To Whom Was Sin Imputed?

[KenH]

No

Yes!

 

[KenH]

if that were true then the elect would not physically die.

 

[KenH]

if that were true then the elect would not physically die.

The elect, even after being regenerated, are still living in corrupt, sin-filled, fleshly bodies and subject to physical death, although they are legally perfectly righteous in Christ in God's sight. The elect do not receive their incorruptible spiritual bodies until Christ returns to establish the new heavens and earth wherein dwells righteousness.

 

[JonC]

If Jesus died instead of us then we would not die.

But that is not what the Bible says.

The Bible says that it is appointed man once to die and then the Judgment.

We must die with Christ (we must die to the flesh). We will still experience a physical death (we die to the flesh, and our flesh will die).

The Judgment is also described in the Bible.

God will separate nations like a shepherd separates goats and sheep. The list will perish. They will be cast into the Lake of Fire (this is the second death).

So there are two deaths mentioned in Scripture.

One is the flesh and the other is when the lost are cast into the Lake of Fire.

Obviously Jesus was not cast into the Lake of Fire. Obviously Jesus did not die spiritually. He died in the flesh.

Yet we also must die in the flesh.

Not "instead of". Not substitutionary.

 

[JonC]

The elect, even after being regenerated, are still living in corrupt, sin-filled, fleshly bodies and subject to physical death, although they are legally perfectly righteous in Christ in God's sight. The elect do not receive their incorruptible spiritual bodies until Christ returns to establish the new heavens and earth wherein dwells righteousness.

Yes. Those who are saved must have died to the flesh (and all flesh will perish).

My point is Penal Substitution Theory has nothing to do with Scripture except in what we all affirm (what makes the Theory different from other views has nothing to do with God's Word).

 

[KenH]

If Jesus died instead of us then we would not die.

Christ paid the sin debt of God's elect so that they can never be charged with their sins again. Christ did not die in place of the elect's physical bodies.

 

[KenH]

My point is Penal Substitution Theory has nothing to do with Scripture

Substitutionary atonement is one of the bedrock doctrines of the Scriptures. Without it, none of us would have any hope of salvation.

 

[JonC]

Substitutionary atonement is one of the bedrock doctrines of the Scriptures. Without it, none of us would have any hope of salvation.

Then why did God choose not to include it in His Word?

It looks like, given how detailed Scripture is regarding the Cross, that at least one verse would present Christ as dying instead of us or experiencing God's wrath if that were indeed true.

The issue is substitutionary atonement cannot pass the test of Scripture (the test of "what is written".

All Penal Substitution theorists can do is say that is what they believe is taught, but not actually recorded, in Scripture.

 

[KenH]

Then why did God choose not to include it in His Word?

God did.

 

[JonC]

God did.

How so, as is not in the text of Scripture (in "what is written")?

The only way people have been able to defend Penal Substitution Theory is by giving a verse and saying "but this is what it really means . . . ".

How, being foreign to the text of Scripture, can Penal Substitution Theory pass the test of comparing it to God's Word?

 

[KenH]

How so, as is not in the text of Scripture (in "what is written")?

The only way people have been able to defend Penal Substitution Theory is by giving a verse and saying "but this is what it really means . . . ".

How, being foreign to the text of Scripture, can Penal Substitution Theory pass the test of comparing it to God's Word?

What exactly do you want God to have said in His Word to satisfy you? Not that our own supposed satisfaction means anything when it comes to God's Word.

 

[JonC]

What exactly do you want God to have said in His Word to satisfy you? Not that our own supposed satisfaction means anything when it comes to God's Word.

I am satisfied with God's Word (with what is written in Scripture). That is why I cannot affirm Penal Substitution Theory.

For me to have continued to hold Penal Substitution Theory one of two things would have had to happen - either I would have had to abandon my belief in the sufficiency of Scripture or God would have had to record the elements that make the Theory distinct in His Word.

I am unwilling to abandon the belief that Scripture is perfect, sufficient, and complete. The elements that make Penal Substitution Theory are not recorded in God's Word. So I do not hold it as true.

 

[JesusFan]

Hebrews 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. (emphasis mine)

Strong's: "i.e. a bondsman:—surety."

A surety according to Merriam-Webster is "one who has become legally liable for the debt, default, or failure in duty of another"

A bondsman according to Merriam-Webster is "one who assumes the responsibility of a bond"

A bond according to Merriam-Webster is "an obligation"

To argue against the Biblical doctrine of the substitutionary atonement of Christ as a propitiation for the elect, all those whom God gave to Christ, is to fly in the face of the meaning of words - Greek and English. The Bible is replete with the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement of Christ. There would be no hope for any human being if not for the substitutionary atonement of Christ. To argue against this doctrine is to declare that one does not believe there is any hope of salvation for anyone - not that I expect one who argues against this doctrine to admit that is what they are doing, otherwise they would be disingenuous.

It would be that to deny the psa view of the Atonement is committing serious theological error!

 

[JesusFan]

No, if that were true then the elect would not physically die. Jesus did not die "the Second death", but died under the curse to free us from the bondage of sin and death.

It is appointed man once to die and then the judgment. This is the Cross - Jesus died physically (it is appointed man once to die) and God judged Him righteous and gave Him a name that is above every name.


But yes, the Just for the unjust (NOT "instead of") that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.

We must die with Christ. And if we die with Christ we believe that we will live with Him.

This is what Penal Substitution Theory ultimately denies. It is a truth, however, that is a central theme of Scripture.

How and where was the wrath of God propitiated towards us in your non Psa view?

 

[JesusFan]

If Jesus died instead of us then we would not die.

But that is not what the Bible says.

The Bible says that it is appointed man once to die and then the Judgment.

We must die with Christ (we must die to the flesh). We will still experience a physical death (we die to the flesh, and our flesh will die).

The Judgment is also described in the Bible.

God will separate nations like a shepherd separates goats and sheep. The list will perish. They will be cast into the Lake of Fire (this is the second death).

So there are two deaths mentioned in Scripture.

One is the flesh and the other is when the lost are cast into the Lake of Fire.

Obviously Jesus was not cast into the Lake of Fire. Obviously Jesus did not die spiritually. He died in the flesh.

Yet we also must die in the flesh.

Not "instead of". Not substitutionary.

Jesus death was payment to the father for our spiritual state. and his death atoned for all of our sins and did provide foe us the physical resurrection in his second coming!

 

[JonC]

How and where was the wrath of God propitiated towards us in your non Psa view?

How? In Christ. Where? "On that day".

 

[JonC]

Jesus death was payment to the father for our spiritual state. and his death atoned for all of our sins and did provide foe us the physical resurrection in his second coming!

I understand your belief. I am just saying it is not in the Bible.

 

[JesusFan]

How? In Christ. Where? "On that day".

What day?

 

[JesusFan]

I understand your belief. I am just saying it is not in the Bible.

its much more in the bible then a non Psa Atonement view!

 

[JonC]

What day?

The Judgment. God will separate the nations as a shepherd separats goats and sheep. Those who are lost will be condemned in the Lake of Fire.