Thank you for this helpful post.It is crystal clear.:thumbs:
-
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!
Penal Substitutionary Atonement
- Thread starter The Biblicist
- Start date
Thank you for this helpful post.It is crystal clear.:thumbs:
Christ came for the sheep alone. That's who He laid down His life for --John 10:11,15. He gives them eternal life --John 10:28. Christ gives eternal life to all those the Father has given Him --John 17:2, John 6:37. Christ died for "the Church of God which He bought with His own blood." --Acts 20:28.
"Christ loved us and gave himself up for us" Ephesians 5:2. Who is being referenced? "Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her." Ephesians 5:25. The sheep and the church are the same folks. There are many more terms in Holy Writ for the elect. But Christ did not die for the church and everybody else. He specifically laid down His life for His sheep --the church of God --His Body.
Have you read Matthew 25? The sheep will be separated from the goats. See verses 32,33. The sheep alone will be blessed by the Father. The kingdom prepared for them since the foundation of the world will be given to them as an inheritance. See verse 34.
The wicked goats "will go away to eternal punishment" --verse 46. These are cursed ones. They will be placed "into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." --verse 41.
The Lord doesn't pray for --which means He does not intercede -- for the goats (non-elect). He tells them He does not even know them. See Matt. 25:12 and Matt. 7:23.
He died for all. Obviously "sheep" used in this context means more than just "his" sheep as he does differentiate.
[FONT="]John 10:12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.[/FONT]
--Either that, or you believe that "the supposed elect" loses his salvation when the wolf comes and catches "the elect."
Sheep in this passage is used quite generically, as in all mankind, just as it is in Isa.53:6 "All we like sheep have gone astray..." This is a verse commonly used to demonstrate the depravity of man. All mankind has gone asstray. We lead each other astray. Sheep are stupid--like mankind.
Jesus died for all sheep in this chapter. Then he differentiates between them by saying "my sheep."
Context!
First, He draws all men to Himself. That excludes no one. Those who are convicted of their sin are drawn to Him. They are the ones that receive Him.
The word "church" is not capitalized, and you are inferring an interpretation that is not there. The word is ekklesia and always means local assembly. You are avoiding context once again. What is the context?
[FONT="]Acts 20:17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.[/FONT]
--He said to the elders of the church at Ephesus:
[FONT="]Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, (which is at Ephesus) which he hath purchased with his own blood.[/FONT]
--In context he is speaking of the local church. He died for me; he died for you; he died for the local church; he died for all. Not one of those statements is false. It is your plucking the scripture out of its context and then pitting on verse against another that is wrong. Pitiful!
The same people are being reference as were in Acts 20:28--the believers in Ephesus. If you want to take it according to its historical context (an idea put forth by Icon), then the atonement was only for first century believers, and not applicable to us at all. That makes as much sense as your view--only a select view. At least we would have the context narrowed down better--first century believers only. But if it is applicable to you, then it is applicable to all.
There is no such thing as "The Body," His Body," "The Church." It only exists in the minds of those who have been misled by tradition. "Ekklesia" means "assembly." There is no such thing as an "unassembled assembly," an assembly that has no pastor, no deacons, no place to meet, no one to preach, no function whatsoever. It doesn't exist. It is a fairy tale. I don't believe in fairy tales.
It is an illustration that Jesus uses that will take place at the end of the Tribulation and right before the Millennial Kingdom. It has no application to us now. Read it again. It has to do with the separation of nations. Specifically those nations that were friendly to the Jews as opposed to those nations that were opposed to the Jews. It has nothing to do with this day and age.
Yes they will. I imagine that all those opposed to the Jews will be nations as the Islamic nations virulently opposed to all that Christianity stands for.
Since this takes place at the end of the Tribulation, and the Bride of Christ has already been raptured, of course he doesn't know them. Your entire point is moot. They are the enemies of the cross of Christ.
However, that doesn't mean he didn't die for them.
He died for Judas Iscariot as well. He gave him every chance to repent while he was with him, and still he betrayed him. Did He love Judas? Yes!
Another solid post....:applause::applause:
The place of mercy?
What is the sin of the world that the Lamb of God taketh away?
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
U. When was it appointed?
B. Is one judged before he dies, after he is dead, or because of the following; For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. Will he be resurrected and then judged?
What sin (singular) brought the wages, the death? What sin (singular) does the Lamb of God take away?
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
U. When was it appointed?
B. Is one judged before he dies, after he is dead, or because of the following; For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. Will he be resurrected and then judged?
What sin (singular) brought the wages, the death? What sin (singular) does the Lamb of God take away?
You have contradicted yourself. You claim on the one hand that He draws all people to himself --then you withdraw that and say that those who are convicted of their sin are drawn to Him.
Each and every person past, present and future are not drawn to Christ. It means all sorts of people. It's not a mere attraction. Those that are drawn by Him are united with Him. Christ doesn't go half-way.
I'm not joining your pity party. The local assembly (or assemblies) in Ephesus is being addressed. But obviously it applies to all the elect of God from around the world in all ages. Christ laid down His life for His Bride --the Church Universal. Christ did not die for the believers in Ephesus alone!
What do you do with 1 Cor. 12:12-30? Look at verse 27 especially :"Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it." Was Paul only referencing the believers in Corinth, or is it a truth that applies to all believer everywhere? That latter most certainly. All believers are the Bride of Christ --His cherished possession.
And you are off and running on your eschatological jaunt. Matthew 25:31-46 is dealing with all of humanity. Two distinct groups are featured --the lost and the redeemed --goats and sheep respectively. It's dealing with eternal destinies. Christ does not save or die for those He doesn't know.
Yes, but mercy had a price that must be "satisfied" did it not? What was it that was placed upon the lid of the ark of covenant between the cheribums? Was it not the blood of Christ? To propitiate means to SATISFY God's wrath against sin as the basis for mercy.
The Jewish Mindset
When Jesus went into Samaria the Samaritan woman asked "How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans." - Jn. 4:9
Did not Jesus tell her that "salvation was of the Jews"
When the Gentile woman from Seraphonicea came to Jesus did not Jesus say:
Mt 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.
Was not even the form Jewish proselytes that came from various countries like the Enuch that embraced Christ as the Messiah were treated as second class church members in regard to their widows?
Acts 6:1 ¶ And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.
The Jewish Church in Jerusalem did not go to the gentiles until chapter ten, and then only by coersion due to God showing Peter THREE times he was not to treat as unclean what God had cleansed and even then the first words he had for gentiles was:
Acts 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
Even then, God had to send persecution to get the gospel to the Gentiles in Acts 8-11 and even then we read:
Acts 11:19 ¶ Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
Only the Jewish Proselyted church members would preach to Gentiles:
Acts 11:20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
Finally, God had to call and commission an Apostle for the Gentiles in order to bring the gospel to Gentiles as the church at Jerusalem simply would not do it:
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Even after this special called apostle to the Gentiles, Peter, James and John committed themselves to the "circumcision" while agreeing Paul was to go to the "uncircumcision"
Gal. 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision..
When James writes his epistles it is to the "twelve tribes" or the Hebrew Christians:
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
When John writes, he writes to those who had already been given the "old" commandment which is also the "new" commandment - thus writing to Hebrew Christians.
The whole letter of the "Hebrews" was written to Hebrew Christians alone.
My point is, that this mindset of Hebrew Christianity was generally opposed to evangelizing the Gentiles and the evidence demonstrates it clearly. It is in the epistles written by Hebrew Apostles to Hebrew Christians that we find the emphasis upon "the world" and "the whole world" in regard to the gospel.
The term "world" and "all" used in these Hebrew Apostolic writings to Hebrew Christians was designed to turn them from their Jewish inclusivism to accepting ALL RACES, CLASSES AND GENDERS = "world" and thus all mankind WITHOUT DISTINCTION of race, class or gender "all" as objects of God's grace.
Rev. 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
Ga 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Jesus did not come to redeem all human beings without exception but came to give eternal life only to as many as the Father had given him to save:
Jn. 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Take note that God gave him "power over ALL flesh", but he was not to give eternal life within that sphere of flesh to any more than "as thou hast given me" and "ALL" that the Father gave him do come to him and "of ALL" the Father gave him "NOTHING" will be lost, thus proving he did not come to give eternal life to "all flesh".
THE JEWISH MINDSET
When Jesus went into Samaria the Samaritan woman asked "How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans." - Jn. 4:9
Did not Jesus tell her that "salvation was of the Jews"
When the Gentile woman from Seraphonicea came to Jesus did not Jesus say:
Mt 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.
Was not even the form Jewish proselytes that came from various countries like the Enuch that embraced Christ as the Messiah were treated as second class church members in regard to their widows?
Acts 6:1 ¶ And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.
The Jewish Church in Jerusalem did not go to the gentiles until chapter ten, and then only by coersion due to God showing Peter THREE times he was not to treat as unclean what God had cleansed and even then the first words he had for gentiles was:
Acts 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
Even then, God had to send persecution to get the gospel to the Gentiles in Acts 8-11 and even then we read:
Acts 11:19 ¶ Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
Only the Jewish Proselyted church members would preach to Gentiles:
Acts 11:20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
Finally, God had to call and commission an Apostle for the Gentiles in order to bring the gospel to Gentiles as the church at Jerusalem simply would not do it:
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Even after this special called apostle to the Gentiles, Peter, James and John committed themselves to the "circumcision" while agreeing Paul was to go to the "uncircumcision"
Gal. 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision..
When James writes his epistles it is to the "twelve tribes" or the Hebrew Christians:
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
When John writes, he writes to those who had already been given the "old" commandment which is also the "new" commandment - thus writing to Hebrew Christians.
The whole letter of the "Hebrews" was written to Hebrew Christians alone.
My point is, that this mindset of Hebrew Christianity was generally opposed to evangelizing the Gentiles and the evidence demonstrates it clearly. It is in the epistles written by Hebrew Apostles to Hebrew Christians that we find the emphasis upon "the world" and "the whole world" in regard to the gospel.
The term "world" and "all" used in these Hebrew Apostolic writings to Hebrew Christians was designed to turn them from their Jewish inclusivism to accepting ALL RACES, CLASSES AND GENDERS = "world" and thus all mankind WITHOUT DISTINCTION of race, class or gender "all" as objects of God's grace.
Rev. 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
Ga 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Jesus did not come to redeem all human beings without exception but came to give eternal life only to as many as the Father had given him to save:
Jn. 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Take note that God gave him "power over ALL flesh", but he was not to give eternal life within that sphere of flesh to any more than "as thou hast given me" and "ALL" that the Father gave him do come to him and "of ALL" the Father gave him "NOTHING" will be lost, thus proving he did not come to give eternal life to "all flesh".
I am not the one with the contradiction.
This is precisely what Christ said, and not to his disciples only but to all, in public:
[FONT="]John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.[/FONT]
He continues the same discourse to the end of the chapter:
[FONT="]John 12:44 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.[/FONT]
Who was he talking to?
[FONT="]John 12:42 Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:[/FONT]
--It was a mixed multitude. Some of the chief rulers believed. Obviously there were Pharisee (whom they feared) that were also present. The greater context gives you a better idea.
He is in the Temple at Jerusalem. The Chief Priests along with the Pharisees are there plotting to kill him. Thousands have gathered for the feast.
Jesus has made it plain. He came to all the world. They have only one option. They will either be judged by him or be saved by him. That is still the option that all people have in the world today. There is only one way of salvation; and that is through Christ. If anyone say that there is another they preach a false gospel. This is the message Christ was getting across right here.
His bride, yes; universal church, no! No such animal exists as a universal church. It is a contradiction in terminology. One cannot have an "unassembled assembly." How does that make any sense? It doesn't. This is where OR's and Icon's favorite commentator comes useful. (I have never read his commentary, but from time to time I read his translation). I am speaking of Darby, of course. He faithfully translates ekklesia as assembly every time it appears. If the KJV had done that there would be a lot less confusion in our ecclesiology.
[FONT="]Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to all the flock, wherein the Holy Spirit has set you as overseers, to shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own.[/FONT]
--It was their duty to pastor or shepherd the assembly of God which was located in Ephesus. He had gathered together the elders of Ephesus (vs.17) and was addressing them! Context!
As much as it hurts your pride the U-Church is not in this picture.
I agree with the statement that all believers are the bride. They are also in the kingdom. They are also in the family of God--we are brothers and sisters in Christ. But they are not in the "Church." There is no such thing. The word means "local church" every time.
1Cor.12:12-30? Are you sure you want to go there?
It is a local church only passage. You have to do some serious eisigesis to make it anything else but!
He is speaking specifically to the church of Corinth and its problem of divisiveness. It has already been addressed before, but here in the context of spiritual gifts given to the local church he addresses the problem once again. Notice:
[FONT="]1 Corinthians 12:14 For the body is not one member, but many.
15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?[/FONT]
The "body" that is the local church as a whole, has many members. They all need to work together or the church will continue to be divided. This church had ALL the gifts.
[FONT="]1 Corinthians 1:7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:[/FONT]
--They didn't lack in any of them.
Many of the Corinthians being "carnal" wanted more than what God had given them. As in Charismatic circles today, they wanted to look spiritual at any cost; they wanted to be seen by others; they weren't content with some of the "lesser gifts." The fourteenth chapter gives us the clues we need here that many of them were seeking after tongues when the gift really wasn't theirs to seek after.
So Paul tells them that they must use the gifts that God gave them:
[FONT="]15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?[/FONT]
The foot cannot be the hand. Not everyone can be a hand.
[FONT="]1 Corinthians 12:16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?[/FONT]
--Not everyone can be an eye.
--We all have to work together in the local church contributing the various talents and gifts that God has given us.
[FONT="]1 Corinthians 12:20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.[/FONT]
--This is the central theme. The local church is one body, but it has many members, and we all have to work together as one unified body.
[FONT="]1 Corinthians 12:25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.[/FONT]
--Now were getting down to basics. These verses can never apply to a U-Church. It is impossible. It speaks of caring one for another. Tell me can you physically care for a sick person over in Africa, Asia or South America? If not, then how is this speaking of a U-Church? It isn't. It is local church only.
[FONT="]1 Corinthians 12:26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.[/FONT]
--Applicable to local churches only! How can you suffer with those you have never seen nor heard? Impossible! But we do care for, suffer with, and rejoice with the others in our own local church when they go through trials and/or win victories.
There is no U-church.
I agree. All of humanity that is left at the end of the Tribulation. :smilewinkgrin:
The Bride will have been raptured seven years previous to that time.
He died for Judas Iscariot.
He died for both thieves on the cross. Only one repented. Both equally had the same chance. He paid the penalty for all our sins. His blood is sufficient for all the sins of the world. You seem to think Christ was not as powerful as either He said or could be. Why do you believe in a "weakened" Christ?
He is all-powerful, and died for all the sins of all mankind. Whether or not man appropriates that gift of salvation unto himself is up to him.
Take note that God gave him "power over ALL flesh", but he was not to give eternal life within that sphere of flesh to any more than "as thou hast given me" and "ALL" that the Father gave him do come to him and "of ALL" the Father gave him "NOTHING" will be lost, thus proving he did not come to give eternal life to "all flesh".
I agree with you, yet let me ask.
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, From Gal 3:22 All men are born concluded under the sin (singular), which I believe to be the sin of Adam. That sin applies to all men. However, "Behold the Lamb of God that takes away the sin (singular) of the world. The sin of Adam.
That was, "the Passover." The shed blood of the lamb that would wash away sins. Now the Passover is past the sin (singular) has been dealt with.
Then begin the holy convocation, rest days, feast days, of the LORD.
Immediately following the Passover, the following day, begins the unleavening, the removing of sin. Day 15 and day 21 are holy convocations, rest days.
For unleavening to take place something needed to take place between these days.
And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 1 Cor 15:17
If Christ is not raised from the dead is anyone's sins washed away in his shed blood? Without the resurrection has anyone been unleavened by the sacrifice of the Passover?
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
What regeneration allowed the blood of Christ to wash away our sins? Was it the regeneration of being the first begotten from the dead.
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Rev 1:5
BTW that resurrection/regeneration is the mercy for the a/c of his blood you ask about in another thread. propitiation
Now sin and sins are taken of by God and his Son what about those the Father is giving the Son.
Fifty days from the firstfruit of them that slept, the resurrection, is the feast of firstfruit.
Did that begin the firstfruit of the Spirit Romans 8:23?
Are these who have the firstfruit of the Spirit the same as these? Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. James 1:18
Are these the ones the Father has given to the Son?
But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 1 Cor 1:23
Does the, "afterward they that are Christ's at his coming," take place on the next holy convocation, rest day, feast day?
Does kind of first fruit of his creatures, imply fruit of the same kind at a later time.
What about the other holy convocations, rest days, feast days.
First, you cannot determine doctrine by types and symbols simply because they are too easy to twist and turn to suite whatever idea you want to support. Doctrine must be determined by clear unambiguous precepts and teaching.
Second, you are attempting to determine New Testament doctrine on the basis of Old Testament instead of determining Old Testament by New Testament teaching.
Did not know that was what I was doing, however thanks for your response.
Basically I was asking questions.
Does first fruit imply, more to come, of same likeness, at some other time?
Yes, the firstfruits were given to the Lord as a tithe, and then it was followed by the harvest. The firstfruits are like in kind to what would be harvested. The bodily resurrection in a glorified state was the firstfruit to the bodily resurrections at the end of the age.