JonC's view of Substitution in the Atonement

[JonC]

Romans 3:23, ". . . For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; . . ."

Yep. Here are some truths:

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
2. There are none righteous, no, not one.
3. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.
4. God will not punish the Righteous or acquit the unjust.
5. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

A doctrine that removes even one of those truths is a false doctrine.

It is not a problem to be solved, but a truth to accept.

God is just and the justifier of sinners.

 

[JesusFan]

My view has already been laid out. You actually repeated it (or extracts) when you quoted the ECF's.

Anyway, I believe Jesus had to physically assume human nature, unite it to his divine nature, overcome temptation throughout his life in reliance on the Holy Spirit, bearing our sins bodily on the cross suffer and die under the powers of the World (under the powers of Satan....i.e., the Serpent striking the heel), conquer the grave (victory over sin and death...crushing the Serpent's head), ascend to the Father as humanity’s representative and share the Spirit of new humanity with all who believe.

His death was as the great sin bearer , a sit was the predetermined will and plan of the Trinity to have Him nailed upon that Cross!

 

[JesusFan]

That is my point. Why not just say "Justification"?

In the past I have quoted from the gospels and JesusFan responded that was not "Pauline Justification".

My point is there is one justification (Paul explained what was already given, his was not a different justification).

Pauline Justification is the very heart of the Gospel of Christ, as His inspired teaching and doctrine to us in Romans are the fullest understanding of revelation from God to us what Justification meant!

 

[JesusFan]

Obviously no Christian believes that 'Pauline Justification' is different from that which our Lord taught. George Smeaton, a 19th Century Scottish theologian wrote Christ's Doctrine of the Atonement and The Apostles' Doctrine of the Atonement )both published by Banner of Truth). He showed that they were both the same doctrine (Penal Substitution).
The term, as I said, is a modern one, and @JesusFan used it. It seems to refer to the Reformers' understanding of Justification as expounded by the Apostle Paul, in answer to the writings of NPP.

Paul had revealed to Him by the Lord Jesus the fullest revelation on biblical justification, see Romans, hence term of "Pauline Justification"

 

[JesusFan]

Christ could not have succeeded where Adam fails without suffering and dying under the powers of this World. As the ECF's pointed out, He had to take in all that it is to be human (including the curse).

It is not about defending doctrines. All a defence needs is a good argument. It is about testing doctrines against what is written in Scripture.

Simply put, the only place we find divine justice demanding sins be punished for them to be forgiven is in 16th century philosophy.

This should be evident to all, as I have been asking this board (including you) for passages stating that God must punish to forgive. For over a decade all that has been offered are passages interpreted using the assumption divine justice means punishing sins therefore God must punish either Christ (our sins in Him) or us. But the very foundation of Penal Substitution Theory is not in the Bible.

Jesus suffered and died die to the predetermined plan of the trinity, not due to 'evil world, nor satan!"

 

[JesusFan]

Yep. Here are some truths:

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
2. There are none righteous, no, not one.
3. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.
4. God will not punish the Righteous or acquit the unjust.
5. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

A doctrine that removes even one of those truths is a false doctrine.

It is not a problem to be solved, but a truth to accept.

God is just and the justifier of sinners.

Jesus suffered for us as he who knew no sin became the sin bearer for our sake, and as such, had to experience the same treatment from God the father as we deserved as lost sinners!

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yep. Here are some truths:

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
2. There is none righteous, no, not one.
3. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.
4. God will not punish the Righteous or acquit the unjust.
5. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

A doctrine that removes even one of those truths is a false doctrine.

It is not a problem to be solved, but a truth to accept.

God is just and the justifier of sinners.

It would be nice if you would explain how your version of Christus Victor incorporates these truths. However, I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than
630 pm EDT / 330 pm PDT

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yep. Here are some truths:

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
2. There are none righteous, no, not one.
3. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.
4. God will not punish the Righteous or acquit the unjust.
5. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

A doctrine that removes even one of those truths is a false doctrine.

It is not a problem to be solved, but a truth to accept.

God is just and the justifier of sinners.

Four more thruths:
1. Christ ded for the ungodly.
2. He was pierced for our transgressions.
3. By His wounds we are healed.
4. It pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.

 

[JonC]

Four more thruths:
1. Christ ded for the ungodly.
2. He was pierced for our transgressions.
3. By His wounds we are healed.
4. It pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.

I agree. Except I'd say Christ died for the ungodly. Your phone must be like mine.

 

[JonC]

It would be nice if you would explain how your version of Christus Victor incorporates these truths. However, I'm not holding my breath.

Serious??? All theories of Atonement incorporates those truths (perhaps Penal Substitution Theory doesn't include the truth that God will not punish the just for the unjust).

 

[JonC]

It would be nice if you would explain how your version of Christus Victor incorporates these truths. However, I'm not holding my breath.

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

We have all sinned. Sin (against God) is, by definition, falling short of the glory of God.

2. There are none righteous, no, not one.

See above. We fail to meet the standard of righteousness.

3. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.

The wicked simply will not inherit the kingdom of God. Also, flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom of God.

4. God will not punish the Righteous or acquit the unjust.

God will not punish the Righteous to acquit the unjust because both punishing the just and acquitting the unjust are abominations to God.

5. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

God is just. He will punish the wicked, they shall not enter His kingdom. They shall be cast into the Lake of Fire. God justifies sinners. He recreates the sinner, sprinkles clean water on them and they are clean, removes their old heart and gives them a new one, removes their old spirit and gives them a new one, puts His Spirit in them. There is nothing wicked about the Spirit of God.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

We have all sinned. Sin (against God) is, by definition, falling short of the glory of God.

2. There are none righteous, no, not one.

See above. We fail to meet the standard of righteousness.

3. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.

The wicked simply will not inherit the kingdom of God. Also, flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom of God.

4. God will not punish the Righteous or acquit the unjust.

God will not punish the Righteous to acquit the unjust because both punishing the just and acquitting the unjust are abominations to God.

5. God is just and the justifier of sinners.

God is just. He will punish the wicked, they shall not enter His kingdom. They shall be cast into the Lake of Fire. God justifies sinners. He recreates the sinner, sprinkles clean water on them and they are clean, removes their old heart and gives them a new one, removes their old spirit and gives them a new one, puts His Spirit in them. There is nothing wicked about the Spirit of God.

So why did Jesus have to die? And what happened to 'Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins'?

 

[JonC]

So why did Jesus have to die? And what happened to 'Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins'?

"Sin" as used in Scripture is human sin. The wages of sin is death. How can sin be forgiven but by the shedding of blood?

Leviticus 17:11 - For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

All forgiveness is Christ centered. It is His blood (He is the Life, it is in Him everything holds together, everything came into being).

Christ had to die under the curse of man, under the bondage, under the powers of this World in order to redeem man from the curse.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

"Sin" as used in Scripture is human sin. The wages of sin is death. How can sin be forgiven but by the shedding of blood?

Leviticus 17:11 - For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

All forgiveness is Christ centered. It is His blood (He is the Life, it is in Him everything holds together, everything came into being).

Christ had to die under the curse of man, under the bondage, under the powers of this World in order to redeem man from the curse.

Do you not see the disconnect between your accounts? Posts 172 and 174 are like two entirely separate theories.
The problem with your last line is Isaiah 53:10.

 

[JonC]

Do you not see the disconnect between your accounts? Posts 172 and 174 are like two entirely separate theories.
The problem with your last line is Isaiah 53:10.

I understand that you see a disconnection, but it is not there.

Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

I completely agree with the passage as it appears in Scripture. That said, I am not sure that I agree with what you believe the passage teaches (I'm not sure what you think it teaches). I believe it teaches exactly what is written.

Perhaps the primary difference between you and I is the role we assign to Scripture (the actual text). I take an approach that many dismiss as I sincerely believe primary doctrines are written in God's Word, hence the test of doctrine should be what is written in the text of Scripture.

I freely admit that I don't hold some doctrines as you hold your doctrine of Atonement (they cannot pass the test of Scripture as actually existing in the Bible). But these are things that I find less important and issues of interpretation.

When it comes to the Atonement, I believe the doctrine we teach has to be present in the text of God's Word because it is a primary doctrine (a doctrine upon which other doctrines are developed, or through which other passages are interpreted).

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than
630 pm EDT / 330 pm PDT[/QUOTE

This thread is closed