• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Penal Substitution

Greetings again Carbon, Eleanor and Sereni-tea,
Im sorry you think that was calling you aa heretic. I assure you I am not, and if you read what I wrote, "Trying to take away a biblical doctrine an essential part of the gospel, I believe is heresy." Do you disagree?
Fine line, but I understand that a person who teaches heresy is more or less a heretic, but it may come down to whether the person can be educated in the correct teaching.
Personally, I do not see you doing that yet. I see you more as not being 100% settled. I also believe if you study and understand scripture you will accept it also.
If I say that I doubt very much that I will ever accept PSA, and I could uses stronger terms, then possibly you may label me a heretic already.
how he endured the Father's wrath in our place, you will then agree "by removing this doctrine, you lose the gospel."
Yes, I am fixed in my opinion, that the Father's wrath was not upon Jesus. God the Father was with Jesus in love and care every inch of his trial, suffering, death and resurrection. To quote the experience of Abraham and Isaac and the anti-typical burnt offering and resurrection, "they went both of them together" Genesis 22:6,8.
Please explain your view.
I may add another post later or another day, on another additional theme starting with Genesis 3:15. You may like to comment on this verse first.
Looks to me like you have a few things (errors) mixed together. Do I understand you as saying if Jesus was our substitute, he would never have risen again? But would still be in the grave? Wow!
PSA says that Jesus paid the price or received ALL the wrath of God against sin and the punishment for sin is suffering and death and return to the dust.
I think your misunderstanding stretches much further than PSA.
I have already stated that my understanding of other Bible teachings differ from most here on this forum, and hence we have different foundations as a basis to understand the Atonement.
Because people, both unsaved and saved, there is no PSA? That is such a silly argument, I won't reply to that.
I will not answer the above as I cannot understand your objection.
Wow, I am surprised by your lack of understanding. I don't mean to be rude or disrespectful, I am just not good at saying things any other way but right out and bluntly.
Also I will not detract what I stated about the Book of Job.
You do not address the OT sacrificial system here, the death of a perfect animal in the place of the sinner, which was the pattern for Christ's sacrifice.
Penal (death) substitionary (of the animal) atonement (for remission of sin).
The death of the animal was not simply a swap, a substitute. The whole series of sacrifices, the sin, trespass, burnt, peace offerings and the Passover Lamb was to teach that salvation would come through the representative sacrifice of Jesus. Without proper faith their offering was like a pagan ritual.
But He could only do that because of who He is - the Son of God, the second person of the blessed Trinity.
I believe Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Is that what that teaches in Lev 4:20?

I believe the teaching (types and shadows) is these sacrifices temporarily covered sins.
What actually covered OT saints sins was the doctrine of imputation which these sacrifices pictured beautifully~The very elect who offered them understood to a degree, some more, some less, yet they knew Psalms 32:1,2 that these scriptures teaches, a truth that was past down from Aaron and Moses, forward to David, to John the Baptist to us NT saints.

. "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile."

John the Baptist said: "Behold the lamb of God"~which all those under Moses pointed to who were offered for the sins of the people.

Actually, eternal justification is taught in the scripture and understood by a few. 2nd Timothy 1:9,10~"Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, BUT NOW is made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:'

Abraham was a friend of God, and the only way that would have been possible was his sins had to be covered by grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ's life, death and resurrection~and not imputeth to him, there is no other way. Abraham saw Jesus' day and was glad.

Enoch walked with God, and he could only do so if his sins were covered, and they were by imputation to Christ, who was a lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
 
Some people are able to dismiss or reinterpret the verses that don't suit their views, but I am not able to do so. Due to my inability to reconcile the numerous Biblical contradictions, I have concluded that the Bible is not infallible and/or complete, and that God is merciful enough to save everyone.
Sir, you have a major problem. There are no biblical contradictions, only in man's inability to reconcile scriptures with scriptures.

Question: how have you concluded the bible is not infallible, and, or, completed~yet believe God is merciful?

What you really mean is you have formed a God in your own heart that you think that he thinks and acts like YOU regardless what the scriptures say! Got it!
 

1st 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.​

Here is one of the plainest statements of justification, reconciliation, and salvation in the Bible.

This is a legal verse, which does not address the eternal, vital, practical, or final phases of salvation.

There is no possibility or potential in this transaction, for God purposed it and did it (Eph 1:11).

Legally speaking, reconciliation was completed by Jesus Christ at Calvary (Romans 4:25; 5:10).

Legal transactions are in God’s mind, but as binding as any other transaction (Romans 5:12-19).

God viewed the elect from eternity as reconciled, but He actually provided the price at the cross.

Consider the two incredible sides of the most fantastic legal settlement made in the world’s history.

First, God put our sins on sinless Jesus Christ, Who then died as a Substitute for them (Isaiah 53:4-12; Daniel 9:24; Romans 5:6-10,15-21; Ist Corinthians 15:3; Hebrews 9:15; 10:10-14; 1st Pet 2:24; 3:18; Revelation 1:5; 5:9)!

Second, God put the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ on us, by choosing us acceptable in Him (Acts 10:34-35; Romans 3:21-26; 5:15-21; 8:3-4; Ist Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:3-6; Philippians 3:9)!

If you, reader, do not believe this truth, then you do not believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, and that's serious! You are promoting another gospel, one that falls under God's curse according to Galatians 1. Better to hear it from me, than from God in that day that's soon coming.
 
Greetings Red Baker,
God put our sins on sinless Jesus Christ, Who then died as a Substitute for them (Isaiah 53:4-12; Daniel 9:24; Romans 5:6-10,15-21; Ist Corinthians 15:3; Hebrews 9:15; 10:10-14; 1st Pet 2:24; 3:18; Revelation 1:5; 5:9)!
I read that Jesus was our representative, not substitute in all the verses you quote. Could I ask, how are our sins transferred to Jesus?
If you, reader, do not believe this truth, then you do not believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, and that's serious! You are promoting another gospel, one that falls under God's curse according to Galatians 1. Better to hear it from me, than from God in that day that's soon coming.
I consider Paul's words very seriously and it is for this reason I believe the Gospel that he and the Apostles preached.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings again Carbon, Eleanor and Sereni-tea,
Fine line, but I understand that a person who teaches heresy is more or less a heretic, but it may come down to whether the person can be educated in the correct teaching.
If I say that I doubt very much that I will ever accept PSA, and I could uses stronger terms, then possibly you may label me a heretic already.
Yes, I am fixed in my opinion, that the Father's wrath was not upon Jesus. God the Father was with Jesus in love and care every inch of his trial, suffering, death and resurrection. To quote the experience of Abraham and Isaac and the anti-typical burnt offering and resurrection, "they went both of them together" Genesis 22:6,8.
I may add another post later or another day, on another additional theme starting with Genesis 3:15. You may like to comment on this verse first.
PSA says that Jesus paid the price or received ALL the wrath of God against sin and the punishment for sin is suffering and death and return to the dust.
I have already stated that my understanding of other Bible teachings differ from most here on this forum, and hence we have different foundations as a basis to understand the Atonement.
I will not answer the above as I cannot understand your objection.
Also I will not detract what I stated about the Book of Job.
The death of the animal was not simply a swap, a substitute. The whole series of sacrifices, the sin, trespass, burnt, peace offerings and the Passover Lamb was to teach that salvation would come through the representative sacrifice of Jesus.
A representative is a substitute for the one represented.
Without proper faith their offering was like a pagan ritual.

I believe Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son.
According to the NT, the Word (Jesus, Jn 1:14) is God (Jn 1:1).
 
Greetings again Carbon and Eleanor,
A representative is a substitute for the one represented.
Possibly but there is a big difference, in my understanding at least, between a Substitute (especially also a Penal Substitute) and a Representative when speaking of the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the captain of our salvation, and we follow him.
According to the NT, the Word (Jesus, Jn 1:14) is God (Jn 1:1).
I responded to @Sereni-tea because he introduced the Trinity. I do not accept your view of John 1:1 as I believe that John 1:1 is speaking about The Word, not Jesus or God the Son. John 1:14 is speaking about Jesus. I believe that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is a human, now exalted to sit at the right hand of God, in God the Father's Throne, and Jesus is the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection. Please also refer to my thread "The Yahweh Name".
Please explain your view.
I mentioned that I may add some more detail by considering Genesis 3:15.
Genesis 3:14–15 (KJV): 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 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.
I do not know how you understand this, but it specifically states that God was going to put the enmity between these. I consider that these two groups represent the faithful and the world.

The world are those who follow the lusts of the flesh, those lusts that were awakened in Adam and Eve in the Garden.
1 John 2:15–17 (KJV): 15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

The above also highlights the faithful who allow the word of God to guide them and they overcome to a great degree the lusts of the flesh. This is part of Christ and the Apostle's teaching concerning the crucifixion of the lusts of the flesh:
Matthew 16:24 (KJV): Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Galatians 2:20 (KJV): I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Galatians 5:24 (KJV): And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Jesus is the preeminent example of crucifying the flesh with its affections and lusts. He did no sin, and as a result he was raised from the dead. We can be included in him and be forgiven of our sins if we affectionately believe in what was accomplished in him and unite and participate in his death and resurrection by baptism in water.

God reveals in Genesis 3:15 that this outcome was planned from the beginning. Jesus is not being punished, but purified by trial, and God is declared righteous by Jesus' voluntary submission to death.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings again Carbon and Eleanor,

Possibly but there is a big difference, in my understanding at least, between a Substitute (especially also a Penal Substitute) and a Representative when speaking of the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the captain of our salvation, and we follow him.
Which does not alter his being our substitute on the cross.
I responded to @Sereni-tea because he introduced the Trinity. I do not accept your view of John 1:1 as I believe that John 1:1 is speaking about The Word, not Jesus or God the Son. John 1:14 is speaking about Jesus.
Failure to see that Jn 1:14 is speaking of the Word in Jn 1:1 demonstrates a problem with understanding text.
There is no basis for common understanding under these conditions.
 
I responded to @Sereni-tea because he introduced the Trinity. I do not accept your view of John 1:1 as I believe that John 1:1 is speaking about The Word, not Jesus or God the Son. John 1:14 is speaking about Jesus. I believe that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is a human, now exalted to sit at the right hand of God, in God the Father's Throne, and Jesus is the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection. Please also refer to my thread "The Yahweh Name".
Hi @TrevorL , You will not be able to understand Substitutionary atonement if you do not accept the deity of Christ. I will not derail this thread by discussing this further here. I will look at your thread titled "The Yahweh Name" when I have some time. Blessings.
 
Greetings again Sereni-tea and Eleanor,
Which does not alter his being our substitute on the cross.
Was the death of Abel an evidence of the wrath of God against sin, or a by product of Adam's and Eve's sin, and the poor character of Cain? Was the crucifixion of Jesus an evidence of God's wrath against Jesus or even God's wrath against sin? Or was it again the consequence of sin, revealed through wicked hands? How was such a sacrifice effectual in balancing justice, which is described by those who accept substitution, punishing the innocent so that the guilty could go free?
Acts 2:22–24 (KJV): 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

Failure to see that Jn 1:14 is speaking of the Word in Jn 1:1 demonstrates a problem with understanding text.
There is no basis for common understanding under these conditions.
I stated that I did not consider that "the Word" in John 1:1 is Jesus or God the Son.
You will not be able to understand Substitutionary atonement if you do not accept the deity of Christ. I will not derail this thread by discussing this further here.
I agree that we should not discuss the Trinity here. If you would like to discuss this elsewhere I may decide to participate. You could start by saying that my conclusions in the Yahweh Name thread must be wrong because of your view of John 1:1,14. I could give a larger explanation of how John 1:1,14 is patterned after or fulfills the Yahweh Name, as Jesus was full of grace and truth John 1:14. Also I have a reasonable understanding of other popular so called "Trinity" verses such as John 8:58, John 10:30, John 17:5, John 20:30 and some other passages. I try to avoid some other passages as I do not have a clear personal response, though I could tentatively copy some answer from my resources. If you only make a list and are like a banner supporter at a political rally, then I am not interested.

I am not sure why the Trinity is considered necessary for God to achieve the Atonement. One of my workmates claimed that Jesus must be God otherwise he would have sinned like any other man. I believe that salvation must be the work of God and he raised up Jesus "Yah's salvation" to accomplish this. If you need to drive a nail into the wall you may try a tack hammer and fail, and you could possibly try a sledge hammer and be very unsuccessful, bending the nail and damaging the wall. But using a proper hammer, skillfully wielded would achieve the desired result.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Then there is the concept that PSA claims, that God punishes the innocent so that the guilty can go free. This is simply a travesty of justice, and does not in any way declare God's righteousness or justice. Also PSA cannot speak about the forgiveness of sins, if the penalty has been paid.
Thanks Trevor for sharing your thoughts. For me, PSA is explicitly taught in Scripture, I believe people's biases, conjecture, presuppositions either muddy the waters, or blatantly refuse to accept without any supporting evidence. Scripture is clear that Christ signed his death warrant knowing exactly what he has to do.

Christ was born in the flesh under the Law; Galatians 4:4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law. Why does Christ do this? Because Christ came to do his Father's will. John 6:39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.

How does Christ do this? Christ has to redeem us and become a curse for us, and fulfill the Law with perfect Law-keeping which restores the broken Covenant of Works that Adam breached by his One Act of Disobedience.

The Greek word for “redeem” in the Bible is exagorazo. It was a financial term that referred to the process of purchasing a slave’s freedom. When a slave was “redeemed,” he or she was no longer bound to the rules and expectations of a slave’s life. So, to be redeemed from the curse of the law means to be set free from its rules and regulations. In other words, those who are redeemed from the curse of the law are no longer required to observe the law’s commands as the Israelites were.

Galatians 3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”.

So you can see that Christ willingly volunteered to become a curse to redeem us. He condemns our sin in his flesh as they are imputed to Christ, bore in his body, the Christ who knew no sin, became sin for us.

1 Peter 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh

We are convicted felons on death row awaiting state of execution, judgment and the sentence has been handed down. But Christ steps in as our penal substitute paying the ransom to God for our sins.

Colossians 2:13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

Christ once and all pays for all our sins; the only sacrifice that will take away our sins forever. Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This means that Christ; the righteous for the unrighteous SUFFERED once for sins; meaning that he receives the full punishment upon his head for us, in our stead.

And the clearest passages on PSA, is Isaiah 53.
1 Who has believed what he has heard from us?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.


4 Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned—every one—to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.


7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?
9 And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him;
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for guilt,
he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days;
the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11 Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,
because he poured out his soul to death
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and makes intercession for the transgressors.
People tend to reject PSA, and say is non-sense or cosmic child abuse for the Father to abuse an innocent child who got in the way of a blood thirsty deity looking for revenge. This couldn't the furtherest from the truth. There was no other way to redeem the lost condemned souls from their fate. This is the greatest act of Love demonstrated in the Cosmos for all to witness. That Christ triumphs in his victory over sin, death, and Satan to redeem us through his suffering, afflictions, blood shed, crushing, buried among the wicked, Crucified and hung on tree by becoming a curse for us, the righteous for the unrighteous.

By Grace Alone!

I want to thank someone in challenging us on this topic, I have grown in this glorious doctrine that gives all the glory to God Alone in redeeming the ungodly!​
 
Last edited:
Greetings again Sereni-tea and Eleanor,

Was the death of Abel an evidence of the wrath of God against sin, or a by product of Adam's and Eve's sin, and the poor character of Cain? Was the crucifixion of Jesus an evidence of God's wrath against Jesus or even God's wrath against sin? Or was it again the consequence of sin, revealed through wicked hands? How was such a sacrifice effectual in balancing justice, which is described by those who accept substitution, punishing the innocent so that the guilty could go free?
Acts 2:22–24 (KJV): 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
I stated that I did not consider that "the Word" in John 1:1 is Jesus or God the Son.
Failure to see that Jn 1:14 is speaking of the Word in Jn 1:1 demonstrates a problem with understanding text.
There is no basis for common understanding under these conditions.
 
Greetings again Eleanor,
Failure to see that Jn 1:14 is speaking of the Word in Jn 1:1 demonstrates a problem with understanding text.
There is no basis for common understanding under these conditions.

Failure to see that Jn 1:14 is speaking of the Word in Jn 1:1 demonstrates a problem with understanding text.
There is no basis for common understanding under these conditions.
Yes, the same banner twice and no discussion. I will not elaborate a thorough response but briefly mention "Wisdom" in Proverbs 8 and the partial personification of the "Word" in Psalm 33:6,9 and Isaiah 55:8-11. Please also refer to my thread "The Yahweh Name".

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings Red Baker,

I read that Jesus was our representative, not substitute in all the verses you quote.
Greetings Trevor~He was both sir. Sir hear carefully what Paul said:
For he hath made him to be sin for us
That is more than Christ being our representative before the law of God. DId you hear what Paul said? "He hath MADE HIM to be SIN"
I could go to Isaiah 53, to show it even more in depth, but I think another brother has already done so, so I forbear doing so again.

Could I ask you a question? What does Psalms 22 mean to you? Psalms 22:1 ~"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?" John Gill said it perfectly:

My God, my God
God is the God of Christ as he is man; he prepared a body for him, an human nature; anointed it with the oil of gladness; supported it under all its sorrows and sufferings, and at last exalted it at his own right hand:, and Christ behaved towards him as his covenant God; prayed to him, believed in him, loved him, and was obedient to him as such; and here expresses his faith of interest in him, when he hid his face from him, on account of which he expostulates with him thus, "why hast thou forsaken me?" which is to be understood, not as if the hypostatical or personal union of the divine and human natures were dissolved, or that the one was now separated from the other: for the fulness of the Godhead still dwelt bodily in him; nor that he ceased to be the object of the Father's love; for so he was in the midst of all his sufferings, yea, his Father loved him because he laid down his life for the sheep; nor that the principle of joy and comfort was lost in him, only the act and sense of it; he was now deprived of the gracious presence of God, of the manifestations of his love to his human soul, and had a sense of divine wrath, not for his own sins, but for the sins of his people, and was for a while destitute of help and comfort; all which were necessary in order to make satisfaction for sin: for as he had the sins of his people imputed to him, he must bear the whole punishment of them, which is twofold the punishment of loss and the punishment of sense; the former lies in a deprivation of the divine presence, and the latter in a sense of divine wrath, and both Christ sustained as the surety of his people. This expostulation is made not as ignorant of the reason of it; he knew that as he was wounded and bruised for the sins of his people, he was deserted on the same account; nor as impatient, for he was a mirror of patience in all his sufferings; and much less as in despair; for, in these very words, he strongly expresses and repeats his faith of interest in God; see ( Psalms 22:8 ) ; and also ( Isaiah 50:6 Isaiah 50:7 Isaiah 50:9 ) . But this is done to set forth the greatness and bitterness of his sufferings; that not only men hid their faces from him, and the sun in the firmament withdrew its light and heat from him, but,. From hence it appears that he was truly man, had an human soul, and endured sorrows and sufferings in it; and this may be of use to his members, to expect the hidings of God's face, though on another account; and to teach them to wait patiently for him, and to trust in the Lord, and stay themselves upon their God, even while they walk in darkness and see no light;
Could I ask, how are our sins transferred to Jesus?
By imputation! Sir, the key lies right here in the following scriptures:

Romans 3:21-25~"But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus."

Trevor, would you like for you and I to discuss these scripture in depth, the answer you asked lies in them?
 
Greetings again Red Baker,
Trevor, would you like for you and I to discuss these scripture in depth, the answer you asked lies in them?
I am not sure that I would be adequate to explain my perspective which is the "Central" view of my fellowship which is what Robert Roberts explained in "The Blood of Christ" and in "The Slain Lamb" and John Carter explained in one chapter of "God's Way" and here in Australia in his lectures on "The Atonement" and "Isaiah 53" and also his documentation in the "Australian Unity Book". What I am trying to say is that it is a large subject and difficult at times to explain it properly and get the balance right.

We start from very different perspectives as I believe that man is mortal and returns to the dust, and has no immortal soul. Thus we are being saved from sin and death. My definition is also that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is a human, now exalted to sit at the right hand of God, in God the Father's Throne, and he is the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection.

Yes Romans 3:21-25 is one of the most important references that I would attempt to explain and endorse and others such as Romans 5:12 and Romans 6:23 and Romans 8:3 and possibly many others. Just an aside, would you accept "for us" to mean "on our behalf" (as our representative) or would you insist that it means "instead of us" (our substitute)?

If you keep calling me Sir, I will start addressing you as "Sir Red Baker" and ask if you have been personally knighted, or inherited your title as a Baron.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Last edited:
I agree that we should not discuss the Trinity here. If you would like to discuss this elsewhere I may decide to participate.

I am not sure why the Trinity is considered necessary for God to achieve the Atonement. One of my workmates claimed that Jesus must be God otherwise he would have sinned like any other man. I believe that salvation must be the work of God and he raised up Jesus "Yah's salvation" to accomplish this. If you need to drive a nail into the wall you may try a tack hammer and fail, and you could possibly try a sledge hammer and be very unsuccessful, bending the nail and damaging the wall. But using a proper hammer, skillfully wielded would achieve the desired result.
My apologies @TrevorL for not getting back to you sooner. I have had a busy week.

Unfortunately I do not currently have the time at the moment to devote to a discussion with you on the important topic of the Trinity. I will just say that in regards to the Atonement, if Jesus was only a man, how could he atone for the sins of the world? How could he win the victory over the spiritual forces of darkness that rules the world? How could the blood of a man (even a 'sinless' man if that was even possible) bring about the new covenant and the forgiveness of sins? Only God incarnate could do this. We needed God Himself to come into our world, as our Substitute and Representative, to break the power of Sin and Death, and bring us to Himself. To say that a mere man could do this is to not comprehend the power of Sin and evil that infects us and our world. So the deity of Christ is absolutely essential to the Atonement. It was the Trinity, Father, Son and Spirit, working together that brought about the redemption of God's covenant people.
 
Greetings again Red Baker,

I am not sure that I would be adequate to explain my perspective which is the "Central" view of my fellowship which is what Robert Roberts explained in "The Blood of Christ" and in "The Slain Lamb" and John Carter explained in one chapter of "God's Way" and here in Australia in his lectures on "The Atonement" and "Isaiah 53" and also his documentation in the "Australian Unity Book". What I am trying to say is that it is a large subject and difficult at times to explain it properly and get the balance right.

We start from very different perspectives as I believe that man is mortal and returns to the dust, and has no immortal soul. Thus we are being saved from sin and death. My definition is also that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is a human, now exalted to sit at the right hand of God, in God the Father's Throne, and he is the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection.

Yes Romans 3:21-25 is one of the most important references that I would attempt to explain and endorse and others such as Romans 5:12 and Romans 6:23 and Romans 8:3 and possibly many others. Just an aside, would you accept "for us" to mean "on our behalf" (as our representative) or would you insist that it means "instead of us" (our substitute)?

If you keep calling me Sir, I will start addressing you as "Sir Red Baker" and ask if you have been personally knighted, or inherited your title as a Baron.

Kind regards
Trevor
Travis, sorry about calling you sir, that's the way we were trained in the south ( USA ). I'll let this be, and go no further with you on this subject.
 
Greetings again Sereni-tea and Red Baker,
How could the blood of a man (even a 'sinless' man if that was even possible) bring about the new covenant and the forgiveness of sins? Only God incarnate could do this. We needed God Himself to come into our world, as our Substitute and Representative, to break the power of Sin and Death, and bring us to Himself. To say that a mere man could do this is to not comprehend the power of Sin and evil that infects us and our world. So the deity of Christ is absolutely essential to the Atonement.
There are many Scriptures and prophecies that clearly teach of the uniqueness of the sinless Son of God, Jesus, Jesus Christ, Yah's Salvation. I used a figure to illustrate, driving in a nail, and you reject my understanding by almost claiming that I believe in a tack hammer "mere man", but you insist on a sledge hammer "the deity of Christ is absolutely essential to the Atonement". God achieved the desired result by giving birth to Jesus, educating him, guiding him and bringing him to perfection by the things that he suffered. Your view effectively ignores all of this. Also there was no anger directed against Jesus by hs Loving Father. Was God angry against Abel, Joseph, Job, the Apostles and all the faithful who have suffered?
I'll let this be, and go no further with you on this subject.
That's fine, as I also need to take my participation in this forum at a more manageable pace especially in areas that I have not had previous experience at a forum level. Nevertheless the Atonement has been one of the most discussed subjects in our fellowship, and I have been involved personally in many of these.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Bible 101: God is not governed by human reasoning.
A God Who cannot be understood through the reason He has endowed us with cannot be obeyed, yet God in the Bible says: "come now, and let us reason together" (Isaiah 1:18).
 
Back
Top