• 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!

Did Jesus suffer God's wrath instead of us?

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
And you have not, you have succeeded.
Yep. That is my intention. I do not believe Christians shoukd teach their understanding, or even lean on their understanding but on every word that comes from God.

I am pleased that you recognize I have presented not my understanding but my beluef (Scripture).

I do not understand why you insist on leaning on your understanding opposed to God's Word. It seems very close to you trying to elevate yourself to God (you chose which men to worship, you chose which theories and understandings "tickle your ears".
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Yep. That is my intention. I do not believe Christians shoukd teach their understanding, or even lean on their understanding but on every word that comes from God.

I am pleased that you recognize I have presented not my understanding but my beluef (Scripture).

I do not understand why you insist on leaning on your understanding opposed to God's Word. It seems very close to you trying to elevate yourself to God (you chose which men to worship, you chose which theories and understandings "tickle your ears".

The moral to this story, lol, if you find a concept between the lines in Scripture, Don't present it to JonC, you may get your feelings hurt!
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Friend you have not taught anything I can tell, not God's word especially
I have not tried to teach anything here.

I have only said that we are not to lean on our understanding but on every word that comes from God.

I realize that concept is not something you grasp, but basically it means that we believe "what is written" in the Bible rather than what men tell is is taught by the Bible.

The concept is that the Bible teaches what is written in the text of Scripture tather than what any cult within "Christianity" tells us the Bible teaches.

In other words, @Brightfame52 , all that I have offered here (all that you find confusing, that you reject, that you have said you do not understand) has been in the text of God's Word.

That which is natural cannot understand that which is spiritual. To them God's Word is foolishness. That is why so many reject "teaching" that consist of God's words. They do not reject the Christians who say, teach, or respond with His words but they reject God.


This is why it does not bother me when men find my posts confusing. They are not my words.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
The moral to this story, lol, if you find a concept between the lines in Scripture, Don't present it to JonC, you may get your feelings hurt!
Nah. . . We all have thick skins :Biggrin

There are times where opinions are useful. We will see things "between the lines", and they may or may not be accurate.

BUT I do believe that essential and foundational doctrines (essential for salvation and foundational in that other doctrines are built upon it, or important doctrines) have to be in God's Word because we do "lean" on them.
 

Van

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Again no such thing as a means of reconciliation, them Christ died for were reconciled to God Rom 5:10
Once again these posters make another false claim. How many times will they shout taint so to hide the truth before they come to their senses. Lord knows...

See post #43
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Just curious, @Brightfame52

Do you believe that punishing the righteous and clearing the guilty are both abomination to God?

Do you believe that sins cannot be transferred to those innocent of these sins?

Do you believe that the basis upon which God forgives sins is repentance (turning from evil to God, a new heart)?

Do you believe that God makes the sinner into a new creation, removes that old guilty heart and gives him a new heart and spirit?

You succeeded

Okay

You have not shown that you understand that you posted

They are confusing your post are
Lol......again, I KNOW you do not understand. I posted passages.

Rom 5:10 shows people Christ died for were reconciled to God
No, it does not.

It says - For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been it reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

You are reading the verse through the lens of your theory. I know..... you do not understand.

Read my post and thread to see what I believe
I know what you believe. You reject those passages.

You follow the men you jave chosen to worship and will not be moved from what they tell you to believe.

Yes it does. So now you have a problem believing what scripture says
I have no problem with what the passage actually says.

For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been it reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

You really don't see how you are reading into the passage?

Read the chapter as a whole.

So then why ask?
I was hoping that if you saw the passages and had to again deny them you might realize your error and turn to God.
 

Zaatar71

Well-Known Member
I never said I understand correctly. None of us have a perfect understand.

I can absolutely say that you are wrong because your belief is not in God's Word (you have departed from "every word that proceeds from God" and are "leaning on your understanding" of what you think the Bible teaches.
I have not seen the poster jesusfan do as you accuse him of. You are doing the same to him as you do to the poster Martin. Why do you feel you need to do that? he has not indicated any departure from God's word. If he himself says that, then point it out to him. Any of us could accuse you of apostasy, and claim you have drifted away from the mainstream.
I know that my belief is correct because it is God's words.
I do not believe that my understanding of my belief is perfect.
You believe your view is correct, but looks as if every believes their view is correct also. Both are not rue at the same time.
But I can test my faith with God's Word and it will pass that test.
You cannot.
I think that these men can both pass the "text". I think you might be quite suspect. You are welcome to your view.
If my belief is wrong then God is wrong.
This is a horrible claim to make, as if your mistakes in understanding scripture can in any way be linked to God, and to suggest such a thing is very base, and profane! Look at what you just posted! Are you kidding me?
If your belief is wrong then a small sect if "Christians" are wrong.
Your opinion is yours alone.
You are also wrong about "nearly all Baptist scholars" holding your belief.
No, he is correct. Historically it is true.
The largest Baptist grouo is the SBC. This topic was important when they developed their faith & message. It alliwed for your belief but did not insist on it because so many held to traditional Christianity as opposed to Calvin's theory of Atonement. Some of the SBC oresidents were vocally opposed to your theory.
They are headed for apostasy as we speak.Dr. Tom nettles pointed out in one of His books that in the USA. it is something like 263, out of the 265 churches originally held to reformed confessions of faith. Your redo of Histrory is miles from the truth.
And the SBC reflected Baptists as a whole. Baptists are a diverse group.
Many are a shallow as a small puddle after a 5 minute rain, sadly.
Now, if you change your claim to "Reformed Baptists" then you would be right. Most, not all Reformed Baotists share your theory.
Reformed Baptists believe the bible teaching , that to you is a theory because you have departed, and drifted from these truths. The truth has not changed, you claim to have looked at it a bit, but now look away.
But we are talking about a small cult within Baptist theology as a whole.
Others see it as the mainstream belief of most Christians, that you reject.
 

Piper 2

Active Member
I am starting this thread for room. On a thread about to close due to length @Martin Marprelate claimed he would provide passages stating his belief.

Since a kep point of his faith is God punishing our sins laid on Jesus, Jesus experiencing God's wrath against sin, instead of us, I thought this would be a good place to start.

Why? Because if what Jesus suffered was not God's wrath against our sins then his entire theory is nullified.

Now, I know people can start with that idea and then go to the Bible and say "thats what it really teaches". BUT we can do that with any heresy as well.

So I am interested in the passages @Martin Marprelate (and others) have found in the text of S ripture si.ply stating Jesus suffered God's wrath. I think this is a good start.
Why do you feel the need to call PSA heresy? You attack the faith of anyone who differs from you and it is repugnant. Thousands if not millions of solid evangelical exegetes believe in the Penal Substituionary Atonement. Are you calling all of them adherents of heresy?
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Why do you feel the need to call PSA heresy? You attack the faith of anyone who differs from you and it is repugnant. Thousands if not millions of solid evangelical exegetes believe in the Penal Substituionary Atonement. Are you calling all of them adherents of heresy?
I do not believe that the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement is a heresy. At one time in history (before the 16th century) it would have been considered a heresy but today it us within orthodox Christiani

The number of people and pastors who hold the theory correct does not matter. While it is a relatively small number (in comparison to other views) the number of people believing something does not say anything about the validity of the belief. There are over 17 million Mormons. I also believe that Mormonism is unbiblical.

The Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement is unbiblical if by biblical one means actually in the words that come from God. It is biblical if by biblical you mean what a sect of people think the Bible teaches.

1. I believe that the doctrine of the Atonement is important. While not necessarily an essential doctrine (depending on the extent we are speaking about) for salvation it is a foundational doctrine.

2. I believe it is a foundational doctrine because it is a doctrine we "lean" on, onw that is used to build doctrine upon and one used to understand orher parts of Scrupture.

3. I believe that all essential and foundational doctrines taught in God's Word, by God's words (by "what is written"

4. I believe that we should not lean on our own understanding but on every word that comes from God.

5. I believe that we are to test doctrine against God's Word and dismiss what is not according to the Scriptures.


The Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement is a departure from that faith delivered to us in God's Word. It relies not on the words of God but on the understandings of men telling others what the Bible "realky" means.


To answer your question, I point this out because while Christians can also hold the theory it is possible for men to be carried away by these types of philosophies.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
@Piper 2

If God's Word ("what is written", "the words coming forth from God") is perfect, complete, and makes sence then why deny the Bible teaches "what is written" and look for what men think the Bible "really" teaches?

If you choose the teachings of men over God's actual words, then why choose a relatively new theory like Penal Substitution Theory (why not something older like Aquinas' theory that was used to develop Penal Substitution Theory?)?


The issue is many here who hold the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement correct insist that believing the actual words written in the Bible is wrong. We are not talking about different interpretations - we are talking about the text of Scripture vs what a relatively small sect of men think is taught by the Bible.


The text of Scripture itself makes sence to many of us. Why should we abandon the words that came from God for what any group claims the Bibke "really" teaches?


From my perspective it is like the Bible says "In the Beginning God created the heavens and the Earth" , believing that literally, and you guys are saying "What that means, though, is that God caused the Big Bang then He formed the Earth from the left over materials, took water from Mars and put it on Earth...".

The words that come from God makes sence to me. More Christians have came to the same conclusion as me, so I do not see a need to go beyond "what is written" to discover the "real meaning" of the Bibke. I believe the Binke teaches what is written in the biblical text.

A benefit is I can actually highlight my faith in my Bible while you have to look for the writings of men who agree with you to use your highlighter.
 
Last edited:

Alan Dale Gross

Active Member
I am sorry, brother, for my lack of clarity.
Are you saying that the word 'Wrath' isn't used in a sentence
where God is said to have inflicted suffering on Jesus.

So what is your point ?
I came across something about how Jesus' Redemption equals the number of the Elect.

Along with several other things of God that are equal to Redemption in their respective extents.
Jesus Death appeased the wrath of God for the sins of the elect. All others He did not die in behalf of, must endure God's Wrath for their sins.

"The objects of Redemption are such who are the objects of God's Love;
because Redemption, as has been observed, flows from the Love of God and Christ;

"and which Love is not that general kindness shown in Providence to all men, as the creatures of God; but is special and discriminating;

"the favour which He bears to His Own people,
as distinct from others; "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated":
and the Love which Christ has expressed in Redemption is towards His Own that were in the world, whom He has a special right and property in, "His" people, and "His" sheep; as will be seen hereafter.

"2. The objects of Election and Redemption are the same;
= "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's Elect?-
-It is Christ that died!"
and it is He Who died for the Elect:

"so the same, us all, for whom God Delivered up His Son,
= are those whom He Foreknew, and whom He Predestinated;
and whose Calling, Justification, and Glorification are Secured thereby, #Ro 8:30-33

"and the same us, who are said to be Chosen in Christ, before the Foundation of the World,
= have Redemption in Him through His Blood, #Eph 1:4,7.

"Election and Redemption are of equal extent;
= no more are Redeemed by Christ than are Chosen in Him;
and these are a special people:
= what is said of the objects of the one is True of the objects of the other.

"Are the Elect the beloved of the Lord? and does the act of Election Spring from Love?
= Election presupposes Love: so the Redeemed are the beloved of God and Christ;
and their Redemption flows from Love.

"Are the Elect a people whom God has Chosen for His peculiar treasure?
= the Redeemed are Purified by Christ, to be a peculiar people to Himself.

"Do the vessels of mercy, afore prepared for Glory, consist of Jews and Gentiles;
even of them who are called of both?
= so Christ is the Propitiation, not for the sins of the Jews only, or the Redeemer of them only;
but for the sins of the Gentile world also, or the Redeemer of his people among them.

"Are the Elect of God a great number, of all nations, kindreds, people, and tongues?
= Christ has Redeemed those He has Redeemed unto God,
out of every kindred, tongue, people, and nation.

"Is it true of the Elect, that they cannot be totally and finally deceived and perish?
=it is true of the Ransomed of the Lord, that they shall come to Zion with everlasting joy;

"Christ will never lose any part of the Purchase of His blood.

"3. Those for whom Christ has died, and has Redeemed by His Blood,
= are no other than those for whom he became a Surety.

"Now Christ was the Surety of the Better Testament, or Covenant of Grace;
= and of course became a Surety for those, and for no other,
than who were interested in that Covenant, in which He Engaged to be the Redeemer:

"Christ's Suretyship is the Ground and Foundation of Redemption;
the true reason of the sin of His people, and the punishment of it,
being laid upon Him, and of His Bearing it;

"the Payment of the debts of His people, and of Redeeming them out of the Hands of Justice was because He Engaged as a Surety, and Laid Himself under Obligation to do all.

"But for those for whom He did not become a Surety,
He was not Obliged to Pay their debts, nor to suffer and die in their room and stead.


"Christ's Suretyship and Redemption are of equal extent, and reach to the same objects;
they are the Lord's Benjamins, the sons of His Right Hand, His Beloved sons, that Christ, the Antitype of Judah, became a Surety for, and Laid Himself under Obligation to Bring them Safe to Glory, and Present them to His Divine Father,"
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Are you saying that the word 'Wrath' isn't used in a sentence
where God is said to have inflicted suffering on Jesus.


I came across something about how Jesus' Redemption equals the number of the Elect.

Along with several other things of God that are equal to Redemption in their respective extents.


"The objects of Redemption are such who are the objects of God's Love;
because Redemption, as has been observed, flows from the Love of God and Christ;

"and which Love is not that general kindness shown in Providence to all men, as the creatures of God; but is special and discriminating;

"the favour which He bears to His Own people,
as distinct from others; "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated":
and the Love which Christ has expressed in Redemption is towards His Own that were in the world, whom He has a special right and property in, "His" people, and "His" sheep; as will be seen hereafter.

"2. The objects of Election and Redemption are the same;
= "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's Elect?-
-It is Christ that died!"
and it is He Who died for the Elect:

"so the same, us all, for whom God Delivered up His Son,
= are those whom He Foreknew, and whom He Predestinated;
and whose Calling, Justification, and Glorification are Secured thereby, #Ro 8:30-33

"and the same us, who are said to be Chosen in Christ, before the Foundation of the World,
= have Redemption in Him through His Blood, #Eph 1:4,7.

"Election and Redemption are of equal extent;
= no more are Redeemed by Christ than are Chosen in Him;
and these are a special people:
= what is said of the objects of the one is True of the objects of the other.

"Are the Elect the beloved of the Lord? and does the act of Election Spring from Love?
= Election presupposes Love: so the Redeemed are the beloved of God and Christ;
and their Redemption flows from Love.

"Are the Elect a people whom God has Chosen for His peculiar treasure?
= the Redeemed are Purified by Christ, to be a peculiar people to Himself.

"Do the vessels of mercy, afore prepared for Glory, consist of Jews and Gentiles;
even of them who are called of both?
= so Christ is the Propitiation, not for the sins of the Jews only, or the Redeemer of them only;
but for the sins of the Gentile world also, or the Redeemer of his people among them.

"Are the Elect of God a great number, of all nations, kindreds, people, and tongues?
= Christ has Redeemed those He has Redeemed unto God,
out of every kindred, tongue, people, and nation.

"Is it true of the Elect, that they cannot be totally and finally deceived and perish?
=it is true of the Ransomed of the Lord, that they shall come to Zion with everlasting joy;

"Christ will never lose any part of the Purchase of His blood.

"3. Those for whom Christ has died, and has Redeemed by His Blood,
= are no other than those for whom he became a Surety.

"Now Christ was the Surety of the Better Testament, or Covenant of Grace;
= and of course became a Surety for those, and for no other,
than who were interested in that Covenant, in which He Engaged to be the Redeemer:

"Christ's Suretyship is the Ground and Foundation of Redemption;
the true reason of the sin of His people, and the punishment of it,
being laid upon Him, and of His Bearing it;

"the Payment of the debts of His people, and of Redeeming them out of the Hands of Justice was because He Engaged as a Surety, and Laid Himself under Obligation to do all.

"But for those for whom He did not become a Surety,
He was not Obliged to Pay their debts, nor to suffer and die in their room and stead.


"Christ's Suretyship and Redemption are of equal extent, and reach to the same objects;
they are the Lord's Benjamins, the sons of His Right Hand, His Beloved sons, that Christ, the Antitype of Judah, became a Surety for, and Laid Himself under Obligation to Bring them Safe to Glory, and Present them to His Divine Father,"
No. I am saying that Jesys suffering God's wrath os not in the biblical text (in "what is written"). You cannot highlight in your Bible a passage stating Jesus suffered God's wrath. But it is what some people believe is taught by the Bible.

We have to decide if we are going to trust in the understanding of men (what men think is taught by the Bible) or the actual words coming from God ("what is written").

I can highlight in God's own words, in my Bible, what I believe.

Those who hold that Jesus suffered God's wrath have to include explanations why they believe thise words are teaching what they believe (their understanding).
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
No. I am saying that Jesys suffering God's wrath os not in the biblical text (in "what is written").
Actually, it is, just not using your sound bites. You just don't believe in the substitutionary death of Christ for the elect, or do you ? Gods wrath Christ suffered is nothing but suffering the penalty and punishment for sin due to elect people.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Actually, it is, just not using your sound bites. You just don't believe in the substitutionary death of Christ for the elect, or do you ? Gods wrath Christ suffered is nothing but suffering the penalty and punishment for sin due to elect people.
I do believe that Jesus is "the Second Adam" and that those who are "in Christ" are the elect.
The reason I believe this is it is in the Bible.

One issue with your theory is that the "wages of sin", for "sin begats death", does not apply only to those who are "in Christ", those "who believe" (the biblical definition of the elect).

The Bible states that Jesus tasted death for everyone that many woukd be brought to glory.


What I do not believe are those theories you mentioned that are not in the Bible.

The reason I do not believe those theories is that God commanded us not to lean on understandings but on His words. Since they are not a part of the "words coming forth from God" I see no reason to believe them.
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I never said I understand correctly. None of us have a perfect understand.

I can absolutely say that you are wrong because your belief is not in God's Word (you have departed from "every word that proceeds from God" and are "leaning on your understanding" of what you think the Bible teaches.

I know that my belief is correct because it is God's words.
I do not believe that my understanding of my belief is perfect.

But I can test my faith with God's Word and it will pass that test.
You cannot.

If my belief is wrong then God is wrong.
If your belief is wrong then a small sect if "Christians" are wrong.


You are also wrong about "nearly all Baptist scholars" holding your belief. The largest Baptist grouo is the SBC. This topic was important when they developed their faith & message. It alliwed for your belief but did not insist on it because so many held to traditional Christianity as opposed to Calvin's theory of Atonement. Some of the SBC oresidents were vocally opposed to your theory.

And the SBC reflected Baptists as a whole. Baptists are a diverse group.

Now, if you change your claim to "Reformed Baptists" then you would be right. Most, not all Reformed Baotists share your theory. But we are talking about a small cult within Baptist theology as a whole.
pretty much all Reformed, and a majority of Baptist would hold to it , especially pastors, teachers, and theologians
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I do believe that Jesus is "the Second Adam" and that those who are "in Christ" are the elect.
The reason I believe this is it is in the Bible.

One issue with your theory is that the "wages of sin", for "sin begats death", does not apply only to those who are "in Christ", those "who believe" (the biblical definition of the elect).

The Bible states that Jesus tasted death for everyone that many woukd be brought to glory.


What I do not believe are those theories you mentioned that are not in the Bible.

The reason I do not believe those theories is that God commanded us not to lean on understandings but on His words. Since they are not a part of the "words coming forth from God" I see no reason to believe them.
We just think that your new understandings are not found in the scriptures, but is a means to circumvent the wrath of God and Jesus death being made to propiate that very wrath of a Holy God
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
pretty much all Reformed, and a majority of Baptist would hold to it , especially pastors, teachers, and theologians
You are wrong.

If you define "Reformed" as Calvinists then yes, most hold the theory. It IS Calvinism at its core.

But with Baptists it is not the majority view. It depends on timing.

Initially pretty much all Baptists recognized the theory as a Calvinistic heresy, clinging to the RCC.
But as Calvinism influencdd Baptist theology this would change.
In the 1900's Baptists were split over this theory. Some adopted it while others maintained it was just RCC doctrine thinly disguised.

Now we really can't say.

Many Baptists, for example, do not view Jesus as suffering God's wrath but think they affirm penal substitution because they believe Jesus suffered a punishment instead of us ?which is actually closer to Anselm's theory and Lutheran theology than the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement).

Anyway, just prove your point.

Provide the passages stating Jesus suffered God's wrath (shouldn't be hard, its just four words) and let's see if they really came from the Bible or if you were reading another book by mistake.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
We just think that your new understandings are not found in the scriptures, but is a means to circumvent the wrath of God and Jesus death being made to propiate that very wrath of a Holy God
Strange since what I provided as my "new understanding" was actual passages.


Here is what you say is a "new understandingnot found in the scriptures":

God created Adam from the dust, planted a Garden and placed Adam there. God commanded Adam not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil . God told Adam that in the day he ate of the fruit death would be certain. Adam transgressed God’s command and his eyes were opened. God told Adam that because of his transgression he would work the land (the land was cursed) until he died, for he was dust and to dust he would return. God told the Serpent that he would put enmity between him and the woman, and between their offspring, that He would crush its head and he would strike His heel.

Adam had become like God, knowing good and evil. So that he would not take from the Tree of Life and live forever, God cast Adam out of the Garden, back to the place from which he was created.
Through Adam’s sin death entered the world and spread to all man, for all have sinned. Sin was in the world before God gave the Law, but sin was not charged against people as a transgression as they did not break a command. Nevertheless, death reigned even where there was no law because of sin.

Just as through the disobedience of one man, Adam the many were made sinners , so also through the obedience of the one man, Christ, the many will be made righteous.

The wages of sin is death, for sin produces death. Death spread to all because all have sinned. It is appointed man once to die and then the Judgment. I believe that God became man (truly man) like us but without sin. He bore our sins bodily on the cross. God became one of us so that we would become like Him and share in His glory.

The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is life in Christ Jesus. Jesus bore our sins bodily, He died for our sins, He was made sin for us. Men esteemed Him as stricken by God but it is by His stripes we were healed.

God set forth Jesus as a Propitiation. He is the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world. It pleased God to crush Him, He died by the means of the wicked, but this was God's predetermined plan.

Christ became a life giving Spirit. Although we die so shall we live. God recreates us in Chriat and conformed us into the image of Christ. In Christ there is no condemnation and we escape the wrath to come.


NOW THAT I HAVE RESTATED MY BELIEF TO YOU FOR THE SIXTH (6TH) TIME - TELL ME WHAT PARTS ARE NEW AND "NOT FOUND IN SCRIPTURE" SO THAT I. AN ADDRESS THEM BY OROVIDIBG A PASSAGE OR CORRECTING MY BELIEF.


ALSO - PLEASE ADDRESS THE PART OF YOUR THEORY THAT I SAID I CAN NOT FIND IN SCRIPTURE BY PROVIDING THE VERSE THAT STATES JESUS SUFFERED GOD'S WRATH.
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
You are wrong.

If you define "Reformed" as Calvinists then yes, most hold the theory. It IS Calvinism at its core.

But with Baptists it is not the majority view. It depends on timing.

Initially pretty much all Baptists recognized the theory as a Calvinistic heresy, clinging to the RCC.
But as Calvinism influencdd Baptist theology this would change.
In the 1900's Baptists were split over this theory. Some adopted it while others maintained it was just RCC doctrine thinly disguised.

Now we really can't say.

Many Baptists, for example, do not view Jesus as suffering God's wrath but think they affirm penal substitution because they believe Jesus suffered a punishment instead of us ?which is actually closer to Anselm's theory and Lutheran theology than the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement).

Anyway, just prove your point.

Provide the passages stating Jesus suffered God's wrath (shouldn't be hard, its just four words) and let's see if they really came from the Bible or if you were reading another book by mistake.
Think that a majority of Baptist pastors teachers would still see the Atonement in the lines of the Pst, regardless if hold to Calvinism or not, as Pst does NOT need to hold to any particular Sotierology to be found in the scriptures as the best view on the Atonement, not the only, but the most biblical view
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
Just curious, @Brightfame52

Do you believe that punishing the righteous and clearing the guilty are both abomination to God?

Do you believe that sins cannot be transferred to those innocent of these sins?

Do you believe that the basis upon which God forgives sins is repentance (turning from evil to God, a new heart)?

Do you believe that God makes the sinner into a new creation, removes that old guilty heart and gives him a new heart and spirit?


Lol......again, I KNOW you do not understand. I posted passages.


No, it does not.

It says - For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been it reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

You are reading the verse through the lens of your theory. I know..... you do not understand.


I know what you believe. You reject those passages.

You follow the men you jave chosen to worship and will not be moved from what they tell you to believe.


I have no problem with what the passage actually says.

For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been it reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

You really don't see how you are reading into the passage?

Read the chapter as a whole.


I was hoping that if you saw the passages and had to again deny them you might realize your error and turn to God.
Do you believe that from eternity, teh father and the Son had planned the Cross, and that the Son would become incarnated as the man Jesus, and agreed to take upon Himself the very wrath we all deserved of a a Holy God ? And that Jesus willingly took upon Himself that required wrath and judgement due to us so that by his death we could now be justified before the father because of what he did, not due to us repenting or anything that we could do period?
 
Top