 1994 Q&A from Surprised by Suffering).
Last edited:
Joel Beeke is one of my favourite Presbyterians , but he's wrong here. Just believe the words!
'No one takes My life from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.'
What is it about the words 'no one' that you and @kyredneck find so difficult to understand?
But this was threshed out in a thread some years ago. This thread is about John 19:30. You are a moderator; keep your posts and others on topic.
I like both Beeke and Sproul. I also agree that they are men and not our authority (both are Calvinists, I am not).
I was responding to your thread (about Gen 3:15).
John Owen had a different take. He did not view this as a prophecy but as explaining the natural revulsion of human beings to snakes as both died (the snake kills the man, before the venom takes effect the man kills the snake).
Calvin understood this to be about the human race. Satan will lead man captive but the human race will crush Satan. (Calvin, commentary on Genesis).
Calvin understood this to be about the human race. Satan will lead man captive but the human race will crush Satan. (Calvin, commentary on Genesis).
Last edited:
My favorite (although not as plain as Beeke) is Spurgeon's view. He says the same thing, but I like how he says it.
He says that "it pleased God to crush Him" refers to this being God's predetermined plan (a point I often make). But that Satan was the one under whom Christ suffered and died.
Spurgeon includes all of his sufferings throughout His earthly ministry culminating in the ultimate act of Satan; "his enemies pierced his hands and his feet, and he endured the shame and pain of death by crucifixion.Look at your Master and your King upon the cross, all distained with blood and dust! There was his heel most cruelly bruised. ... the devil had let loose Herod, and Pilate, and Caiaphas, and the Jews, and the Romans, all of them his tools, upon him whom he knew to be the Christ, so that he was bruised of the old serpent.
That is all, however! It is only his heel, not his head, which is bruised! For lo, the Champion rises again; the bruise was not mortal nor continual. Though he dies, yet still so brief is the interval in which he slumbers in the tomb that his holy body hath not seen corruption..."
He says that "it pleased God to crush Him" refers to this being God's predetermined plan (a point I often make). But that Satan was the one under whom Christ suffered and died.
Spurgeon includes all of his sufferings throughout His earthly ministry culminating in the ultimate act of Satan; "his enemies pierced his hands and his feet, and he endured the shame and pain of death by crucifixion.Look at your Master and your King upon the cross, all distained with blood and dust! There was his heel most cruelly bruised. ... the devil had let loose Herod, and Pilate, and Caiaphas, and the Jews, and the Romans, all of them his tools, upon him whom he knew to be the Christ, so that he was bruised of the old serpent.
That is all, however! It is only his heel, not his head, which is bruised! For lo, the Champion rises again; the bruise was not mortal nor continual. Though he dies, yet still so brief is the interval in which he slumbers in the tomb that his holy body hath not seen corruption..."
Question ?
When Christ said, "It is finished," what did Christ, within the next few seconds I believe, do?
My answer if I am correct is died. He committed the spirit of life that was in him unto the hands of his Father. He gave up the spirit, of life.
Now why do I think the all things that was accomplished of verse 28 ended with the LORD, God the Father, having lain on him, the Son of God the iniquity of us all. Because Christ just before saying, "it is finished," had said, " My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me".
The LORD had just made him to be sin. Therefore Romans 8:3 and James 1:15 applied to the Christ.
Romans 8:3 KJV For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
James 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and [the yet] sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
When Christ said, "It is finished," what did Christ, within the next few seconds I believe, do?
My answer if I am correct is died. He committed the spirit of life that was in him unto the hands of his Father. He gave up the spirit, of life.
Now why do I think the all things that was accomplished of verse 28 ended with the LORD, God the Father, having lain on him, the Son of God the iniquity of us all. Because Christ just before saying, "it is finished," had said, " My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me".
The LORD had just made him to be sin. Therefore Romans 8:3 and James 1:15 applied to the Christ.
Romans 8:3 KJV For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
James 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and [the yet] sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
Martin Marprelate said:
"It refers to finishing the work that the Father gave Him to do (John 17:4), particularly, in context, of providing propitiation - satisfaction to the outraged justice of God - by His sacrificial death upon the cross."
Yes, the context is fulfilling the Messianic prophecies, including reconciliation. Your "satisfaction of the outraged justice of God" is something you seem to have made up or copied from a non-scriptural source. First you limited the context to two verses, now to one aspect of fulfillment.
If your posts addressed one issue, it would be easy to follow arguments against that view.
Once again you misrepresent my view. Here is what you said, and I quote:
And here is what I said, and I quote:
"It refers to finishing the work that the Father gave Him to do (John 17:4), particularly, in context, of providing propitiation - satisfaction to the outraged justice of God - by His sacrificial death upon the cross."
Yes, the context is fulfilling the Messianic prophecies, including reconciliation. Your "satisfaction of the outraged justice of God" is something you seem to have made up or copied from a non-scriptural source. First you limited the context to two verses, now to one aspect of fulfillment.
If your posts addressed one issue, it would be easy to follow arguments against that view.
Once again you misrepresent my view. Here is what you said, and I quote:
"You are assuming that kosmos means every single person in the world"
And here is what I said, and I quote:
"Christ provided the means of reconciliation for the whole of humanity, 1 John 2:2."
Referring to a group, might include every part of the group, or only some of the parts, down to just one of the parts. You seem to be saying or pretending to cannot grasp that reality.
I have limited my response to just two of your issues to help you focus.
Last edited:
Spurgeon made a good point about Satan bruising the heel (and yes, @Martin Marprelate , it applies to John 19:30).
He noted that all of Christ's suffering caused by Satan was this bruising. His sufferings during His ministry, His betrayal (Satan entering Judas), His arrest, the abuse, and ultimately His death.
On the cross Satan's work intensified. Christ is suffering on the cross and what does He hear? From the crowd He hears if you really are the Son of God then come down from the cross. From an adjoining cross He hears save yourself and us too.
And finally He is offered vinegar and gall to help escape the suffering.
All of this was Satan tempting Christ to abandon that fate.
Job is a good lesson here. God forsaken Job, for a time, to Satan. Satan does his best to make Job abandon God. Although Satan cannot act against God's righteous without God allowing it (it is God's plan), it was Satan and not causing Job's suffering.
He noted that all of Christ's suffering caused by Satan was this bruising. His sufferings during His ministry, His betrayal (Satan entering Judas), His arrest, the abuse, and ultimately His death.
On the cross Satan's work intensified. Christ is suffering on the cross and what does He hear? From the crowd He hears if you really are the Son of God then come down from the cross. From an adjoining cross He hears save yourself and us too.
And finally He is offered vinegar and gall to help escape the suffering.
All of this was Satan tempting Christ to abandon that fate.
Job is a good lesson here. God forsaken Job, for a time, to Satan. Satan does his best to make Job abandon God. Although Satan cannot act against God's righteous without God allowing it (it is God's plan), it was Satan and not causing Job's suffering.
God is reconciling humanity to Himself. 2 Corinthians 5:19. The Greek word, translated "world" by the NASB is "kosmos" and refers to humanity, but not to every single person of humanity. He has reconciled some of the parts of humanity, and some more will be reconciled in the future.
To claim the verse actually means God has reconciled those of the world chosen individually as foreseen individuals is nonsense. And everyone knows it.
Does "everyone" refer to everyone imaginable, or only to everyone who knows it? Go figure.
To claim the verse actually means God has reconciled those of the world chosen individually as foreseen individuals is nonsense. And everyone knows it.
Does "everyone" refer to everyone imaginable, or only to everyone who knows it? Go figure.
If that is what Spurgeon wrote, it is almost exactly what I argued on a previous thread on this subject.
It does seem to me to be verging on blasphemous to suggest that Satan killed the Lord Jesus, not to mention being contradicted by a large number of Biblical texts. However, that is not to say that the devil was not active.
The devil's aim was to prevent our Lord from dying on the cross. It is like a chess game, with Satan constantly attacking, but God counter-moving and steadily moving towards victory.
Satan did this first by attempting to destroy the Messianic line.
Firstly by persuading Abram to seek an heir after the flesh through Hagar, but God produces the true heir, Isaac
Secondly by leading the evil Athaliah to slay all the royal heirs after the death of king Ahaziah (2 Kings 11:1-2), but Jehosheba saves the baby Joash, and the line is safe.
Thirdly, king Nebuchadnezzar kills all the royal princes after the fall of Jerusalem (2 KIngs 25:6-7), but the Messianic line continues in secret until Sheshbazzar (aka Zerubabbel) pops up (Ezra 1:7-8 etc.; Luke 3:27).
Fourthly, three foreigners turn up at the court of king Herod, asking where the One born King of the Jews might be found. So Satan moves Herod to destroy all the little children in Bethlehem, but he is too late; Jesus isn't there (Matt. 2:1-18).
After Jesus begins His ministry, Satan tempts the Lord Jesus - to do what? Not to go to the cross! But when Jesus refuses him, 'he departed until an opportune time' (Luke 4:13).
Then he leads Peter to tempt our Lord not to go to the cross but our Lord recognizes the source of Peter's outburst (Mark 8:31-34).
Then the Jewish leaders repeatedly attempt to kill Him before He can go to the cross (Mark 11:18; John 7:30, 32, 44; 8:59; 10:31; 11:53), but 'His time had not yet come.' Were they prompted by Satan? Possibly, in the light of John 8:44. Were they trying to get him to go to the cross? Absolutely not!
Next, we come to Peter's denial. "Simon, Simon, Indeed, Satan has asked for you [plural. All the apostles] that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you [singular. Just Peter] that your faith may not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren' (Luke 22:31-32). There's a lot that could be said about Judas here that I haven't got time to deal with, but undoubtedly Satan entered into him (John 13:26-30) and he betrayed Christ to the Jewish leaders. In the light of the devil's attempt to keep our Lord from going to the cross, does it not seem that his attack on Peter and Judas was designed to demoralize Jesus and make Him decide not to go to the cross? He asked to 'sift' all the apostles, but presumably he was not given the others, only those two, though the others all went to sleep rather than supporting our Lord through His ordeal.
Then we come to Gethsemane. After his unsuccessful tempting of Our Lord, the devil 'departed until an opportune time.' What more opportune time than in the shadow of the cross? But what was his temptation? Was he saying, "You really must obey Your Father and go to the cross? Of course not! He was saying, "You don't have to do this! You don't have to go through all that agony. Tell Him you won't do it!" That his words were persuasive is shown by our Lord's words in Matt. 26:39-42. He did not disobey His father, but He did ask whether there might be a Plan B. Finally, on the cross, in Matt. 27:39-44, we see the passers-by, the chief priests and , initially, the two criminals, all taunting Christ, and doing what? Telling Him to come down from the cross! If they were Satan's minions, they were his last desperate throw of the dice to get our Lord to abandon His mission.
Why was Satan desperate to stop Christ from dying on the cross? Because he knew he would be defeated and cast down. 'And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb' (Rev. 12:11). By His death and resurrection, the Lord Jesus took away the sins of His people (John 1:29) and the guilt of them (Rom. 8:1). Satan, the 'accuser of the brethren' (Rev. 12:10), now has nothing to accuse them of. On the cross Christ redeemed them out of his hand. There is no case for them to answer.