D
Deleted member 5
Guest
Lol, of course it didn't, it was a picture of what Christ would do. Your argument here fails. You've yet to address a single Scripture I've given, you're simply conjecturizing.Only sort of ... killing an animal never settled the legal debt owed God for a sin committed:
Um, yeah, until He took OUR punishment for us.It caused PUNISHMENT to pass over for a season (until Jesus came).
Throwing in "torture" is another fail. Penal substitution is literally fitting because that is what it pictures and entails. You need to read Gordon Wenham on this.So the OT sacrifice was really more "propitiation" than "penal substitution". Nobody ever tortured the lamb or doves because the sin deserved it. The analogy to "penal substitution" seems a bit forced.
By the way, no one is saying the substitute "deserved" the punishment.
Of course.However, there is already a topic about PENAL SUBSTUTUTION, this is a topic about CHRIST VICTORIOUS as a reason for the Atonement.
Yes, He took our sins and curse upon Himself. Galatians 3:13.Jesus died to accomplish what He did accomplish.
OK, but this proves nothing against PSA.God forgives because God said he would forgive ... sin was defeated and God loves US ... there is no DEBT to anyone (except the debt to love as we are loved).
LOL!!!!!!!! The ENTIRETY of the argument in Hebrews completely refutes your above.That is what Jesus and the NT teaches without needing to interpret symbolism from the OT to change what the NT says.
Come on pollard.