1 Peter (Discussion about Redemption)

[percho]

IMHO

for to this ye were called, because Christ also did suffer for you, leaving to you an example, that ye may follow his steps, who did not commit sin, nor was guile found in his mouth, who being reviled -- was not reviling again, suffering -- was not threatening, and was committing himself to Him who is judging righteously, who our sins himself did bear in his body (of flesh)(made a little lower than the angels), upon the tree, that to the sins having died, to the righteousness we may live; by whose stripes ye were healed,

Penal substitution?

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Ezek 18:20
for the soul of the flesh (body) is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul. Lev 17:20 Darby

Did that, judgement of the Judge, fall upon the Son of God born of woman?

Now I have a question that may apply here or not. Remember I know, no Greek and say that with sincerity.

When things are in the aorist tense, does that have the meaning of having begun unto a completion?

As above, to the righteousness we should be living?

I mean by that, through we having the Holy Spirit and being in Christ, unto the following which I believe to be future?

Phil 3:9-11 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

 

[JesusFan]

I agree Jesus bore our sins. And I agree this is why He suffered. But it is not in the Bible that Jesus bore our sins so that we don't have to. 1 Peter pretty much dismantled that error (if you just accept the passage as written).

Were our sins imputed to Jesus?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

1 Peter 2:20–25 (NKJV): 20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:
22 “Who committed no sin,
Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. 25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your soul.

Peter has been encouraging his readers to bear up under the pain of unjust suffering (v.19), and so sets forth Jesus as an example to follow in verses 21-23.. These verses are particularly helpful in understanding the Doctrine of Penal Substitution because they contain allusions to, and direct quotations from, Isaiah 53 which it will be necessary to consider as they come up.

The exemplary significance of our Lord’s suffering and death cannot account for all of the teaching in the passage. For example, take verse 25. This alludes to Isaiah 53:6, ‘We all like sheep have gone astray,’ and presents the Lord Jesus not as an example whose sufferings we should imitate, but as the Saviour from whose sufferings we benefit.

The ‘for’ at the start of v.25 points us immediately to the heart of the passage in v.24, and the basis for our reconciliation with God. We will look at this in some detail:

‘Who Himself.....’ No substitute would do for the work given by the Father to the Lord Jesus. In Gethsemane, an angel was despatched to strengthen Him, but on the cross, no archangel, no seraph or cherub could deputize for Him.

‘There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin.

He, only, could unlock the gate of heaven and let us in.’

‘.....Bore our sins......’ There is an allusion here to Isaiah 53:4 & 12. ‘He has carried our sorrows........He bore the sin of many.’ The Hebrew word here is sabal (Strongs 5445) which has the meaning of bearing, enduring or carrying burdens, perhaps as a slave (Genesis 49:15) but also of bearing iniquities or punishments (Lamentations 5:7).

‘....In His own body....’ Now the question arises here: how can one bear something metaphysical like a sin in one’s body? Clearly it must mean that the Lord Jesus bore the punishment in His own body, and this is amply proved by the last part of the verse: ‘By whose stripes [Gk molops, ‘wounds’] you are healed.’ Let us be quite clear what this means. He was wounded; we are healed. He bore our sins, and therefore we do not and nor do we bear the punishment of them. This is Penal Substitution.

‘.....On the tree....’ This is most significant. Peter uses the Greek word xulon, ‘tree,’ instead of stauron, ‘cross.’ In this he follows Paul in Galatians 3:13f, which quotes Deuteronomy 21:23 to the effect that anyone who is hung on a tree is under the curse of God. ‘Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.’ So Christ receives the curse and we receive the blessing! Once again, it is Penal Substitution.

‘....That we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness.....’ One more point before I close. Paul states that Christ became a curse so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit. It is Christ’s substitutionary sufferings and death which means that God can be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus. God’s outraged justice having been satisfied, He gives the Holy Spirit to those for whom Christ died. Redemption must first be accomplished at the cross, before it can be applied through the Spirit in the New Birth.

 

[JonC]

1 Peter 2:20–25 (NKJV): 20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:
22 “Who committed no sin,
Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. 25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your soul.

Peter has been encouraging his readers to bear up under the pain of unjust suffering (v.19), and so sets forth Jesus as an example to follow in verses 21-23.. These verses are particularly helpful in understanding the Doctrine of Penal Substitution because they contain allusions to, and direct quotations from, Isaiah 53 which it will be necessary to consider as they come up.

The exemplary significance of our Lord’s suffering and death cannot account for all of the teaching in the passage. For example, take verse 25. This alludes to Isaiah 53:6, ‘We all like sheep have gone astray,’ and presents the Lord Jesus not as an example whose sufferings we should imitate, but as the Saviour from whose sufferings we benefit.

The ‘for’ at the start of v.25 points us immediately to the heart of the passage in v.24, and the basis for our reconciliation with God. We will look at this in some detail:

‘Who Himself.....’ No substitute would do for the work given by the Father to the Lord Jesus. In Gethsemane, an angel was despatched to strengthen Him, but on the cross, no archangel, no seraph or cherub could deputize for Him.

‘There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin.

He, only, could unlock the gate of heaven and let us in.’

‘.....Bore our sins......’ There is an allusion here to Isaiah 53:4 & 12. ‘He has carried our sorrows........He bore the sin of many.’ The Hebrew word here is sabal (Strongs 5445) which has the meaning of bearing, enduring or carrying burdens, perhaps as a slave (Genesis 49:15) but also of bearing iniquities or punishments (Lamentations 5:7).

‘....In His own body....’ Now the question arises here: how can one bear something metaphysical like a sin in one’s body? Clearly it must mean that the Lord Jesus bore the punishment in His own body, and this is amply proved by the last part of the verse: ‘By whose stripes [Gk molops, ‘wounds’] you are healed.’ Let us be quite clear what this means. He was wounded; we are healed. He bore our sins, and therefore we do not and nor do we bear the punishment of them. This is Penal Substitution.

‘.....On the tree....’ This is most significant. Peter uses the Greek word xulon, ‘tree,’ instead of stauron, ‘cross.’ In this he follows Paul in Galatians 3:13f, which quotes Deuteronomy 21:23 to the effect that anyone who is hung on a tree is under the curse of God. ‘Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.’ So Christ receives the curse and we receive the blessing! Once again, it is Penal Substitution.

‘....That we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness.....’ One more point before I close. Paul states that Christ became a curse so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit. It is Christ’s substitutionary sufferings and death which means that God can be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus. God’s outraged justice having been satisfied, He gives the Holy Spirit to those for whom Christ died. Redemption must first be accomplished at the cross, before it can be applied through the Spirit in the New Birth.

The passages you quote are clear without your additions.

None of the passages even hint at "God’s outraged justice having been satisfied".

The passage does not say that it is Christ’s substitutionary sufferings and death which means that God can be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.

The reason God is just and the justifier of sinners, according to Scripture, is that He manifested His righteousness apart from the law.

God's law does not change. The wicked MUST perish at Judgment.

Scripture is very simple. It is appointed to men once to die and then the Judgment. We die because this is the wages of sin. And we are judged. If you are wicked at Judgment, then you will perish. If you are just, then you will live.

But God's Word is foolishness....sometimes even to Christians as they rely on their own wisdom.

I once stood in your shoes, MartinM. I know it is difficult for you to set aside your tradition and philosophies....to not lean on your own understanding....but to simply trust God and His Word. That said, it is not impossible. And yes, Christ became a curse so that we might have the promise of the Spirit. Man is reconciled by Christ's death, we are saved by His life. He is a life giving Spirit.

Scripture really does make sence without adding to it.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The passages you quote are clear without your additions.

Well, indeed they are, but you plainly don't understand them, swo I was trying (at your request) to help you.

None of the passages even hint at "God’s outraged justice having been satisfied".

Well of course they do. The whole point of Christ bearing our sins on the tree is so that we might die to sins and live to righteousness, but the second could not happen without the first.

The passage does not say that it is Christ’s substitutionary sufferings and death which means that God can be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.

Again, it does - very plainly. Christ has borne our sins, and the curse attached to them. Now we can be reconciled to God. If you do not understand the practice of comparing Scripture with Scripture, what on earth did you learn at seminary?

The reason God is just and the justifier of sinners, according to Scripture, is that He manifested His righteousness apart from the law.

Indeed He did, but He has done so in such a way as to establish the law (Romans 3:31), and to magnify it and make it honourable (Isaiah 42:21). He has not simply abandoned it and tried something else.

God's law does not change. The wicked MUST perish at Judgment.

Scripture is very simple. It is appointed to men once to die and then the Judgment. We die because this is the wages of sin. And we are judged. If you are wicked at Judgment, then you will perish. If you are just, then you will live.

As I asked once before, don't you think that the Lord Jesus Christ might come into this somewhere?

But God's Word is foolishness....sometimes even to Christians as they rely on their own wisdom.

It is certainly foolishness in the way that you fail to interpret it.

I once stood in your shoes, MartinM. I know it is difficult for you to set aside your tradition and philosophies....to not lean on your own understanding....but to simply trust God and His Word. That said, it is not impossible.

As a matter of fact, I once stood in your shoes - before I was saved. Most of the time I believed in God, but I couldn't really find a place for Jesus. There was God and His law; there was I; and I reckoned I was better than a lot of people (Hitler, Dr Crippen, Boston strangler). So I reckoned that God would find a way of letting me into heaven apart from His law which I found so constricting.
My problem was that I didn't understand the sinfulness of sin, the holiness of God, and His absolute justice. When I discovered these things, I realised that I needed a Saviour and, by the grace of God, found Jesus and discovered what He had done to save me.
Your problem is that you have a low view of sin, a low view of Christ and a low view of God's law, which is exactly what I had. What I don't believe I ever had - at least, I certainly hope not - was your smug, condescending, sense of superiority. .

Scripture really does make sence without adding to it.

Indeed it does, but you can't even spell sense, let alone find it in the Bible.

 

[JonC]

Well, indeed they are, but you plainly don't understand them, swo I was trying (at your request) to help you.

Well of course they do. The whole point of Christ bearing our sins on the tree is so that we might die to sins and live to righteousness, but the second could not happen without the first.

Again, it does - very plainly. Christ has borne our sins, and the curse attached to them. Now we can be reconciled to God. If you do not understand the practice of comparing Scripture with Scripture, what on earth did you learn at seminary?

Indeed He did, but He has done so in such a way as to establish the law (Romans 3:31), and to magnify it and make it honourable (Isaiah 42:21). He has not simply abandoned it and tried something else.

As I asked once before, don't you think that the Lord Jesus Christ might come into this somewhere?

It is certainly foolishness in the way that you fail to interpret it.

As a matter of fact, I once stood in your shoes - before I was saved. Most of the time I believed in God, but I couldn't really find a place for Jesus. There was God and His law; there was I; and I reckoned I was better than a lot of people (Hitler, Dr Crippen, Boston strangler). So I reckoned that God would find a way of letting me into heaven apart from His law which I found so constricting.
My problem was that I didn't understand the sinfulness of sin, the holiness of God, and His absolute justice. When I discovered these things, I realised that I needed a Saviour and, by the grace of God, found Jesus and discovered what He had done to save me.
Your problem is that you have a low view of sin, a low view of Christ and a low view of God's law, which is exactly what I had. What I don't believe I ever had - at least, I certainly hope not - was your smug, condescending, sense of superiority. .

Indeed it does, but you can't even spell sense, let alone find it in the Bible.

@Martin Marprelate ,

There are differences how people view Scripture and interpret Scripture.

You believe that @agedman and I reject what Scripture teaches. We believe that you add to what is actually written in the text of Scripture.

What I have is a high view of God, of God's law, and of God's love.

Neither of us have been smug or condescending. We simply argue for what we see as true (as do you). You take our confidence in what re read in God's word as arrogance. That is wrong of you.

As I have said, I use my phone on this forum. The letters are small and my eyesight is not what it once was. This does not mean I lack the ability to spell.

But if I were uneducated, if I were unable to spell, if I struggled with expressing my self, if I had a cognitive disorder.....I would be no less a human being. I would be no less a child of God. God would not love me any less. I would not have been purchased at a discount.

As far as your statement that I am not saved because I disagree with you, I can only say you are wrong. You claim to have stood where I am now when you were lost.

I do not believe you, even though both you and @Iconoclast make the claim. It only discredits you, and it is sad.

What I believe is that while we were enemies of God He sent His Son as a sin offering, laid our sins on Christ, was pleased to bruise Him - to put Him to grief. Christ bore our sins bodily, shared in our infirmaty, died for our sins, and by His stripes we are healed. He is the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Through Him we escape the wrath to come. Man is reconciled to God through Christ's death and we are saved through His life. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

You and icon claim you believed this before you were saved. That is fine. I do not question your claim.

You both go too far in declaring us lost for not accepting your conclusions. That is the ultimate arrogance.

We have been saved by the same blood that saved you. We have been purchased by the blood of Christ. Don't trample the cross to make a point.

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC
You are misreading these posts to have them say what you want them to say.
MM was speaking of his error before HE was allowed to understand saving truth
The position He held was wrong...as your position is.
He did not comment on your salvation or lack of salvation.
If you read what we say and feel it applies to you maybe you should examine yourself.
Do not tell us what you think we mean...because like this discussion you get it wrong.
I have not posted on this thread because it is yet another repeat of false ideas.Why are you dragging me in to it?

 

[JonC]

JonC
You are misreading these posts to have them say what you want them to say.
MM was speaking of his error before HE was allowed to understand saving truth
The position He held was wrong...as your position is.
He did not comment on your salvation or lack of salvation.
If you read what we say and feel it applies to you maybe you should examine yourself.
Do not tell us what you think we mean...because like this discussion you get it wrong.
I have not posted on this thread because it is yet another repeat of false ideas.Why are you dragging me in to it?

No. Both you and @Martin Marprelate equated my belief (and the bluef of most Christians) as the belief of the unsaved.

I drag you into it because you said at one time you believed as I. I questioned you about that prior belief and you replied:

My previous belief was I was an unsaved person.
I did not know the gospel.
When God saved me I understood PSA in it's basic truth.
There was never a time when PSA was viewed as anything but truth.

If you and @Martin Marprelate did not mean to call us lost, that is fine. I understand posts can be taken in ways they are not meant.

I believe Scripture literally tells us what to believe (the actual text of Scripture).

The text (what is written) presents a rebirth (men being recreated....made just). So the idea that God is just and the justifuer of sinners is there. God will not condemn the just or acquit the wicked. It is appointed to men once to die and then the Judgment.

The issue, then, is not God being just and justifier but the question you brought up earlier....where does God's wrath go if the wicked is now righteous?

Your answer affects what you think Scripture teaches.

I am content with "what is written". At one time I was content with what I thought Scripture taught. But now I see Scripture as teaching what is in its text.

 

[Van]

Confirmation bias asserts we see what we are looking for. Calvinists see opponents as not presenting truth. Calvinists see scripture as not meaning what it says.

God choosing twins so that the older would serve the younger is said not to be a conditional election.

Paul speaking to new Christians as to men of flesh using spiritual milk, does not in their view, mean men of flesh can understand and respond to spiritual milk.

People in the process of entering the kingdom were not, according to Calvinists, seeking God.

Christ becoming the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world does not, Calvinists claim, mean Christ died for all humanity.

Redemption occurs when God transfers an individual from the realm of darkness into the Kingdom of His Beloved Son.
Redemption occurs when God calls an individual into His marvelous light.
Redemption occurs when God baptizes an individual spiritually into Christ.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

@Martin Marprelate ,

There are differences how people view Scripture and interpret Scripture.

You believe that @agedman and I reject what Scripture teaches. We believe that you add to what is actually written in the text of Scripture.

Leave @agedman out of it. I have respect for him because he himself is respectful. Your case and his are quite different.

What I have is a high view of God, of God's law, and of God's love.

I am glad to hear it. It does not come across in many of your posts.

Neither of us have been smug or condescending.

@agedman has not been smug or condescending.

We simply argue for what we see as true (as do you). You take our confidence in what re read in God's word as arrogance. That is wrong of you.

If you argued for what you see as true I would have no issue with you. But you don't argue; you merely dismiss what you don't like without engaging with it and then say time after time after time that you once believed as we do, as if that actually proved something one way or the other. @Iconoclast and I are still waiting to hear what you think Christ was accomplishing on the cross. Do you actually know?

As I have said, I use my phone on this forum. The letters are small and my eyesight is not what it once was. This does not mean I lack the ability to spell.

But if I were uneducated, if I were unable to spell, if I struggled with expressing my self, if I had a cognitive disorder.....I would be no less a human being. I would be no less a child of God. God would not love me any less. I would not have been purchased at a discount.

If you were uneducated, I would not criticize you, but sometimes your posts have so many mistakes that I have to spend time working out what it is you are trying to say. You owe those you write to a certain courtesy to make sure that what you write is legible. Do what I do; go through your posts and check what you've written. To misquote Oscar Wilde, one spelling mistake in a short post may be a misfortune; two looks like carelessness and four, five or six is a lack of courtesy.

As far as your statement that I am not saved because I disagree with you, I can only say you are wrong. You claim to have stood where I am now when you were lost.

I have not said that you are not saved. I wrote that I once believed what you appear to believe, and that was before I was saved. I say "appear to believe" because I find it almost impossible to drag out of you what you do believe.

I do not believe you, even though both you and @Iconoclast make the claim. It only discredits you, and it is sad.

What I wrote is true. Whether you believe it or not is of no concern to me.

What I believe is that while we were enemies of God He sent His Son as a sin offering, laid our sins on Christ, was pleased to bruise Him - to put Him to grief. Christ bore our sins bodily, shared in our infirmaty, died for our sins, and by His stripes we are healed. He is the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Through Him we escape the wrath to come. Man is reconciled to God through Christ's death and we are saved through His life. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

You and icon claim you believed this before you were saved. That is fine. I do not question your claim.

You say you believe all these things, but you don't say what you think they mean. What do you think it means that Christ bore our sins bodily? What does it mean that by His stripes we are healed? How do we escape the wrath of God through Him? You seem to state that God saves sinners simply by abandoning the Law, as here.

The reason God is just and the justifier of sinners, according to Scripture, is that He manifested His righteousness apart from the law.

Where does Christ come in to that? I have asked you several times and you don't answer. I can only assume that you think He doesn't, which is what I believed before I was saved.

You both go too far in declaring us lost for not accepting your conclusions. That is the ultimate arrogance.

We have been saved by the same blood that saved you. We have been purchased by the blood of Christ. Don't trample the cross to make a point.

Is this the 'Royal We'? I was not addressing @agedman or anyone else, I was addressing you, and I did not question your salvation. But I would like to know exactly HOW you have been purchased by the blood of Christ because your posts make it seem as if such a purchase is not necessary.

For a long time I avoided interacting with you on this board for the sake of peace, but I believe that the Doctrine of Penal Substitution is of such importance that I would be letting my Lord down if I did not contribute to the discussion. From this point on, I will not address you on the board, but so long as I am allowed, I will continue to make a stand for the truth of God's word

 

[Iconoclast]

No. Both you and @Martin Marprelate equated my belief (and the bluef of most Christians) as the belief of the unsaved.

I drag you into it because you said at one time you believed as I. I questioned you about that prior belief and you replied:


If you and @Martin Marprelate did not mean to call us lost, that is fine. I understand posts can be taken in ways they are not meant.

I believe Scripture literally tells us what to believe (the actual text of Scripture).

The text (what is written) presents a rebirth (men being recreated....made just). So the idea that God is just and the justifuer of sinners is there. God will not condemn the just or acquit the wicked. It is appointed to men once to die and then the Judgment.

The issue, then, is not God being just and justifier but the question you brought up earlier....where does God's wrath go if the wicked is now righteous?

Your answer affects what you think Scripture teaches.

I am content with "what is written". At one time I was content with what I thought Scripture taught. But now I see Scripture as teaching what is in its text.

No. Both you and @Martin Marprelate equated my belief (and the bluef of most Christians) as the belief of the unsaved.

I drag you into it because you said at one time you believed as I. I questioned you about that prior belief and you replied:



If you and @Martin Marprelate did not mean to call us lost, that is fine. I understand posts can be taken in ways they are not meant.

I believe Scripture literally tells us what to believe (the actual text of Scripture).

The text (what is written) presents a rebirth (men being recreated....made just). So the idea that God is just and the justifuer of sinners is there. God will not condemn the just or acquit the wicked. It is appointed to men once to die and then the Judgment.

The issue, then, is not God being just and justifier but the question you brought up earlier....where does God's wrath go if the wicked is now righteous?

Your answer affects what you think Scripture teaches.

I am content with "what is written". At one time I was content with what I thought Scripture taught. But now I see Scripture as teaching what is in its text.

No...you have it wrong again.
I explained to you in that thread I cut and paste your own responses back to you.lol
When you took the bait so to speak and asked me to explain what was actually your comment...I was forced to answer in my own words.
I said before I even heard of PSA....I was unsaved and did not know the gospel....so once again your report was not accurate.
Your idea it is the majority view is wrong.
What confessional documents use it...all teach PSA.
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY ALL PSA.

 

[agedman]

Leave @agedman out of it. I have respect for him because he himself is respectful. Your case and his are quite different.
I am glad to hear it. It does not come across in many of your posts.

@agedman has not been smug or condescending.

I try not to come across as either, because unlike looking eye to eye, we read within our own conceptualization of the emotions of the other.

I don't know if it which thread it was posted, but I was ask concerning how I believe the wrath of God was dealt with when one is redeemed because we are all born as children of wrath.

1) The first concept we believers must consider is that we are not appointed to wrath. As a closer to Calvinist thinking then Armenian thinking person, this is consistent with the presentation of predestination and of the limit to atonement to those given by the Father to Christ.

Therefore, there is no purpose for wrath to be poured out upon Christ if the redeemed are not appointed to wrath. Though born as "children of wrath" the appointment of wrath is not upon us. We sin, certainly, but that doesn't bring wrath, but "coarse correction" in the sense that we may forfeit some blessing or some ministry. We may appeal for forgiveness and cleansing without fear of wrath unlike Akin who died as well as his whole household, father, mother, the whole family of relatives.

2) The second concept we believers must consider is the work of the crucifixion was not substitutionary; rather, it was that of satisfaction. The same exampled throughout the OT tabernacle/temple presentations. Wrath was not shown when the priest and the sacrifice were worthy. As Hebrews shows, "How much more" of a high priest is Christ, and how much better a sacrifice.

Therefore, the suffering of our Lord though satisfactory to God, is also that which is an example for us. Identification marks as Paul might say if being faithful despite the wounds, bruising, cursing, mockery, humiliation... of Christ. As He is the High Priest, we too must be worthy shepherds responsible in instructing, witnessing, and living that others see Christ in us is satisfactorily sufficient.

3) The third concept we believers must consider is the positional players of the crucifixion were also pictured in the tabernacle/temple. However, instead of the people in the land and especially the Israeli, we have the whole world systems at work. The religious, government, populace, and military (Israel shown as the world). The ones needing the sacrifice bring the sacrifice to be sacrificed. The High Priest (Christ) delivers the sacrifice to God who is please.

4) The fourth concept we believers must consider (and this is the most overlooked aspect (imo)) is that the war was not over flesh and blood, but over authority, and power, and that of the unseen. It involved the whole of creation and eternity. No place is found in heaven for the enemy of the believers has been cast out. So, he skulks around to devour. He knows his time is short compared with the time from his creation.

Therefore, it is imperative that Christ live in us, that we portray the same thinking as Christ who gave Himself for (hyper - benefit) us. That because He died that we might live, we also might die that the Word be spread.

Fifth (and last for now) or this post doesn't get read. Is in a sentence or more - what about the wrath of God?

There was none.

The wrath of God, Scriptures state, is reserved for the ungodly, those who oppose God, who are swine and dogs (as our Lord may term). Christ was never ungodly. He remained fully God throughout the crucifixion.

So, when I talk to others concerning their need of Christ, it is not to discuss the wrath, for does not the Scriptures teach, "The goodness of God leads us to repentance."

I tell of the Goodness of God, the crucifixion as that which reconciled man to God, and that belief is the determining factor between eternal life or not.

I tell of the Christ who was victorious over sin, death, and the grave who said, "Come..." and believers also appeal "come..."

I tell them that all have sinned.

That all have an appointment with death, but that believers have everlasting life.

That all do not desire and none deserve by their own human nature salvation. That evidence is seen by people cursing God every day in speech and living.

That if a person does desire salvation, it is that work of the Holy Spirit opening their ears and allowing the Word to enter the heart. That the person repents (changes direction) and believes.

I tell them that Christ does not redeem without purpose.

And I tell them to "come...", appeal to them to "come..."

If you have read this far, this is but a beginning. Are their not many books written?

God's wrath has never "vanished" but it is not appointed to believers. Are we not predestined?

 

[JonC]

No...you have it wrong again.
I explained to you in that thread I cut and paste your own responses back to you.lol
When you took the bait so to speak and asked me to explain what was actually your comment...I was forced to answer in my own words.
I said before I even heard of PSA....I was unsaved and did not know the gospel....so once again your report was not accurate.
Your idea it is the majority view is wrong.
What confessional documents use it...all teach PSA.
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY ALL PSA.

Uh....no. You went into detail that definitely did not belong to me.

I recognize quoted because they appear differently (they appear in a box within the post).

Perhaps we both need to be more careful in our word choices.

 

[JonC]

I have respect for him because he himself is respectful. Your case and his are quite different.

I cannot help how you perceive my comments. I can only control how I am.

 

[Iconoclast]

Uh....no. You went into detail that definitely did not belong to me.

I recognize quoted because they appear differently (they appear in a box within the post).

Perhaps we both need to be more careful in our word choices.

I cut and pasted your words.

 

[agedman]

I cut and pasted your words.

I cannot help how you perceive my comments. I can only control how I am.

There is a way that I use to separate out a thread.

As you both know, it is most difficult if you are not using a computer. Even on my Ipad it is finger numbing.

May I suggest that if you all are having a bit of a problem in discerning when a quote ends and a reply starts, and you are not using a computer, that it may be wise to either use the colors or to mark out by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between quote and reply and the next quote.

On a phone, even finding a comma is an exercise!

I have struggled reading my own posts after rambling. It does seem that I am never quite finished with trekking in wondering wonderful wonder of God's word.

 

[JonC]

There is a way that I use to separate out a thread.

As you both know, it is most difficult if you are not using a computer. Even on my Ipad it is finger numbing.

May I suggest that if you all are having a bit of a problem in discerning when a quote ends and a reply starts, and you are not using a computer, that it may be wise to either use the colors or to mark out by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between quote and reply and the next quote.

On a phone, even finding a comma is an exercise!

I have struggled reading my own posts after rambling. It does seem that I am never quite finished with trekking in wondering wonderful wonder of God's word.

Another very easy way is to use the quote feature on the site. You don't have to quote the entire post, but can remove what you don't mean to post.

You can even select multiple quotes.

This works well or on a mobile device. And it cuts out misquoted, taking out of context (it is linked to the original) and the appearance of stealing words from other people.

Other than that, quotation marks are a great tool.

 

[agedman]

Another very easy way is to use the quote feature on the site. You don't have to quote the entire post, but can remove what you don't mean to post.

You can even select multiple quotes.

This works well or on a mobile device. And it cuts out misquoted, taking out of context (it is linked to the original) and the appearance of stealing words from other people.

Other than that, quotation marks are a great tool.

Are quotation marks on a phone?

My daughter got me one of those amazon fire tablets. Great tool to read and even write.

The difficulty I have is getting eye hand coordination right. My desire to point out error results in my pointy finger taking a beating hitting the little letters that I have sore bones and crooked joints. My pointy finger is beginning to point back toward me!

I also have an Ipad. Going to need to replace the glass screen, I cracked it.

Between those two, I get a lot of exercise - well one finger does. But at least I can tell the doctor I exercise nearly everyday.

Trouble is, she keeps asking me those probing questions, and then does more probing. Claims it's all for medical reasons, but I think there is an underlying agenda.

Quotation marks - wasn't that the point of the post?

See how my mind wanders? One day it may just get lost and not come back!

 

[JonC]

Are quotation marks on a phone?

My daughter got me one of those amazon fire tablets. Great tool to read and even write.

The difficulty I have is getting eye hand coordination right. My desire to point out error results in my pointy finger taking a beating hitting the little letters that I have sore bones and crooked joints. My pointy finger is beginning to point back toward me!

I also have an Ipad. Going to need to replace the glass screen, I cracked it.

Between those two, I get a lot of exercise - well one finger does. But at least I can tell the doctor I exercise nearly everyday.

Trouble is, she keeps asking me those probing questions, and then does more probing. Claims it's all for medical reasons, but I think there is an underlying agenda.

Quotation marks - wasn't that the point of the post?

See how my mind wanders? One day it may just get lost and not come back!

Quotation marks? Yea...that was the "point" of the post.

 

[agedman]

I cut and pasted your words.

I am in no manner making fun of your words. But I often see things written as pictures and I thought I would share why this brought me a chuckle.

Decades ago, I had the opportunity to work with children, and a couple things that children really enjoy is finger painting and cutting/pasting activities. It allows them to self express, and one wise can observe much in their behavior that can be helpful.

Anyway:

In the group, was a very tender larger bodied boy that was working very hard, standing bent over the desk, tongue sticking out one corner of his mouth, a bit of glue caught in his hair, eyes concentrating hard on the sticky scissors as he was determined to stay on the lines. He was so into the activity he had shut out everything but what he was doing. Fun to observe.

So when I read this post your words triggered that long ago memory and my mind caused the scene to morph into a picture stream of a larger man, unshaven, jaw set, bent over with determination oozing, dust flying, bugs splattering, barreling along, glaring in concentration, one hand clenched on a large steering wheel while the other held a pair of gooey scissors cutting and painstaking attempting to paste. Shreds of paper and glue can be seen in the hair, on the knobs, hanging off the wheel, turn signal, gear shift, and even on the dirty well-used coffee cup.

Nothing like you really probably are, but .....

Oh, well, so much for picturing what I read.

Be very safe out there, wherever you might be.