When Understanding the Cross

[JonC]

Throughout history there have been several views of the Cross. People understand things differently and have different experiences contributing to their understanding.

I wanted to list things that we must keep in mind when forming our understanding. People will work through these things differently, but they should at least be "fence posts" marking the boundary lest the line be crossed.

 

[37818]

Unique in John's account.
John 19:28, . . . were . . . accomplished . . . . τετελεσται
John 19:30, . . . It is finished . . . . τετελεσται

And was before Christ's physical death.

 

[JonC]

I would list a boundary for how we view divine justice.

Whatever we view of the cross we need to make sure that we do not make a solution that presents God as unjust.

We have two huge fence posts:

1. God will punish the wicked.
2. God will not punish the righteous.

One who justifies the wicked and one who condemns (literally views as guilty) the righteous are both an abomination to God (Prov 17:15).

It is not good to punish the righteous (Prov 17:26).

The evil man will not go unpunished, but the descendants of the righteous will be delivered (Prov 11:21).

God will punish the world for its evil and the wicked for their iniquity (Isaiah 13:11).

 

[Charlie24]

I would list a boundary for how we view divine justice.

Whatever we view of the cross we need to make sure that we do not make a solution that presents God as unjust.

We have two huge fence posts:

1. God will punish the wicked.
2. God will not punish the righteous.

One who justifies the wicked and one who condemns (literally views as guilty) the righteous are both an abomination to God (Prov 17:15).

It is not good to punish the righteous (Prov 17:26).

The evil man will not go unpunished, but the descendants of the righteous will be delivered (Prov 11:21).

God will punish the world for its evil and the wicked for their iniquity (Isaiah 13:11).

Do you see Christ being punished for us on the Cross, "the just for the unjust?"

"While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

"He has made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him."

 

[JonC]

Do you see Christ being punished for us on the Cross, "the just for the unjust?"

"While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

"He has made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him."

Yes, to all three.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

1. God will punish the wicked.

Well, we're all in big trouble then! 'As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one!"'
It looks like we need a Saviour!

2. God will not punish the righteous.

But it isn't going to be Jesus. Unless, of course the Bible is true (Isaiah 53:5-6)!

 

[DaveXR650]

Unique in John's account.
John 19:28, . . . were . . . accomplished . . . . τετελεσται
John 19:30, . . . It is finished . . . . τετελεσται

And was before Christ's physical death.

If I'm understanding this wrong then disregard it. But this post, and the thumbs up by @JonC , if it is trying to in some way suggest that because Jesus said "it is finished" while still alive - that that somehow indicates his death was not necessary?

 

[DaveXR650]

Well, we're all in big trouble then! 'As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one!"'
It looks like we need a Saviour!

But it isn't going to be Jesus. Unless, of course the Bible is true (Isaiah 53:5-6)!

Yes. This idea that @JonC seems to like, that being that the atonement as we understand it violates the nature of God being just rather than providing the reason for it's necessity is a perfect illustration of the dangers of private revelation, and exegesis of scripture, without any concern for what other saints say, and even more importantly, what else others who might agree with you are saying in other areas of Christian doctrine.

 

[JonC]

Well, we're all in big trouble then! 'As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one!"'
It looks like we need a Saviour!

But it isn't going to be Jesus.

No, they call your reasoning here a "logical fallacy" for a reason. The logic is flawed.

We are not in big trouble. We were in big trouble.

Jesus is the Savior we need. We are made new creations in Christ Jesus. We are made into His image. He is the firstborn of many brothers. We die to sin and are made alive in Him.

God will not view the righteous as guilty or the wicked as righteous.

God will punish the wicked.
God will justify the righteous.

We were wicked. God is immutable. He does not change. His word stands.

But Christ took care of this problem. He is the reconciliation of God and man and wrought a better covenant.

Man is saved not through the law but apart from the law. We are predestined to be conformed to His image, to be justified, to be righteous, to be glorified.

On "that day", when God judges the world, thise who stand before God as wicked will be punished with the second death.

If you stand at judgment as one of the wicked, even if you believe Jesus already took your punishment so God can't harm you, you will perish.

But if you are a new creation, if what God says is true (that you are predestined to be made in Christ's image and actually be just and glorified) then God will not punish you because it is an abomination to view the righteous as guilty.


The interesting thing is my position is actually in the biblical text and yours is not. Yet you are nevertheless willing to stake your life on your understanding.

 

[37818]

If I'm understanding this wrong then disregard it. But this post, and the thumbs up by @JonC , if it is trying to in some way suggest that because Jesus said "it is finished" while still alive - that that somehow indicates his death was not necessary?

His physical death was for His bodily resurrection as evidence of what Jesus had completed. 1 Corinthians 15:17, And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

 

[37818]

Isaiah 53:9, And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his *death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

* translation note, death, Hebrew deaths.

 

[DaveXR650]

If you stand at judgment as one of the wicked, even if you believe Jesus already took your punishment so God can't harm you, you will perish.

But if you are a new creation, if what God says is true (that you are predestined to be made in Christ's image and actually be just and glorified) then God will not punish you because it is an abomination to view the righteous as guilty.

You are making a distinction that does not exist. You do stand as one who is "in Christ". That is not in dispute. You will have differences in the way people describe a multi faceted action like the atonement. A Calvinist will describe one as being justified as "ungodly" or as having their sins covered and then as one integrated process of salvation - being born again, coming to faith and repentance, being made one in Christ and so on. They don't mean that anyone of God's elect will ever stand at judgment claiming to have their sins placed on Jesus and yet being wicked. It is all one package and Calvinists insist on that. But the events happen in time, and Christ's death happened at a specific time, already past. There is going to be difficulty in explaining the parts of the whole without appearing to make them logically separate. Most people understand that unless one wishes to deliberately sow confusion.

For non Calvinists the explanation is more that Christ's death being sufficiently able to take the sins of our whole world as well as multiple other worlds if need be was done at the appointed time. As people come to Christ and are born again, and united with Christ their sins are actually forgiven and thus they would not stand as "wicked" while claiming to have their sins covered but would be viewed by God as being "in Christ".
I can't understand what you are trying to say anyway because the only way to work out so to speak the incorrect way you understand God not punishing the innocent would be for Christ to not die at all whether "on our behalf", "with us", "for us", or in any other way under a just God. There is simply no way to have Christ die in any way connected with us than to violate your own logical necessity. Fortunately, your understanding is wrong and in reality what happened at the atonement is precisely what a proper understanding of God's justice demanded. I can't tell you why that is. It is revealed scripture.

So you do indeed with your system, end up with Christ not actually having to die. In fact you say that according to your understanding that would be an abomination. You may be appalled to say that (at least I hope so), but others have taken that concept and run with it. ie, Why can't you just ask to join up with Jesus, become one with him, straighten up and fly right, and all will be well. After all, cannot God just forgive sin, without worrying about justice?

Of course then you are still left with a crucifixion. That must be reduced to an example for us or a testimony of how bad men are, which I actually agree with, unless you try to use that to get away from the fact that it was Christ's death that atones for your sin. That's an exchange, a substitution, and it's penal.

 

[JonC]

Yes. This idea that @JonC seems to like, that being that the atonement as we understand it violates the nature of God being just rather than providing the reason for it's necessity is a perfect illustration of the dangers of private revelation, and exegesis of scripture, without any concern for what other saints say, and even more importantly, what else others who might agree with you are saying in other areas of Christian doctrine.

Kinda.

You do have God as laying the sins of the wicked on Christ and punishing Christ for those sins to clear the wicked. That is making God unjust per His own words and standard of justice.

BUT you are wrong on a couple of points.

First your ideas of "private revelation" is flawed. The Spirit does work in the believer to reveal the truth of God's words. Your denial of this work of God is anti-Christian.

That said, we also make sure that our understanding is not in isolation. We make sure we did not come up with a new understanding.

For example, I can point to early church theology of the cross, to the general Orthodox view, to traditional Anabaptist theology and say that is what I believe.


Second, my point is that the Cross is NOT contrary to God's words about His justice.

God DOES NOT condemn or treat the righteous as guilty AND He does not justify threatening wicked. God is NOT the just and the justifier of sinners. God IS just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

We WILL become the righteousness of God in Christ.

Your faith that God will not punish at Judgment you even though you remain wicked is wrong.

 

[DaveXR650]

Your faith that God will not punish at Judgment you even though you remain wicked is wrong.

Didn't I just explain that this is not the case. Yet you go right back and say it again. Go back and read the post.

 

[JonC]

You are making a distinction that does not exist. You do stand as one who is "in Christ". That is not in dispute. You will have differences in the way people describe a multi faceted action like the atonement. A Calvinist will describe one as being justified as "ungodly"...

No, I am saying you are introducing false doctrine into Scripture on the claim that it is just a part of a multifaceted doctrine God forgot to include in the biblical text.

God NEVER justifies the ungodly. The wicked will be punished, period. No wiggle room. God is not a liar.

And God will NEVER treat the righteous as if they were guilty, period. No wiggle room.

IF we are ungodly when God judges the world we will perish.

We are, by faith, declared righteous in Cjrist as He is the surety of a better covenant, the actual image of what we will be when God judges the world.

 

[JonC]

Didn't I just explain that this is not the case. Yet you go right back and say it again. Go back and read the post.

No. You claimed that it was not the case. But you did so by denying Scripture (denying that God can forgive sins at all, that He must punish sins on Jesus to allow the sinner escape accountability).

You would be more biblical if you said God punished our sin on us do that the sinner in us is destroyed. It would be weird, still not forgiveness by definition, but at least you would not be making Gid unjust.

 

[DaveXR650]

God NEVER justifies the ungodly. The wicked will be punished, period. No wiggle room. God is not a liar.

Like I said, God justifies the ungodly who believe, counting their faith as righteousness. But like I was trying to explain to you, we who believe will be found "in Christ", in a process of practical sanctification, after having been born again, by God. No, we do not stand there as wicked people saying that our sin has been put on someone else so we can remain wicked. God forbid!

 

[DaveXR650]

No. You claimed that it was not the case.

This is what I said:

A Calvinist will describe one as being justified as "ungodly" or as having their sins covered and then as one integrated process of salvation - being born again, coming to faith and repentance, being made one in Christ and so on.

You have to have the ability to read more than one sentence and then stopping. Or else you are deliberately misrepresenting me.

 

[JonC]

Do you see Christ being punished for us on the Cross, "the just for the unjust?"

"While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

"He has made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him."

I probably need to expound a bit as I think we do see the "how" differently. I just do not want to leave it as we completely agree based on not defining beliefs. That would not be right.

I believe Christ was punished for us and because of our sins on the Cross. Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil.

I believe that this is the Just for the unjust. For it is better to suffer for doing what is right rather than for doing what is wrong. For Christ also suffered for sins once for all time, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the body, but made alive in the spirit.

I believe that when we were sinners Christ died for us. I do not think we see this any differently.

I believe He has made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. Again, I font think we see this differently.


I think we differ in Christ bearing our sin because you told me awhile back that you view this as meaning God had to take our sns from us and put on Him for Him to bear our sins.

I cannot agree with that.

God laid our iniquity on Christ.
God lays His righteousness on us now.

He bore our sins.
We currently bear His righteousness.

If I viewed Chriiat bearing our sins meaning God took those sins from us and put on Him then I would have to apply that to us now bearing His righteousness because this is "the Just for the unjust" (same type of concept).

This would mean God now takes Jesus' righteousness from Him and puts it on us and He is now in righteous.

 

[JonC]

Like I said, God justifies the ungodly

God changes the ungodly, they are not justified. You reject, ultimately, that this is a righteousness of God manifested apart from the law.