-
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!
A False Teaching on Christ’s Satisfaction Exposed
- Thread starter Protestant
- Start date
- Status
You want a war with Jesus "words"??
It is like saying:
John 8:44 are the words of Jesus. therefore you are a child of Satan!
Right??
savedbymercy
New Member
very insightful post P....despite being insulted and falsely accused:wavey:
DHK;-
-
This is off topic...stick to the OP.....This has nothing to do with the OP.:thumbs:
This is off topic...stick to the OP.....This has nothing to do with the OP.:thumbs:
-
.
This is off topic...stick to the OP.....This has nothing to do with the OP.:thumbs:
This is off topic...stick to the OP.....This has nothing to do with the OP.:thumbs:
Last edited by a moderator:
Rippon
yes....that has also happened several times:thumbsup:
That is a reasonable conclusion:applause:
Many have noticed this also:1_grouphug:
yes you did:thumbs:
yes....that has also happened several times:thumbsup:
That is a reasonable conclusion:applause:
Many have noticed this also:1_grouphug:
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
as a followup to my answer to Protestant - in #220
The bottom line is that Atonement argument Protestant is making works in the case of a lot of Arminians because those Arminians use the same Atonement model as Calvinists - and therefore the Calvinist conclusion is the only one that logically follows.
However as I point out in that post - Seventh-day Adventists use the Lev 16 model for atonement and in that model both the work of Christ as sin offering AND the work of Christ in Heb 8 as High Priest are necessary before you can reach the "Atonement process complete" state.
Today we have the Atoning Sacrifice completed - once for all at the cross - but Christ is still functioning in heaven in His role as our High Priest applying the benefits of that blood sacrifice - blood atonement to whosoever will. And all of it would need to be complete -- before you get to "atonement process completed ... no more choices to be made".
The bottom line is that Atonement argument Protestant is making works in the case of a lot of Arminians because those Arminians use the same Atonement model as Calvinists - and therefore the Calvinist conclusion is the only one that logically follows.
However as I point out in that post - Seventh-day Adventists use the Lev 16 model for atonement and in that model both the work of Christ as sin offering AND the work of Christ in Heb 8 as High Priest are necessary before you can reach the "Atonement process complete" state.
Today we have the Atoning Sacrifice completed - once for all at the cross - but Christ is still functioning in heaven in His role as our High Priest applying the benefits of that blood sacrifice - blood atonement to whosoever will. And all of it would need to be complete -- before you get to "atonement process completed ... no more choices to be made".
Protestant
Well-Known Member
Hello Bob,
Again, thanks so much for continuing the dialogue.
Hopefully many will be edified by it.
Although there are several points I wish to address, I will first respond to this particular statement of yours:
Let us look at a more complete representation of the verse you cited, re: God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself on the cross:
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (2Cor.5:18-21)
First, please note that verse 18 states men worldwide have been reconciled to God by Christ’s atonement.
It says nothing of that which yet needs to be done on God’s part in order to effect on that reconciliation.
Paul and all Christians announce the Good News of Reconciliation Accomplished.
Christ’s sheep worldwide will hear His voice of reconciliation, and they will follow Him. (John 10:27)
They do so because it is God who works in them to will and to do His good pleasure. (Phil. 2:13)
It is for them that Christ lays down His life. (John 10:15)
It is for them that He prays as their High Priest. (John 17:9; Luke 23:34)
Had Christ reconciled all mankind there would be no need for the Second Death.
God does not punish reconciled people.
Next, please note that it was the God-man, Jesus Christ, upon whom the guilt of our sin was placed.
That guilt was placed upon the man, Christ Jesus.
His Godhead remained untainted, pure and holy.
The Father was not made a sin-offering. Neither was the Holy Spirit.
The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons.
It was the person of the Son who hung on the cross.
Christ suffered for us in His flesh as man. (1 Peter 4:1)
As God He did not suffer in the flesh because God is Spirit.
Thirdly, Isaiah 53:10 tells us: Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin
The Father was pleased to sacrifice His Son for the Elect’s sake.
Therefore, God the Father did not suffer while Christ hung on the cross.
Also, God the Son did not offer His soul for sin, proving further that as God He did not suffer.
Bob, the doctrine of God’s impassibility is an important one.
For it is inextricably linked to the doctrine of God’s immutability. (Mal. 3:6)
For God to suffer loss of whatever kind is to be less than perfect.
But God is perfect and that will never change.
Matt. 5:48: Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Perhaps I am introducing new biblical doctrines to you, Bob.
Why not take some time and ‘investigate’ for yourself?
Again, thank you for the enlightening discussion.
Again, thanks so much for continuing the dialogue.
Hopefully many will be edified by it.
Although there are several points I wish to address, I will first respond to this particular statement of yours:
Let us look at a more complete representation of the verse you cited, re: God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself on the cross:
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (2Cor.5:18-21)
First, please note that verse 18 states men worldwide have been reconciled to God by Christ’s atonement.
It says nothing of that which yet needs to be done on God’s part in order to effect on that reconciliation.
Paul and all Christians announce the Good News of Reconciliation Accomplished.
Christ’s sheep worldwide will hear His voice of reconciliation, and they will follow Him. (John 10:27)
They do so because it is God who works in them to will and to do His good pleasure. (Phil. 2:13)
It is for them that Christ lays down His life. (John 10:15)
It is for them that He prays as their High Priest. (John 17:9; Luke 23:34)
Had Christ reconciled all mankind there would be no need for the Second Death.
God does not punish reconciled people.
Next, please note that it was the God-man, Jesus Christ, upon whom the guilt of our sin was placed.
That guilt was placed upon the man, Christ Jesus.
His Godhead remained untainted, pure and holy.
The Father was not made a sin-offering. Neither was the Holy Spirit.
The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons.
It was the person of the Son who hung on the cross.
Christ suffered for us in His flesh as man. (1 Peter 4:1)
As God He did not suffer in the flesh because God is Spirit.
Thirdly, Isaiah 53:10 tells us: Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin
The Father was pleased to sacrifice His Son for the Elect’s sake.
Therefore, God the Father did not suffer while Christ hung on the cross.
Also, God the Son did not offer His soul for sin, proving further that as God He did not suffer.
Bob, the doctrine of God’s impassibility is an important one.
For it is inextricably linked to the doctrine of God’s immutability. (Mal. 3:6)
For God to suffer loss of whatever kind is to be less than perfect.
But God is perfect and that will never change.
Matt. 5:48: Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Perhaps I am introducing new biblical doctrines to you, Bob.
Why not take some time and ‘investigate’ for yourself?
Again, thank you for the enlightening discussion.
Icon:
My son has a dog. Whenever my son goes out the dog jumps up and down and starts yapping. When the children start playing or go outside to play the dog does the same thing, as if in agreement--jumps up and down and starts yapping.
You are like that dog. You don't add anything to the conversation. You just jump up and down like a dog and yap in applause when someone else posts something with which you agree. Try adding something positive, using the intellect that God has given you, next time.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the emphasis on that text -- perfect!
Here it is in the NASB as well.
18 Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
NKJV
18 Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. 21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
KJV
2 Cor 5
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
Because Atonement in God's Lev 16 includes more than reconciliation with God where the saved-saints are stuck on this earth dying the first-death, still not walking by sight, and the unsaved yet-to-be-saved are all around them waiting to be converted. (And indeed - some of them will be).
He declares the offer of reconciliation to those who live in a life of reconciliation NOT accomplished - for they have not accepted the Gospel, nor turned from rebellion but they live as servants of satan as Paul says in Ephesians 2:1-4 and in Romans 6.
And also he "Came to His own - and His own receive Him not".
Both situations exist.
And because they choose to open the door -- alone and Christless they choose to open the door.
Rev 3
20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me. 21 He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. 22 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’”
Had all mankind been reconciled there would be no need for Paul to then "beg" mankind to "BE reconciled".
That goes without saying...
True He remained holy - but he suffered and God the Father was "IN Christ" on the cross "reconciling the WORLD to Himself".
It is not possible that a loving Father could ever witness such torture of His own Son and not suffer. Gladly choosing to trade places were that possible.
They are - but they suffer as one - because they "Love God with all your heart and all your soul and all your might" in keeping their own first-commandment.
Indeed - the God-man -- fully God... fully man.
I think you are going "beyond what is written" in that statement.
Not at all "God getting paid". Rather this is - God being tortured.
"God was IN Christ" on the cross - reconciling the World to Himself.
No loving Father would witness that - and not be fully tortured to the degree that he was fully informed of the torture being done to His Son.
Christ - the Son of God - -the God-man was "pleased" to serve in that regard.
That is not a statement that either one of them enjoyed being tortured.
Clearly you are welcome to that opinion - but I beg to differ.
You express your argument in the form of a logical fallacy - circular reasoning where you assume the salient point of your own point as if that forms "proof" of it.
That does not work in any line of discussion that I am aware of.
I appreciate your sharing your views as I think I more clearly see where we differ. But as I said above - you are making your case in the form of a circular argument.
in Christ,
Bob
Protestant
Well-Known Member
Hi Bob,
Thanks for your prompt and zealous response!
However, I cannot for the life of me find a translation which states God the Father was actually in God the Son on the cross. Can you find one?
The NIV states it as thus: All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.
We do know, however, that the fullness of the Godhead bodily dwells in Christ (Col. 2:9)………thereby giving His satisfaction infinite value had God intended to extend it to all mankind.
Furthermore, because of His infinite value 6 hours on the cross was sufficient punishment to pay for all the sins of all the Elect.
Also, I cannot find a translation which implies reconciliation was not accomplished on the cross, but instead was waiting for man to say, “Yes” to Jesus.
In fact, reconciliation was accomplished on the cross, in the same way Paul teaches the Elect whom God predestinated, He also called, and whom He called He justified, and whom He justified, He glorified. (Romans 8:30)
Please note the fact of glorification accomplished.
In God’s infallible decree of Election, glorification is as certain as was reconciliation on the cross.
What’s more, the Scripture in verse 20: “Be ye reconciled to God” is not an invitation. It is a command. (aorist imperative passive)
This is why Christ continually uses the phrase, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”
Christ’s elect sheep will be given ears to hear.
His sheep will hear His voice and respond obediently. (John 10:27)
In fact, Jesus promises His sheep do not hear and obey the voices of strangers, thieves and robbers.....or false prophets. (John 10:5, 8)
John is speaking to Christ’s Jewish bloodline.
They killed Him because they were not His sheep, for not all Israel are of Israel. (Romans 9:6)
In other words, it is not through bloodline, or man’s wisdom, or man’s good free-will decision that he is a son of God, but it is due to the eternal effectual will of God who elected him to salvation through faith in Christ. (John 1:12-13)
Rev. 3:20 is not a particularly good choice to prove free-will. Christ is speaking to a professing Christian church that has shut Christ out of their worship service. In other words it is a huge rebuke to professing Christians who know not the living God.
Please prove your points using sola Scriptura, not sola persona feelings. :>))
Please prove your assumption first before dismissing my very logical point which uses the biblical attributes of the Godhead as proof.
If perfection is not less than perfect due to loss (which is what pain and suffering is) please prove that perfection is still maintained as well as immutability.
You must prove that pain and suffering is part of God’s perfections – not Jesus the man’s perfections – but God’s perfections, and that God, who never changes, is always in pain and suffering.
Do you see the quagmire in which you have beset yourself?
To simply wave your hand in a grandiose manner citing ‘circular reasoning’ is not worthy of a Bible scholar, let alone a Bob Ryan. :saint:
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
In John 17 - Christ repeatedly claims the Father was "in Him".
In 2Cor 5 we had this.
Here it is in the NASB as well.
, 19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself,
NKJV
19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself,
KJV
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself,
Which would also argue in favor of God the Father who is a member of the Godhead - dwelling in Christ.
As God says "For OUR sins and NOT for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1 John 2:2.
That would have been a great time to say "Just for OUR sins and NOT for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"
But John could not write that - knowing that in 1John 4 he was about to write that "God sent His Son to be the savior of the WORLD".
"WE BEG you -- on behalf of Christ - BE reconciled to God" 2Cor 5 is the place where I would start ..
"reconciling" is the ongoing act it is not "the world was reoncilED to God on the cross".
"We BEG you" is the prefix - making it a request via the context.
(aorist imperative passive)
notice the imperative "WE BEG you - do as we say" the absolute imperative follows but the context makes it a request.
So also "We BEG you - be reconciled to the fact that we are not going on vacation this year".
It is not the strange situation that precludes request, that some have proposed.
"He came to His OWN and His own received Him not" John 1:11.
Is 5:4 makes it clear "WHAT MORE could I do that I have not already done?"
2 Peter 3 "God is NOT Willing that ANY should perish"
Luke 7 "The pharisees rejected God's PURPOSE for themselves"
Matt 23 "Jerusalem Jerusalem how I WANTED ... but YOU would not"
God calls out "Oh WHY will you die? turn to Me and live!"
in Christ,
Bob
Protestant
Well-Known Member
If as you say, the Father was in Christ as He hung on the cross, then of what purpose was Christ’s painful plea: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
If the Father indwelt Christ, He most definitely did not forsake Him.
Do you see the quandary of your proposition yet?
Bob, has Jesus or will Jesus save the whole world?
If not, then He is not the savior of the whole world --- meaning the savior of every single human being ever born.
If you answer ‘yes’ then you place yourself in the Universalist camp.
If you answer “only those who say ‘yes’ to Jesus”, then you are adding to Scripture that which is not written.
We answer (as has Rippon innumerable times) John is referring only to those who presently or in the future will believe on Christ.
In other words, Jesus atoned for His sheep, comprised of Jews and Gentiles worldwide.
It is they whom the Father gave Him who are those He actually saves.
You may beg, plea, cry, scream, tear out your hair, play emotional music, etc.
Only Christ’s sheep will hear His voice despite the theatrics. They and they alone will respond to the command, “Be ye reconciled to God.”
Not sure why you repeat this verse when I have explained the meaning in simple to understand terms.
Have you an answer regarding the impassibility and mutability of God based on scriptural proofs for God's perfection which refute your unbiblical proposition that God can experience pain and suffering?
Thanks!
The above is the crux of not only this awfully lame post of yours but scores of your ramblings. You mention the man of Geneva out of the blue in mutitudes of posts when no one has referenced him. Then to add icing on your devil cake you permeate your remarks with lies --as is your norm.
You are unhinged DHK. Get a new shtict.
The remark is not half as unkind as the last statement and attack that you just made.
Secondly, every word I said is true.
Rippon, I, like many others, am not a Calvinist. I label myself for simplicity sake a "non-Cal." You may trump your Calvinism as loud and long as you wish but that does't make it right. Others are entitled to their opinions, and they have every probability, if not more so, than being right in their theology than you do.
So don't say I am wrong, or I have told a lie. I haven't. IMO, Calvinism is doctrinal error. Any non-Cal would say that.
Any historian would admit that Calvin "murdered" in Geneva. He put people to death. That is a no brainer. Those acquainted with history will readily admit to these facts.
That some people want to persist in their error no matter how much truth they are shown is also very obvious.
"Ripponology" does not qualify as truth.
DHK
These men are very gifted and smarter than I am. That is why I drive a truck.
The thing is...I know good teaching when I see it...and they are trouncing each point you make with solid biblical teaching...can't you see that ???
So I get excited and want to support them with positive comments to edify them. I did not post those for you as you censor my posts and make up infractions saying I used foul language when I did not do it at all...I asked you to show it and you did not.
But I do add to the conversation. You just do not like what I post because it isolates and exposes your error's. So then you censor my posts and remove them because You do not agree with the content....no surprise because it is mostly your error being exposed...That must not be fun for you:wavey:
I did ..but you did not notice , or you do not comment because it destroys your whole theory.
I added this recently and you ignored it;
I am very simple, but I have found many smarter believers and what they teach...you have never come close to refuting any link I put up...not even close.:wavey:
These men are very gifted and smarter than I am. That is why I drive a truck.
The thing is...I know good teaching when I see it...and they are trouncing each point you make with solid biblical teaching...can't you see that ???
So I get excited and want to support them with positive comments to edify them. I did not post those for you as you censor my posts and make up infractions saying I used foul language when I did not do it at all...I asked you to show it and you did not.
But I do add to the conversation. You just do not like what I post because it isolates and exposes your error's. So then you censor my posts and remove them because You do not agree with the content....no surprise because it is mostly your error being exposed...That must not be fun for you:wavey:
I did ..but you did not notice , or you do not comment because it destroys your whole theory.
I added this recently and you ignored it;
These verses show what everyone else believes is that God has His Covenant children...ONE BODY.....not two.
I am very simple, but I have found many smarter believers and what they teach...you have never come close to refuting any link I put up...not even close.:wavey:
Of course you are wrong. I will tell you that as much as I like when you indeed are wrong.
Not a single time --on multitudes of occasions.
I have cited the words of scores of Church historians and Calvin scholars who label your fiction as absurd.
But this thread is not about the man of Geneva --you bring the fictions regarding him every chance you get. Start a thread. You're muddying up the place.
Indeed you are guilty in that regard.
DHK
This is not the topic of the op...but you mention it again...fine, but do not tell us to post to the OP if you do not set an example.
Most so called ...non cals..are arminians to the core, except they now plead the 5th...clinging to osas.
And your comment does not make it wrong. Rippon backs up anything he posts at anytime he is asked...In fact he brings forth an overabundance of truth that no one refutes:thumbs:
This is your subjective opinion. I personally think that any Christian is a Cal but just has not studied themselves fully into the position....they pick and choose, struggle with the L...and the U.
Several of us have pointed out when you have not been truthful, usually you try and silence us with infractions or removing the proof when we cut and post those things that are seen as lies , or false witness.
In our opinion you cannot even give an accurate description of the teaching to even determine what it is.
We know you are not only mistaken but have a clear agenda against these truths.....you hate all the confessions of faith,the catechisms and the teaching of all that hold to these truths.
NO...in fact most non Cals will say...they agree with parts of it, but not all of it. But if the right questions are asked of them...they will give almost the same answer a Cal gives, they have to because the same scriptures come into play.
Whatever happened there God is judge...this is a lame excuse to try and do away with the scriptural truth using Calvin as a get out of theological jail, FREE card.
:laugh:...the thing is....that describes you...take a poll and see :laugh:
it does to me...ask Protestant, SG, Reformed, AA., and several others they will tell you:thumbsup:
This is not the topic of the op...but you mention it again...fine, but do not tell us to post to the OP if you do not set an example.
Most so called ...non cals..are arminians to the core, except they now plead the 5th...clinging to osas.
And your comment does not make it wrong. Rippon backs up anything he posts at anytime he is asked...In fact he brings forth an overabundance of truth that no one refutes:thumbs:
This is your subjective opinion. I personally think that any Christian is a Cal but just has not studied themselves fully into the position....they pick and choose, struggle with the L...and the U.
Several of us have pointed out when you have not been truthful, usually you try and silence us with infractions or removing the proof when we cut and post those things that are seen as lies , or false witness.
In our opinion you cannot even give an accurate description of the teaching to even determine what it is.
We know you are not only mistaken but have a clear agenda against these truths.....you hate all the confessions of faith,the catechisms and the teaching of all that hold to these truths.
NO...in fact most non Cals will say...they agree with parts of it, but not all of it. But if the right questions are asked of them...they will give almost the same answer a Cal gives, they have to because the same scriptures come into play.
Whatever happened there God is judge...this is a lame excuse to try and do away with the scriptural truth using Calvin as a get out of theological jail, FREE card.
.
:laugh:...the thing is....that describes you...take a poll and see :laugh:
it does to me...ask Protestant, SG, Reformed, AA., and several others they will tell you:thumbsup:
- Status