A Proper Concept of the Atonement

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

So now I think I'm getting the idea behind the soteriology of some here, with this distinction between "payment of the penalty of the Law" and "payment for sins". Basically, what that sounds like is that Christ wiped the slate clean that one time, and I guess those who were alive then got the clean slate, but afterward, we're all in the same boat as they were before Christ. Christ's death really means nothing to us then, except as a way to not have to sacrifice animals, but just ask forgiveness of every sin instead. No wonder salvation is all about works, then, to some of you.

To me, the two things you discussed; paying the penalty, and paying for all sin go together. Pulling them apart like that can only be for a doctrinal agenda. Anyway, the argumet relies heavily on the premise that Christ would have to suffer Hell for eternity to pay for every sin, but you forget that one of the biggest necessities of His deity was the ability to pay for all the sins. That's why He had to be both God and Man. Man sinned, so man had to pay for man's sin, and only God would be worth enough to be able to pay the penalty. that's why denials of Christ's deity are almost always found in groups that advocate works righteousness, and thus change the concept of what Christ did on the Cross, so the New Covenant could be made basically a rehash of the Old Covenant.

This is more like the Gospel! Thank God some still can distinguish truth from rubbish.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

One first needs find substance in yours to be able to answer with substance, BobRyan.

 

[BobRyan]

Anyway, the argumet relies heavily on the premise that Christ would have to suffer Hell for eternity to pay for every sin, but you forget that one of the biggest necessities of His deity was the ability to pay for all the sins

This is a circular arugment that was stiillborn from the moment of the post. It makes no sense at all to ANSWER the problem of ETERNAL and therefore INFINITE debt owed by ONE person for ONE sin and the fact that an ETERNAL and therefore INFINITE being could only pay for AT MOST ONE -- with the circular argument offerred above.

The fact that this is the hole that both ERIC and DHK settle for is in fact "instructive" as it means -- they have no other option!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

One first needs find substance in yours to be able to answer with substance, BobRyan.

Vaccuous post "after" vaccuous post GE?? come on - I don't think I have ever seen you stuck like that before.

 

[BobRyan]

HP
Of a truth, Christ bore our sins, IN THE SENSE OF SATISFYING THE PENALTY OF THE LAW, but What He did not do in any literal sense is to make or pay a ‘literal payment’ of eternal death for even ‘one’ ‘specific’ sin. Absolutely He suffered only once, all the more evidence that whatever he accomplished was not the literal payment of the penalty you agreed with me, that served as the common truth which allowed for this boat ride together, that was said to be the penalty for sin, i.e., eternal separation from God. Christ NEVER suffered that literal payment once DHK. If that happened, He would still be suffering throughout millions of eternities. (The reason why that sounds absurd, is because such would be absurd to consider)

HP's logic is irrefutable once you use the same definition for "debt owed" as being "Suffering for eternity".. THAT is the key centerpiece of his argument and if you agree to it the conclusion is innescapable.

I do not agree with the central premise since I find the Bible a strong argument against it - THUS the Bible can then go on logically and reasonably to claim EXACT payment for the precise debt of BILLIONS of sinners through all of time.

But if I were to accept the central primis as stated (as both DHK and GE probably do) I would stuck like they are.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Hi Bob,
With all of my disagreements with you, you have correctly understood the inescapable logic that if one accepts the notion of eternal punishment that Christ could not have paid that debt ‘literally.’

The reason why I said that I feel you made your own “grocery store model” mistakes in your reasoning, was that you as well try and make the atonement a literal payment, but with a different debt owed. (IF I understand you correctly) This appears to be the same basic misconception as to the nature of the atonement that others here are making, but with an added attempt to at least make the penalty for sin logically, or Scripturally as you obviously see it, fit into your ideas. To me, any ‘literal payment’ notion, regardless of the penalty one places for sin, is a ‘grocery store model’ and breaks down in view of not only Scripture, but in its necessitated logical ramifications as well.

Help me out here. Can you, or anyone else, set forth the Scriptures that clearly depict the atonement as a literal payment of a ‘debt?’ We might take them,(or it) if in fact one can be pointed to, and examine the verse (s) together.

 

[BobRyan]

There are two main differences in my view and the ones that DHK and Eric hold.

#1. The penalty "owed" in God's Holy Just and true law for one sin is not found to be "eternal torture - infinite cost". Your entire argument hinges on that.

#2. The term "Atonement" is bigger than the "atoning sacrifice" completed at the cross if we accept Lev 16 as "the definition". It must include the Work of High Priest that is seen in Lev 16 and that we see in Heb 8. That means that we have the ongoing work of Christ - that is Individually applied according to Heb 4.

Both of these Bible based concepts reveal the significant differences with their views and mine.

As for the "LITERAL PAYMENT" - take a look at Col 2. Paul states clear that the "Certificate of DEBT" is cancelled - paid in full - at the cross.

The Holy Just and True Law of God (Romans 7) continues but the certificate of debt that it generates for each soul (which as we saw in Luke 12 is variable and individually specific) is paid at the cross in the "Atoning Sacrifice 1John 2:2 NIV" part of the Lev 16 Atonement process.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Col 2:

14 having canceled out the certificate of debtconsisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and he has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

Notice the context is that of making you alive solving the problem of you being dead in transgression.

It is God’s Law that “defines what sin is” as we saw in Rom 3,4, 5, and 7 - it is not a "record of guilt" but a standard of perfect sinless righteousness).

By definition Law has force because it specifies penalties for violation. Then a “certificate of debt” or a “ticket” or a ”fine” is generated for each individual as that person violates the law. As we see in Luke 12:45-55 that penalty is variable and individually specific. The one who knew much and goes to hell owes “much” whereas those in the dark who go to hell will owe less.

What form does this “certificate of debt” specific to each person take?

Clearly it is defined by a record of which sins we commit and how often. A record of some kind must exist to show what each individual owes "according to his deeds"

Rev 20

11 then i saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them.
12 and i saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.
13 and the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.

Clearly the "decrees against us" are written in these books out of which each person is judged "according to their deeds".

2Cor 5

9 therefore we also have as our ambition, whether at home or absent, to be pleasing to him.
10 for we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

So then, what records/defines what each person's debt is? The law is the basis for knowing what is sin, but it is not the transaction of judgment specific to each individual - it is not a “record of guilt” it is instead a standard of judgment. It is the authoritative legal basis upon which judgment is rendered the standard that is compared to the life and actual deeds of each human. The resulting judgment then shows exactly where each one falls short of the glory of God. All are placed under condemnation and incur a debt of sin specific to their actual sins. The Holy Just and true “the spiritual Law of God” (Rom 7) is not that record of sin – it is not the “certificate of debt owed”.

The books of record show our "debt" they record each deed and also determine the debt owed - the "certificate of debt".

However - it is not the books of record that are "nailed to the cross" - rather it is the "debt" that they say each individual "owes". The certificate of debt that they decree as owed (a decree made by comparing our lives against the perfect standard - God's Law), is what is nailed to the cross and stamped "paid in full". And this - for every one of mankind.

But to avail ourselves of that cancelled debt - we must choose Christ - choose to be born again - to have the LAW of God written in our heart - instead of nailed and done away with. To have the new creation that walks after the spirit - instead of rebelling against the Law of God - being hostile to God's Law - refusing to submit and indeed UNNABLE to submit to it (Roman 8:5-8)

Christ took the "stroke due us" the debt of death (Rom 623) was paid, nailed to the cross. It is the debt that is paid - the "certificate of debt" which itself "consists of decrees against us" faithfully records our deeds and what is owed individually -- and Christ pays the debt accumulated by each one of us.

Obviously when the police write out a ticket with a fine attached, then when the fine is canceled (via payment) - the law that defines obedience and violation - is not also cancelled.

 

[BobRyan]

Also note that the law that defines our sin - is not some local law specific only to the Hebrew nation. (as if only Hebrews need a savior)


God's law places all under condemnation.

Gal 3[/b]

:9 so then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer.
10 for as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "" cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.''
11 now that b]no one is justified by the law[/b] before God is evident; for, "" the righteous man shall live by faith.''
12 however, the law is not of faith; on the contrary, "" he who practices them shall live by them.''

Gal 3:21 is the law then contrary to the promises[b/] of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.
22 but the scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

Notice that in Galatians 3 Paul equates the law known to NT saints with “scripture” known to NT saints. God’s infallible word places all mankind “under sin” telling the truth – that we are all sinners and in need of a savior – someone who will pay our debt and redeem us.

Rom 3:9
what then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and greeks are all under sin;
10 as it is written, "" there is none righteous, not even one;
....
23 for all have sinnedand fall short of the glory of God,

It must be the law that defines debt and for which the cross was intended as payment. That can only be one law - the moral law. (without it there is no debt, no sin Rom 5).

Rom 5:13 sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Rom 4:14 15 for the law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Bob, I fail to find any mention of a 'debt' or 'decrees against us' in this verse.

 

[BobRyan]

From the NASB - Quote:
Col 2:
Quote:

14 having canceled out the certificate of debtconsisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and he has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.


Notice the context is that of making you alive solving the problem of you being dead in transgression.

It is God’s Law that “defines what sin is” as we saw in Rom 3,4, 5, and 7 - it is not a "record of guilt" but a standard of perfect sinless righteousness).

By definition Law has force because it specifies penalties for violation. Then a “certificate of debt” or a “ticket” or a ”fine” is generated for each individual as that person violates the law. As we see in Luke 12:45-55 that penalty is variable and individually specific. The one who knew much and goes to hell owes “much” whereas those in the dark who go to hell will owe less.

NASB

13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

MSG -- 14the slate wiped clean, that old arrest warrant canceled and nailed to Christ's Cross.

AMP -- 14Having cancelled and blotted out and wiped away the handwriting of the note (bond) with its legal decrees and demands which was in force and stood against us (hostile to us). This [note with its regulations, decrees, and demands] He set aside and cleared completely out of our way by nailing it to [His] cross.

NLT -- 14He canceled the record that contained the charges against us. He took it and destroyed it by nailing it to Christ's cross.
{New Living Translation)

ESV -- 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
( English Standard Version)

CEV --14God wiped out the charges that were against us for disobeying the Law of Moses. He took them away and nailed them to the cross.
()(Contemporary English Version) )

ASV – (American Standar Version)
14 having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;

 

[BobRyan]

Notice the insight that John Gill gives for Col 2:14

John Gill on Col 2:14

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=col&chapter=002&verse=014

the whole law of Moses is intended, which was the handwriting of God, and obliged to obedience to it, and to punishment in case of disobedience; and this the Jews F26 call (bwx) (rjv) , "the writing of the debt", and is the very phrase the Syriac version uses here: now this was as a debt book, which showed and testified the debts of men; that is, their sins, how many they are guilty of, and what punishment is due unto them: and may well be said to be that

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Bob,
Not desiring to get in any protracted discussion over various so-called translations, I will just say that I feel that one of the greatest curses upon the cause of truth foisted upon the Church has been the proliferations of translations. I believe the Wescott- Hort text to be a corrupted text, discarded properly due to its gross errors and variations from the vast majority of manuscripts used and trusted.

That aside, in the ASV, AMP, and MSG there is again no specific mention of debt or decrees against us. You have to approach these versions with a preconceived presupposition to get them to be rendered as such.

 

[BobRyan]

Notice that A.T Robertson makes the same observation about the certificate of Debt being paid in full at the Cross.

A.T. Robertson – Col 2:14

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/rwp/view.cgi?book=col&chapter=002&verse=014

Colossians 2:14
Having blotted out (exaleipsav).
And so "cancelled." First aorist active participle of old verb exaleipw, to rub out, wipe off, erase. In N.T. only in Acts 3:19 (LXX); Revelation 3:5; Colossians 2:14. Here the word explains xarisamenov and is simultaneous with it. Plato used it of blotting out a writing. Often MSS. were rubbed or scraped and written over again (palimpsests, like Codex C).

The bond written in ordinances that was against us (to kat' hmwn xeirograpon toiv dogmasin).
The late compound xeirograpon (xeir, hand, grapw) is very common in the papyri for a certificate of debt or bond, many of the original xeirograpa (handwriting, "chirography"). See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 247. The signature made a legal debt or bond as Paul says in Philemon 1:18: "I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it." Many of the papyri examples have been "crossed out" thus X as we do today and so cancelled.

One decree is described as "neither washed out nor written over" (Milligan, N. T. Documents, p. 16). Undoubtedly "the handwriting in decrees" (dogmasin, the Mosaic law, Ephesians 2:15) was against the Jews (Exodus 24:3; Deuteronomy 27:14-26) for they accepted it, but the Gentiles also gave moral assent to God's law written in their hearts (Romans 2:14). So Paul says "against us" (kat' hmwn) and adds "which was contrary to us" (o hn upenantion hmin) because we (neither Jew nor Gentile) could not keep it. Hupenantiov is an old double compound adjective (upo, en, antiov) set over against, only here in N.T. except Hebrews 10:27 when it is used as a substantive. It is striking that Paul has connected the common word xeirograpon for bond or debt with the Cross of Christ (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 332).

 

[BobRyan]

Bob,
Not desiring to get in any protracted discussion over various so-called translations, I will just say that I feel that one of the greatest curses upon the cause of truth foisted upon the Church has been the proliferations of translations. I believe the Wescott- Hort text to be a corrupted text, discarded properly due to its gross errors and variations from the vast majority of manuscripts used and trusted.

That aside, in the ASV, AMP, and MSG there is again no specific mention of debt or decrees against us. You have to approach these versions with a preconceived presupposition to get them to be rendered as such.

And so I presented you with the Greek text using A.T Robertson's comments as well as the Aramaic using John Gill's comments. So even if you reject the NASB and the other texts showing the reference to a legal bond (debt) or explicitly "Certificate of Debt" -- I have presented you with the ancient language text itself.

This is going way beyond what was needed to respond to your request that I find a text speaking to this point.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Bob Ryan: Notice that A.T Robertson makes the same observation about the certificate of Debt being paid in full at the Cross.

HP: I am not here to have a discussion with Mr. Robertson. I am trying to have a discussion with you. You show me where such notions as you suggest are to be found in the text. Put it in your own words.

 

[BobRyan]

HP: I am not here to have a discussion with Mr. Robertson. I am trying to have a discussion with you. You show me where such notions as you suggest are to be found in the text. Put it in your own words.

That was my starting point see my post --

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=785759&postcount=28

I have simply added to my own expanded exposition of the chapter - the underlying proofs from the ancient language in the text as well as showing modern translation scholarship that agrees with this.

You may therefore select either my own exposition or the NASB translators and others that use the legal term BOND or the ancient texts as shown here- to respond to...

I am more than happy to have you respond to my own exposition given on this thread post 28 in the link above if you prefer.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Bob, Here again is the KJV. Can you read the word 'debt' or 'decrees against us' anywhere? I sure cannot.

 

[BobRyan]

Your selection is to respond to 'My words" but then appeal to "translation and language".

If your chosen context is to debate at the level of "language and translation" then I offer you both the GREEK and the NASB translation.

If it is your claim that Paul wrote KJV English instead of Greek - then I really don't have a lot to contribute to that argument.

Having said that - it is reasonable to view the "certificate of Debt" that the Greek and Aramaic versions speak to as "hand written decrees against us" which amount to the debt or the "ticket" written against us for each violation - the debt defined.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Bob,
Let me understand you as completely and correctly as I am able. Are you trying to indicate that the words you see in the verse concerning ‘debt’ and ‘decrees against us’ have anything to do directly with our guilt of 'sin' against the moral law of God, and or God’s retribution for that moral guilt?