Transferred Wrath

[Carbon]

Christ bore the wrath of God had for men, but Christ did not receive the wrath of God.

He didn't? Really?

Similarly, Christ bore our punishment but He, though He suffered greatly, yet Christ was NOT punished.

He wasn't? really?

Jesus died for the elect only. To die for the reprobate would to die in vain. Jesus sacrifice is sufficient for ALL men without exception

These are my point of view.

A couple of bad ones, I see.

 

[fastfredy0]

He Suffered because he was Smitten...

I don't think that statement qualifies as "cause" and "effect" .... to be smitten is to suffer

 

[ReverendRV]

I don't think that statement qualifies as "cause" and "effect" .... to be smitten is to suffer

Smitten means to Suffer? I don't think so...

He was Suffered by God? Okay...

 

[fastfredy0]

re: Christ bore the wrath of God had for men, but Christ did not receive the wrath of God.

He didn't? Really?

God is immutable (does not change)
Christ is God. God has never been angry, raged at, been annoyed, shown fury, had outrage with Himself. Because of what Christ did the Father rewards him (puts everything under His fee), hardly a sign of any of these negative verbs.

A couple of bad ones, I see.

Do you think God hated/disfavored Christ for doing what God asked Christ to do? I don't.
And a voice from heaven said, 'This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Is the immutable God pleased with the son some times and not others? Is the Father displeased with the Son for obey everything He was asked to do? I don't think so.

We both think Christ is perfect. Our concept of perfection varies.

 

[fastfredy0]

Smitten means to Suffer? I don't think so...

Smitten: strike with a firm blow.
Suffer: experience or be subjected to (something bad or unpleasant).

I guess we disagree. ... would be boring to always agree

 

[Hazelelponi]

He Suffered because he was Smitten by God...

Merry-go-round time...

It makes sense, but it does sound wrong put together like that doesn't it?

Huh .. interesting... I wonder why it sounds fine until you put it together...

 

[Carbon]

re: Christ bore the wrath of God had for men, but Christ did not receive the wrath of God.


God is immutable (does not change)
Christ is God. God has never been angry, raged at, been annoyed, shown fury, had outrage with Himself. Because of what Christ did the Father rewards him (puts everything under His fee), hardly a sign of any of these negative verbs.

I think you lack understanding of the Trinity and the hypostatic union. Jesus is 100% God the Son, and 100% man, but he is not the Father and he is not the Holy Spirit.

Do you think God hated/disfavored Christ for doing what God asked Christ to do?

Why would you ask such a silly question? Do you think I might have given a different answer than you just gave?

I don't.

And a voice from heaven said, 'This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.

Yes, and?

Is the immutable God pleased with the son some times and not others? Is the Father displeased with the Son for obey everything He was asked to do? I don't think so.

We both think Christ is perfect. Our concept of perfection varies.

 

[Carbon]

re: Christ bore the wrath of God had for men, but Christ did not receive the wrath of God.


God is immutable (does not change)
Christ is God. God has never been angry, raged at, been annoyed, shown fury, had outrage with Himself. Because of what Christ did the Father rewards him (puts everything under His fee), hardly a sign of any of these negative verbs.


Do you think God hated/disfavored Christ for doing what God asked Christ to do? I don't.
And a voice from heaven said, 'This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Is the immutable God pleased with the son some times and not others? Is the Father displeased with the Son for obey everything He was asked to do? I don't think so.

We both think Christ is perfect. Our concept of perfection varies.

Christ did come for a purpose,
15 just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice; and they will become one flock, with one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it back. John10.

 

[fastfredy0]

I think you lack understanding of the Trinity and the hypostatic union.

That is an assumption. We tend to believe someone that doesn't agree with us lacks understanding. I've consider bringing the hypostatic union doctrine into the discussion but things seemed complicated enough.

Jesus is 100% God the Son, and 100% man, but he is not the Father and he is not the Holy Spirit.

So, what's you point? Are you saying Christ has sinned or done something to deserve God's hate(non favor) or wrath or anger or displeasure?
I am saying both the divine and human nature of Christ are without moral blemish and therefore God does nothing but favor Him. You seem to say God is angry/wrathful/disfavors Christ... if so, what is your proof. Christ was not punished because the definition of punishment is to inflict a penalty or sanction on (someone) as retribution for an offense. WHAT WAS CHRIST'S offense that proves your position that Christ was punished????


Re: Do you think God hated/disfavored Christ for doing what God asked Christ to do?

Why would you ask such a silly question? Do you think I might have given a different answer than you just gave?

No, I don't think you believe God disfavored Christ, yet your logic contradicts this.
You say Christ was punished and since punishment presupposes the infliction a penalty or sanction on (someone) as retribution for an offense then logic concludes you think Christ did some offense worthy of punishment.
Aside: I don't see the need to inject ad hominems like "silly" question. If you think I'm silly why waste your time discussing this further?

Christ did come for a purpose,
15 just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice; and they will become one flock, with one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it back. John10.

Agreed, though I don't see the relevance.

Just to cool things down I'd like to say I respect your opinions and I'm confident they are based on a solid foundation of knowledge.

I don't see this progressing much further, so I will give you the last word.

 

[David1701]

Christ bore the wrath of God had for men, but Christ did not receive the wrath of God.
Similarly, Christ bore our punishment but He, though He suffered greatly, yet Christ was NOT punished.

Jesus died for the elect only. To die for the reprobate would to die in vain. Jesus sacrifice is sufficient for ALL men without exception

These are my point of view.

If Christ was not punished, then God's justice was not satisfied. Do you agree with that statement? If not, then please explain how God's justice could be satisfied, without punishment for sin.

 

[Carbon]

If Christ was not punished, then God's justice was not satisfied. Do you agree with that statement? If not, then please explain how God's justice could be satisfied, without punishment for sin.

I just don't think he quite gets that.

 

[Carbon]

That is an assumption. We tend to believe someone that doesn't agree with us lacks understanding. I've consider bringing the hypostatic union doctrine into the discussion but things seemed complicated enough.


So, what's you point? Are you saying Christ has sinned or done something to deserve God's hate(non favor) or wrath or anger or displeasure?
I am saying both the divine and human nature of Christ are without moral blemish and therefore God does nothing but favor Him. You seem to say God is angry/wrathful/disfavors Christ... if so, what is your proof. Christ was not punished because the definition of punishment is to inflict a penalty or sanction on (someone) as retribution for an offense. WHAT WAS CHRIST'S offense that proves your position that Christ was punished????


Re: Do you think God hated/disfavored Christ for doing what God asked Christ to do?

No, I don't think you believe God disfavored Christ, yet your logic contradicts this.
You say Christ was punished and since punishment presupposes the infliction a penalty or sanction on (someone) as retribution for an offense then logic concludes you think Christ did some offense worthy of punishment.
Aside: I don't see the need to inject ad hominems like "silly" question. If you think I'm silly why waste your time discussing this further?


Agreed, though I don't see the relevance.

Just to cool things down I'd like to say I respect your opinions and I'm confident they are based on a solid foundation of knowledge.

I don't see this progressing much further, so I will give you the last word.

Ya know @fastfredy0, I believe we are both discussing things that are unsearchable and unknowable, besides what we have in scripture. That's the only place we can gather any info on this subject, as I am sure you agree.

Yet, you claim Jesus was not punished when scripture declares he was. Of course, he was not punished for anything he had done, I am in agreement with you that both his divine and human nature are without sin or blemish. So why did he suffer? Why did he have to drink the cup? Why was he crucified? Obviously, because of our sin (the elect) was imputed unto him.
Again, we know there was no inherent sin in Jesus, but all the sins of all the elect were imputed unto him at one time. Leviticus 16 describes it well. So he was indeed without sin inherent in him, but not without sin imputed unto him, as scripture teaches. And to think, how else could have the law justly proceeded against him? We know he was not punished for anything he did, but if he didn't become a curse and sin, how else could our punishment have been, in justice, inflicted upon him, "if he had not had a relationship to our sin?" And since Jesus is God, this sin he voluntarily accepted being charged unto him.

After considering this, I am not sure what you could say to me, @fastfredy0 said: You seem to say God is angry/wrathful/disfavors Christ... if so, what is your proof.

Jesus suffered all things so we don't have to. When Jesus was on the cross, would you point to a time when God the Father didn't seem angry at Jesus? When was there no wrath or disfavor on Christ? Would you point that out? Maybe when they mocked him, to save himself? Or maybe it was when they held him down and drove spikes into his feet and hands? Maybe when he was thirsty on the cross,
My strength is dried up like a piece of pottery,
And my tongue clings to my jaws;
And You lay me in the dust of death. Psalm 22.

Or maybe the Father didn't really turn from Jesus?


And you ask me this: @fastfredy0 wrote: WHAT WAS CHRIST'S offense that proves your position that Christ was punished????

Ya know, I'm not going to answer thisagain.

Do you think God hated/disfavored Christ for doing what God asked Christ to do?

Really? Is this a real question? Do you really think for one minute that I believe the Father hated His Son?

No, you're right about one thing, these aint silly questions. These are the kind of questions people sometimes ask when they have no case and are trying to build one emotionally.

Scripture teaches, Christ became sin, a curse, was a sacrifice, and suffered since his birth, was crucified, suffered the wrath of God, was abandoned by his Father, died on the cross, and lay in a grave dead for 3 days. All for us, his chosen. Was it all successful? Absolutely! The proof is his resurrection. He is the conqueror, the King!

 

[ReverendRV]

Ya know @fastfredy0, I believe we are both discussing things that are unsearchable and unknowable, besides what we have in scripture. That's the only place we can gather any info on this subject, as I am sure you agree.

Yet, you claim Jesus was not punished when scripture declares he was. Of course, he was not punished for anything he had done, I am in agreement with you that both his divine and human nature are without sin or blemish. So why did he suffer? Why did he have to drink the cup? Why was he crucified? Obviously, because of our sin (the elect) was imputed unto him.
Again, we know there was no inherent sin in Jesus, but all the sins of all the elect were imputed unto him at one time. Leviticus 16 describes it well. So he was indeed without sin inherent in him, but not without sin imputed unto him, as scripture teaches. And to think, how else could have the law justly proceeded against him? We know he was not punished for anything he did, but if he didn't become a curse and sin, how else could our punishment have been, in justice, inflicted upon him, "if he had not had a relationship to our sin?" And since Jesus is God, this sin he voluntarily accepted being charged unto him.

After considering this, I am not sure what you could say to me, @fastfredy0 said: You seem to say God is angry/wrathful/disfavors Christ... if so, what is your proof.

Jesus suffered all things so we don't have to. When Jesus was on the cross, would you point to a time when God the Father didn't seem angry at Jesus? When was there no wrath or disfavor on Christ? Would you point that out? Maybe when they mocked him, to save himself? Or maybe it was when they held him down and drove spikes into his feet and hands? Maybe when he was thirsty on the cross,
My strength is dried up like a piece of pottery,
And my tongue clings to my jaws;
And You lay me in the dust of death. Psalm 22.

Or maybe the Father didn't really turn from Jesus?


And you ask me this: @fastfredy0 wrote: WHAT WAS CHRIST'S offense that proves your position that Christ was punished????

Ya know, I'm not going to answer thisagain.



Really? Is this a real question? Do you really think for one minute that I believe the Father hated His Son?

No, you're right about one thing, these aint silly questions. These are the kind of questions people sometimes ask when they have no case and are trying to build one emotionally.

Scripture teaches, Christ became sin, a curse, was a sacrifice, and suffered since his birth, was crucified, suffered the wrath of God, was abandoned by his Father, died on the cross, and lay in a grave dead for 3 days. All for us, his chosen. Was it all successful? Absolutely! The proof is his resurrection. He is the conqueror, the King!

Sola Scriptura...

Let's make it about Sola Scriptura; instead of about Smooth Words. I don't mean to sound harsh; but at the end of the day, it's about the Bible...

Striken, and Smitten of God...

 

[makesends]

I agree with everything you said in post #352 with one possible minor exception (got to keep the discussion interesting .. )


I might take issue with:

I would say Christ work on the cross MORE THAN (not equivalent) covered the punishment due men. Many people imply this when they say Christ died for the elect but His work was sufficient for everyone without exception. (of course, "many people" could be wrong ... *giggle*)

But wouldn't that invoke the same accusation concerning 'efficiency' we wield against the Pelagians who claim that Christ paid the penalty for everyone, that it makes no sense for Christ to pay and for the person to end up in hell anyway? According to what you just said, there, are you not implying that Christ paid more than was required, denying the principle of efficiency?

Too summarize my minor issues in this thread ...
I agree that Christ bore the punishment of men. I don't agree that Christ was punished because the dictionary definition of punish is:
inflict a penalty or sanction on (someone) as retribution for an offense, especially a transgression of a legal or moral code.

Yet even by that definition, there is no mention concerning WHO pays that penalty —nor, for that matter, who inflicts that penalty. That Christ was not the transgressor and thus not guilty, does not imply that he was not punished, but only that he did not deserve it.

Since Christ made no transgressions (He was sinless) the definition of punish is not appropriate IMO. Christ suffered but it was not because of His sin and thus He was not punished, He was sacrificed to bare our punishment.

Same thing here. It seems a bit of a leap to go that far with it. The fact that it was not his sin, doesn't (to me) imply that he was not punished.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

Aside: Not often I have to validate that Jesus was sinless.

But you didn't have to here. This is a repeat of things already covered.

You said, "Anyone who says God punished Jesus is wrong, since Jesus was sinless" (link).

I replied, "He was—until God made him to be sin for us" (link).

I appreciate you sharing James White's perspective on this, as it closely mirrors the point I am making: Jesus was not sinless when God made him to be sin for us. And that was obviously by imputation. (Did that really need to be spelled out?) He committed no sin (1 Pet. 2:22). In him there is no sin (1 John 3:5). He was without sin (Heb. 4:15). And so on. Brother, I agreed with you: Jesus was sinless—

—until he wasn't.

He was punished by God for our iniquities, which were imputed to him for that very purpose. So, no, it is not wrong to say God punished Jesus. Your first premise collapses at the cross.

Premise 1: Punish means "to impose a penalty for a fault, offense, or violation" (Merriam-Webster).
Premise 2: Christ was not sinless on the cross.

If justice requires an atonement equal to the penalty committed …

Where did that come from? It requires a sacrifice sufficient to meet the demands of justice—and it was.

You said that Christ's atoning sacrifice was "far greater than was necessary and thus, by this definition, justice was not done." But who said it was greater than was necessary? You are, again, implying that forgiveness and atonement didn't require the cross.