You as well. Just not as well as me.
We're going to have to go fishing one weekend, Jon, before the great moon passes over us.
-
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!
PSA
- Thread starter Ben1445
- Start date
We're going to have to go fishing one weekend, Jon, before the great moon passes over us.
easternstar
Active Member
I am suspicious of individuals or groups holding PSA, as their views in other areas are also unsound.
See how that works?
See how that works?
easternstar
Active Member
I have uncertainties about many things, but I am absolutely certain, without a shadow of a doubt, that PSA did not exist prior to Calvin and Luther. It is unscriptural, and unhistorical for the first 1500 years A.D.
Give us an example of the other areas.
I'm planning on expanding my fishing. Getting a fly rod. Gotta learn something new.
I tried that one time, my one and only fly rod.
I guess it's still in the bottom of the creek I chunked it in.
Good luck, Brother.
easternstar
Active Member
The other four points of Calvinism.
easternstar
Active Member
My post was made in response to the fanatical PSA adherent who claimed that all opponents of PSA were doctrinally unsound in other areas.
I wouldn't know anything about that either.
easternstar
Active Member
I know. The person I was referring to is not you.
I want to approach this from two angles.
Firstly, from a human viewpoint, I am not particularly familiar with the USA justice system, but it is not my impression that if someone commits murder, rape or some other crime and then says he is sorry, he is immediately forgiven and all charges are dropped. If that is your justice system, I stand corrected, but I think that however genuinely sorry someone is, he still has to face justice, and that justice goes all the way up to the death sentence. Why do you think that God should have a different system?
Secondly, I want to quote from Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones:
'Then there is the argument which says that surely God's love is enough. The argument goes like this. It says, "We forgive one another without any substitution and without any punishment, and if we, in our love for one another, can do that, surely God, whose love is so much greater, should be able to do it with greater ease." To which, of course, the reply is this: if God were only love there might be some force in the arguent, but God is light, and God is holy, and God is just, and God is righteous. Not only that; there is no greater fallacy than the argument that goes from men to God. It is a very common error today. People are constantly arguing like that -- if this is true of us, they say, how much more so of God? As if God were in series with us! The ruth is, of course, that we are in sin and all our ideas are wrong; our conception of love is more wrong than anything else and if we begin to think of God's love in terms of what we do, and what we think, then -- I say it with reverence -- God help us! If we are going to attribute our sentimental, loose, unjust and unrighteous notions to the everlasting Godhead, then we place ourselves in the most precarious position.
Another form of that last objection is that this substitutionary view of the atonement detracts from God's character, from His justice. People say that it would be unjust in God to punish someone who is innocent, to which the reply is that the innocent person volunteers and takes upon Himself the sins of others and asks God to put them on Him, and punish them in Him, so there is obviously no injustice at all. This was the great decision of the eternal Council, between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Son said, "Here am I, send Me," and God provided Him a body. There was perfect agreement and therefore no injustice.'
[From God the Father, God the Son, by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Hodder & Stoughton Books, 1996; chapter 30. ISBN 0-340-65165-2]
I am absolutely certain, without a shadow of a doubt that PSA did exist prior to Calvin and Luther, and on this very thread I have produced evidence to prove it. PSA is entirely Scriptural, and historical.
I need to clarify as you misunderstood a major point. Nobody, that I know of, believes God forgives men based on them apologizing or even sincerely being sorry.
In the US (and I am not sure about the UK, so we have a similar issue) if a man stands before the court guilty of murder, but he is discovered not to be the man who committed the murder, he is not punished for the murder.
That is the ultimate difference in our positions.
You seem to say God punished Jesus - or our sins laid on Jesus - instead of us and therefore we are not punished (correct me if I misunderstood your view).
I am saying that Christ cleanses us from all unrighteous, that at Judgment when we stand before God we have been conformed into Christ's image, the "old self" crucified, and we stand as a new creation (not guilty of the crimes committed by the "old self" which by then no longer exists).
I hope that helps you understand a bit better. Knowing you thought this recreation was just saying "I'm sorry" explains how you thought it did not fulfill the law.
easternstar
Active Member
It is neither scriptural nor historical. You try desperately to twist the words of the ECF and read your meanings into their writings to support a theory that was non-existent at the time. And you do the same with scripture. Neither the Eastern nor Western branches of the church believed PSA, yet you assert that prominent teachers of those churches -- the ECF -- believed PSA. If they had, they would have been charged with heresy. Your position is irrational, untenable, and ridiculous. You cannot be taken seriously.
In short, neither the Greek nor Latin church taught PSA, and that includes the Fathers. This is a theological and historical fact that cannot be altered by wishful thinking, faulty interpretation, or dishonesty.
There is not one trace of PSA in the entire church, East or West, prior to Calvin and Luther.
Last edited:
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
Where exactly are you getting that? What sources are you using? You are relatively new, have been into it with almost every thread you get involved in and I believe have said that you have come to question everything. So why in this particular area are you completely sure of yourself? Are you well read in the ECF's? I'd be glad to look at some of your references. I have looked at what Jon has shared and find it sadly lacking but share your sources.
Are you well read on the ECF's?
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
No, but I have read some excerpts from their writings that indicate to me that they did indeed have some understanding of PSA. And I have read published and peer reviewed articles challenging the assertion that PSA is totally new and never found before the 1500's. I don't know why you butted in but easternstar could answer for himself. He may surprise us.
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
Do Orthodox Christians Believe in the Atonement?. Fr. John Whiteford
As is often the case, the proper Orthodox perspective on this question is one of balance. We should proclaim the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27), and not just the parts that we find most appealing. Nor should we overreact to the imbalances of heterodox theologians, and thus fall into a new...
You cannot judge by excerpts.
The Early Church did not "do theology" as we think of it. They did not have, or really need, a theology of the atonement. Excerpts are rarely in context to what was being discussed.
If you are really interested in understanding what they believed you need to read their actual writings.
I recommend starting with the Clement of Rome (a disciple of Paul). His only extant and uncontested work is his letter to a church (or to Christians) in Cornith. Do not read it to prove an agenda but to understand his beliefs and focus in the work (the letter is about a dispute they were having over the removal of a leader). But you will see how he touches on the atonement as well.
I would read Tertullian last...just because he is my least favorite. His beliefs were...well...I don't want to give any spoilers.
Imagine if, 2000 years from now, somebody took your words and argued over your beliefs. It would not be fair for them to pull out extracts that they like and ignore your beliefs that play into those extracts. They could make you a Methodist, for Pete's sake.