Featured Doctrine, and church membership

The OT sacrificial system underlain the concept of pst for coming Messiah, as Paul and peter and Jesus themselves help to that view of his atonement!

 

What is the "wages of sin?" Is it physical punishment or death?

Did not the Christ Die?

The manner of death was prescribed in the OT. It was to signify the type of death to mark that death in definable terms.

However, those definable terms do not make the Christ any more dead than what He was. He died: Physically dead. The Son commended His Spirit to the Father. (See Revelation when the slain lamb appeared in the midst and took the Scroll)

For some reason, folks look at the human depraved inflictions of wounds upon the Savior as if that suffering were part of the "judgement for lost sinners."

Not completely true, for such wounds were for our benefit according to Isaiah 53. Our transgressions, our peace, our healing were the results of the depraved inflictions we gave out.

This is why Isaiah also tells of the Father being pleased that the Son. Again, IMO, the Berean Study Bible does a good job in translating Isaiah 53:

10Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush Him
and to cause Him to suffer;
and when His soul is made a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days,
and the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

11After the anguish of His soul,
He will see the light of life and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant will justify many,
and He will bear their iniquities.​

Did not the Son pray in the Garden, "Not my will, but thine be done."?

God used depraved Humanity to perform His will. He didn't have to dump judgement upon the Son. The Son took human depravity yet did not become depraved, but forgave. Christ took all done to Him physically not for God's benefit, but for humankind.

What was God's response? According to the passage in Isaiah, it was that He prolonged the days of Christ, Christ prospers, Justification of many and the bearing the iniquities of many.

We see all these in action in the NT.

 

Where in any of the OT temple sacrifices were the sacrifices wounded, bruised, fur pulled out, smitten, whipped, arrayed in robes, crowned with thorns,....?

Beside, the fact is that the PSA theory was not developed until the early 1500's under Martin Luther's thinking.

Prior to that time, there was no PSA theory, but other substitution and redemption theories that are more valid (imo).

 

Jesus in his death upon the Cross experienced the Hell of the lost at that time, as he was being the sin bearer of his own before a Holy God the father!

 

was not formalized, but just as calvinism is taught in the scriptures before made "official" was found in the scriptures!

 

Hebrews 10:1 explains, "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, . . ."

 

Being the Sin bearer does not automatically equate to experiencing hell. Christ was never corrupted, neither in body nor in Spirit. Therefore, hell was not His destiny. Just as a newborn does not enter hell, though born in sin.

Where did Jesus tell that He was going? He told the thief - Paradise. There the Scriptures indicate that He presented Himself before those in that estate, and then that great place was removed, and hell enlarged itself.

That is a major problem, because for 1500 years from the early church teaching until Martin Luther, there is no scheme such as comes close to PSA (to my understanding).

The first churches relied upon a teaching of a blend of both ransom and victory, ever grateful for the two and well founded in Scripture.

They did not focus upon the way the Christ died as those who followed for during the first two centuries, crucifixion was common, scourging was typical interrogation technique, and mockery was all part of it. So, what was different? It was the victory over sin and the grave - the resurrection.

At no point am I diminishing the horribleness of the treatment nor the death of my Lord and Savior. He bears such marks even to this day, and the Scriptures teach that when He returns that all Israel will look upon Him and morn.

Nor am I diminishing that such treatment was for the benefit of the humanity and that such was pleasing to God. That is all found in other substitution schemes, as well as ransom and victory.

Personally, my opinion is that the artist depictions began a idol worship of the people. The RC soon took advantage by seeing a way to finance building cathedrals, and other endeavors. Martin Luther as well as John Calvin, being both school firstly as lawyers and in the RC, having been indoctrinated to the thinking of sin needing penitence for forgiveness, slipped into the PSA thinking.

Some of the PSA aspects are according to the Scriptures, but not all are true to the portrayal of the OT nor to the statements of the NT.

 

It would have been nice for you to place your reference in context, for then folks would see that it does not concern itself with what you insinuated.

1For the law is only a shadow of the good things to come, not the realities themselves.
It can never, by the same sacrifices offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2If it could, would not the offerings have ceased? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt the guilt of their sins.3Instead, those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

5Therefore, when Christ came into the world,
He said:

“Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
but a body You prepared for Me.
6In burnt offerings and sin offerings
You took no delight.
7Then I said, ‘Here I am, it is written about Me in the scroll:
I have come to do Your will, O God.’ ”​

8In the passage above He says, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings You did not desire, nor did You delight in them” (although they are offered according to the law). 9Then He adds, “Here I am, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first to establish the second. 10And by that will, we have been sanctified through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11Day after day every priest stands to minister and to offer again and again the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12But when this Priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God. 13Since that time, He waits for His enemies to be made a footstool for His feet, 14because by a single offering He has made perfect for all time those who are being sanctified.

15The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this.
First He says:

16“This is the covenant I will make with them
after those days, declares the Lord.
I will put My laws in their hearts
and inscribe them on their minds.”​

17Then He adds:

“Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more.”​

18And where these have been forgiven, an offering for sin is no longer needed.

​

 

most of this post is untrue, pejorative in nature and sophomoric at best. It’s full of hyper emotionalism and entirely based on a presupposition prior to any factual work or effort. It has no value and is a waste of bandwidth

 

OK. Thank you.

 

Your false characture of PSA does not make PSA false. Only your characture of it is false.

Now how about you presenting Christ's death on the behalf of our sins as you understand it.

 

Jesus tasted being forsaken by he father, as that was the Cup that he did not want to drink in His humanity!