• 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!

Without Christ's Substitutionary Death, There Could Be No Gospel

KenH

Well-Known Member
We were one day conversing with an unbeliever who lay on a bed of suffering and was murmuring against the God that made him. He put the question in an angry tone,
“Where did this pain come from?”
“From sin,” we answered.
“But why should pain follow sin?”
“Because God is a righteous God.”
“How does that prove that where there is pain there must have been sin?”
“Because a righteous God must punish what is wrong.”
“Why must He?’
“Because if He did not the universe would go to pieces.”
“How so?”
“Just as a kingdom would go to wreck if the ruler did not punish evil doers, so the whole universe would go into disorder if God did not attach punishment to sin.”
The sufferer thought a little, and then admitted that this was right, and that pain ought to be the consequent of sin, for the sake of preserving the universe in order and happiness.
Again he asked,
“What do you mean by sacrifice, and why was it necessary?”
“Because sin must be punished.”
“What has that to do with sacrifice?
“Much every way; chiefly this, that sacrifice is punishment—the punishment of one instead of another—for it is impossible that there can be sin without punishment.”
“But is that just?”
“Quite just, if he who is to bear the punishment undertakes it of his own free will, and is not compelled.”
“How so?”
“In this way: If you were in debt and I were compelled to pay your debts, there would be great injustice; but if I came forward and did it willingly, there would be no injustice to any one, and the law would be maintained.”
He thought a little, and then said calmly and distinctly,
“Yes, I see that; there would be no injustice then.”
“Just so is it,” we said, “with the payment of our debts by the Son of God. He came forward and presented His sufferings to God instead of ours, His life instead of ours, His death instead of ours.”
The sufferer was greatly interested, and the light seemed to break into his dark soul, as we then spoke to him of Christ “bearing our sins in His own body on the tree,” “suffering, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.”
It is on this great truth of substitution that the Gospel rests, for without this work of sin-bearing by the Son of God there could be no Gospel to the sinner. The proclamation of God’s love without the expiation on the Cross would be mockery. It would bring no satisfaction, no relief, no peace. Sin must be borne and its penalty exhausted before the guilty can draw nigh to God. And thus a German poet sings:—

“I and my heavy load of guilt,
My sins of crimson dye,
As countless as the grains of sand
That on the sea-shore lie—
These brought on Thee, dear suffering Lord,
The woes which were on Thee out-poured.

“I, I it is, who should atone
Bound hand and foot in hell;
I, I it is should bear the bonds,
The scourge which on Thee fell:
Yea, all that was endured by Thee
Hath been deserved, dear Lord, by me.”

- Excerpt from Horatius Bonar's Bruised For Our Iniquities
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Kinda (Scripture presents Christ as a representative substitute, "He bore our sins", "shared our infirmity", "came in the likeness of sinful flesh", "shared our humanity").

But the OP is paraphrasing Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologiae) mixed in with Calvin's philosophy as a law student (Renaissance humanism).

Aquinas argued that an innocent man could be punished instead of a guilty man as long as the punishment was satisfaction and not for the actual crime and all parties were willing.

Calvin did not like Aquinas' works, but this was also his tradition (Roman Catholic). Calvin "Christianized" the neoGreco-Roman judicial philosophy of his secular movement (as a law student). He changed "every crime must be punished, punishment satisfies the law, the role of the judge is to vindicate the law" to "every sin must be punished, punishment satisfies divine justice, it is the role of the Judge to vindicate the law".

Scripture, however, shows another Way, the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law. The law is fulfilled, every demand of the law is met, yet the way it is fulfilled baffled the Pharisees (and Calvin) because it was not through the law itself.


A better approach, for those wanting to know the gospel of Jesus Christ, is to set adide what various men think is really taught by the Bible and sinoly believe the biblical text itself.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
The Bible teaches that Christ Jesus paid the total sin debt(willingly) and satisfied God's justice for each of God's elect(chosen before the world began) - the people for whom He died. Period. To teach anything else is anti-Gospel.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
The Bible teaches that Christ Jesus paid the total sin debt(willingly) and satisfied God's justice for each of God's elect(chosen before the world began) - the people for whom He died. Period. To teach anything else is anti-Gospel.
You have a very different Bible than I. That is actually foreign to any passage in my Bible (I am currently using the NASB, NIV, and ESV on Logos). I do not have some of the newer "translations".

I believe what the Bible teaches is the actual biblical text. So if you mean some "Christian" philosophy about what any one of over a hundred sects claim is "really" taught "when properly understood", I'll pass.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
You have a very different Bible than I.

Same Bible; I usually use the KJV.

I believe what the Bible teaches is the actual biblical text.

It requires more than just reading the Biblical text to understand it. I read the Bible for decades without understanding it until the Holy Spirit opened my heart to the Word of God. (Biblical example: Lydia - Acts 16:14)

1 Corinthians 2:6-16
Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
But as it is written,

Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
Neither have entered into the heart of man,
The things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

(emphasis mine)
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Same Bible; I usually use the KJV.



It requires more than just reading the Biblical text to understand it.
I agree. But the understanding is not "secret knowledge". It is "spiritual knowledge" that does not differ from the biblical text.

Too many have advocated a "secret knowledge", only revealed through study of a particular sects philosophy. Some we call non-Christian cults (like Mormonism, SDA, JW). Others are "Christian" cults as they are more mainstream.

What they all have in common is their conviction that their belief, while completely foreign to the biblical text, is what the Bible "really teaches when properly understood".

I was with you at one time. My degree is in theology but I was not an observer (I was a participant, using "theology" to mean "Christian philosophy"... I was a Calvinist).

But I have come to realize that what the Bible teaches is not a sects understanding but the actual words of God ("what is written").

Spiritual knowledge is understanding God's words as is stated in the biblical text, understanding that Christ died for our sins not according tosome sects understanding of what the Bible "really" teaches but actually according to the Scriptures.

A benefit is I can text my faith against God's words and pass the test while you cannot. You have to text what you think the Bible is teaching against what others who agree with you say is taught by the Bible. That is a very subjective faith.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Spiritual knowledge is understanding God's words as is stated in the biblical text

I am well aware of the false teaching of Pelagianism - I was raised in it in the Church of Christ - that all one needs is to read the Bible, that there is no need for the Holy Spirit to open a sinner's heart and grant understanding of the Biblical text.

I am so very thankful to God that He delivered me from the false teaching of Pelagianism.

A benefit is I can text my faith against God's words and pass the test while you cannot.

Yes, I can, but only as the Holy Spirit grants understanding - see 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 that I quoted in my post #6 above. I am not about to go around saying, "This is what I think" on matters of doctrine. What I think is irrelevant; I can think wrongly, as I did all that time in the Church of Christ.

Jon, the Holy Spirit must give one understanding of the text to understand it in a spiritual manner; that is just the plain fact. Otherwise, one is reading only as a "natural man".
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I am well aware of the false teaching of Pelagianism - I was raised in it in the Church of Christ - that all one needs is to read the Bible, that there is no need for the Holy Spirit to open a sinner's heart and grant understanding of the Biblical text.
I agree. Pelagianism was a heresy (semi-
Pelagianism is not much better). I was unaware that this was the CoC view. Interesting.

What I was talking about, however, was God opening both the heart and mind to His words.

Today we live in a culture of individual "truth". One finds a sect that appeals to them, for whatever reason, and they adopt that as their "truth".

I guess it has always been that way. Calvin was a part of a secular movement and viewed Scripture through that lens. Joseph Smith and Ellen White were involved in mysticism, and viewed Christianity through that lens. Anselm focused on his own worldview and the olace of honor. Each held individualistic "revelations", and people followed.


But I was saying that ANY doctrine that cannot pass the test of "what os written", whether Calvinistic or Arminianism, is a false doctrine.


Spiritual knowledge- that act of the Holy Spirit - is not coming up with some secret teaching different ftom the words of God. Spiritual knowledge is understanding and applying the biblical text itself.

We look at the doctrine, compare what the doctrine says is taught, and if it is not the biblical text itself we know it is a doctrine of demons.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Today we live in a culture of individual "truth". One finds a sect that appeals to them, for whatever reason, and they adopt that as their "truth".

I am so very thankful to God that He delivered me from such as that and that the Holy Spirit opened my heart to the gospel of Christ, and regenerated me - as He does to all of God's elect, whom He chose before the world began.

1 John 5:20
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

(emphasis mine)
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I am so very thankful to God that He delivered me from such as that and that the Holy Spirit opened my heart to the gospel of Christ, and regenerated me - as He does to all of God's elect, whom He chose before the world began.

1 John 5:20
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

(emphasis mine)
When I lived around Nashville the CoC was very popular in smaller towns.

Anyway, my point is if one arrives at an understanding of what God "teaches" that is not God's words then they are listening to somebody other than God.

He is sovereign and His words stands.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
@KenH

Spiritual understanding (the work of the Holy Spirit) is understanding that the Bible teaches "what is written". It is understanding God's words without having to lean on what men say is "really taught" by those words.


The biblical text confuses many who canmot accept those words. In truth, the biblical text itself seems to them as lacking. The reason is "the faith once delivered" does not conform to the "wisdom of the world".

This was the problem the Pharisees had. They could not understand how God could fulfill the law except through the law. They understood justice through carnal minds, seeing the law itself as divine justice rather than one manifestation of God's righteousness. They were blind, lacking spiritual knowledge so that what was written plainly before their eyes went unacknowledged. They could read the words of Scripture, but lacked understanding.

The flesh simply cannot understand that which is spiritual. So fallen man content themselves by theorizing about what the Bible "really" teaches never able to grasp the truth before their eyes. It is to them foolishness. It does not answer the questions they seek because God's redemption is not the theory they want it to be.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Spiritual understanding (the work of the Holy Spirit) is understanding that the Bible teaches "what is written". It is understanding God's words without having to lean on what men say is "really taught" by those words.

I am so very thankful to God that He led me in 2021 to Grace Baptist Church in Ruston, Louisiana, where the gospel of Christ is preached, which led me to finding out about other faithful gospel-preaching churches, as well as to faithful gospel preachers who lived long ago.

God provides spiritual nourishment for His elect, Christ's sheep:

2 Timothy 2:2
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I am so very thankful to God that He led me in 2021 to Grace Baptist Church in Ruston, Louisiana, where the gospel of Christ is preached, which led me to finding out about other faithful gospel-preaching churches, as well as to faithful gospel preachers who lived long ago.

God provides spiritual nourishment for His elect, Christ's sheep:

2 Timothy 2:2
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
I did not know the CoC was popular in Louisiana.

The criteria for teaching is, of course, the biblical text. We have to test the spirits guiding is, test the doctrine being taught.

Mormons legitimately believe their teachers are teaching the truth. JW's and SDA's legitimately believe their teachers are teaching what the Bible teaches.

We have to test the doctrine taught against God's words. If they change anything or add to His words then we know they are false teachers.

Their intentions may be good, they may simply not understand "the faith once delivered".

A good practice is to take a highlighter and highlight the words a teacher or pastor says in your bible. If they are not there then you have a false teacher. Perhaps the teacher means well. But he is a false teacher nonetheless.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
How does that remark apply to my post #13, which mentioned nothing about the Church of Christ that I left in early 1999?
I do not know if it applies or not. I was commenting that I knew the CoC centered around TN and KY.

It was a simple off hand comment. I was curious if the CoC wss prominent in Louisiana. I do not know the denominational make up of LA.

My point of the post was that spiritual knowledge is not dome secret knowledge but instead an understanding that what the Bible teaches is the biblical text itself.

If somebody says Jesus was not raised then they are a false teacher even if they think that is what is really taught.

If somebody says God punished Jesus then they are a false teacher even if they think that is what is really taught.

If somebody says Jesus is not God then they are a false teacher even if they think that is what is really taught.

Good intentions are not the problem. The problem is spiritual blindness.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
I do not know if it applies or not. I was commenting that I knew the CoC centered around TN and KY.

By the way, I don't live in Louisiana(I grew up in Texas, went to college at Harding University(a Church of Christ college) in Searcy, Arkansas, and moved to El Dorado, Arkansas in 1978 to work after graduating). I drive across the border from Arkansas to attend Grace Baptist Church in Ruston, Louisiana.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
If somebody says God punished Jesus then they are a false teacher even if they think that is what is really taught.

If somebody says that Christ did not pay the total sin debt for His sheep, God's elect, then they are a false teacher even if they think that is what is really taught.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
If somebody says that Christ did not pay the total sin debt for His sheep, God's elect, then they are a false teacher even if they think that is what is really taught.
Only if those are God's words.

The issue here is the biblical text actually addresses all that needs to be addressed. The people who come up with alternate theories (like "sin debt") do so because to them God's words do not make sense. Natural man cannot understand the things of the Spirit. But there is a desire to have a form of godliness, so they create theories to replace that which they cannot understand.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
alternate theories (like "sin debt")

"Sin debt" is not an "alternate theory". It is solid Biblical teaching. Even we humans use the term for those who break law administered by man. Have you ever heard of paying one's debt to society in describing enduring the punishment for breaking law administered by man?

Furthermore,

Mark 10:45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

A ransom is a payment.

Furthermore,

Isaiah 53:4-6 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Furthermore,

From Isaiah 53:8 For the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Furthermore,

From Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin.

Furthermore,

From Isaiah 53:11 He shall bear their iniquities.

Furthermore,

From Isaiah 53:12 He bare the sin of many.

Furthermore,

1 Peter 1:18-19 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.

To redeem something is to buy it back.

I have now shown that the Bible teaches that it was God the Father who placed the punishment for the sin debt of His elect upon God the Son to redeem them, or buy them back, from the justice that they were deserving of, and God's justice being satisfied in God the Son's perfect life lived and willing sacrifice offered in the stead of God's elect.

God the Son had the power to do ALL of this.
God the Son was willing to do ALL of this.
God the Son accomplished ALL of this.

God does not just overlook sin, He does not just wave His hand and clear the guilty(Exodus 34:7). The sins of God's elect and their guilt was imputed to Christ, He satisfied God's justice, and His perfect righteousness was imputed to God's elect.

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath
made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

(emphasis mine)
 
Top