SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Atonement & all things pertaining

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Atonement & all things pertaining

[b]Genisis 2:17[/b] [color=990000]But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it: for in the day that you eat thereof [b]you shall surely die[/b].[/color]
The judment was death, therefore, the Atonement includes the punishment for sin as our substitute(Penal) so that the judgment of death is caried out.
The Atonement is not disciplinary or the law is not for rehabilitation intended to reform humankind of which it would be if it wasn't penal.

Atonement is the translated word kaw-far' from Hebrew to English which means “to cover” of the Jewish Fast of Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement). It incorporates the words reconciliation, propitiation (satisfaction) and forgiveness. The work of Christ on His cross makes away for salvation while the salvation it's self comes from the relationship one has with Him and not just in what he did on the cross.

[b]1:[/b] Reconciliation = To restore a broken relationsip.
[b]2:[/b] Propitiation = A satisfaction, appeasement of wrath from a transgression of the law.
[b]3:[/b] Forgiveness = To pardon an offense or an offender of the law.

To understand how the the Atonement (sacrifice of Jesus) restores a relationsip with God, appeases his wrath, and pardons our sin, we must know what God says.
God uses His law on the account of sin to implement the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. God says,
[b]Deut 21:23[/b] [color=990000]His body shall not remain overnight on the tree (cross), but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance; for he who hangs on a tree is accursed of God.[/color].
Jesus was taken off the cross that same day He died so the curse of sin would stay on Him.

[b]Hebrews 9:14-15[/b] [color=990000]How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through his eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
[b]:15[/b] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new covenant, [b]that by means of death[/b], for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they who are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.[/color]
[b]Lev.17:11[/b] [color=990000]For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the alter to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.[/color]
[b]Eze 18:20a[/b] [color=990000]The soul that sins, it shall die.[/color]
[b]Heb. 9:22[/b] [color=990000]for without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin[/color]

For man to be legally pronounced just, is not impossible, however, there is but one ground of the justification of man outside of grace, that is by obedience to the law.
I repeat, there can be no justification in a [b]legal sense[/b], but upon the ground of perfect, and uninterrupted obedience to law.
Jesus is the only Man that has accomplished this, He performed the law perfectly, therefore, while in His earthly ministry, He would have had a perfect conscience from sin according to(Hebrews 9:9)

Christ was required perfect obedience to the law for Himself, however, since he perfectly obeyed, he did not need to suffer the penalty of death for breaking the law as we who have broken the law do. He could, therefore, suffer the penalty of death for in our place as a proxy.

[b]Romans 3:19a[/b] [color=990000]We know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those under the Law[/color]
Therefore, in order for man to be justified; man must be taken out from under the law. This only comes by death which is to satisfy the law. Having been set free from the Law by dieing to the Law through the body of Christ.(Romans 7:4)

Since the penalty for sin is death and we die to the Law through the body of Christ(Romans 7:4) we must also rise from the dead with Him(Ephesians 2:6).

When Jesus shed His blood on the cross which is Gods’ alter, God accepted His sacrifice. In verification of Gods' acceptance, He raised Jesus from the dead. The resurrection is the basis of our Faith
[b]1Corinth 15:14[/b] [color=990000]and if Christ be not risen, then [is] our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.[/color]

God lets there be a proxy (replacement for you & I) to take the judgment, but the proxy must not be guilty like the one accused or he would be taking the judgment for himself and not for us. So then the only person who could be with out the judgment of sin must not be created So that is where the seed of the woman comes in. In the bible, the seed is always from the man, The Hebrew word for seed is zera` {zeh'-rah} it can mean, semen virile (sperm), offspring, descendants, posterity, or children. The man would plant his seed into the woman. God said in
[b]Genesis 3:15[/b] [color=990000]And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.[/color] Notice the term her seed. Mary was the mother of Jesus but Joseph, Mary's husband, wasn't the father of Jesus. Jesus was not from a seed of a man but conceived by the Holy Spirit. Jesus is sinless; therefore He can take our place of judgment.

If it not had been for Jesus, we would have to satisfy the law because of our sin by our own blood.
Atonement is the complete leagal and retributive justice of God.

[b]Hebrews 10:29-31[/b] [color=990000]Of how much worse punishment, suppose you, shall he be thought worthy, who has trodden under foot the Son of God, and has counted the blood of the covenant, with which he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and has done insult unto the Spirit of grace?
[b]:30[/b] For we know him that has said, Vengeance belongs unto me, I will recompense, says the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.[/color]
This vers is implying that if one does not recive the Atonement there remains a retribution of God's wrath for the sin of who ever is not taking Christ as his proxy or scapegoat.

 2007/9/15 12:44Profile
Nile
Member



Joined: 2007/3/28
Posts: 403
Raleigh, NC

 Re: Atonement & all things pertaining

Hey Logic, good thread!

I think you've outlined the penal substitution view of the atonement nicely. As you may or may not know by now, I don't ascribe to this view. Hopefully this can be a good discussion of the issue. I know I could certainly learn more about the Atonement.

Quote:
1: Reconciliation = To restore a broken relationsip.
2: Propitiation = A satisfaction, appeasement of wrath from a transgression of the law.
3: Forgiveness = To pardon an offense or an offender of the law.


The way 2 and 3 are defined here is one of the main reasons I don't believe penal substitution is correct. I have trouble understanding how about 2 and 3 can [i]both occur[/i]. That is, how can someone offer forgiveness yet still demand judgment at the same time? That is not true forgiveness, and is certainly not true pardon.

Let me give a simple example to explain...

...

Scenario A.
I catch a thief who has stolen $100 from me.
I demand that the thief pay me $100.

Scenario B.
I catch a thief who has stolen $100 from me.
I pardon the thief and do not demand that he pay me $100.

Scenario C.
I catch a thief who has stolen $100 from me.
I demand that someone pay me $100 (I don't care who).

In A, I demand judgment for the crime. I in no way extend pardon or forgiveness.

In B, I extend pardon and forgiveness. I in no way demand judgment.

In C, [b]I am still demanding judgment[/b]. I deserve to get my $100 back and that's what I want. [b]I have not extended pardon or forgiveness[/b]. If I had extended pardon, I would not be concerned with the exaction of the judgment, for I would have [b]set aside the offense[/b].

...

My point is, if we as humans can forgive others, truly forgive them, that is, [i]not require that judgment be executed[/i] (as in B) - why can't, indeed, why do we say that God doesn't do this?

Is God so incredibly angry with sinners, even repentant sinners, that He is unable to forgive them, that He is just so angry He has to take out His wrath on someone? It almost sounds like we're saying that God has angry issues and just needs to "vent His anger".

And don't be confused - I'm not saying in any way that the death of Christ wasn't necessary for forgiveness! Although if you don't understand why I think it was necessary you might be inclined to believe that.

Looking forward to your response!
(And now I need to do some homework!)
Nile


_________________
Matthew Miskiewicz

 2007/9/15 14:58Profile
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2768
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re: Atonement & all things pertaining

Here is a good place to begin a study on atonement...

from Torrey's Topical Textbook

[b]Atonement, the[/b]

Explained
Romans 5:8-11; 2 Corinthians 5:18,19; Galatians 1:4; 1 John 2:2; 4:10

Foreordained
Romans 3:25; 1 Peter 1:11,20; Revelation 13:8

Foretold
Isaiah 53:4-6,8-12; Daniel 9:24-27; Zechariah 13:1,7; John 11:50,51

Effected by Christ alone
John 1:29,36; Acts 4:10,12; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Timothy 2:5,6; Hebrews 2:9; 1 Peter 2:24

Was voluntary
Psalms 40:6-8; Hebrews 10:5-9; John 10:11,15,17,18

EXHIBITS THE
Grace and mercy of God
Romans 8:32; Ephesians 2:4,5,7; 1 Timothy 2:4; Hebrews 2:9
Love of God
Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:9,10
Love of Christ
John 15:13; Galatians 2:20; Ephesians 5:2,25; Revelation 1:5

Reconciles the justice and mercy of God
Isaiah 45:21; Romans 3:25,26

Necessity for
Isaiah 59:16; Luke 19:10; Hebrews 9:22

Made but once
Hebrews 7:27; 9:24-28; 10:10,12,14; 1 Peter 3:18

Acceptable to God
Ephesians 5:2

Reconciliation to God effected by
Romans 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:18-20; Ephesians 2:13-16; Colossians 1:20-22; Hebrews 2:17; 1 Peter 3:18

Access to God by
Hebrews 10:19,20

Remission of sins by
John 1:29; Romans 3:25; Ephesians 1:7; 1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5

Justification by
Romans 5:9; 2 Corinthians 5:21

Sanctification by
2 Corinthians 5:15; Ephesians 5:26,27; Titus 2:14; Hebrews 10:10; 13:12

Redemption by
Matthew 20:28; Acts 20:28; 1 Timothy 2:6; Hebrews 9:12; Revelation 5:9

HAS DELIVERED SAINTS FROM THE
Power of sin
Romans 8:3; 1 Peter 1:18,19
Power of the World
Galatians 1:4; 6:14
Power of the devil
Colossians 2:15; Hebrews 2:14,15

Saints glorify God for
1 Corinthians 6:20; Galatians 2:20; Philippians 1:20,21

Saints rejoice in God for
Romans 5:11

Saints praise God for
Revelation 5:9-13

Faith in, indispensable
Romans 3:25; Galatians 3:13,14

Commemorated in the Lord�s supper
Matthew 26:26-28; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26

Ministers should fully set forth
Acts 5:29-31,42; 1 Corinthians 15:3; 2 Corinthians 5:18-21

Typified
Genesis 4:4; Hebrews 11:4; Genesis 22:2; Hebrews 11:17,19; Exodus 12:5,11,14; 1 Corinthians 5:7; Exodus 24:8; Hebrews 9:20; Leviticus 16:30,34; Hebrews 9:7,12,28; Le 17:11; Heb 9:22|


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2007/9/15 15:18Profile









 Re: Atonement & all things pertaining


I wasn't aware that 'Atonement' means 'to cover', although that is in line with the Old Covenant expectation of the Day of Atonement.

Our atonement through Christ, does much more than 'cover' our sins. (1 John 1:7)

There is an inner cleansing of the soul, the spirit and the mind, as well as healing of these in some measure although many of us need more.


Hi InTheLight,

I did a search on this page for any reference from Romans 6, and it is not in your post. I wondered if that is conscious on your part?

But, I have not checked out any of the texts you [i]have[/i] offered. Still Rom 6:6 is the only one which says 'knowing this, that [u]our old man[/u] was crucified with [i]Him,[/i] that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.'

This seems to be less about the wrath of God for sins, and more about God taking upon Himself to deal with man's bent towards sinning.

 2007/9/15 16:37









 Re: Atonement & all things pertaining


Hi Nile,

I believe Romans 6:6 deals with an aspect of Christ's death which is controversial amongst those who believe that each man 'falls' individually, rather than that he arrives in this world already in a state of falleness due to Adam's sin of disobedience, (by which we are all already dead spiritually, going to die eternally, unless we turn to Christ).

This emphasis on the individual sins of individuals, as the cause rather than the SIGN of their falleness, means that the full meaning of Christ's death and what Paul wrote about it in Romans 6 and Gal 2:20, is not acknowledged by some Christians.

I believe differently.... that in Christ we are also put to death, (with our permission, of course!) so that in resurrection with Him through the Spirit, we are also freed from the sin [u]principle[/u] and its outworkings.

Have you ever heard this explanation before?

 2007/9/15 16:49
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Nile wrote:
Hey Logic, good thread! I think you've outlined the penal substitution view of the atonement nicely.

Thanx
Quote:

As you may or may not know by now, I don't ascribe to this view.

Can you deny any of the conclusions that I gave, give some rebuttals, I am interested to find any errors that I have made in my conclusions.

On the matter of forgiveness, I think we need to have some definitions set forth.
Forgiveness is not the deletion of a crime but a covering. The fact of our sin is still real.
For example:
David’s sin with Bathsheba. He murdered and committed adultery. God forgave him but the consequences of the sin are still in effect.
A man is still dead and a child was still born from David’s sin. The forgiveness of David’s sin is that God will not hold his sin against him and never bring it up again to remembrance. That is true forgiveness.
Another example is the if you stole $100.oo from me and I say that I forgive you but bring the fact of your theft up to you every time we meet, that would not be true forgiveness.
So with God, Because of the legal act of payment for the crime, God is justified in over looking our sin to never bring it up again.
Quote:

Nile wrote:
In C, I am still demanding judgment. I deserve to get my $100 back and that's what I want. I have not extended pardon or forgiveness. If I had extended pardon, I would not be concerned with the exaction of the judgment, for I would have set aside the offense.

God is 100% just & 100% loving, God love says forgive but God's justice says the law must be satisfied.

With the definition of forgiveness that I have set fourth makes possible for God to truly forgive us and still satisfy the law.
Quote:

Nile wrote:
Is God so incredibly angry with sinners, even repentant sinners, that He is unable to forgive them that He is just so angry He has to take out His wrath on someone? It almost sounds like we're saying that God has angry issues and just needs to "vent His anger".

In order to keep justice and not sweep sin under the carpet, there needs to be a punishment or payment for the crime.
Quote:

Nile wrote:
And don't be confused - I'm not saying in any way that the death of Christ wasn't necessary for forgiveness! Although if you don't understand why I think it was necessary you might be inclined to believe that.

Tell me, why do you think the death of Christ was necessary for forgiveness?
Quote:

(And now I need to do some homework!)

How old are you that you go to school?

 2007/9/15 17:45Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Nile wrote: Is God so incredibly angry with sinners, even repentant sinners, that He is unable to forgive them that He is just so angry He has to take out His wrath on someone? It almost sounds like we're saying that God has angry issues and just needs to "vent His anger".



Honestly brother, whenever I read many of your posts I think "This guy must have read my mind. I have thought and said the EXACT same thing!" What you just said, I said the identical thing in a discussion on the atonement 2 weeks ago.

I agree with you Nile. The blood atonement was a governmental requirement, not a personal requirement. No blood shed is needed on a person to person relationship when it comes to forgiving sin. A blood atonement is only needed on a government to criminal relationship.


Quote:
Logic answered: In order to keep justice and not sweep sin under the carpet, there needs to be a punishment or payment for the crime.



The governmental atonement theory says that God requires blood shed in order to forgive sin, so that nobody believes that they can sin with impunity, and so the atonement is to uphold God's government.

But the governmental atonement says that the blood offering of Christ is substituted with our punishment. The death of Christ was not our punishment. We deserve eternal hell but Christ was crucified on a cross. But the atonement of Christ was substituted for our punishment, enabling God to be able to set aside our punishment (forgiveness by grace).

 2007/9/15 20:26
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2768
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re:

Quote:
I did a search on this page for any reference from Romans 6, and it is not in your post. I wondered if that is conscious on your part?



Sister, I just directly copied the Scripture references on The Atonement from Torrey's Topical Textbook.

In Christ,

Ron


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2007/9/15 22:18Profile
Nile
Member



Joined: 2007/3/28
Posts: 403
Raleigh, NC

 Re:

dorcas:

Quote:
I believe differently.... that in Christ we are also put to death, (with our permission, of course!) so that in resurrection with Him through the Spirit, we are also freed from the sin principle and its outworkings.

Have you ever heard this explanation before?



hmm, not sure. You might have to explain a little more fully.

Jesse:
Quote:
Honestly brother, whenever I read many of your posts I think "This guy must have read my mind. I have thought and said the EXACT same thing!" What you just said, I said the identical thing in a discussion on the atonement 2 weeks ago.


^_^


Logic:

I just wanted to mention this real quick:
Quote:
there can be no justification in a legal sense


Then is what sense is there justification? Follow the logical path of this question...and you arrive at Moral Government Theology.

Quote:
Can you deny any of the conclusions that I gave, give some rebuttals, I am interested to find any errors that I have made in my conclusions.


I believe that you have many of the right conclusions!
In fact, I would go so far as to say that you probably believe in a Governmental Atonement without realizing it - you just believe that there are other aspects of the atonement as well.
I do not believe that these "other aspects" are necessary or Biblical, but that a Governmental Atonement alone is the sum of everything necessary, the satisfaction of everything required, and the complete fulfillment of every Biblical description of the Atonement.

Quote:
A man is still dead and a child was still born from David’s sin. The forgiveness of David’s sin is that God will not hold his sin against him and never bring it up again to remembrance. That is true forgiveness.


A good argument brother! Consider though, that God's forgiveness of David saved him from the legal penalty...Hell. The death of his child was a reminder of his sin and a chastisement, but was in no ways "justly required" by his crime. Do you see what I mean?
David prayed that God would not let the child die. If the child's death was "justly required" of David's crime, then would David have been asking that God do something unjust? Do you see how, therefore, the child's death is not pertaining to a satisfaction of the law?

Quote:
God is 100% just & 100% loving,


I agree.

Quote:
God love says forgive but God's justice says the law must be satisfied.


I disagree in how you mean it. See below.

Quote:
In order to keep justice and not sweep sin under the carpet, there needs to be a punishment or payment for the crime.


I believe it is possible to set aside the law and forgive without requiring any payment.
Go back to my previous example.
Am I being unjust in scenario A, by not requiring payment?
Is it wrong of me to "forgive" the man like this?
Are you saying that for every wrong done to us, we should demand payment of some sort be exacted?
Does this mean that in our courts, there should never be any pardons or mercies given ever?
I would very much like to know how you answer these questions, as I think it's critical to this discussion.

Quote:
Tell me, why do you think the death of Christ was necessary for forgiveness?


Awesome :-)

First, let me point out that God cannot forgive in the way I described above for this reason: forgiveness as such would be detrimental to His kingdom. While accomplishing pardon (1 below), it accomplishes nothing of punishment (2 below).
Let me be clear: it is not because God is just "so angry" with repentant sinners that He demands bloodshed. No, it is because a just, good, peaceable, and [u]Moral Government[/u] demands it.

[b]Christ's death was necessary to accomplish two things simultaneously, which otherwise cannot be accomplished simultaneously:

1. The accomplishments of pardon. Of having mercy and letting a sinner go free.
2. The accomplishments of punishment. Of which are these:
a. Punishment stops/hinders the sinner from sinning more.
b. Punishment deters others from sinning.
c. Punishment declares and establishes God's sovereign rule and ability to maintain His Law.

With Christ's death, all of these things are accomplished!! AMEN!!!!![/b]

Aside from why it was justly necessary, Christ's death does so much more!!!

Christ's death puts to death the old man and allows us to be partakers of the divine nature!

Christ's death declares God love for all the universe to see!

Christ's death [b]actually lessens[/b] the total suffering in the world! Do you know what I mean by this??? Instead of billions suffering in hell for all of eternity, One Man died on a tree in a matter of hours!!! What a glorious trade!!! What a blessed exchange! Praise God!!!

You see, [b]God was not required by the law to dish out so much punishment in order to be counted just.[/b] No, God merely needed to satisfy the requirements of justice. He did so with the death of Jesus - without dishing out any supposed "wrath" at all! Jesus suffered, oh yes...but His suffering was not equal to the suffering of billions in Hell for eternity...[i]it did not have to be equal to satisfy justice[/i].

:-)

Looking forward to your responses.

Quote:
How old are you that you go to school?


19 :-P

One last thing, I highly suggest reading "The Atonement" by Albert Barnes. It's online for free, just do a search. I'll post some excerpts from it sometime.

Thanks for the good discussion Logic!
Nile


_________________
Matthew Miskiewicz

 2007/9/16 17:25Profile









 Re: Atonement and all things pertaining


Nile said

Quote:
hmm, not sure. You might have to explain a little more fully.

After I left this post for you, I realise I'm not qualified to explain it much more fully or formally, but I notice that Christian (hmmhmm) has posted the links to two talks which cover this, by someone who [i]is[/i] qualified to explain it thoroughly.


[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=19602&forum=34&0]https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=19602&forum=34&0[/url]


You will be able to answser with your comments in that thread, if you feel this one is inappropriate for a more detailed discussion.

 2007/9/16 18:08





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