SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Did Jesus really Die as a Substitute for our Sins?- by Michael Brown

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 Next Page )
PosterThread
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re:

Not sure how to use the quote function .... sorry.

"Let me give a human example. If someone faces criminal charges and someone else pays their fine fully, that criminal is free to go regardless of whether or not he is repentant."

I get that. But, as a lawyer, I can tell you that in such cases the interest of justice is redefined as "revenue". :) I have seen cases where someone else paying was actually forbidden. Now, if Billy Joe loans Sammy the money, and Sammy takes it to the court clerk to pay the fine, Sammy "paid" it. But, it is a limitation of the system that someone else can even pay the fine of the guilty. In the case of us and Jesus, He "became sin". Sin was attributed to Him for our benefit. As "sin" was imputed to Him, it was then just for God to demand satisfaction of His own righteous requirements of the law from the blood of His own Son. Of His own sovereign, eternal will He did this. It is not unjust. If He does it, it is by definition right and just, even if incomprehensible to those, like Brian Zahnd, who have eyes but do not see. I am amazed at the gall of Zahnd's argument, as if God's righteousness must pass our muster. Incredible.


_________________
Tim

 2014/9/17 14:24Profile
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re:

TrueWitness said,

"PSA would be considered cosmic child abuse except for the fact that Jesus WILLINGLY accepted his death on the cross. He did it because he wanted to please His Father whom he dearly loved and trusted. And He also did it to gain a bride, the Church. God did not force or otherwise foist the cross on Jesus. In the Garden of Gesthemene Jesus struggled in prayer over this decision but in the end he chose it. Jesus himself said that He laid down his life and no one took it from Him. The Bible says he went to the cross "for the joy set before him." This is all plainly stated in the scriptures."

------------------------------------------------------------

If Jesus had not willingly submitted to the Father, He would not have been God. In fact, it was impossible for Jesus to not willingly submit to the Father. God cannot lie. God cannot be divided. He cannot contradict Himself. While Jesus certainly was "free" to choose as a human, He could not do other than submit to His Father. The possibility that God Himself could contradict Himself is a non-sequitur. If it were possible, He is not God. Our atonement was vouchsafed in God the Son by the will of the Father and the immutable, undeniable unity of Elohim.


_________________
Tim

 2014/9/17 14:29Profile
TrueWitness
Member



Joined: 2006/8/10
Posts: 526


 Re:

dolfan-

I agree with you that Jesus' obedience to the Father's will was something that was in agreement with his own will. I reject any arguments that insist or imply that Jesus was forced against His will to go to the cross. (I am not suggesting anyone on this forum holds this position, only Brian Zahnd misunderstands this point). He was willing all along. What I am saying is that Jesus WOULDN'T choose his own will against the will of the Father so that the issue of whether he COULDN'T never comes into play. We venture into a semantic minefield when we say Jesus couldn't have chosen otherwise. The fact that He never WOULD makes speculation on whether He COULD or COULD NOT a moot point.

The reason I say that we enter a semantic minefield when we talk about Jesus not being able to go against the Father's will is that such talk implies that He is FORCED AGAINST HIS WILL in His actions. Nothing could be further from the truth. His will was always one with His father's. Love defers to the will of the One loved. He would not means that He would not allow Himself to be at odds with His Father because He loves the Father and is of one mind with Him. The issue of can't never enters the picture.

 2014/9/17 15:10Profile
sermonindex
Moderator



Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 37303
"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11

Online!
 Re:

Quote:
By general atonement I mean that Christ also paid partially for the sins of the non-elect and therefore they are able to live temporarily in this life without immediately being thrown into hell when they commit a sin. Because of this general atonement God can bestow temporal blessings on the non-elect here on earth. Without this general atonement there would be no forbearance of God toward the non-elect



Where do we see this view in scriptures brother?


_________________
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon

 2014/9/17 15:20Profile
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re:

True said, "We venture into a semantic minefield when we say Jesus couldn't have chosen otherwise. The fact that He never WOULD makes speculation on whether He COULD or COULD NOT a moot point."

----—–--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is very easy to slip into semantic minefields on that, for sure. I think we are on the same page on it....except I'm not sure what you mean by partially paid for sins of unbelievers and would take exception on that. There is a general grace that is common to humanity wherein life here is a gift of God in the sense that He does not "snuff us out", so to speak. I do not see where the death of Jesus, per se, affords that grace. The will of the Father that sent His Son to Calvary is the same will that none should perish but all should come to repentance. The possibility, from our vantage point, of repentance unto salvation is indeed the only hope of the unbeliever.


_________________
Tim

 2014/9/17 16:01Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2039
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Quote:
Where do we see this view in scriptures brother?


Sure. First I'd point out 1Timothy 4:10 which says that Christ is "the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."

I'd also point out the clear teaching of the scriptures that the soul that sins will die (Ezek.18:4)and that the wages of sin is death(Rom.6:23), meaning not only physical but also spiritual and eternal damnation. Apart from the mercy of God and benefits of the cross of Christ, every person would be thrown into hell immediately when they sinned.

I'll share a piece from John Piper's ministry website(MacArthur also holds this same two-fold view of the atonement btw):

"We do not deny that all men are the intended beneficiaries of the cross in some sense. 1 Timothy 4:10 says that Christ is “the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.” What we deny is that all men are intended as the beneficiaries of the death of Christ in the same way. All of God’s mercy toward unbelievers — from the rising sun (Matthew 5:45) to the worldwide preaching of the gospel (John 3:16) — is made possible because of the cross.

This is the implication of Romans 3:25 where the cross is presented as the basis of God’s righteousness in passing over sins. Every breath that an unbeliever takes is an act of God’s mercy withholding judgment (Romans 2:4). Every time the gospel is preached to unbelievers it is the mercy of God that gives this opportunity for salvation.

Whence does this mercy flow to sinners? How is God just to withhold judgment from sinners who deserve to be immediately cast into hell? The answer is that Christ’s death so clearly demonstrates God’s just abhorrence of sin that he is free to treat the world with mercy without compromising his righteousness. In this sense Christ is the savior of all men.

But he is especially the Savior of those who believe. He did not die for all men in the same sense. The intention of the death of Christ for the children of God was that it purchase far more than the rising sun and the opportunity to be saved. The death of Christ actually saves from ALL evil those for whom Christ died “especially.”

There are many Scriptures which say that the death of Christ was designed for the salvation of God’s people, not for every individual. For example:

John 10:15, “I lay down my life for the sheep.” The sheep of Christ are those whom the Father draws to the Son. “You do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep.” Notice: being a sheep enables you to become a believer, not vice versa. So the sheep for whom Christ dies are the ones chosen by the Father to give to the Son."

Source: http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-we-believe-about-the-five-points-of-calvinism#Atonement


_________________
Oracio

 2014/9/17 16:11Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2039
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Another scripture that came to mind is 2Peter 2:1, "But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction."

So that scripture says that there were false teachers whom the Lord "bought". I'd take that to mean a partial, temporal purchase, if those false teachers never repented and trusted in Christ while on earth.


_________________
Oracio

 2014/9/17 16:58Profile









 Re:

Really, brothers, it sounds like you are playing semantics. Either Christ died to save us from sin or He did not. Either the wrath of God was appeased at the cross or it was not. So which is it?

Dare I may also ask did Christ die only for the sins of the elect or the sins of the world?

Bearmaster.

 2014/9/17 18:18
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5413
NC, USA

 Re:

Bear-

That was just being discussed-- see oracio's first post.

I didn't intend for this to turn into a discussion on letter "L" of TULIP.

I don't want to be accused of starting a riot ;)


_________________
Todd

 2014/9/17 19:40Profile









 Re:

TMK you are right bro. We don't need a riot but a revival.:)

 2014/9/17 20:10





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy