Biblical Atonement (Part 4....but who's counting)

[DaveXR650]

But when you read Scripture for Scripture - for what is written. ..without Penal Substitution Theory - you get a fuller appreciation of God's love, even manifested as the wrath to come - than with Penal Substitution Theory.

Not only that, but you get unadulterated Scripture rather than doctrine corrupted by humanistic philosophy and paganism.

Jon, honestly I have been a believer for a long time and until very recently I didn't know there were competing theories about this. I didn't think of it in terms of theories, penal substitution just seems to be all over scripture. I think I am starting to see elements of where you are getting your ideas on the atonement but I know you don't want to commit to a known theory. Which is OK. The atonement is one of those things that although very important and essential it is something we all agree is completely and already done. And you're right in that we all can benefit from reading the Bible much more than most of us do.

 

[JonC]

Jon, honestly I have been a believer for a long time and until very recently I didn't know there were competing theories about this. I didn't think of it in terms of theories, penal substitution just seems to be all over scripture. I think I am starting to see elements of where you are getting your ideas on the atonement but I know you don't want to commit to a known theory. Which is OK. The atonement is one of those things that although very important and essential it is something we all agree is completely and already done. And you're right in that we all can benefit from reading the Bible much more than most of us do.

I was exactly where you were first most of my life. I grew up in a Baptist church. I also saw Penal Substitution Theory all over Scripture (and I was unaware of other views...particularly that Christianity condemned aspects of the Theory as heresy before it was ever articulated).

I never even knew just how little a minority the Theory was among Christians (and that it had only existed in Western Christianity).

It goes back to the ink blot. If I tell you I'm going to show you a picture of a bat, show you an ink blot, you will probably always see a bat even after being told it's just an ink blot.

 

[JesusFan]

Are the lost in Hell under the wrath of God? If you mean the Second death, no. I believe the Judgment and wrath to come is in the future.

Define "active wrath".

His anger

 

[JesusFan]

But you have been unable to provide even one passage!

You make claims and post Scripture that do not support your claims, and then repeat.

I suggest there os no "Pauline Justification". Paul justifies nobody. God justifies and the means is written in the Word of God.

Pauline Justification is in Romans and Galatians, and NOT in the works of NT Wright and his NPP Ilk!

 

[JesusFan]

Then why is this not written in the Bible (your notes don't count)?

Jesus experienced exactly what the lost do in hell!

 

[JonC]

His anger

Are you implying that God is angry at sinful actions rather than the sinner who sinned (sin must be punished, but it can be transfered from the sinner and then be punished)????

 

[JesusFan]

But when you read Scripture for Scripture - for what is written. ..without Penal Substitution Theory - you get a fuller appreciation of God's love, even manifested as the wrath to come - than with Penal Substitution Theory.

Not only that, but you get unadulterated Scripture rather than doctrine corrupted by humanistic philosophy and paganism.

For me, Scripture is enough. I do not need man's theories as they take away from God's Word.

Psa was found ONLY in the scriptures, as Luther and Calvin and all of the reformers saw it and got in from scripture alone!

 

[JesusFan]

Are you implying that God is angry at sinful actions rather than the sinner who sinned (sin must be punished, but it can be transfered from the sinner and then be punished)????

God anger burns against the ungodly and those remaining in their sins!

 

[JonC]

Pauline Justification is in Romans and Galatians, and NOT in the works of NT Wright and his NPP Ilk!

But you rejected the passages I quoted and said they were not Pauline Justification. How do you really know that you understand Pauline Justification if you find it is different from the rest of the Bible's doctrine?

I don't care about NT Wright (I mean, I wish him well as a person but I don't know him). I do believe he exceeded Scripture with the NPP. I said before, as much as you bring up NT Wright you must have a man crush on the guy.

 

[JesusFan]

Jon, honestly I have been a believer for a long time and until very recently I didn't know there were competing theories about this. I didn't think of it in terms of theories, penal substitution just seems to be all over scripture. I think I am starting to see elements of where you are getting your ideas on the atonement but I know you don't want to commit to a known theory. Which is OK. The atonement is one of those things that although very important and essential it is something we all agree is completely and already done. And you're right in that we all can benefit from reading the Bible much more than most of us do.

Still cannot see on what basis God can justify the lost and still remain Holy if not the Psa view?

 

[JonC]

Psa was found ONLY in the scriptures, as Luther and Calvin and all of the reformers saw it and got in from scripture alone!

But you have not yet found even ONE passage that supports the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement. You just offer words and Calvin and Luther.

Dude, get back to Scripture!

 

[JesusFan]

But you rejected the passages I quoted and said they were not Pauline Justification. How do you really know that you understand Pauline Justification if you find it is different from the rest of the Bible's doctrine?

I don't care about NT Wright (I mean, I wish him well as a person but I don't know him). I do believe he exceeded Scripture with the NPP. I said before, as much as you bring up NT Wright you must have a man crush on the guy.

Not a crush on him, but your view on the Atonement is VERY close to what what he espouses!

 

[JesusFan]

But you have not yet found even ONE passage that supports the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement. You just offer words and Calvin and Luther.

Dude, get back to Scripture!

See Romans and Galatians!

 

[JonC]

Still cannot see on what basis God can justify the lost and still remain Holy if not the Psa view?

I'm sorry you can't. Perhaps the first step you should take is moving closer to Scripture and accepting God's Word as complete, perfect, and the test of doctrine. If you do, you will move longer hold the Penal Substitution Theory.

Then you can struggle to understand Scripture.

 

[JesusFan]

I'm sorry you can't. Perhaps the first step you should take is moving closer to Scripture and accepting God's Word as complete, perfect, and the test of doctrine. If you do, you will move longer hold the Penal Substitution Theory.

Then you can struggle to understand Scripture.

Your refusal to accept Pauline Justification means that you are cutting out the very heart of the Gospel that SAVES!

 

[JonC]

Not a crush on him, but your view on the Atonement is VERY close to what what he espouses!

Then you severely misunderstand my view. The NPP approaches the Cross as an event particularly for the time (in a secular sence) and forces it to place the Roman Empire against Israel.

I suspect you only know of NT Wright and the NPP second hand...much like you deal with Scripture here. That said, at least the man has enough sense to respect Scripture (something Penal Substitution Theorists neglect).

 

[JonC]

Your refusal to accept Pauline Justification means that you are cutting out the very heart of the Gospel that SAVES!

No. I accept Pauline Justification. It is the same Justification spoken of throughout the Bible.

I reject Penal Substitution Theory as pagan and humanistic philosophy. But I accept every word of Scripture.

You need to get back to the Bible. Forget Calvin, Luther, and Wright and pay attention to what is written in God's Word.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Same old stuff from someone who still cannot grasp that the Holy Bible Teaches Penal Substitution Atonement.

​

 

[SavedByGrace]

No. I accept Pauline Justification. It is the same Justification spoken of throughout the Bible.

I reject Penal Substitution Theory as pagan and humanistic philosophy. But I accept every word of Scripture.

You need to get back to the Bible. Forget Calvin, Luther, and Wright and pay attention to what is written in God's Word.

No dude you reject it because you cannot accept that the Bible actually teaches it.

Your personal warped view against the Infallible Word of God

 

[JonC]

No dude you reject it because you cannot accept that the Bible actually teaches it.

Your personal warped view against the Infallible Word of God

Except it is nowhere in the Bible. None of it is in the Bible.

The Bible nowhere says Christ experienced God's wrath.

Nowhere does it say Jesus died instead of us.

Nowhere does it even say Christ's death appeased God.

Nowhere does it say God punished Jesus.

Nowhere does it say God punished Jesus instead of punishing us.

Nowhere does it say our sins can be transferred to another person (it actually says the opposite).

Nowhere does it say God will substitute the innocent for the guilty (again, it says the opposite).

So how has something so foreign to the biblical text become so foundational to your faith?

It is because you are a Roman Catholic once removed.