The Bearer of Sin and Guilt

[Iconoclast]

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.

No explanation of the terms is not an answer to the question.
What you are convinced of is not the issue.Joseph Smith was convinced he discovered the book of Mormon.
Even described a burning in the bosom.

 

[Iconoclast]

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.

Another open denial of God's determined purpose.

 

[Aaron]

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)?

I should ignore this paragon of preposterous poopyheadedness, but just in case . . .

Under the law, one guilty of a sin worthy of death and hanged on a tree was accursed of God. This law is there to teach us of the Cross of Christ, and its meaning, and Paul rightly cited it to document the fact that Christ was made a curse for us.

 

[Iconoclast]

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.

No...you deny PSA which is indicated in all relevant texts.

 

[JonC]

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

So those Christians who died by hanging on a tree were cursed by God because they were hung on a tree??

 

[JonC]

No explanation of the terms is not an answer to the question.
What you are convinced of is not the issue.Joseph Smith was convinced he discovered the book of Mormon.
Even described a burning in the bosom.

And Penal Substitution Theorists are convinced they have the "truth" even though it is not in God's Word.

The problem you are having, your barrier (if you will) to the Truth of Scripture, is in your quest to redefine terms.

You read Christ was wounded, but you add "God wounded Christ" (just an illustration).

What I am trying to tell you is that Scripture itself IS sufficient for doctrine. We do not need to help it out by adding what is not there.

In fact, some believe it is sinful to add to Scripture.

 

[Revmitchell]

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

this response is evidence that you are trying to ignore what scripture says. Uou said God didnt do that to Jesus men did yet this here is another clear passage that says otherwise

 

[JonC]

this response is evidence that you are trying to ignore what scripture says. Uou said God didnt do that to Jesus men did yet this here is another clear passage that says otherwise

There are very clear passages staring that Chrust suffered and died at the hands of the wicked and by God's predetermined plan. There are no passages that state, imply, or teach that God was punishing Christ, that Christ experienced God's wrath, or that Christ was punished instead of us. Otherwise you or another Penal Substitution Theorist would have posted those passages before and this thread would not exist.

Why not just stick with Scripture? Is God's Word not enough for Christian doctrine?

 

[agedman]

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?

You missing the mark?

Romans states, "there is no condemnation..." not because God poured the wrath out upon the Son.

All believers have the decrees of the Law that stood against them satisfied, Just as God was temporally reconciled with Israel through the sacrifice, so all believers of all ages are (even the yet unborn) reconciled by the Christ who once offered for all time. Does not Hebrews deal more particularly with this subject.

Sin has consequences. Romans states it is death - physical death.

At the physical death choice and decision making are over, for after death is the judgement.

One stands before Christ in eternity with eternal life, the other finds themself in the place of torment waiting for the great judgement when time is no more.

What you perhaps desire is some physical, emotional, mental, anguish to take place on this earth while living as if that were to pay for sin. It does not.

The Lord certainly suffered, was tortured, mocked, felt abandoned by all, yet this was all by the hand of humans as Isaiah, Peter and the Psalms show.

Therefore, the wrath of God remains, filling the buckets in which at the proper time will be poured out not upon the church or the Groom, but upon those who rebel.

The church nor the Christ were appointed to the wrath of God.

 

[agedman]

this response is evidence that you are trying to ignore what scripture says. Uou said God didnt do that to Jesus men did yet this here is another clear passage that says otherwise

Then perhaps you should read it again.

Tradition would suggest it, but the Scriptures do not.

 

[agedman]

Another open denial of God's determined purpose.

God's determined purpose is not denied.

What is denied is that God did not pour wrath out upon the Son for doing what the Father, Son, and Spirit agreed upon, caused to be written about, and were pleased that it took place as they determined.

 

[agedman]

I should ignore this paragon of preposterous poopyheadedness, but just in case . . .

Under the law, one guilty of a sin worthy of death and hanged on a tree was accursed of God. This law is there to teach us of the Cross of Christ, and its meaning, and Paul rightly cited it to document the fact that Christ was made a curse for us.

However, WAS the Lord guilty of sin?
Do not the Scriptures state that He took the sin yet remained sinless?

Did not Peter state

22Men of Israel, listen to this message: Jesus of Nazareth was a man certified by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs, which God did among you through Him, as you yourselves know. 23He was delivered up by God’s set plan and foreknowledge, and you, by the hands of the lawless, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross. 24But God raised Him from the dead, releasing Him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for Him to be held in its clutches.
​

Under the Law the Christ was never cursed for the Law was made for Him, not Him for the Law (as recorded concerning the response of the Law of the Sabbath).

Paul is not wrong

13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.”f 14He redeemed us in order that the blessing promised to Abraham would come to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.​

It does not say Christ was cursed, but that He caused Himself to become a curse.

But it makes little difference, because there is no evidence that God cursed the Son nor poured wrath out upon Him.

 

[agedman]

No...you deny PSA which is indicated in all relevant texts.

Where have I denied that the Lord suffered?

Where have I denied He was wounded, mocked, and brutilized?

I have not denied the suffering.

What I deny is the who and why of what PSA theory presents.

Did you not see were I agreed with the greater amount of what you posted, with one exception?

However, you didn't include it all.

You did not include that the PSA presentations present God as divinely judging the Son (as Packer states) and that is were it is wrong.

God cannot judge a member of the trinity.

They are in total union and not in any manner or matter in disciplining each other.

 

[JesusFan]

So those Christians who died by hanging on a tree were cursed by God because they were hung on a tree??

No, but the truth of the Holy Spirit inspired Pauline text was that Jesus was cursed and smitten by God for our sakes!

 

[Iconoclast]

We both see it and understand what we are reading.
I do believe you have looked and cannot understand what we do.
It has been 5 threads now where you indeed suggest you agree with the posts but you clearly do not as you strip the cross and justice of God against sin. Many have posted your exact words and showed where you have done this.
So now you claim I am doing this.
The problem for you is if anyone wants to take the time to read all 5 threads, they can see this is so.

I understand Acts 4 as posted.I do not struggle with God being in control of even the wicked acts of ungodly men? And how God uses even such sinful acts to accomplish His ordained plan.
I offered you Isa.10 as such an example.You disregard it, that is now between you and God.

Of course scripture is sufficient as God has given it to us.
Properly understood all of us see PSA.
That being said, correct and a caution has been given. You and agedman can continue on not believing what scripture declares

 

[JonC]

No, but the truth of the Holy Spirit inspired Pauline text was that Jesus was cursed and smitten by God for our sakes!

Scripture does say Christ became a curse for us, and I do agree.

Scripture does not say Christ was smitten by God. Actually, what it says is "we" esteemed Him smitten by God BUT He was wounded for our transgressions.

You really should handle Scripture more carefully, as if it really were God's words.

 

[JesusFan]

Scripture does say Christ became a curse for us, and I do agree.

Scripture does not say Christ was smitten by God. Actually, what it says is "we" esteemed Him smitten by God BUT He was wounded for our transgressions.

You really should handle Scripture more carefully, as if it really were God's words.

Being cursed by and of God was how it was written!

 

[agedman]

No, but the truth of the Holy Spirit inspired Pauline text was that Jesus was cursed and smitten by God for our sakes!

Where?

“WE esteemed him smitten by God and afflicted, BUT He….”

PSA - He wasSmitten of God

Peter - “…and you, by the hands of the lawless, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross. 24But God raised Him from the dead, releasing Him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for Him to be held in its clutches.”

 

[agedman]

Being cursed by and of God was how it was written!

No, Paul said He BECAME a curse.

Not God cursed Him.

 

[percho]

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.

Paragraph 2 sentence 1.

for him who did not know sin, in our behalf He did make sin, that we may become the righteousness of God in him.

Jesus the Son of the living God, became, sin. ----- And when he became sin he cried out ---- Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? --- which was followed with --- I thirst --- they put vinegar to his lips ----
It is finished

What just took place? From James 1:15 and sin, (Which Jesus had just been made by God the Father) when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

It is finished Luke 23:46 Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost. John 19:30 It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

Is Jesus the Son of God still hanging in the tree, sin and death? What happened to that sin and death that Jesus had become?

Is the rest of post 60 strawman? What happened to, sin, Jesus had been made? How or has sin removed from Jesus the Son of God?

Does Acts 13:33,34 have anything to do with it? Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.? What day.

Does that day and begotten have anything to do with?
And himself is the head of the body -- the assembly -- who is a beginning, a first-born out of the dead, that he might become in all things -- himself --

Did that have anything to do with the sin he had become?

Were out sins, which Christ had become to flesh, washed away in Christ blood (life), when Christ was made (alive) to the Spirit?

PSA