The Bearer of Sin and Guilt

[agedman]

The bowl judgements have nothing to do with PSA.

Sure, for they are the wrath of God.

Not poured out upon the Saviour, but upon the ungodly.

 

[agedman]

The wages of sin is spiritual death. Sin separates from God, Who is the fount of all life. This was shown forth in Eden. Previous to the Fall, Adam enjoyed blessed fellowship with his Maker, but in the early eve of that day that marked the entrance of sin into our world, as the Lord God entered the Garden and His voice was heard by our first parents, the guilty pair hid themselves among the trees of the garden. No longer might they enjoy communion with Him Who is always light, instead, they are alienated from Him. So, too, was it with Cain: when interrogated by the Lord he said, "From your face shall I be hid" (Gen 4:14).

Sin excludes from God's presence. That was the great lesson taught Israel. Jehovah's throne was in their midst, yet it was not accessible. He abode between the cherubim in the Holy of Holies and into it none might come, saving the high priest, and he but one day in the year bearing blood with him. The veil which hung both in the tabernacle and in the temple, barring access to the throne of God, witnessed to the solemn fact that sin separates from Him.

The wages of sin is death, not only physical but spiritual death; not merely natural but essentially penal death. What is physical death? It is the separation of the soul and spirit from the body. So penal death is the separation of the soul and spirit from God. The Word of Truth speaks of her that lives in pleasure as being "dead while she lives" (1 Timothy 5:6). Note, too, how that wonderful parable of the prodigal son illustrates the force of the term "death." After the return of the prodigal the father said, "This my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found" (Luke 15:24). While he was in the "far country" he had not ceased to exist; no, he was not dead physically, but spiritually—he was alienated and separated from his father!

Now on the Cross the Lord Jesus was receiving the wages which were due His people. He had no sin of His own, for He was the Holy One of God. But he was bearing our sins in His own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). He had taken our place and was suffering—the Just for the unjust. He was bearing the chastisement of our peace; and the wages of our sins, the suffering and chastisement which were due us, was "death." Not merely physical but penal; and, as we have said, this meant separation from God, and hence it was that the Savior cried, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

You were doing good until this point.

The wages of sin is death and that is PHYSICAL death, not “spiritual”.

It is after death that the judgement comes, the second death.

The word death in the Scriptures nearly always pertains to the physical body vitality ceasing.

It is this death that is cast into the lake of fire.

The Savior’s body ceased vitality; but, as evidenced by His conversation with the thief, He did no die Spiritually.

 

[agedman]

"It is finished." The mission upon which God had sent His Son into the world was accomplished. That which had been eternally purposed had come to pass. The plan of God had been fully carried out. It is true that the Savior had been by "wicked hands crucified and slain," yet was He "delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" (Act 2:23). It is true that the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against His Christ; nevertheless it was but for to do what God's hand and God's counsel "determined before to be done" (Act 4:28). Because He is the Most High, God's will cannot be thwarted. Because He is supreme, God's counsel must stand. Because He is almighty, God's purpose cannot be overthrown.

There is nothing here that is disagreeable other than your treatment of the word death.

Your statements (with that exception) fit nicely into what @JonC and I have posted.

However, this is not the complete statement of PSA theory, is it.

Packer calls it divine Justice. Others “the wrath of God” and it is what makes PSA error.

It is that which others on these threads have been greatly exercised about and which @JonC and I have consistently shown is false teaching.

So, do I assume you agree with @JonC and me?

 

[agedman]

Isaiah 53:4-6 ESV / 24 helpful votes
Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.

And this is disputed by @JonC and I, where?

 

[5 point Gillinist]

you wrote, yet our sins were laid on him.

No, actually, I didn't write that. I wrote that He bore the PENALTY for our sin. He exhausted our punishment in a few short hours what we could not exhaust in an eternity in hell. This does not mean, nor does it say that He became sinful - which would make Him an insufficient sacrifice.

I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your strawman. Feel free to respond to what I actually wrote.

Edit: Nevermind, you messed up the quotation at the beginning and it confused me. Though I'm really not all that sure of what you are saying, and what you are arguing against.

 

[agedman]

Are you able to deal honestly with PSA? What you described is the heretical word of faith teaching that Kenneth Copeland teaches and other WOF teachers hold to, which IS NOT PSA. All who hold to PSA vehemently condemn this teaching as heresy.

To take upon the burden of someone else's debt doesn't make you the party who incurred that debt. Christ standing in our place and being accounted with our penalty doesn't make Him sinful.
If you run up a bill that you can't pay, and I step in to pay your debt. I do not become the party that ran up the debt, rather I become the individual who takes your debt upon myself and pay the one to whom it is owed.
In this case, Christ steps in to bear the penalty. This does not mean that He ceases to be God or is cut off from the rest of the Trinity.

I've tried to understand your and JonC's position, but it is incoherent.

which is what @JonC and I have been presenting.

There was no wrath of God poured out upon the Son, but the natural consequences of the wages of sin.

The physical death of the Saviour, and every person’s death is the wages of sin.

After physical death comes the judgement, not prior, for the unbeliever is already condemned, and the unbeliever is untouched by the physical death but is passed from that death to eternal life.

It is the presentation of the wrath of God poured out upon the Christ that is error.

 

[5 point Gillinist]

which is what @JonC and I have been presenting.

There was no wrath of God poured out upon the Son, but the natural consequences of the wages of sin.

The physical death of the Saviour, and every person’s death is the wages of sin.

After physical death comes the judgement, not prior, for the unbeliever is already condemned, and the unbeliever is untouched by the physical death but is passed from that death to eternal life.

It is the presentation of the wrath of God poured out upon the Christ that is error.

Why does sin end in death? Why does God have a law? Why is God angry with sinners who break His law? Why do sinners suffer in hell?

 

[agedman]

No, actually, I didn't write that. I wrote that He bore the PENALTY for our sin. He exhausted our punishment in a few short hours what we could not exhaust in an eternity in hell. This does not mean, nor does it say that He became sinful - which would make Him an insufficient sacrifice.

I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your strawman. Feel free to respond to what I actually wrote.

im not convinced that He was being punished on the cross.

For there to be punishment, their must have been a crime, yet the Chris was innocently placed by the hands of men to suffer and die, thus fulfilling the statements of the prophets.

Did He suffer? Yes.

The why of the suffering is where we may not agree.

 

[agedman]

Why does sin end in death? Why does God have a law? Why is God angry with sinners who break His law? Why do sinners suffer in hell?

Sin is rebellion.

The sin of every person is rebellion.

it is that which God judges.

Did Christ at any point rebell?

 

[agedman]

The sacrifice of our Lord was pleasing to God. Therefore it satisfied eternally the breach caused by the decrees which stood against humankind and the resulting lack of fellowship between God and humanity.

Just as in OT the breach was temporarily healed by death and Blood, so too the breach was permanently healed by the death and blood of the Savior.

The benefit to believers is the lack of “tasting death” in the form of some torturous keeping place until the final judgement.

There is no victory for the grave, and death has no sting for the believer, for we have eternal life.

 

[Aaron]

_doesn't make Him sinful," you wrote, yet our sins were laid on him.

Peter said so. 1 Peter 2:24

 

[Aaron]

I don’t disagree with Peter, where did you get the thinking I did?

What I want to know is if all your side tracking you actually found evidence from Scripture that God’s wrath was poured out upon the Son.

Our Saviour made a promise to one of the thieves. He was hanging on a tree, too. Did God pour out His Wrath upon Him?

How about Peter, He hung on a tree, and what about all the people Nero suspended to light up, did God pour Wrath upon them, too.

I’m looking for consistency in your presentation thinking.

You claim that I make stuff up.

So, it is your turn, Don’t make anything up, and show specifically we’re the Scriptures state God pour wrath upon the Son.

You don't get to make up rules concerning verbatims either. We will call things what they are. Your exclusion of wrath from the penalty of sin is arbitrary and invalid. And what's worse, it makes God's wrath less than just, since it's more than the sinner's due. So, I'm not going to yield to it.

And contrary to your implications, I have been eminently consistent.

The argument is whether or not Christ is our substitute in judgement. You say no. I say yes. There are a myriad of eminent pictures God has drawn for us, in the Ark, in the Offerings, in the Veil, and in the Cross and in the Supper. But I will deal with the central theme, and that is the Cross.

1. Christ himself bore our sins in His own body on the Cross. 1 Peter 2:24
2. Paul takes us right to the law that defines the meaning and significance of the Cross. Galatians 3:13 , Deuteronomy 21:22-23
3. In that law we see that the Tree and everything that accompanies it, death and the curse of the law, is the sentence on a condemned sinner. The Cross was justly my place.
4. Instead of sending me, God sent His Son, the Just for the unjust, bearing my sins in His own body, to that tree which is justly mine to take the punishment due me, death and the curse of the law.

There is no way around it and remain faithful to the Scriptures.

 

[Aaron]

Pay special attention to the wording in Deuteronomy 21:23 , who is accursed? He that is hanged on a tree, Jesus.

By whom is He cursed? God (the Father).

 

[JonC]

im not convinced that He was being punished on the cross.

For there to be punishment, their must have been a crime, yet the Chris was innocently placed by the hands of men to suffer and die, thus fulfilling the statements of the prophets.

Did He suffer? Yes.

The why of the suffering is where we may not agree.

I am convinced He was not being punished on the cross. He did bear the wages of sin. He did suffer and die by the will of God. The chastening for our well-being did fall on Him.

But Scripture is fairly clear that this was not divine punishment.

 

[JonC]

Pay special attention to the wording in Deuteronomy 21:23 , who is accursed? He that is hanged on a tree, Jesus.

By whom is He cursed? God (the Father).

So your interpretation of the passage is anybody who is hanged on a tree is cursed by God (like Peter, Black people who were lynched, the Hebrews who were crucified by the Saducces during the Hasmonean period, etc.)?

Isn't that a little like witchcraft (if you want to have somebody cursed by God, hang them on a tree)?

 

[JonC]

Are you able to deal honestly with PSA? What you described is the heretical word of faith teaching that Kenneth Copeland teaches and other WOF teachers hold to, which IS NOT PSA. All who hold to PSA vehemently condemn this teaching as heresy.

To take upon the burden of someone else's debt doesn't make you the party who incurred that debt. Christ standing in our place and being accounted with our penalty doesn't make Him sinful.
If you run up a bill that you can't pay, and I step in to pay your debt. I do not become the party that ran up the debt, rather I become the individual who takes your debt upon myself and pay the one to whom it is owed.
In this case, Christ steps in to bear the penalty. This does not mean that He ceases to be God or is cut off from the rest of the Trinity.

I've tried to understand your and JonC's position, but it is incoherent.

Our position is simple to understand, but the obstacle is tradition. I had the same issue when I first realized Penal Substitution Theory was not biblical (trying to read Scrioture without reading into it).

One thing that may help is your illustration of a debt. Why do you think on those terms?

Sin is not a financial debt, but a moral issue.

If I punch you in the nose, who do you have to punch in the nose to settle the debt so that you can forgive me?

Penal Substitution Theory is based on a mid 15th to 16th century philosophy that has prevailed in our culture, but now is actually being challenged to a degree (sometimes wrongly).

 

[Iconoclast]

Sure, for they are the wrath of God.

Not poured out upon the Saviour, but upon the ungodly.

This is a big swing and a miss.Not anywhere near truth.
So by saying the bowl judgments are yet future you are saying the wrath of God against the sin of all departed believers does not get punished?
All since the first century have been given a "sin with no consequence card?

 

[Iconoclast]

You were doing good until this point.

The wages of sin is death and that is PHYSICAL death, not “spiritual”.

It is after death that the judgement comes, the second death.

The word death in the Scriptures nearly always pertains to the physical body vitality ceasing.

It is this death that is cast into the lake of fire.

The Savior’s body ceased vitality; but, as evidenced by His conversation with the thief, He did no die Spiritually.

So....now you deny that Adam died spiritually?
Do you really want to ignore the fall?
In the day you eat...dying thou shall surely die?
Many errors proceed from a wrong view of the fall.

 

[Iconoclast]

There is nothing here that is disagreeable other than your treatment of the word death.

Your statements (with that exception) fit nicely into what @JonC and I have posted.

However, this is not the complete statement of PSA theory, is it.

Packer calls it divine Justice. Others “the wrath of God” and it is what makes PSA error.

It is that which others on these threads have been greatly exercised about and which @JonC and I have consistently shown is false teaching.

So, do I assume you agree with @JonC and me?

Not at all.
You and JonC have drifted from the whole reason of the cross.
You say you agree but then contradict what you post, up and down the line.
Looks like everyone has posted on this contradiction, sort of like...yes water is wet, I agree with that, but it is a lo so dry.
There have been 5 threads of this.

 

[Iconoclast]

So your interpretation of the passage is anybody who is hanged on a tree is cursed by God (like Peter, Black people who were lynched, the Hebrews who were crucified by the Saducces during the Hasmonean period, etc.)?

Isn't that a little like witchcraft (if you want to have somebody cursed by God, hang them on a tree)?

None of those people were sinless.
None of those people kept the law on our behalf.
None of those people were the Divine God/man.
Not one of them was qualified to give their life for the Church