When Understanding the Cross

[DaveXR650]

Why do we forgive?
[and, no, I am not laying the groundwork for "Why does God ask something of man that He cannot do?" ... that is flawed as we are not like God so it is an apples to oranges comparison.]

But seriously, WHY does God expect us to "forgive" and why do we choose to "forgive"?
Like God, we were injured (in reality and in honor).
Like God, satisfaction is owed to us.
Those who have wronged us are subject to "our wrath".
Yet God calls us to forgive "seventy times seven times" ... and we do (at our best).
So WHY do we?

Multiple reasons.
God is the judge not us and we defer to him. Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.
We have been forgiven much. It is a heinous offense to then turn on a fellow creature who owes us and demand a pound of flesh. This is illustrated in a parable.
We are taught so in the Lord's prayer and told specifically to forgive others.
We may be able to win others over to follow Christ too by patiently enduring wrong.
We have an example of Christ enduring wrongdoing. This is even part of an atonement theory. While not a complete explanation it nevertheless is true.

 

[JonC]

The Father still has His wrath towards those of us before we were saved stored up, and it cannot just disappear, as that has to be appeased/atoned and paid for, THEN He is able to justify us and make us new creations in Christ jesus

No, the Bible is very specific here. What you are describing is how the pagans viewed their gods when they become angry.

And even the pagans knew that wrath is not substance, like water or sand, that is stored in buckets or bags.

God does not have buckets of wrath somewhere just waiting for the day of wrath so He can collect them and pour over the wicked.

You have some very odd beliefs. I do not mean just odd for a Christian but odd in general.

 

[Charlie24]

The following are not found in my bible ...

"take (our/your/their) place"
"took (our/your/their) place"
"substitute"

... in any relationship to God, Christ or Justification. Where the words appear at all, the context is completely unrelated, like:

Matthew 27:7 [ESV] So they took counsel and bought with them the potter's field as a burial place for strangers.
Leviticus 27:10 [ESV] He shall not exchange it or make a substitute for it, good for bad, or bad for good; and if he does in fact substitute one animal for another, then both it and the substitute shall be holy.

So, I must call into question whether this teaching stands on the grounds of Sola Scriptura?
I do not call it "false", but I CANNOT affirm it to be "True" as stated with no scripture making the same claim.

Were you able to pay for your sins, or did Christ have to do that for you to be accepted by the Father?

 

[JonC]

In God' economy man cannot pay the debt. Christ paid our debt by volunteering to take our place, God the Father demanded that debt to be paid.

We were bought with a price, the payment was death that we deserved.

The wrath of God is "the wages of sin is death." The One who never sinned and did not deserve death took that wrath in our place.

If I'm wrong then Lord forgive my ignorance, but that's the only way I can see it.

I am not sure where this "debt" thing is coming from. When we sin we earn death as a wage. God is not in debt to pay is this wage because sin itself produces death.

In God's economy a man did suffer the wages of sin for all humanity and all of humanity was reconciled to God for that suffering. This is not God's wrath but the wages of sin ("sin produces death", "the one who holds the power of death - that is the devil").



You are mistaken on this topic, but that is not something that needs to be forgiven. It is also not an ignorance.

You are reading the Atonement as if it were a product of Western culture. We all start there.

The important part is the gospel of Jesus Christ, and as we are dealing with a Near Eastern worldview thousands of years ago we typically do need a familiar framework upon which to hang the gospel.

As long as you need it, use that support. As time goes on, start moving that framework away. Or if you need to keep it as a brace, keep it.

God does not condemn us for having an understanding. The problem comes in when we lean in it, or worse...teach it.

 

[atpollard]

Were you able to pay for your sins, or did Christ have to do that for you to be accepted by the Father?

Respectfully, both.

The "wages" of sin is death and I fully expect to "shuffle off this mortal coil" one day ... so I will indeed pay the same "wage" as every other sinner.

Christ certainly had to do something to make me "accepted" by the Father (and acceptable to the Father). As I understand it, nailing my sins to a tree was not enough ... I had/have to become a "new creature/creation" and that can only happen "IN CHRIST". A "propitiation" is "that" which makes us acceptable to the Father, and Jesus Christ IS the "propitiation" ... Jesus is THAT which makes us acceptable. Not his suffering, not the offer he made, JESUS HIMSELF.

So you are placing the emphasis on some act of balancing a scale of Justice, when the emphasis was, is, and will always be on the PERSON Himself (Jesus). Jesus makes us acceptable, not what he did. What He did is just the MEANS God chose to use. In the OT sacrifice, it was GOD accepting the offer that made it acceptable, not how hard the Priest poured out wrath on that lamb. It is always about the person of God and His love for us.

 

[JonC]

Were you able to pay for your sins, or did Christ have to do that for you to be accepted by the Father?

For me - I never had a debt of sin. I did sin because I fell short of God's glory. But I earned the wages of sin. I know this because the Bible says "sin produces death".

Jesus reconciled man to Himself (He is that reconciliation).

I do not have to be concerned about what my "old self" earned because when God judges the world I will be what He has predestined me to be - conformed into the image of Christ.

That one who earned death as a wage will not be alive to be punished at judgment.

 

[Charlie24]

Respectfully, both.

The "wages" of sin is death and I fully expect to "shuffle off this mortal coil" one day ... so I will indeed pay the same "wage" as every other sinner.

Christ certainly had to do something to make me "accepted" by the Father (and acceptable to the Father). As I understand it, nailing my sins to a tree was not enough ... I had/have to become a "new creature/creation" and that can only happen "IN CHRIST". A "propitiation" is "that" which makes us acceptable to the Father, and Jesus Christ IS the "propitiation" ... Jesus is THAT which makes us acceptable. Not his suffering, not the offer he made, JESUS HIMSELF.

So you are placing the emphasis on some act of balancing a scale of Justice, when the emphasis was, is, and will always be on the PERSON Himself (Jesus). Jesus makes us acceptable, not what he did. What He did is just the MEANS God chose to use. In the OT sacrifice, it was GOD accepting the offer that made it acceptable, not how hard the Priest poured out wrath on that lamb. It is always about the person of God and His love for us.

I'm saying that if Christ had not suffered and died on that Cross all of us would have a debt we can't pay.

We were bought with a price, as the apostle said. If that price had not been paid by Christ we would all meet in Hell.

 

[JonC]

I think you will find that I did not say that Christ is impure.

I think you will find you have, although not directly.

At Judgment we will be made like Jesus. We will be righteous. We will be glorified. Anything wicked will have been done away with.

You suggest that we, having become what God says He predestined us to become, will be too impure to enter heaven is to say Christ is impure.

God tells us we are being refined as metal is refined and fitted for this state.

"Refined" dies not mean charged a fine twice. It is the process of removing impurities from metal. And God says He does this to us to make us what we will be.

 

[Charlie24]

I am not sure where this "debt" thing is coming from. When we sin we earn death as a wage. God is not in debt to pay is this wage because sin itself produces death.

In God's economy a man did suffer the wages of sin for all humanity and all of humanity was reconciled to God for that suffering. This is not God's wrath but the wages of sin ("sin produces death", "the one who holds the power of death - that is the devil").



You are mistaken on this topic, but that is not something that needs to be forgiven. It is also not an ignorance.

You are reading the Atonement as if it were a product of Western culture. We all start there.

The important part is the gospel of Jesus Christ, and as we are dealing with a Near Eastern worldview thousands of years ago we typically do need a familiar framework upon which to hang the gospel.

As long as you need it, use that support. As time goes on, start moving that framework away. Or if you need to keep it as a brace, keep it.

God does not condemn us for having an understanding. The problem comes in when we lean in it, or worse...teach it.

We have a debt of sin to God. We have earned our wages of that debt in death, eternal separation from God.

Surly you can see the debt, Jon.

Christ is the satisfaction for that sin debt, making it possible for us to be declared free of that debt by grace through faith.

 

[atpollard]

Multiple reasons.
God is the judge not us and we defer to him. Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.
We have been forgiven much. It is a heinous offense to then turn on a fellow creature who owes us and demand a pound of flesh. This is illustrated in a parable.
We are taught so in the Lord's prayer and told specifically to forgive others.
We may be able to win others over to follow Christ too by patiently enduring wrong.
We have an example of Christ enduring wrongdoing. This is even part of an atonement theory. While not a complete explanation it nevertheless is true.

Might it be reasonable to say that WE forgive because we find what we gain by FORGIVING (the reward) greater than what we would gain from taking the "vengeance" that we are due for the wrong that we have suffered (the cost)?

Is it POSSIBLE that God FORGIVES because God finds what He gains of greater value than His cost? MERCY without VENGEANCE (to balance Justice).
Just thinking out loud ... Ultimately, I want clarity from scripture and "transferred wrath" doesn't seem to be there.

 

[JonC]

We have a debt of sin to God. We have earned our wages of that debt in death, eternal separation from God.

Oh...I do see it. I disagree with how you understand it, which is ok. Satan did punish Jesus for our sins and this is the plan of God so that we escape the wrath to come in Christ.

The "old self" is not reconciled to God. Jesus did not remove punishment from the "old self". The mind set on the flesh cannot please God and is death.

But we are predestined to be conformed into the image of Christ, the old perishing ans we are made new.


I have to ask (and either answer is fine) - you said that you can only understand the Atonement as God punishing Jesus instead of us for our sins.

Are you engaging to defend your understanding or to understand another view as well as your own?


The reason I ask is I do not want to waste my time trying to explain what you are not interested in understanding.

I like that I understand your (my old) position even though I do not believe it is true. How else could I evaluate which is mora faithful to Scripture? But that is me. Many people are not interested in understanding the views of other Christians.

 

[Charlie24]

Oh...I do see it. I disagree with how you understand it, which is ok. Satan did punish Jesus for our sins and this is the plan of God so that we escape the wrath to come in Christ.

The "old self" is not reconciled to God. Jesus did not remove punishment from the "old self". The mind set on the flesh cannot please God and is death.

But we are predestined to be conformed into the image of Christ, the old perishing ans we are made new.


I have to ask (and either answer is fine) - you said that you can only understand the Atonement as God punishing Jesus instead of us for our sins.

Are you engaging to defend your understanding or to understand another view as well as your own?


The reason I ask is I do not want to waste my time trying to explain what you are not interested in understanding.

I like that I understand your (my old) position even though I do not believe it is true. How else could I evaluate which is mora faithful to Scripture? But that is me. Many people are not interested in understanding the views of other Christians.

I'm not defending my belief, I stated it's possible I could be wrong and if I am please forgive me Lord.

I'm saying that its the only way I can see it. I'm open for another view but I haven't seen one that fits Scripture.

 

[Charlie24]

I'm not defending my belief, I stated it's possible I could be wrong and if I am please forgive me Lord.

I'm saying that its the only way I can see it. I'm open for another view but I haven't seen one that fits Scripture.

@JonC

Doctrine is formed by Scripture interpreting Scripture, we have to be very careful in how we do that.

Especially as you have noted from the beginning there is no direct Scripture confirming PSA.

We have to let the Scripture tell us, and I have stated the only way I can see it interpreted.

 

[JesusFan]

No, the Bible is very specific here. What you are describing is how the pagans viewed their gods when they become angry.

And even the pagans knew that wrath is not substance, like water or sand, that is stored in buckets or bags.

God does not have buckets of wrath somewhere just waiting for the day of wrath so He can collect them and pour over the wicked.

You have some very odd beliefs. I do not mean just odd for a Christian but odd in general.

I am just giving to you my friend NOT any new or novel theology, but what the reformers regarded the Atonement as being, and the Apostles themselves

I think you will find you have, although not directly.

At Judgment we will be made like Jesus. We will be righteous. We will be glorified. Anything wicked will have been done away with.

You suggest that we, having become what God says He predestined us to become, will be too impure to enter heaven is to say Christ is impure.

God tells us we are being refined as metal is refined and fitted for this state.

"Refined" dies not mean charged a fine twice. It is the process of removing impurities from metal. And God says He does this to us to make us what we will be.

God the Father imputed to Jesus the sin debt, and by His atoning and satisfying that obligation, the Father can now freely impute His very righteousness towards us now

 

[JonC]

I'm not defending my belief, I stated it's possible I could be wrong and if I am please forgive me Lord.

I'm saying that its the only way I can see it. I'm open for another view but I haven't seen one that fits Scripture.

Do you believe that your view fits the following (without explaining away the passages)?

1. One who justifies the wicked and one who condemns the righteous, both are an abomination to the Lord (Prov 17:15)

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

3. Let the wicked forsake his way,
and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. (Isa 55:7)

I am just offering three.


Anyway, have you considered that perhaps the reason you have not seen any other view that better fits Scripture is because you have not spent enough time and patience to understand another view in light of Scripture?


We want theories and theologies in a box. I realized Penal Substitution Theory was not in God's Word. But it took me a long time reading and praying to understand the Atonement without it. When I did I realized that the issue was greater than Pensl Substitution Theory not being in the biblical text.

 

[JesusFan]

Oh...I do see it. I disagree with how you understand it, which is ok. Satan did punish Jesus for our sins and this is the plan of God so that we escape the wrath to come in Christ.

The "old self" is not reconciled to God. Jesus did not remove punishment from the "old self". The mind set on the flesh cannot please God and is death.

But we are predestined to be conformed into the image of Christ, the old perishing ans we are made new.


I have to ask (and either answer is fine) - you said that you can only understand the Atonement as God punishing Jesus instead of us for our sins.

Are you engaging to defend your understanding or to understand another view as well as your own?


The reason I ask is I do not want to waste my time trying to explain what you are not interested in understanding.

I like that I understand your (my old) position even though I do not believe it is true. How else could I evaluate which is mora faithful to Scripture? But that is me. Many people are not interested in understanding the views of other Christians.

Satan had nothing to do with the Cross, as it was the pleasure of the father to have Jesus nailed there and be the sin bearer and lamb of God, and Jesus willingly agreed to do such, as satan was a tool used by God to work behind the scenes to get wicked men to deliver Jesus unto that Cross, due to the very will of the Father

 

[Charlie24]

Do you believe that your view fits the following (without explaining away the passages)?

1. One who justifies the wicked and one who condemns the righteous, both are an abomination to the Lord (Prov 17:15)

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

3. Let the wicked forsake his way,
and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. (Isa 55:7)

I am just offering three.


Anyway, have you considered that perhaps the reason you have not seen any other view that better fits Scripture is because you have not spent enough time and patience to understand another view in light of Scripture?


We want theories and theologies in a box. I realized Penal Substitution Theory was not in God's Word. But it took me a long time reading and praying to understand the Atonement without it. When I did I realized that the issue was greater than Pensl Substitution Theory not being in the biblical text.

I never rule out the possibility that I have misunderstood something.

At the same time I have studied the atonement in detail and continue to try and better understand it.

It will take some powerful truths from Scripture for me to see it any other way.

But that's not impossible, I have been wrong in the past and sure to be wrong in the future.

 

[JonC]

I never rule out the possibility that I have misunderstood something.

At the same time I have studied the atonement in detail and continue to try and better understand it.

It will take some powerful truths from Scripture for me to see it any other way.

But that's not impossible, I have been wrong in the past and sure to be wrong in the future.

You and I both admit that there is a possibility that our understanding is flawed. I would say that there is a certainty that our understanding is flawed.

Given this, would you be interested in understanding how the Early Church view of the Atonement is biblical while not being the same view you hold?

If so I will start a thread of my belief (a thread limited to looking at my belief rather than debating its accuracy or offering an alternate view).

That way, I hope, you will understand my view and then accept or reject it on its own merits rather than a lack of understanding.

I would start it here but this thread is too hostile (no legitimate dialogue will take place). And I fully admit that I have contributed to the hostility. That is a character flaw (a sin) that I am working on. I expect others to understand what I did not understand when I was in their position.

 

[Charlie24]

You and I both admit that there is a possibility that our understanding is flawed. I would say that there is a certainty that our understanding is flawed.

Given this, would you be interested in understanding how the Early Church view of the Atonement is biblical while not being the same view you hold?

If so I will start a thread of my belief (a thread limited to looking at my belief rather than debating its accuracy or offering an alternate view).

That way, I hope, you will understand my view and then accept or reject it on its own merits rather than a lack of understanding.

I would start it here but this thread is too hostile (no legitimate dialogue will take place). And I fully admit that I have contributed to the hostility. That is a character flaw (a sin) that I am working on. I expect others to understand what I did not understand when I was in their position.

Contributing to hostility is only natural and all of us at one time or another have contributed to it. That's not an excuse, more like a fact.

But yes, I'd like to read what you have.

 

[JonC]

Contributing to hostility is only natural and all of us at one time or another have contributed to it. That's not an excuse, more like a fact.

But yes, I'd like to read what you have.

I am working tonight (12.5 hour shift) and have the count room. So I will start a thread. Please ask any questions. I want you to understand my position. But bear in mind that I am not a good teacher. I'll introduce others who hold my view.


I am looking forward to this. It will be nice to have a dialogue rather than a fight.