That is debatable. It definitely has notable Reformed and Calvinist members but it is trending toward social justice and broad evangelicalism. Many Reformed theologians I know are cutting their ties with TGC.
-
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!
Atonement
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
That is debatable. It definitely has notable Reformed and Calvinist members but it is trending toward social justice and broad evangelicalism. Many Reformed theologians I know are cutting their ties with TGC.
I don't know enough about them. I do like D.A. Carson and Tim Keller (and have seen some of their articles on the site). But that's about it.
Was that sparked by David Well's No Place for Truth or am I thinking of something else?
NT Wright viewpoint on the Atonement and His NPP would not be within any prominent reformed/or Calvinistic Baptist that I am aware of !
I think the views expressed by those at Lignior ministries in regards to the NT Wright view on the atonement would be much closure to how reformed and Calvinistic Baptists regard him views!
You are not giving me a straight answer but deflecting again. You say that in addition to their state of unbelief (which is sin) they "remain in their sins." Again, does the law of God penalize sinners for their sin of unbelief and whatever other sins they remain in??? Does the law condemn sinners without penalizing them? Does the Law have a loud bark but no bite? If so, then what do the words "judged according to their works" mean if judgement has no penalization as a consequence of sins?
We are born as sinners, so we all already have been judged and condemned in Adam by God....
I am not sure how else to describe my belief. I believe that those who do not believe in Christ are condemned because they do not believe in Christ. I believe they will remain in their sins and, not being "in Christ" will face the Judgment. I am not sure how else to word it, so you have my apology.
I am not really sure it matters how Reformed and Calvinistic Baptists view other Christians.
But thank you for the info.
I thought it was linked to Presbyterian doctrine.
With respect, you are the one who has been pushing a difference between Penal Substitution and Penal Substitution 'theory.' To my way of thinking you do not believe in P.S. at all for the reasons I gave earlier.
Yes. That is exactly my point and the distinction I was making. When we look at early writings some ckaim they evidence a belief in Penal Substitution Theory. But when contemporary people hold the same ideas regardinf divine wrath all of a sudden definitions change. I think this plays into the difficuly placing labels on other people.
I prefer to simply talk about what we believe. That seems more reasonable than trying to decide how to label each other (another Calvinist just stated I held Penal Substitution Theory, I agree with you I don't....but pitting you against him in labeling me seems a bit childish at best).
I quite agree. that is why I wrote earlier:
That's what I believe.Martin Marprelate said:
To clarify- I believe that Christ was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. I believe Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us. My view states that as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. Christ was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
And I agree with you that Penal Substitution is something other than that belief. Other people, however, believe that it is Penal Substitution. Hence the confusion.
Thabiti Anyabwile has gone all-in on social justice and reparations. Tim Keller has always been tilted a bit more to the progressive side. There are other things but they will derail this thread. Just know that there are many on the Reformed Baptist and Reformed Presbyterian side who want nothing to do with TGC.
The thread does not matter anymore. Given its length it will be closed soon. Just not enough time, but at least I hope I gave you more information on my view (both where we agree and disagree).
Thank you for engaging me with kindness even though we differ in interpretations.
It seems you want to completely avoid the term "penalty"! My question is simply does the violation of God's law carry a penalty for its violation and if so, what is that penalty? You say they will "face judgement" but what does that mean with regard to penal consequences?
Is the justice system of God a two teir system? Do those outside of Christ pay a penalty for their own sins but neither Christ or those in Christ face the same penalty for sin and so the same justice system denies any penalty for sinners must be paid either by Christ or by those he represents?
What do you mean by "sin created a penalty"? I know of no one who believes that "sin" created anything? The question is does the law condemn sinners to pay a penalty for their violation? Do you believe the Law requiers sinners outside of Christ to pay a penalty for their sins?
Is it reasonable to conclude that you repudiate PENAL Substitutionary Atonement whether you call it a "theory" or a "doctrine" simply because you deny the "penal" aspect of it altogether?
There is one thing you did not do. You did not make an exegetical argument for your position. You told me what you believe (post #129), but I am still left wondering how you defend it from scripture. I mention this because this was your charge in a previous thread against @Martin Marprelate and (I believe) another poster whose posts I am not able to read. With that component missing you open yourself up to the same charge you made against them.
I prefer to dial down the temperature on these discussions. They become more profitable and you are able to glean more information. That does not mean that debate is not without sparks.
I actually enjoy the "sparks", but this was not meant as a debate.
I believe that the passages I mentioned prove my position (which is why I hold it). The wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life. We sin and will die (both physically and to the flesh). Christ was offered as a guilt offering, He bore our sin and by his stripes we are healed. It is through Him we escape the wrath to come. Those in Christ are not judged but those who do not believe have been condemned already. We have died with Christ and have the hope of His resurrection. We are children of Promise.
All of that is where I rest my view. Perhaps it would be better to simply discuss where we disagree.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
This is not plausible. Why was Adam then condemned to die? It wasn't because of his unbelief in Christ, it was because of his sin.
- Status