Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have no idea whay you just said. Please, don't explain!
Why wouldn't you want me to explain?
I'm saying that the passages that you quote confirm your bias (the doctrine of penal substitution) only if you read the passages assuming that your bias is true. Basically, it's circular reasoning, I'd say.
We can examine all these Isaiah scriptures and other scriptures and some say or imply that we did it and others say that God did it, but nowhere, to the best of my knowledge (and more knowledgeable opponents of penal substitution) does it specifically state God was pouring out His wrath on His Son in substitution for the wrath He felt He had to pour out on us. And proponents will sift out a dozen verses scattered throughout the Bible and cobble them together and say, "Ah Ha! Look! Genesis plus Leviticus plus Daniel plus Haggai plus Matthew plus Galatians equals penal substitution. Context Context." Again, this whole business of "God is love, but God is also equally justice and His sense of justice must be appeased; sin must be punished eternally, but rather than vent His wrath on us and punish us for eternity in fiery hell He chose to vent His wrath on His Son, who chose to step in our place and receive that wrath" -- all this is not to be found anywhere in the Bible. Again, it's a man-made construct assembled from dozens of scattered verses and hammered together like a badly-built treehouse in order to justify other man-made dogmas which we won't go into because they are not the subject of this thread.
The bottom line is that if penal substitution were so prima facie in the scriptures we wouldn't be having this discussion. It would be like trying to debate "Does God condone sin".
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
"He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed” (1 Peter 2:24).
They cannot read without the indoctrinated context. It is automatically a part of what they read, Pleroo. The above post was in response to the same assumptions they added to the verses they read. It is very difficult to remove such early conditioning. Only God can make it happen . . . which is why I am so pleased that you seem to have escaped from it.
You don't know my history, thus you don't know if I'm indocrinated. You just like to elevate yourself to a higher spiritual plane. It helps cover up your poor argument.
Mike, you are saying that God demanded that God must pay God a ransom? God was holding humankind hostage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
The above question of course was originally posted by Pleroo, not by me as the misediting makes it appear.
God was not holding mankind hostage. Man was imprisoned in the slavemarket of sin. Sin had created a barrier between man and God. Since man could not free himself, and could not tear down the barrier that sin had created, God paid the penalty for sin by reason of the Second Person of the Trinity becoming man and going to the Cross and taking the punishment for our sins so that the Father's justice could be propitiated or satisfied. This made it possible for God to offer the gift of salvation to anyone who simply believes on Christ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo
Paid the penalty to whom?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Distinguish between the penalty and the ransom.
The righteousness of God required a penalty for sin. The justice of God imposed that penalty. Sin put a barrier between God and man. That put man in bondage to sin. Jesus' substitutionary death on the Cross satisfied the righteous demands of the Father thus freeing man from the slave market of sin.
God was not holding man hostage, but rather, sin was holding man hostage. Christ's work on the Cross removed sin as a barrier between man and God. The issue therefore is not sin, but trusting in the finished work of Christ on the Cross for eternal life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo
To whom do you believe the ransom was paid, Mike? If it was God who imposed the penalty, then it was to God that the ransom had to be paid.
What I am trying to explain to you is that contrary to your question which asks if God was holding mankind hostage, the answer is no, He wasn't. Man was held hostage by sin. Not by God. But Jesus, by offering Himself as a sacrifice to the Father, freed man from the slavemarket of sin in which man was held hostage.
Jesus offered Himself as a sacrifice to the Father. Jesus paid the ransom to the Father with His own life. This satisfied the Father's righteousness and freed man from capitivity to sin which held him hostage. This is why I told you to distinguish between the penalty and the ransom. Except that I should have told you instead to distinguish between to whom the penalty was paid, and to whom or what man was held hostage.
Jesus paid the ransom with His blood (a reference to His spiritual death) to the Father, but it was not God who held mankind hostage, it was sin that held mankind hostage by erecting a barrier between man and God.
What I am trying to explain to you is that contrary to your question which asks if God was holding mankind hostage, the answer is no, He wasn't. Man was held hostage by sin. Not by God. But Jesus, by offering Himself as a sacrifice to the Father, freed man from the slavemarket of sin in which man was held hostage.
Jesus offered Himself as a sacrifice to the Father. Jesus paid the ransom to the Father with His own life. This satisfied the Father's righteousness and freed man from capitivity to sin which held him hostage. This is why I told you to distinguish between the penalty and the ransom.
Jesus paid the ransom with His blood (a reference to His spiritual death) to the Father, but it was not God who held mankind hostage, it was sin that held mankind hostage by erecting a barrier between man and God.
I hope that's clear enough.
It's clear what you are trying to say. But it makes no sense. A ransom is paid to the person who is holding someone else captive. You say that Jesus (whom you believe is God) paid the Father (God) the ransom that God demanded. Therefore, based on your belief, God the Father was the one holding mankind hostage.
You are tragically mistaken. God demanded a penalty for sin, and Jesus paid that penalty thus satisfying the righteousness of the Father as Scripture states.
<snip>
The whole of the Scriptures point to the substitutionary death of Christ on the Cross for the forgiveness of sins by which means God can offer salvation to the world and give it to those who believe on Christ.
Your theology is the result of forcing the conclusions on the scriptures over time. Atonement appears many times in the Bible seldom using hilasmos. In Greek it is katallagē and in Hebrew it is kaphar. The relationship between them and hilasmos are confused for the modern English reader because the word ‘atonement’ once rendered kaphar in Hebrew or katallagē (Rom. 5:11) . . . has little by little shifted its meaning. The use of hilasmos as ‘atonement’ as Mike uses it now . . . was not so originally. When the original translation was made, hilasmos signified propitiation as reconciliation . . . as innumerable examples prove.
hilasmos = propitiation as reconciliation
katallagē =atonement
kaphar =atonement
Reconciliation is what Christ achieved by making up for our deficiencies ("missing the mark"=sins).
Last edited by MysticPhD; 08-27-2013 at 04:27 PM..
That's right Jimmie. And just before going to the Cross, at the Last Supper, Jesus said that the wine symbolized His blood which was poured out for the forgiveness of sins.
Matthew 26:28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
Well said, Mike! It's there, as plain as day, in Christ's own words.
Not quite Jimmiej ..... the "plain as day in Christ's own words" does not distort what Jesus said.
Jesus did not say the wine :
"symbolized His blood which was poured out for the forgiveness of sins."
Jesus said the wine:
" is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins."
As God said:
Acts 20:30
Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.
2 Peter 3:16
He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters.
His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Matthew 26:28 is one such example of .... " people distort, as they do the other Scriptures,"
Jesus said "IS", and he meant it as "IS" .... not men who distort the truth into "symbolized".
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
"He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed” (1 Peter 2:24).
Yes, but in none of these verses do I read the words, "wrath, anger, fury," or any similar adjectives. I'm not implying that a debt wasn't due. I believe I stated in my OP that Christ's death was necessary for us to be able to come into the presence of God, but once Christ died the debt for our sin was paid and then banished forever and the gates of heaven were opened wide to all humans regardless of their race, creed, faith, color, beliefs, etc. All this business about believing Jesus and accepting Him as the One who made all this possible would be dealt with at a later time in eternity as arranged by God, but God never felt wrath toward us; He loved us always. He had wrath against sin and this was what Christ came to deal with.
Read the tripe Jonathan used to preach to children:
Quote:
You are going to see again the child about which you read in the Terrible Judgment, that it was condemned to Hell. See! It is a pitiful sight. The little child is in this red hot oven. Hear how it screams to come out. See how it turns and twists itself about in the fire. It beats its head against the roof of the oven. It stamps its little feet on the floor of the oven. You can see on the face of this little child what you see on the faces of all in Hell—despair, desperate and horrible!…
If Jonathan Edwards were alive today he'd be locked up for life for child abuse and I'd be the first one to throw away the key. And this garbage is the fruit of the penal substitutionary theory. What a horror. What an absolutely joke.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 08-27-2013 at 04:25 PM..
It's clear what you are trying to say. But it makes no sense. A ransom is paid to the person who is holding someone else captive. You say that Jesus (whom you believe is God) paid the Father (God) the ransom that God demanded. Therefore, based on your belief, God the Father was the one holding mankind hostage.
God was not holding man hostage. Sin was holding man hostage by causing man to be separated from God. God's righteousness had to be satisfied. Sin violated God's perfect standards. This required that a penalty be paid. Once that penalty was paid that opened the door to the 'prison of sin' in which man was being held captive or hostage. All man has to do is to walk through the open door of the 'prison' through faith in Christ in order to take possession of the gift of eternal life.
Why would I not believe that Jesus is God when the Bible explicitly states that Jesus is God (John 1:1, Phil. 2:5-6)? But Jesus didn't pay the penalty as God, He paid the penalty as man. That is one reason why Jesus who is God had to become a man (John 1:1 compared with John 1:14. And Phil. 2:5-6 compared with Phil. 2:7-8 )
This should not be difficult to understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
