What is Your View of The Atonement By Jesus Christ?

[thatbrian]

You assume that God is a child controlled by anger to the point of tantrum, whose anger must placated before anything meaningful can occur.

Loaded language, and not what we would expect from someone who wished a serious discussion on this matter. I block people who I think are not capable or willing to engage in serious discussion, and you might not care one bit if I do, but if you post one more post like the above, I will consider you not ready for serious debate and do just that.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Was Jesus' main purpose in the incarnation to be an "example" for us?

Why would a sinless man need to be baptized with a baptism of repentance?

to authenticate the ministry of John the Baptist, and the baptism as being from God, and not man. As Jesus is always "without sin", the "of repentance" did not apply to Him. As John says, "behold, the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world", which excluded Himself. Are you suggesting that Jesus was not sinless and that His baptism by John was in relation to His own sins? You are straining this reasoning beyond what the Bible tells us, for what purpose?

 

[JonC]

Could you unpack, "fulfill all righteousness" for me, please?

Sure. I'll use this example - think of the Mosaic Law. Some believe that Jesus came to obey the Law and through this obedience merited the righteousness imputed us. But Jesus said that He came to fulfill the Law (that rather than His work pointing to the Law the Law pointed to Him).

Now apply this idea of fulfilling to baptism. Was Jesus baptized in order to point to that baptism (that it signified repentance) or was Jesus' baptism itself pointing to Him? My answer is the latter. Jesus became man, took upon humanity upon Himself. Baptism points to the righteousness of Christ as the "last Adam", into which all believers are baptized.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

You assume that God is a child controlled by anger to the point of tantrum, whose anger must placated before anything meaningful can occur.

The Bible does teach that Jesus' Death was a "ἱλαστήριος", which carries the idea of "propitiation" of the wrath of God, which was turned away from us and placed on Jesus on the cross.

 

[JonC]

Loaded language, and not what we would expect from someone who wished a serious discussion on this matter. I block people who I think are not capable or willing to engage in serious discussion, and you might not care one bit if I do, but if you post one more post like the above, I will consider you not ready for serious debate and do just that.

I gave up serious discussions with Yesuah1 long ago. He just keeps repeating things without even trying to evidence his view. If you were to ask the question then I suspect you would receive a different answer.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Sure. I'll use this example - think of the Mosaic Law. Some believe that Jesus came to obey the Law and through this obedience merited the righteousness imputed us. But Jesus said that He came to fulfill the Law (that rather than His work pointing to the Law the Law pointed to Him).

Now apply this idea of fulfilling to baptism. Was Jesus baptized in order to point to that baptism (that it signified repentance) or was Jesus' baptism itself pointing to Him? My answer is the latter. Jesus became man, took upon humanity upon Himself. Baptism points to the righteousness of Christ as the "last Adam", into which all believers are baptized.

see #22

 

[JonC]

The Bible does teach that Jesus' Death was a "ἱλαστήριος", which carries the idea of "propitiation" of the wrath of God, which was turned away from us and placed on Jesus on the cross.

Although it is debated whether or not "propitiation" is the correct word, I believe it is. Propitiation carries the idea of wrath averted. You may decide this is the wrath of God, just as Origen decided it was the wrath of Satan, but either way it is propitiation.

I agree that this is the wrath of God against sin which we avoid. There are some who avoid this idea (for example, contemporary Mennonite theology), but I think they do this in error. This doesn't mean, of course, substitution. It means propitiation. The Christus Victor position, for example, believes that wrath (in terms of the wages of sin, even God's wrath upon sin) is averted.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Although it is debated whether or not "propitiation" is the correct word, I believe it is. Propitiation carries the idea of wrath averted. You may decide this is the wrath of God, just as Origen decided it was the wrath of Satan, but either way it is propitiation.

I agree that this is the wrath of God against sin which we avoid. There are some who avoid this idea (for example, contemporary Mennonite theology), but I think they do this in error. This doesn't mean, of course, substitution. It means propitiation. The Christus Victor position, for example, believes that wrath (in terms of the wages of sin, even God's wrath upon sin) is averted.

God is the One Who has been sinned against by the human race. It is His wrath that is on each person that does not accept Jesus Christ as their personal and only Saviour (Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. - John 3:36). Instead, the sins of the world have been placed upon Jesus Christ on the cross, which included this "wrath of God". When a sinner repents and come to Jesus for salvation, they are free from this "wrath" (Judgement) in Jesus, and enter into eternal life instead. "Jesus died FOR our sins". This is key to the correct understanding of the Atonement.

 

[thatbrian]

to authenticate the ministry of John the Baptist, and the baptism as being from God, and not man. As Jesus is always "without sin", the "of repentance" did not apply to Him. As John says, "behold, the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world", which excluded Himself. Are you suggesting that Jesus was not sinless and that His baptism by John was in relation to His own sins? You are straining this reasoning beyond what the Bible tells us, for what purpose?

Would you say that a perfectly honest man who engages in a charade like that was a perfectly honest man?

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Would you say that a perfectly honest man who engages in a charade like that was a perfectly honest man?

Who are you referring to here?

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

anyhow, its good night from England

 

[JonC]

God is the One Who has been sinned against by the human race. It is His wrath that is on each person that does not accept Jesus Christ as their personal and only Saviour (Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. - John 3:36). Instead, the sins of the world have been placed upon Jesus Christ on the cross, which included this "wrath of God". When a sinner repents and come to Jesus for salvation, they are free from this "wrath" (Judgement) in Jesus, and enter into eternal life instead. "Jesus died FOR our sins". This is key to the correct understanding of the Atonement.

I agree. This is the major flaw in the Mennonite Theology (Non-Violent Atonement) of men like Denny Weaver. Scripture does not give us the option of choosing passages and ignoring others in making our theories. Non-Violent Atonement ignores divine wrath, at least in any meaningful way.

I like that you put in all caps “FOR”. This is something that is often misunderstood.

 

[thatbrian]

Who are you referring to here?

In your view of Christ's baptism, I'm referring to Christ. Your post seemed to suggest that He was pretending that He was a sinner in His baptism of repentance.

 

[thatbrian]

Sure. I'll use this example - think of the Mosaic Law. Some believe that Jesus came to obey the Law and through this obedience merited the righteousness imputed us. But Jesus said that He came to fulfill the Law (that rather than His work pointing to the Law the Law pointed to Him).

Now apply this idea of fulfilling to baptism. Was Jesus baptized in order to point to that baptism (that it signified repentance) or was Jesus' baptism itself pointing to Him? My answer is the latter. Jesus became man, took upon humanity upon Himself. Baptism points to the righteousness of Christ as the "last Adam", into which all believers are baptized.

Your post is unclear to me. It sounds like a verbal shell game. Have you read much Brian McClaren or Rob Bell?

 

[JonC]

Your post is unclear to me. It sounds like a verbal shell game. Have you read much Brian McClaren or Rob Bell?

No. My favorites are John Piper and D.A. Carson. I haven't read much McClaren or Bell. Are they pastors you look to for instruction? If so, maybe they can explain to you what Christ being baptized to fulfill all righteousness means. It wasn't a shell game but Scripture itself. Sorry you couldn't understand my explanation.

 

[thatbrian]

No. My favorites are John Piper and D.A. Carson. I haven't read much McClaren or Bell. Are they pastors you look to for instruction? If so, maybe they can explain to you what Christ being baptized to fulfill all righteousness means. It wasn't a shell game but Scripture itself. Sorry you couldn't understand my explanation.

D.A. Carson? He doesn't hold your view of the atonement. Of that I am certain.

Also, if you do quote scripture please reference the book, chapter, and verse. I did see any in your post.

 

[JonC]

D.A. Carson? He doesn't hold your view of the atonement.

If you do quote scripture please reference the book, chapter, and verse.

No. He doesn't. Neither does Piper or Bell, or McClaren.

Sometimes I provide reference for passages I quote. Sometimes I had rather see how others will react to Scripture apart from advertising they are God's words. So I will have to decline your request.

 

[agedman]

Why was Jesus baptized?

What has this question got to do with the thread?

 

[agedman]

As in Jesus Died in the place of sinners, who are pardoned only when they repent and accept His salvation. Paul puts it quite well, when he says, "Christ died for (ὑπέρ) our sins according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3).

This doesn’t cut correctly with Scripture.

There is a single requirement for salvation.

The gift of God, belief.

None other.

Belief is not accepted as a gift, it is bestowed upon the unbeliever that they confess what they believe.

God does not go about wringing His hands pleading and hoping that in some manner humankind might pay Him attention.

 

[agedman]

Was Jesus' main purpose in the incarnation to be an "example" for us?

Why would a sinless man need to be baptized with a baptism of repentance?

Again, what has this question got to do with the thread?