Propitiation (words have meanings)

[JonC]

Some seem to think that the words "propitiate" and "propitiation" are words unique to the Bible and treat these words as meaning a wide array of religious philosophy.

The word "propitiation" is an English word derived from the Latin ‘favorable, or gracious’ .

The word "propitiate" means to reconcile (as in reconciling a relationship) from one party to another.

Here is an example:

"The committee tried to propitiate the mob by announcing it was saddened by the conduct"


In the Bible the word translated propitiation (that which propitiares) is used three times pointing to Jesus as their propitiation for our sins. The word can also be translated as "expiation".

The difference between propiation and expiation is propiation focuses on reconciling mankind to God while expiation focuses on Christ taking away sins. Some prefer "atoning sacrifice" as it includes both but is less specific (it is more "word for word", not attempting to narrow the meaning.


In the Bible this means that it is in Christ that we are reconciled to God.


In the Bible the word we translate as "propiate" appears once. The context is Christiabs having Christ as our High Priest who propitiates for us when we sin.

 

[JonC]

I mentioned this because some have defined propitiation as "Jesus appeasing God by experiencing His wrath for our sins". That is not interpreting the verse. It is not even defining the word (the word is a noun).

With Christ propitiating on pur behalf, the context is Christ as a Mediator advocating for Christians.

 

[JonC]

An issue that @JesusFan beings up is God's wrath against the wicked. The wicked store up wrath for themselves for the day of wrath.

So he asks (regarding the saved) "where does that wrath go?".

If anger or wrath is propitiated it goes nowhere (it is propitiated...it ceases to exist).

Calvinism assumes God's wrath is expressed, never propitiated.

This is an issue with Calvin's atonement theory.

If Jesus experienced God's punishment our sins then He is not the propitiation for our sins (He would be the substitute for us, not not the propitiation).

The propitiation for sins or a crime is something that the one being propitiated desires, never something that is viewed negatively.

God desires obedience.
Jesus was obedient to the death on a cross.

That type of thing.


Say I offended you and you are angry with me. I apologize and give you a gift card to your favorite restaurant. The gift card is a propitiation.

If you are angry about the gift card then your anger is not propitiated.

Propitiation itself eliminates the wrath. That is what the word means.

It reconciles two parties once at odds.

 

[Paleouss]

The difference between propiation and expiation is propiation focuses on reconciling mankind to God while expiation focuses on Christ taking away sins. Some prefer "atoning sacrifice" as it includes both but is less specific (it is more "word for word", not attempting to narrow the meaning.

Greetings to you JonC. Peace and hope to you in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Just my musings about this debate. This word propitiation has been difficult for many, I am no exception. At one time I even looked at it as being like the word "satisfaction". I think your analysis above works well within the perimeters of the Strong's G2433, G2434, G2435.

In defense of my brothers that hold to the strict letter of the Penal Sub. Theory. The question about wrath seems to me to be a reasonable one. Their conclusion, or the Penal Sub. conclusion about where the wrath goes, reasonably follows. But reasonably following doesn't mean it's right.

Clearly the Bible tells us that "the law brings about wrath" (Rom 4:15) and those who do not believe the Son, they are "storing up wrath" (Rom 2:5 ESV) and "the wrath of God abides on him" (John 3:36). But we as believers we have been "justified by His blood" (Rom 5:9) and He "delivers us from the wrath to come" (1The 1:10, Rom 5:9).

So it seems like a reasonable question to ask, where does the wrath go? The reason I think it is reasonable is because, of the multiple accomplishments of Christ on the cross, one of those accomplishments had something to do with the law. For we have been "delivered from the law" (Rom 7:6) because He "nailed it to the cross" (Col 2:14). Since "wrath", which is the punishment phase of the law, has something to do with the law and it says we are storing it up then how was it taken away....or where did the wrath go?

So Christ does something in regards to the law. But what is that? (we have discussed this before).

Musing and sticking to the wrath issue only regarding the law. Jesus is "indeed Christ, our Passover [who] was sacrificed for us" (1Cor 5:7, brackets mine). If Jesus is our "Passover" then it would seem to follow that the passover is the OT word picture story explaining what happens to God's wrath regarding His people. That is, by His blood God's wrath 'passes over' us.

So where does the Bible indicate God's wrath goes...according to the Bible, it passes over us. This "passes over" doesn't mean it is directed into another in our stead but simply that it "passes over". The justifying and sanctifying affects of the blood is a sufficient atoning sacrifice to satisfy the law (permanently).

Keep seeking God's truth as if it were hidden treasure (Prov 2)

 

[JonC]

Greetings to you JonC. Peace and hope to you in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Just my musings about this debate. This word propitiation has been difficult for many, I am no exception. At one time I even looked at it as being like the word "satisfaction". I think your analysis above works well within the perimeters of the Strong's G2433, G2434, G2435.

In defense of my brothers that hold to the strict letter of the Penal Sub. Theory. The question about wrath seems to me to be a reasonable one. Their conclusion, or the Penal Sub. conclusion about where the wrath goes, reasonably follows. But reasonably following doesn't mean it's right.

Clearly the Bible tells us that "the law brings about wrath" (Rom 4:15) and those who do not believe the Son, they are "storing up wrath" (Rom 2:5 ESV) and "the wrath of God abides on him" (John 3:36). But we as believers we have been "justified by His blood" (Rom 5:9) and He "delivers us from the wrath to come" (1The 1:10, Rom 5:9).

So it seems like a reasonable question to ask, where does the wrath go? The reason I think it is reasonable is because, of the multiple accomplishments of Christ on the cross, one of those accomplishments had something to do with the law. For we have been "delivered from the law" (Rom 7:6) because He "nailed it to the cross" (Col 2:14). Since "wrath", which is the punishment phase of the law, has something to do with the law and it says we are storing it up then how was it taken away....or where did the wrath go?

So Christ does something in regards to the law. But what is that? (we have discussed this before).

Musing and sticking to the wrath issue only regarding the law. Jesus is "indeed Christ, our Passover [who] was sacrificed for us" (1Cor 5:7, brackets mine). If Jesus is our "Passover" then it would seem to follow that the passover is the OT word picture story explaining what happens to God's wrath regarding His people. That is, by His blood God's wrath 'passes over' us.

So where does the Bible indicate God's wrath goes...according to the Bible, it passes over us. This "passes over" doesn't mean it is directed into another in our stead but simply that it "passes over". The justifying and sanctifying affects of the blood is a sufficient atoning sacrifice to satisfy the law (permanently).

Keep seeking God's truth as if it were hidden treasure (Prov 2)

I agree that there are multiple accomplishments based on the Cross (and Resurrection...we simetimes use "the Cross to include the entire work of God).


The reason I do not understand how "where does God's wrath go?" can be a legitimate question is twofold.

First, this wrath that the wicked are storing up for themselves for the day of wrath is not something that is material. It is not a thing. If you hurt my feelings and I be ime angry, and you apologize and I forgive you, whete did my anger go? It did not go anywhere. So I do not see the logic in how the question is worded.

Second (and more importantly), if the question were "what happens to God's wrath", or maybe "the wrathfulness God had against our wickedness", we could turn to Scripture and answer the question.

God set forth Christ as a propitiation in His blood. He is the propitiation for our sins.

What happened to God's wrath? It was propitiated in Christ (it ceased to exist).

It is impossible that Jesus suffered God's wrath AND propitiate God's wrath on our behalf. The reason is if wrath is propitiated, if punishment is propitiated, then it ceases to exist.

What many do is assume propitiation and substitution are the same. They are not.

If I am angry at you and you apologize and give me a cheesecake for an offense then the cheesecake is the propitiation with which you propitiated my anger. My anger is simply propitiated.


Regarding the Law, we can also turn to Scripture. Christ fulfilled the Law. How? By sacrifices? No. God desires not the blood of bulls but obedience. He became obedient to death, even death on a cross. He fulfilled the Law (actually, I believe the Law pointed to Christ) and canceled that certificate of debt, nailed it to a cross. But our salvation is "God's righteousness manifested apart from the Law".


I think it is interesting that Jesus' death was not under the Law. It was under the pagan worldly powers (Rome). If under the Law then He would have been stoned by the religious community and then hung on a tree.

It is also interesting that, under the Law, intentional sins (sinning "with a high hand") could not be forgiven. One had to be perfect and perfectly obey God to fulfill the Law. This is one reason I think the Law ultimately pointed to Jesus. He is the only one who coukd be judged righteous, not only according to the Law but according to perfect obedience even to die on a cross (obedience beyond the Law).


That said, I do not offer answers but simply point to "every word that comes forth from God" over any understanding. I am only pointing to the words in the text of Scripture, and (obviously) point out when something taught is not actually there as well as the meaning of words.

With "propitiation", that is not the only choice of translators. Some prefer "expiation" (the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the World". For the context, I prefer "propitiation". But either is a legitimate translation (it depends on whether the writer has removing God's wrath or taking away sins in mind).

 

[Paleouss]

I agree that there are multiple accomplishments based on the Cross (and Resurrection...we simetimes use "the Cross to include the entire work of God).

JonC, thank you for your gracious response to my post. May our Lord sharpen us through our interactions as iron sharpens iron. I will be jumping around the topics in your post and not taking them in order.

With "propitiation", that is not the only choice of translators. Some prefer "expiation" (the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the World". For the context, I prefer "propitiation". But either is a legitimate translation (it depends on whether the writer has removing God's wrath or taking away sins in mind).

I agree that these are the appropriate translations to English (to my layman understanding).

What happened to God's wrath? It was propitiated in Christ (it ceased to exist).

It is impossible that Jesus suffered God's wrath AND propitiate God's wrath on our behalf. The reason is if wrath is propitiated, if punishment is propitiated, then it ceases to exist.

From your perspective, do you think that the word "expiation" is congruent with the OT depiction of the Passover Lamb? That is, from the sacrifice and the blood of the Lamb, God's wrath 'passes over' His people? In the story of the Passover, the sacrifice AND the Jewish people applying it to their door post, seemed to "expiate" God's wrath by taking away (or sanctifying or covering) the sins of those that applied it. In this sense, the wrath "passed over" because the sins were expiated by the atoning sacrifice that was applied to the doorpost.

The reason I do not understand how "where does God's wrath go?" can be a legitimate question is twofold.

First, this wrath that the wicked are storing up for themselves for the day of wrath is not something that is material. It is not a thing.

From my perspective, I tend to agree with a form of what your reasoning is objecting to. That is, if one stores up punishment, wrath constitutes the punishment phase, then one would seem to be storying up "offenses". In the legal sense this might be called "counts", i.e., the individual will be accused of 1000 counts of sin. These 1000 counts of sin deserve God's punishment (or wrath) after judgement. So in this sense, man is storying up wrath.

The only snare to this might be verses like; 2Cor 5:21, "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us"; 1Pet 2:24 "who Himself bore our sins"; Heb 9:28 "Christ was offered to bear the sins of many". What exactly is it that He bore our sins? Kinda sounds like our things.

Second (and more importantly), if the question were "what happens to God's wrath", or maybe "the wrathfulness God had against our wickedness", we could turn to Scripture and answer the question.

What do you think about answering the question by referring to the Passover Lamb as I did above? Where did it go, it Passed Over...or was expiated.

What many do is assume propitiation and substitution are the same. They are not.

I agree.

Regarding the Law, we can also turn to Scripture. Christ fulfilled the Law. How? By sacrifices? No. God desires not the blood of bulls but obedience. He became obedient to death, even death on a cross. He fulfilled the Law (actually, I believe the Law pointed to Christ) and canceled that certificate of debt, nailed it to a cross. But our salvation is "God's righteousness manifested apart from the Law".

I whole heartedly agree that the "law pointed to Christ". For a wider view, I think the law is a reflection of that which this world was created for and that which this world was created toward, i.e., the purposeful end in the Son of God. The purpose of this world’s beginning was to be ‘for’ God the Son (Col 1:16) and the purpose of the end of this world is to ‘unite all things’ to God the Son, for Him. (Eph 1:10). The Son of God is the Alpha and Omega (Rev 22:13, 1:8, 21-6)

I have recently been musing about the law and its connection to the Son of God. I started exploring how the law is a reflection of God and points toward the Son of God. What one finds is that the Bible tells us that God is good (Luke 18:19) and so is the law (Rom 7:12). God is holy (Isa 5:16) and just (Deut 32:4) and so is the law (Rom 7:12). God is truth (Deut 32:4), God is perfect (Math 5:48), and so is the law (Psa 119:142, Psa 19:7). God is love (John 4:8), righteous (Exo 9:27) , and pure (1 John 3:3), and so is the law (Rom 13:10, Psa 19:9, Rom 7:14). God is spiritual (John 4:24), unchangeable (Mal 3:6), and eternal (Gen 21:33), and so is the law (Rom 7:14, Matt 5:18, Psa 111:7-8).

Seems like a the Scripture shows us this reflection and pointing.

I started looking at the law as a part of One Plan toward a purpose, that is reconciliation and the culmination of all things to the Son of God.

1. The One law: [you shall not eat] is the only law over Adam before the fall.
2. The Law absent: [meaning lawlessness] is what everyone was under from Adam to Moses… it leads to lawless death.
3. The Law-unfulfilled [temporally incomplete] is what everyone was under from Moses to Christ. The law was waiting for its temporal fulfillment. Under the Law-unfulfilled, transgressions lead to stored up counts of punishment (coming wrath) and death.
4. The Law-fulfilled [temporally complete] by Jesus who was the completion and fulfillment of the law (God’s completed plan of reconciliation that started with the Law-unfulfilled).

The reason I included the above is to show a connection between the law-unfulfilled and the law-fulfilled and the direct connection between the law and Jesus Christ. For without the Son of God and the IDR, "your faith is futile; you are still in your sins" (1Cor 15:17).

But our salvation is "God's righteousness manifested apart from the Law".

After all I said previously, I would like to ask if you think that my distinction can be applied to your quote of Romans 3:21? That is, when Paul says in Romans 3:21 that "God's righteousness" is manifested "apart from the Law". Do you think that what is meant is 'apart from the 'law-unfulfilled'? For if the law is a reflection of God, as I showed earlier, and points toward Jesus Christ then it would seem that God's right standing is apart from the law-unfulfilled but the same as the law-fulfilled.


Keep seeking God's truth as if it were hidden treasure (Prov 2)

 

[JonC]

JonC, thank you for your gracious response to my post. May our Lord sharpen us through our interactions as iron sharpens iron. I will be jumping around the topics in your post and not taking them in order.

I agree that these are the appropriate translations to English (to my layman understanding).

From your perspective, do you think that the word "expiation" is congruent with the OT depiction of the Passover Lamb? That is, from the sacrifice and the blood of the Lamb, God's wrath 'passes over' His people? In the story of the Passover, the sacrifice AND the Jewish people applying it to their door post, seemed to "expiate" God's wrath by taking away (or sanctifying or covering) the sins of those that applied it. In this sense, the wrath "passed over" because the sins were expiated by the atoning sacrifice that was applied to the doorpost.

From my perspective, I tend to agree with a form of what your reasoning is objecting to. That is, if one stores up punishment, wrath constitutes the punishment phase, then one would seem to be storying up "offenses". In the legal sense this might be called "counts", i.e., the individual will be accused of 1000 counts of sin. These 1000 counts of sin deserve God's punishment (or wrath) after judgement. So in this sense, man is storying up wrath.

The only snare to this might be verses like; 2Cor 5:21, "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us"; 1Pet 2:24 "who Himself bore our sins"; Heb 9:28 "Christ was offered to bear the sins of many". What exactly is it that He bore our sins? Kinda sounds like our things.

What do you think about answering the question by referring to the Passover Lamb as I did above? Where did it go, it Passed Over...or was expiated.

I agree.

I whole heartedly agree that the "law pointed to Christ". For a wider view, I think the law is a reflection of that which this world was created for and that which this world was created toward, i.e., the purposeful end in the Son of God. The purpose of this world’s beginning was to be ‘for’ God the Son (Col 1:16) and the purpose of the end of this world is to ‘unite all things’ to God the Son, for Him. (Eph 1:10). The Son of God is the Alpha and Omega (Rev 22:13, 1:8, 21-6)

I have recently been musing about the law and its connection to the Son of God. I started exploring how the law is a reflection of God and points toward the Son of God. What one finds is that the Bible tells us that God is good (Luke 18:19) and so is the law (Rom 7:12). God is holy (Isa 5:16) and just (Deut 32:4) and so is the law (Rom 7:12). God is truth (Deut 32:4), God is perfect (Math 5:48), and so is the law (Psa 119:142, Psa 19:7). God is love (John 4:8), righteous (Exo 9:27) , and pure (1 John 3:3), and so is the law (Rom 13:10, Psa 19:9, Rom 7:14). God is spiritual (John 4:24), unchangeable (Mal 3:6), and eternal (Gen 21:33), and so is the law (Rom 7:14, Matt 5:18, Psa 111:7-8).

Seems like a the Scripture shows us this reflection and pointing.

I started looking at the law as a part of One Plan toward a purpose, that is reconciliation and the culmination of all things to the Son of God.

1. The One law: [you shall not eat] is the only law over Adam before the fall.
2. The Law absent: [meaning lawlessness] is what everyone was under from Adam to Moses… it leads to lawless death.
3. The Law-unfulfilled [temporally incomplete] is what everyone was under from Moses to Christ. The law was waiting for its temporal fulfillment. Under the Law-unfulfilled, transgressions lead to stored up counts of punishment (coming wrath) and death.
4. The Law-fulfilled [temporally complete] by Jesus who was the completion and fulfillment of the law (God’s completed plan of reconciliation that started with the Law-unfulfilled).

The reason I included the above is to show a connection between the law-unfulfilled and the law-fulfilled and the direct connection between the law and Jesus Christ. For without the Son of God and the IDR, "your faith is futile; you are still in your sins" (1Cor 15:17).

After all I said previously, I would like to ask if you think that my distinction can be applied to your quote of Romans 3:21? That is, when Paul says in Romans 3:21 that "God's righteousness" is manifested "apart from the Law". Do you think that what is meant is 'apart from the 'law-unfulfilled'? For if the law is a reflection of God, as I showed earlier, and points toward Jesus Christ then it would seem that God's right standing is apart from the law-unfulfilled but the same as the law-fulfilled.


Keep seeking God's truth as if it were hidden treasure (Prov 2)

Good morning Brother.

I do not know which of the three (propitiation, expiation, or atoning sacrifice) are the best choice in the translations. I think it would depend on the context (escaping God's wrath, forgiving sins, or both) but sometimes all three would work in the context.


2 Cor 5:21, "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us". Now, I think we all would agree that Jesus did not literally become evil, or disobedient to God. I believe here Christ was made sin on our behalf (He represented all human sin, suffered the wages of sin [death], suffered under the powers of evil - the curse, the bondage of sin and death).

Some conclude that "sin" should be translated "sin offering". That is a legitimate interpretation as well.

1 Pet 2:24 "who Himself bore our sins". Christ did bear our sins. He is sinless. It was our sin that He bore, that He suffered under. The biggest issue concerns whether we should add to the verse the idea that our sins were also transferred from us, and add "instead of us" at the end of the verse.

My issue here, other than it is not technically what is in those words, is that the idea treats sins as material things.

Heb 9:28 "Christ was offered to bear the sins of many". What exactly is it that He bore our sins? Kinda sounds like our things.

My answer is that sins ate mot "things". He bore our sins, came under the curse of our sins, came under the bondage of sin and death because 9f our sins (not His own, He is sinless).



I believe the Passover is important as foreshadowing our salvation as well.

In Exodus 12 we read "For the Lord will pass through to strike the Egyptians; but when He sees the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, the Lord will pass over the door and will not allow the destroyer to come in to your houses to strike you."

 

[Van]

I see no reason for anyone to be confused about the meaning of the Greek nouns translated as "propitiation" in most of our English translations.

When God transfers an individual's spirit into Christ, they have then been reconciled by that action. They had been separated spiritually from God, and now they have been united with God. They were spiritually dead, but now made spiritually alive, together with Christ. Thus their reconciliation occurs when they are transferred into Christ. Thus Christ is the means of reconciliation, not only for those who have been transferred into Christ, but also for those who have not been transferred into Christ. Thus Christ is the means of reconciliation for the whole of fallen humanity, and not just a subset. Christ died as a ransom for all. He bought those to be saved and those never to be saved, as taught by 2 Peter 2:1.

Some try to conflate where does the wrath go with when does the wrath go. The wrath goes when the individual is transferred into Christ, not when Christ became the means of removing the wrath on the cross.

The Penal Substitution fallacy claims Christ did not die as a ransom for all, Christ did not become the means of reconciliation for the whole of fallen humanity. PSA is simply a Trojan horse for the Calvinist false doctrine of Limited Atonement.

 

[Van]

I see where a poster indicated, in answer to the question, where does the wrath go, the wrath passes over us. Nope.
God was just in not imposing His wrath upon those who died in their sins, but instead sending them to Abraham's bosom, a place of comfort, not torment, where they waited until Christ suffered and died, as the Lamb of God, becoming the means of reconciliation for the whole of humanity, including those in Abraham's bosom.

Romans 3:25 NASB
whom God displayed publicly as a means of reconciliation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in God's merciful restraint He let the sins previously committed go unpunished;

The "bolded" "to" translated the Greek preposition "eis." Here "eis" is used to introduce a "telic clause" indicating a purpose of the public display of Christ, demonstrating God's righteousness when He exercised His restraint in not punishing the Old Testament saints. Here, with Christ becoming the means of reconciliation for the OT saints, did God demonstrate He was just in not imposing His wrath upon them.

 

[Paleouss]

I see where a poster indicated, in answer to the question, where does the wrath go, the wrath passes over us. Nope.
God was just in not imposing His wrath upon those who died in their sins, but instead sending them to Abraham's bosom, a place of comfort, not torment, where they waited until Christ suffered and died, as the Lamb of God, becoming the means of reconciliation for the whole of humanity, including those in Abraham's bosom.

Greetings to you Van. Long time no talk. Peace and Hope to you and yours.

Since I am the poster that inquired into the possible notion that God's wrath might be considered to have passed over us. I'd like to know more of your thoughts about your "no".

To help me understand exactly where you disagree in the reasoning, could you please indicate which of the assertions below that you think are false.

1. What might sometimes be difficult to understand, God shows us through word pictures of history within scripture.
2. To help us understand some aspects of what Jesus has done for us, the Bible draws comparison to the Passover in Egypt and says that Jesus is considered our "Passover" (1Cor 5:7).
3. The Jews when told that Jesus is our Passover would have immediately thought about Moses and the Passover in the Egypt account. Not just how Jesus is the lamb but how the lamb related to the story of Egypt. Otherwise Jesus might only be called the atoning lamb and not the Passover lamb.
4. We, in turn, should think about the Passover in Egypt to understand some things that Jesus has done for us.

If you do agree with all the statements of 1-4. Then I will continue with the comparisons.

5. The plague of Egypt killing the first born demonstrates a judgement on those that would not obey God (let my people go)...and can be reflected upon as the wrath of God that demonstrates His final judgement on those that will not obey God (unbelief).

In other words, Plague/Judgment = Wrath/Judgement

6. The Passover lamb of Egypt demonstrates the atoning sacrifice needed for the plague of Egypt to pass over...and can be reflected upon like Jesus as the Passover Lamb that is the atoning sacrifice needed for the wrath of God to pass over.

In other words, Passover lamb = Passover Jesus

7. The taking of the atoning sacrifice's blood and having faith and belief that if applied to the doorpost it will cover their home, be a symbol of life, and result in the passing over of God's plague upon Egypt...can be reflected upon as us having faith and belief that the atoning blood of Christ covering us, a symbol of life, will result in eternal life and the passing over of God's wrath upon us.

In other words, Faith to apply blood to doorpost = Faith to apply blood of Christ through belief.


What do you think?

Peace to you brother

 

[Van]

Greetings to you Van. Long time no talk. Peace and Hope to you and yours.

Since I am the poster that inquired into the possible notion that God's wrath might be considered to have passed over us. I'd like to know more of your thoughts about your "no".

To help me understand exactly where you disagree in the reasoning, could you please indicate which of the assertions below that you think are false.

1. What might sometimes be difficult to understand, God shows us through word pictures of history within scripture.
2. To help us understand some aspects of what Jesus has done for us, the Bible draws comparison to the Passover in Egypt and says that Jesus is considered our "Passover" (1Cor 5:7).
3. The Jews when told that Jesus is our Passover would have immediately thought about Moses and the Passover in the Egypt account. Not just how Jesus is the lamb but how the lamb related to the story of Egypt. Otherwise Jesus might only be called the atoning lamb and not the Passover lamb.
4. We, in turn, should think about the Passover in Egypt to understand some things that Jesus has done for us.

If you do agree with all the statements of 1-4. Then I will continue with the comparisons.

5. The plague of Egypt killing the first born demonstrates a judgement on those that would not obey God (let my people go)...and can be reflected upon as the wrath of God that demonstrates His final judgement on those that will not obey God (unbelief).

In other words, Plague/Judgment = Wrath/Judgement

6. The Passover lamb of Egypt demonstrates the atoning sacrifice needed for the plague of Egypt to pass over...and can be reflected upon like Jesus as the Passover Lamb that is the atoning sacrifice needed for the wrath of God to pass over.

In other words, Passover lamb = Passover Jesus

7. The taking of the atoning sacrifice's blood and having faith and belief that if applied to the doorpost it will cover their home, be a symbol of life, and result in the passing over of God's plague upon Egypt...can be reflected upon as us having faith and belief that the atoning blood of Christ covering us, a symbol of life, will result in eternal life and the passing over of God's wrath upon us.

In other words, Faith to apply blood to doorpost = Faith to apply blood of Christ through belief.


What do you think?

Peace to you brother

Here is what you said,

​

That is, from the sacrifice and the blood of the Lamb, God's wrath 'passes over' His people? In the story of the Passover, the sacrifice AND the Jewish people applying it to their door post, seemed to "expiate" God's wrath by taking away (or sanctifying or covering) the sins of those that applied it. In this sense, the wrath "passed over" because the sins were expiated by the atoning sacrifice that was applied to the doorpost. ​

And here is what I said,

​

I see where a poster indicated, in answer to the question, where does the wrath go, the wrath passes over us. Nope. ​

So the issue, in my mind, is that the wrath was NOT removed or "taken away." No flesh can be justified by the Law.
But God did exercise restraint, he did not impose "His wrath" upon the Old Testament saints until the sacrifice and death of His Lamb. But He did of course impose His wrath upon those not chosen to receive mercy.

We agree that the Old Testament account of the Death Angel passing over and not imposing the death of the first born, on the households with the blood of the sacrifice upon their doorway, does foreshadow our "Passover Lamb." The difference of course, was the imposition of wrath was delayed, whereas under the New Covenant, the wrath was removed.

One final point, we do not apply the blood of Christ when we put our faith in Christ. The blood of Christ is applied to us, the washing of regeneration, when God credits our faith in Christ's blood as the means of our reconciliation. God saves us, we do not save ourselves.