Penal Substitution Atonement (explain and discuss)

[JonC]

But then clearly cite it! You haven't.

Yes, I have. One verse states it is an evil to view as guilty the innocent. Another says it is an evil to clear the wicked. Another says punishing the righteous is wrong. Several state that God can and will forgive sins. Several base this forgiveness on repentance and belief.


But just as important is the fact that PSA is not in the biblical text.

 

[DaveXR650]

Why? I do not believe Calvinism us correct. I do not believe Methodist theology is correct. I do not believe Pentecostal, Catholic, or CoC theology is correct.

Because you were saying far worse things about those of us who believe PSA than that we were simply incorrect. If you want to change that now then good. I won't wait for an apology.

But we are not saved through out theology. We are saved through faith, and this faith in Christ.

I hold this faith. They held this faith. You say you do not. That is between you and God.

Uh. Remember, it was me who said that in many cases in the New Testament the gospel was simply presented as Jesus is the Christ and he can forgive sins. Believe this. "You say you do not" is an absolute lie and you should apologize, because that is what I have always said.

. I believe that Christ Himself is the Propitiation for our sins, that by His blood we are cleansed of all unrighteousness. We who have the faith you claimed to reject are crucified with Christ and no longer live - it is Christ who lives in us.

This is perfectly acceptable to me, always has been. Except for the lie about me you have repeated again.

a faith that is not solely in Christ - also means you cannot understand.

Of all the argument against PSA, this simply won't work. We believe that Jesus himself is the only one who ever existed who could truly make atonement for our sin and. You simply make yourself look .... I won't say ignorant because that would imply lack of knowledge. It's just weird the way you are bouncing around. Anyone going back and reading your responses would swear several different people are you.

 

[37818]

Isaiah 53:6, All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Romans 5:8, But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

 

[37818]

Yes, I have. One verse states it is an evil to view as guilty the innocent. Another says it is an evil to clear the wicked. Another says punishing the righteous is wrong. Several state that God can and will forgive sins. Several base this forgiveness on repentance and belief.


But just as important is the fact that PSA is not in the biblical text.

You didn't cite the claimed passage.

 

[37818]

Christ the victor was even before the cross!
Luke 10:18, And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.

 

[JonC]

Because you were saying far worse things about those of us who believe PSA than that we were simply incorrect.

This is a false accusation. I never said Penal Substitution theorists held a different faith. I was one for most of my life as a Christian. More than that, I was a Calvinist and a Christian. So I know for a fact that one can be a penal substitution theorist, a Calvinist, and a Chriatian (share my faith).

BUT I also said that people can lean on their understanding and be carried away from the faith by their philosophies. I said one could be a penal substitution theorist and a Calvinist without sharing in my faith (the gospel of Jesus Christ). I said they will hear "I never knew you."

Some theorists believe that the unrighteous will enter the kingdom of God as their debt has been paid (kinda a "get out of jail free" card). We have seen people claiming that if God casts out the unrighteous then His kingdom in the New Heavens and New Earth will be empty.

 

[JonC]

You didn't cite the claimed passage.

I cited them several times. I sm not going to fo it again. I will say consider Proverbs 17, Ezekiel 18. But just because they are the two I read this morning. I posted over 20.

 

[JonC]

Isaiah 53:6, All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Romans 5:8, But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Yep

 

[JonC]

Christ the victor was even before the cross!
Luke 10:18, And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.

Except Christ the Victor is referring to Jesus incarnate gaining victory as man over Satan (Satan was not cast out of Heaven for holding man in bondage).

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You have a non-Christian philosophy.

As I wrote, one of us does, but I'm afraid it's you.

When God creates a new heavens and Earth and everything unrighteous has been cast out, God's kingdom will not be empty. Jesus will be there. The Apostles will be there. I will be there with all who have believed in Christ.

I know that the Lord Jesus will be there - He's there now. I know the apostles will be there because they have trusted in the atoning sacrifice of Christ that they taught so clearly. On what basis will you be there?

If you remain unrighteous then you will not be there. You will have been cast out.

The unrighteous will NOT inherit the kingdom of God. Period.


That right there is your problem.

No problem to me. Christ suffered and died for ungodly people like me, and when I trusted in Christ and in His redeeming blood, He made me a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17.

Rather than condemning @Salty you should pay more attention to his warning. He said "no sooner than".

I did not close the thread because I knew you would report it and say "he just wanted the last word". Now you condemn me for not closing it??? And you condemn @Salty for not abiding by your schedule.

Have you ever considered there may be a reason @Salty posted the thread will be closed "no earlier than" rather than providing a specific time the thread will be closed?

So why did @Salty give a six-hour warning (post #124). why was the thread closed immediately after you had posted, and why have you removed @DaveXR650's post where he expressed surprise at the post being opened again? If @Salty closed the thread and then re-opened it, perhaps he will tell us why he did so.

 

[37818]

Except Christ the Victor is referring to Jesus incarnate gaining victory as man over Satan (Satan was not cast out of Heaven for holding man in bondage).

Does not change the fact Luke 10:18 was before cross.

 

[JonC]

On what basis will you be there?

On the basis of Christ Himself. I will be righteous, conformed to His image.

If @Salty closed the thread and then re-opened it, perhaps he will tell us why he did so.

As far as I know @Salty did not close the thread. The warning said it would be closed no sooner than...

This means "not before" the time given in the post.

Now, if the post said "no later than" then it should have been closed before or by the time given.


For example:

If it is 1 pm and I say we will eat no sooner than 6pm tonight then we could eat at 6pm OR we may eat at 7pm, or 9pm.

BUT if it is 1 pm and I say we will eat no later than 6pm tonight then we could eat at 6pm OR we may eat at 3pm, or 5pm.

This may help- picture a clock face. In your mind put a sticker on the time @Salty gave. No sooner than would be on OR after that time.

No later than would be on OR before that time.


Does "sooner" mean something different in the UK?

 

[JonC]

Does not change the fact Luke 10:18 was before cross.

No, it doesn't. It does not change the fact that John 1:14 was before the cross either.

 

[JonC]

Thread closed.

I was not going to close it because I was involved in it. But having devolved to the point of having to define sooner vs later...well...I did not join this forum to teach English.

 

[Salty]

I normally close posts because of length - Usually after it hits 90 posts -