• 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!

Disagreements about the Atonement

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
1. Jesus died in the body because of sin (our sins).

3. We die in the body because of sin (our sin)
After all the critique of PSA for treating sin like a "thing" that can be moved around it seems like if anything, this is worse. Our standing is actual guilt and being under actual wrath. We know this because those who refuse to believe have God's wrath remaining on them and people who are addressed as being saved are told they were once "children of wrath". These efforts to avoid the concept of the wrath of God being suffered by Jesus are unhelpful at best and seem to me to be designed by some groups at least, to deceive people about our sinfulness.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
After all the critique of PSA for treating sin like a "thing" that can be moved around it seems like if anything, this is worse. Our standing is actual guilt and being under actual wrath. We know this because those who refuse to believe have God's wrath remaining on them and people who are addressed as being saved are told they were once "children of wrath". These efforts to avoid the concept of the wrath of God being suffered by Jesus are unhelpful at best and seem to me to be designed by some groups at least, to deceive people about our sinfulness.
What part of Jesus dying in the body because of sin, and us dying in the body because of sin, do you find worse than treating human action as material things?

Our standing WAS as one of the wicked. But in Christ God declares us righteous, lays Christ's righteousness on us, Christ Himself being the Guarantor of this better covenant in His blood, as we are predestined to be conformed into His image.

At judgment we will be in the image of Christ. At judgment we will be righteous. We will be glorified.

This re-creation is based on Christ reconciling man to Himself, Christ being a life giving spirit.


So why must God also have punished Jesus for the sins of the "old creation"?
 

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
So why must God also have punished Jesus for the sins of the "old creation"?
That has been answered for you 100 times. You wanted to keep a massive thread open so you can continue this circular pattern without ever attempting to explain why Christ then had to die "for our sins" as is written in scripture. But I don't.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
That has been answered for you 100 times. You wanted to keep a massive thread open so you can continue this circular pattern without ever attempting to explain why Christ then had to die "for our sins" as is written in scripture. But I don't.
No, it has not been answered. You keep saying it has, but it has not.

I did explain why Christ had to die for our sins. Since we are human Jesus shared in our humanity so that by His death He would break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil.

I am not asking you to believe that. But I am answering very specifically for my beliefs so you will understand.

When I ask I get vague assumptions. The law demands it. Justice demands it. To pave the way to finish salvation.

The Father lays our sins on Jesus, punishes our sins on Him....and what is actually accomplished?
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
@DaveXR650

In not jumping ahead, this was my initial question:

What part of Jesus dying in the body because of sin, and us dying in the body because of sin, do you find worse than treating human action as material things?
 
I reject PSA for two reasons: (1) It is a diabolical theory which makes its god a monster. (2) Like dispensationalism, it is a 'johnny-come-lately' invention. The Magisterial Reformers came up with it -- you know, the same ones who advocated religious freedom for themselves while denying the same to others and imprisoning and killing them.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I reject PSA for two reasons: (1) It is a diabolical theory which makes its god a monster. (2) Like dispensationalism, it is a 'johnny-come-lately' invention. The Magisterial Reformers came up with it -- you know, the same ones who advocated religious freedom for themselves while denying the same to others and imprisoning and killing them.
It does make God a monster (punishing the righteous to allow the wicked escape punishment)

It is a "Johnny come lately" theory, relatively speaking (being a little over 500 years old).

It came from a very prejudiced source. We look at many of the teachings of the Reformers and question their scholarship but when it comes to one of the most important doctrines so many just fall in line.


Additionally -

It holds an errant view of divine justice
It materialized sins
It tries to understand the atonement from the vantage of the Father
Ultimately it has no effective purpose for Christ's work
Technically Christ's death is not necessary
It deals with righteousness very superficially
It focuses on human actions rather than the human condition
It has no support from the biblical text itself
It ends with an unaccomplished salvation
It offers a solution to a problem that does not exist
It is centered on what it supposes is the law
It denies that God can legitimately forgive sins
It denies Christ propitiates for our sins in the present

But it has become a popular theory. Recently it is being reconsidered even among Reformed churches seeking a more biblical position, so that is a plus.
 
Last edited:

Martin Marprelate

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That is easy to say, and I do believe that on the cross everything was accomplished for our salvation.

But what you stated was accomplished is our sins being punished. That does nothing to reconcile man to God (like you said, God’s wrath is against the wicked).
What I mean is that Christ was pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him. It pleased God to crush Him and put Him to grief.
What exactly is your problem with that?
That is why I am asking you these questions. I know you are a Calvinist, but there is no univocal Calvinist understanding. I am interested in your understanding.

You mean 2 Corinthians 5:18-21(and I agree with all three passages you provided).

So, from what you have posted (correct me if I misunderstood you):

On the cross the Father laid our sins on Jesus and punished our sins on Jesus. This “opens the way for the reconciliation between man and God” but it is not finished.
Just to be clear, it is finished (John 19:30).
What sort of sacrifice did the Father send the Son to be? A sacrifice for the sins of the world so that we would be cleansed from dead works and as a covenant sacrifice to enact the New Covenant (Heb 9).
God set Him forth as a propitiation, so that He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.
Why was it necessary? Jesus was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit so that He would bring us to God.
Because otherwise God would not be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.
My question, however, not what you believe the Father accomplished by laying our sins on Jesus and punishing them. My question is – what do you believe that Christ Himself accomplished on the cross?
There are seven things that we may see finished, fulfilled or accomplished on the cross.

1. On the cross we may see the fulfilment of all the prophesies which had been written of the Messiah in the Old Testament. He was Despised and rejected of men’ (Isaiah 53:3); ‘Hated without a cause’ (Psalm 69:4; ‘Led as a lamb to the slaughter’ (Isaiah 53:7); His hands and feet were pierced (Psalm 22:16); He was forsaken by God (Psalm 22:1); He was ‘numbered with the transgressors’ (Isaiah 53:12); His clothes were distributed by lot (Psalm 22:18); He was mocked by passers-by (Psalm 109:25), taunted because God did not deliver Him (Psalm 22:7) and, finally, given vinegar to drink (John 19:28; Psalm 69:21). Indeed, there remained a few prophesies concerning Him that could only be fulfilled after His death, such as the piercing of His side (Zech 12:10), His bones not being broken (Psalm 34:20) and His being placed in a rich man’s grave (Isaiah 53:9), but all that needed to be done before His death had now been done and so, ‘When Jesus had received the sour wine, He said “It is finished!” And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit (v30). Note that it was He who gave up His spirit; no one can kill God. “Therefore My father loves Me, because I lay down My lifew that In may take it up again. No one takes it from Me but I lay it down of Myself” (John 10:17-18). Having fulfilled all the prophesies, He dismissed His Spirit.

2. On the cross we see the completion of all His sufferings. We are told that all His life our Saviour was ‘A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief,’ He declared, “I am afflicted and ready to die from My youth up” (Psalm 88:15). From His earliest days, the shadow of the cross hung over Him. In His conversation with Nicodemus He spoke that, “the Son of Man must be lifted up” (John 3:14) and again, ‘“And I, if I am lifted up from the earth will draw all peoples to Myself.” This He said, signifying by what death He would die’ (John 12:32-33). When Peter confessed that He was indeed the Christ, ‘From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things’ (Matt 16:21). On the mount of transfiguration, He was speaking with Moses and Elijah, ‘Of His decease which He was about to accomplish (Gk. teleo) at Jerusalem’ (Luke 9:31). The cross was always before Him, and though He naturally shrank from it as a Man, yet He pressed steadily on towards it (Luke 9:51; John 18:11). “Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?” And drink it He did, right down to the dregs. His physical sufferings must have been immense, but they were as nothing compared to the spiritual and mental tortures that God laid upon Him. All the sins of His people, all our wickedness and vileness, were laid upon His sinless shoulders (2Cor 5:21); He became the very epitome of sin. And the Father turned away. The Lord Jesus had said, “Yet I am not alone, because the Father is always with Me’ (John 16:32). But on the cross the Father, who cannot look upon wickedness (Hab 1:13) had turned away from Him, and the sun had darkened and the weight of sin upon Him became intolerable, and He cried out, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”

But now, the hours of darkness have passed, atonement has been made. “It is finished!” His sufferings are completed.

3. On the cross we see the purpose of His coming attained. Before the Lord Jesus came to earth- indeed, before the very foundation of the world- He had been given a task by the Father. “Behold I come; in the scroll of the book it is written of Me, I delight to do Your will, O My God” (Psalm 40:8). As a boy of twelve He told His earthly parents, “Don’t you know that I must be about My Father’s business?” At the start of His ministry on earth, He declared, “The works My Father has given Me to finish, these I do” (John 5:36). Under the shadow of the cross He told His Father, “I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work You have given Me to do” (John 17:4). There on the cross, the divinely-given task was achieved. The Father’s will was done. ‘Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief’ (Isaiah 53:10). The Pharisees, the priests, Pilate, Herod, the Roman soldiers, they all performed their wicked parts in the death of our Lord; yet they only did what God’s own counsel had decreed before ever time was (Acts 4:28). The Lord Jesus performed what the Father had ordained, and there on the cross, it was completed.

4. On the Cross we can see the accomplishment of the Atonement. ‘For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost’ (Matt 18:11). The Lord Jesus came, above all other things, to save. We owe a debt that we cannot possibly pay- a debt of righteousness which we do not possess. We need a Mediator to come between us and an offended God; we need a city of refuge to which we can run; we need an ark to shelter us from the waves of God’s righteous anger against sin; an advocate to plead our cause before God and to satisfy His outraged justice; we need a robe of perfect righteousness to cover all our sins, a surety to pay our debts on our behalf. The Lord Jesus is all these things for us. He has come between us and God’s justice. He is our refuge, our Surety who has paid the last farthing of what we owe. Tetelestai. ‘It has been paid.’ He is our great High Priest who has offered the one perfect sacrifice for sin, acceptable to God. It is finished.
 

Martin Marprelate

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
[Continuation]
5. On the Cross we can see the end of all our sins. ‘And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all’ (Isaiah 53:6). If my iniquities have been laid upon Christ they are no longer on me. To be sure, there is still sin in me for I still carry the relic of my old Adamic nature and In will do until I die and shed this old body forever, but there is no more sin on me. I am no longer under condemnation. Why not? Because someone else has borne my punishment; someone else has taken the blame. ‘[He] Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree’ (1Peter 2:24). It is a principle of the law that you can only be punished once for the same offence. If someone else has taken my punishment, I am no longer under its penalty. If someone has taken on my debt I am no longer liable to pay it. On the Day of Atonement, the High Priest placed his hands upon a live goat, symbolically transferring to it all the sins of the Israelites, before releasing it into the desert. This looked forward to the day when God the Father would lay all our sins upon the Lord Jesus Christ and He would take them away. But what of future sins? Will I still incur the guilt of these? By no means! This is the wonder of the atonement- not only are our sins laid upon Christ, but His perfect obedience and righteousness are credited to us who believe. ‘For He has made Him who know no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him’ (2Cor 5:21. cf. also Rom 5:19; 1Cor 1:30).

So when God, as Judge, looks upon believers, He sees no sin in His people, but only the perfect righteousness of Christ. As Father, of course, He still sees our failings and lovingly corrects them, but as Judge, He sees none. ‘Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more’ (Heb 10:17). Christ has taken them away forever. ‘For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward those who fear Him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us’ (Psalm 103:11-12). Tetelestai. It is finished. It is the end of all our sins.

6. On the cross we see the fulfilment of tha Law’s requirements. ‘The law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good’ Rom 7:12).The fault is not in the law but in sinful man who cannot keep it. Yet the law must be kept, and kept by a man, so that it might be honoured and magnified, and its giver vindicated. ‘To demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus’ (Rom 3:26. Cf. also 8:3-4) Christ has lived the life of perfect righteousness and obedience that we cannot live; he has fulfilled the righteous requirements of the law, and so have we, in Him.

7. Finally, on the cross we see, by the eye of faith, the defeat of Satan. The death of our Lord, that which appeared to be the Satan’s greatest victory, was in fact his death-knell. ‘For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil’ (1John 2:8). The work of the devil was to plunge the world into sin and death and corruption. Christ’s work was to redeem a people from the great wreck of mankind, to take away the curse on the earth so that a restored and renewed people might live with God forever in a new heavens and a new earth (2Peter 3:13).

Satan is defeated and it happened at the cross. ‘inasmuch as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil’ (Heb 2:14). No longer has Satan any claim on us. We don’t work for him any more (Rom 6:16-18). We are now the willing servants of the Lord Jesus Christ and we delight to do His will (Psalm 40:6-8). Tetelestai. It is finished. Satan’s power is broken and the day will come when it will be ended completely forever. In the meantime we are told, ‘Resist the devil and he will flee from you’ (James 4:7). He must, for our new Master is stronger than he.

We rest upon a finished work. ‘There is now therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus’ (Rom 8:1). There is no more to do- nothing we can do to achieve salvation. “Come to Me all you who labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt 11:28). Are you burdened, trying to earn your way to salvation? Come to Christ and rest. Then rise up to serve Him, not because you must but because you may; because Christ invites to share in His glorious victory and to tell the good news to others.
 

Martin Marprelate

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It does make God a monster (punishing the righteous to allow the wicked escape punishment)

It is a "Johnny come lately" theory, relatively speaking (being a little over 500 years old).
It goes back to the very earliest writings of the 'apostolic fathers.'

It came from a very prejudiced source. We look at many of the teachings of the Reformers and question their scholarship but when it comes to one of the most important doctrines so many just fall in line.
It comes from a whole stream of godly men.
Additionally -

It holds an errant view of divine justice
It holds the Biblical view of Divine justice
It materialized sins
If the Lord Jesus taking away our sins materializes them.
It tries to understand the atonement from the vantage of the Father
It takes its understanding of the atonement from the word of God.
Ultimately it has no effective purpose for Christ's work
It is the only explanation of Christ's work that explains it properly
Technically Christ's death is not necessary
Christ's death is absolutely necessary
It deals with righteousness very superficially
It deals with sin and righteousness comprhensively.
It focuses on human actions rather than the human condition
It forcuses on both human actions and the human condition.
It has no support from the biblical text itself
It is very clearly portrayed in the Biblical text.
It ends with an unaccomplished salvation
It ends with salvation accomplished.
It offers a solution to a problem that does not exist
It is the only doctrine that offers a complete solution to the problem of sin.
It is centered on what it supposes is the law
It is centred on the Gospel.
It denies that God can legitimately forgive sins
It shows how God can legitimately forgive sins.
It denies Christ propitiates for our sins in the present
It shows how Christ is the propitiation for all our sins, past, present and future
But it has become a popular theory. Recently it is being reconsidered even among Reformed churches seeking a more biblical position, so that is a plus.
Fortunately, it is making a resurgence among Bible-believing churches, so that is a plus.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
What I mean is that Christ was pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him. It pleased God to crush Him and put Him to grief.
What exactly is your problem with that?
I do not have a problem with that at all. That is exactly what I believe (and have been saying all this time).

I was asking what you believed that Christ accomplished (if anything) on the cross. I asked because you seemed very focused on what the Father did to Jesus rather than anything Jesus did other than allowing it.

Since you indicated that the cross was one step towards the reconciliation of God and man (followed 50 years after the Resurrection with the giving of the Spirit, and during our lifetime with the work of the Spirit), when you say "it was finished" what do you mean by "it"?

What passage are you pointing to with we "owe a debt"?

We agree that God's wrath is on the wicked.

Where is it said that God must punish sins (other than God punishing the wicked who committed those sins) in order to be just?
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
It goes back to the very earliest writings of the 'apostolic fathers.'


It comes from a whole stream of godly men.

It holds the Biblical view of Divine justice

If the Lord Jesus taking away our sins materializes them.

It takes its understanding of the atonement from the word of God.

It is the only explanation of Christ's work that explains it properly

Christ's death is absolutely necessary

It deals with sin and righteousness comprhensively.

It forcuses on both human actions and the human condition.

It is very clearly portrayed in the Biblical text.

It ends with salvation accomplished.

It is the only doctrine that offers a complete solution to the problem of sin.

It is centred on the Gospel.

It shows how God can legitimately forgive sins.

It shows how Christ is the propitiation for all our sins, past, present and future

Fortunately, it is making a resurgence among Bible-believing churches, so that is a plus.
@Martin Marprelate

No, Penal Substitution Theory does not go back to the early church writers. Calvinists say they had the "elements", but make assumptions as we all believe those "elements".

The early church looked to the cross trusting God to treat them as He did Jesus. They associated their situation as being forsaken to suffer evil for God's glory trusting He would deliver them as He did Jesus.

Some think they were reading their circumstances into Scripture. But I do not. Point is you are creating a myth, and unnecessary so as antiquity does not mean correct.

But I was not replying to your. I know you do not believe what I posted. I was responding to @easternstar .
 

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
I reject PSA for two reasons: (1) It is a diabolical theory which makes its god a monster. (2) Like dispensationalism, it is a 'johnny-come-lately' invention. The Magisterial Reformers came up with it -- you know, the same ones who advocated religious freedom for themselves while denying the same to others and imprisoning and killing them.

It does make God a monster (punishing the righteous to allow the wicked escape punishment)
Wow!
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Wow? He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns ( וּמַרְשִׁ֣יעַ "declares guilty") the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord.

You hold that God viewed the Righteous guilty in order to justify the wicked.

You rejected the idea of Jesus dying in the body because of our sin, and us dying in the body because of sin.

Which one do you reject (or is it both)?

1. Jesus died bodily because of our sin
2. We die in the body because of sin

And what is your reasoning?
 
Last edited:

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
God will not punish the righteous to clear the wicked. God will not punish one for the sins of another but will forgive upon repentance.
You mean like the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all? Or maybe him bearing our sins in his own body on the cross? Or like commending his love toward us that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us? Good point, Jon.
You rejected the idea of Jesus dying in the body because of our sin, and us dying in the body because of sin.

Which one do you reject (or is it both)?

1. Jesus died bodily because of our sin
2. We die in the body because of sin
Actually I don't reject those if you really mean that Jesus was dying for our sake and it was directly because of our sin, and that he bore our sin in his own body. That last part seems to go further than you want which is why you choose obscure language just like a modernist would. You awkwardly seem to want to avoid any mention of the shedding of blood and instead use that language above.

And now you have drawn in some new fella who has come on recently, trolled most everyone, and said himself that he is at a point of questioning everything. I'm sure you will be a great help to him. You have moved beyond just the obscure twisting of phrases which made it hard to tell if you were really that mixed up or if you were having fun pulling our legs because we take this seriously. Now, you are moving into blasphemy and I don't want to contribute any more to you doing this. I am convinced you are willingly ignorant. I don't know what happened to you to cause this but I fear for you. I do wish you well.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
You mean like the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all? Or maybe him bearing our sins in his own body on the cross? Or like commending his love toward us that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us?
No. I believe the Lord laid on Jesus our iniquity (and He lays on us Jesus righteousness). I also believe He bore our dins bodily on the cross (and we bear our sins bodily, die in the body because of sin). And I believe Christ died for us while we were sinners.

What I mean is like "He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns ( וּמַרְשִׁ֣יעַ "declares guilty") the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord."

Actually I don't reject those if you really mean that Jesus was dying for our sake and it was directly because of our sin, and that he bore our sin in his own body. That last part seems to go further than you want.
I meant them as they were written.

Christ died because of our sin. I did add the "our" to clarify I was not saying His sin.

On the last part the verse states "though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness."

I do not understand how you viewed it when rejecting it, but such is online communication.

I think you meant "modernist" to be an insult. But if not the case I will explain your mistake.

You are a modernist and have provided modernist writings to express your faith, like G. Campbell Morgan and John Owen (Owen being early modetnist). Modernist (including Early Modernist) refers to the 16th to 19th century.

I lean more to the Classical era - where you read and study Reformed writers I read and studied the early church writers (that was just where my interest fell).

That is why my grasp on American history is lacking, but my grasp on the Classical era is fairly strong. I do not know why, but I just found that period more interesting.

I like the late modernist to early post-modern period when it comes to poetry, but for literature I jump back to the Classical era.

But you, my friend, are 100% modernist.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
@DaveXR650

The question is still out there.

You have described the cross as the Father laying our sins on Jesus and punishing Him for our sins. You note that Jesus bore those sins, suffered God's punishment, and died.

Do you believe Christ Himself did anything to save us (other than passively exist)?

Also, how is your theory NOT God viewing Christ as if He were guilty and condemning Him to suffer His wrath for sins in order to clear the wicked? (How is it not an unjust abomination)
 

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
The question is still out there.

You have described the cross as the Father laying our sins on Jesus and punishing Him for our sins. You note that Jesus bore those sins, suffered God's punishment, and died.

Do you believe Christ Himself did anything to save us (other than passively exist)?

Also, how is your theory NOT God viewing Christ as if He were guilty and condemning Him to suffer His wrath for sins in order to clear the wicked? (How is it not an unjust abomination)
Seriously Jon. You read like someone on the former fundy blogspot who has "deconverted" and left the faith.
I can find many of your arguments there, almost word for word. You need to be careful. Owen has a whole chapter on this type of stuff, written long before the modernist era.

One thing you can't say without looking like a blithering idiot is that Calvinists don't believe Jesus did anything to save us. That is the main argument they use against non-Calvinists. That being that Jesus did not make it possible for you to save yourself but they he actually did save the elect. Yet you go right ahead and keep affirming this and do so as a person who supposedly used to be a Calvinist.

There is an aspect of Jesus' work that was passive as well as active. Active speaking of his life of perfect obedience as well as his work as our high priest. Read Hebrews again.

As for this charge of God punishing the righteous being a contradiction of some sort, for a more complete explanation consult any of the modern apostate theologians or use the website I listed above. They make the exact same charge word for word. The fact is that we can't know how this was done precisely but we do know that we are given full explanation of the uniqueness of Jesus as fully man and fully God. A complete understanding of that will help realize that only Jesus could have done this and it explains in a sense how God is folding the just wrath for the one's he save back upon himself. And here you are saying he has no right to do this? Romans 8:32-34 explains this very well if you would just read it.

Honestly Jon, you have caused me to really look at this carefully and I do see that the case is even more convincing than I thought for the Calvinist explanation of the atonement verses the hopeful universalism or the idea of a potential atonement available to those who step forward to take it. But I still am concerned about you. You have an obviously high I.Q., seem to have time to think, and don't seem to be willing to rely on any type of pastor or teacher or mentor. You are a classic setup for deconstruction my friend.
 
Top