This is the context Calvin contributed, NOT Scripture.
It is RCC doctrine within the context of retributive justice.
-
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!
Do You Agree with Calvin or Wright On the Nature of the Atonement?
- Thread starter Yeshua1
- Start date
- Status
It is RCC doctrine within the context of retributive justice.
Again, you (and the Reformers, and the RCC) hold that sin called for a penalty. That is NOT what the Scriptures teach.
The Scriptures clearly state that sin PAYS a wage. It is a matter of reaping the benefits of sin. Sowing to the flesh of the flesh will REAP corruption.
Sin PAYS, by God withdrawing support and allowing the payment of rebuke that the nature has available. Be it sickness, famine, destruction, ... it is always a payment due.
Look throughout the OT for examples of the WAGES of sin. Were they not presented for that which the people worked? When they did evil, were they not paid for that evil? When their thoughts were turned from God, to worship idols, did they not earn the wage for that evil?
They took away some of the more egregious and gregarious aspects of excess of the RCC teaching, certainly.
However, they did not depart from the teaching as reflected in their view of the work of the Cross. Displayed by your own desire to have some physical punishment as satisfying some aspect of the brutality of God.
There was not "WORK" in atonement done by the lamb or the Lamb.
Atonement is by the BLOOD, and the blood was given, freely.
There is NO suffering in the atonement, only death, for the blood letting of the lamb brought death, the blood letting of the Messiah Lamb brought death.
Yet, the RCC and Reformers BOTH want some suffering, some penitence, some justification as a result of the brutality of the Cross.
Why not hold such treatment as the Scriptures do?
As identification marks.
Yes, if God desired all sinners to be saved by compulsion, all would be saved. So its your compulsion doctrine that is unbiblical.
LOL, can you not grasp the fact that compulsion is the unbiblical doctrine. He desires all sinners to be saved, and so if He used compulsion, all would be saved. Now you can deny that God desires all men to be saved, which shows your contempt for scripture or deny your doctrine of compulsion. So what do you do, you change the subject.
Calvin contribution to us is the rediscovering of the real Gospel and the correct view on the atonement!
There is indeed wrath of God towards sins and sinners to be propiated/payment made for though!
It is apparent that you know not the Scriptures state:
14What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means!15For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
16So then it depends not on human will or exertion,b but on God, who has mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
19You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?
22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
I would agree in part.
Calvin was an instrument used by God, certainly.
However, the REAL gospel has been taught from the time of Christ.
It was not “rediscovered” by Calvin or anyone else.
Let’s pretend for a bit that I agree.
The question then would need to be addressed, how long does one remain in the lake of fire until their sins are sufficiently paid?
Eternity isn’t the answer, for the person didn’t live that long to begin with. Each sin would have a level of “account due” that payment made in suffering would cancel.
Since this "correct view" of the gospel is not actually in the Bible, how do you believe Calvin came across it? How do you know it is true?
You have got to change the subject, change the subject, change the subject one more time,
cuz your doctrine is bogus, bad, and baloney all the time
Please grasp the fact that compulsion is the unbiblical doctrine. He desires all sinners to be saved, and so if He used compulsion, all would be saved. Now you can deny that God desires all men to be saved, which shows your contempt for scripture or deny your doctrine of compulsion. So what do you do, you change the subject.
cuz your doctrine is bogus, bad, and baloney all the time
Please grasp the fact that compulsion is the unbiblical doctrine. He desires all sinners to be saved, and so if He used compulsion, all would be saved. Now you can deny that God desires all men to be saved, which shows your contempt for scripture or deny your doctrine of compulsion. So what do you do, you change the subject.
Before you run about claiming your not, you need to understand that which you state as your view is found in the semi-pelagic statements.
Please grasp the fact that semi-Pelagianism is heretical.
That you don’t recognize your statements reflecting a heretical view is alarming.
Even the presentation of the unscriptural teaching of “preceding” or “prevenient” grace understands that the fallen person, including the fallen will, is incapable of its own authority to do as you desire.
Is your desire to mar what you do not agree so strongly influencing you that you would do such injustice to the Scriptures?
The real Gospel was held by some within the RCC, but the official church position was another and false way to get saved by God, and so Luther/Calvin the reformers indeed did rediscover and bring that real Gospel back!
The question actually is were they paid for at time of the Judgement? If not by Jesus, than the sinner will be/
Brother, this is what I've been saying - you are reading tradition into the Scripture.
So the sinner does not pay for his own sin debt?
For when you were slaves of sin, you were free from allegiance to righteousness. So what fruit was produced then from the things you are now ashamed of? For the end of those things is death. But now, since you have been liberated from sin and have become enslaved to God, you have your fruit, which results in sanctification-and the end is eternal life! For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
- Status