|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 22, 2007 1:09:44 GMT -5
Vote and give explanation if you like....
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jun 22, 2007 1:38:29 GMT -5
I am not sure if my view is listed, the Governmental view, which is a two-fold substitution in satisfaction of public justice:
1. Christ is substituted with the sinner
2. The cross is substituted with our punishment
And the nature of the atonement being a satisfaction, or propitiation, to public justice - thus enabling God to safely forgive sin without doing damage to justice or His government.
And so I don't know if I should vote for substitution or for satisfaction, since I believe Christ did both.
------------------
Regarding the Early Church Randsom view, I see you voted for it.
I don't know the thorough perspective, other then that it was a randsom paid to the devil. Can you explain it more?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 22, 2007 10:29:55 GMT -5
Sorry I didn't put your view up there Jesse. I guess I just didn't think of it. If I could change the poll I would...but I don't know how...if it's possible. As far as the ransom view, I am still working on putting it all together, but it is what I believe as of right now:
We are all sold into bondage to Satan because of our own willful sin. Therefore Christ came to die to set us free from our bondage to Satan. His death was the ransom paid to set us free. The ransom wasn't paid to God because God wasn't the one who held us in bondage, it was Satan. God's wrath wasn't poured out on Jesus at the cross. God didn't require justice for our sins. He forgived and pardoned our sins based on our repentance and faith in Jesus Christ who freed us from our bondage to Satan and sin. A good example would be the book written by C.S. Lewis: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. In it, a human being named Edmund (symbolic of the human race) broke the law of the land and therefore became a traitor. He was taken captive by the White Witch (symbolic of Satan) because of what he did. Asland, the Lion (symbolic of Jesus), and his forces rescued Edmund from the White Witch and her people. Not long after the rescue, the White Witch came demanding Edmund be given back to her because every traitor belonged to her according to the rules of Narnia. Asland knew this, but offered himself in Edmund's place as long as Edmund could be set free. The White Witch accepted and they tortured and killed Asland. Death could not hold Asland though. He rose again and in the final battle, Asland and his forces defeated the White Witch and her forces once and for all. This can also be seen in the recent movie, The Chronicles of Narnia. I thought that was a good movie as well.
Here are some of the Scriptures used to support this view:
Matthew 20:28 says, "...just as athe Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many."
1 Timothy 2:6 says, "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time."
Matthew 12:25-29 says, "And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, 'Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand. If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? If I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges. But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house.'"
John 10:11 says, "I am the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd gives His life for the sheep."
Hebrews 2:14-15 says, "He Himself likewise share in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage."
2 Corinthians 5:19 says, "God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself."
Colossians 1:21-22 says, "You...once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death."
1 John 2:2 says, "He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."
Matthew 18:21-35 says, "Then Peter came to Him and said, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt. 'But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ So his fellow servant fell down at his feet and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done. Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him. 'So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.'”
Luke 17:3-4 says, "Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him.”
Colossians 3:13 says, "Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you."
Galatians 1:3-4 says, "Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father..."
Acts 20:28 says, "Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which he purchased with His own Blood."
Genesis 3:15 says, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head and you shall bruise His heel."
Ephesians 2:11-13 says, "Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh-who are called Uncircumcision by what is called Circumcision made in the flesh by hands-that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ."
Hebrews 9:14 says, "...how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?"
Hebrews 10:14 says, "For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified."
Hebrews 13:12 says, "Therefore Jesus also, that He might sactify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate."
Just a few points on the Ransom View for those with different views:
- Did God require justice or payment in order to forgive us according to Matthew 18:21-35?
- If we really are to forgive as the Lord forgave us (Colossians 3:13) and God demands payment for our sins, then shouldn't we demand some kind of payment from those who sinned against us?
- When you use the word Ransom, who is a Ransom paid to? For example, if your child was kidnapped and the kidnapper demanded a ransom, would the ransom be paid to the kidnapper, to you or to the judge?
- Which is more important in your view of the atonement: the death or the resurrection of Jesus? Would it have even mattered if Jesus rose from the grave according to your view of the atonement? In the Ransom view, the ressurection is probably the more important part.
- Does God demand some ritualistic sacrifice in order to forgive us? That sounds more like the pagan Gods.
- Was Christ's sacrifice on the Cross more of a ritualistic sacrifice or a heroic sacrifice? In other words, was it more of a pagan sacrifice to a God who demands blood or was it more like someone pushing a kid out of the way from being hit by a car, therefore being hit themselves?
- Who needed to be changed in the broken relationship between God and man. Was it God, who needed to have his justice appeased and his view of man changed? Or was it man who needed to be set free from bondage to sin and Satan so that he could walk Holy and have fellowship with a Holy God?
- The word atonement basically means "to bring together as one" or to reconcile a relationship.
- The Ransom View was the view held by all of the Church up until Anselm proposed the "Satisfaction View" in the 11th Century. The "Penal-Substitution View" was formulated in the 16th Centur.
- Who did Jesus deliver us from? This present evil age or from God?
- Does the blood of Jesus pay the penalty of our sin or does it actually cleanse of from sin and free us from its power?
- What changes when someone becomes a Christian? Is it his legal standing or is it actually the Christian himself?
- Was God in Christ reconciling to world to Himself or reconciling Himself to the world?
- Who was once "far off"? Was it God or was it the sinner?
- Does Christ's blood cleanse us from our sin or just cover it over?
I think that will be enough for now. Maybe I will elaborate more on it later. I am still learning it all myself, but this is what I hold to as of right now...
|
|
|
Post by joem on Jun 22, 2007 11:19:32 GMT -5
I am not sure if my view is listed, the Governmental view, which is a two-fold substitution in satisfaction of public justice:
1. Christ is substituted with the sinner
2. The cross is substituted with our punishment
I am in agreement with Jesse as far as these two points go. I can't say I am in complete agreement with the MGV, I am studying several different views currently, not ready to accept any particular label. The MGV has a strong case, however I am not always comfortable with the words used to convey this position by its proponents.
Rev, I have studied the Ransom View a little and early on I thought it made sense. I used to view God and Satan as a sort of yin and yang type of existence, with God having dominion over Heaven and Satan having dominion over hell. Over time I began to see that Satan's only dominion is a limited and temporal one here on earth and that hell and the lake of fire are within the dominion of God, Satan being subject to its torments and having no authority to govern there whatsoever. I really think that sin places us in the same condemned state as the devil, and while he leads sinners into rebellion, his goal is not to have others to burn in hell with him but to rule over them on earth in the place of God. If every soul were burned in hell fire, Satan would still have no dominion over them, nor would he improve upon his fate or condition as the object of God's wrath. I believe our bondage is to sin, not to Satan, and that we are under the condemnation of God, not Satan. Those that follow after the example of Satan, are following a leader with no real authority and no lasting kingdom, whom God owes nothing to other than judgment. It is an interesting view though, as I put a great deal of stock in the beliefs of the early church. I have become convinced however that some of what the early church held to was a result of the popular philosophy of the day, and that many attempts were made to reconcile the Christian God with pagan concepts of deity. Studying Philo, Plato, the Essenes and Hellenistic Jews have helped me to understand a great deal about some of the statements made during this era, although just because pagans philosophers made statements that agree with Christian theologians, that dosen't mean those statements are necessarily false.
Grace and Peace, Joe
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 22, 2007 12:45:43 GMT -5
Is this what the "Ransom" view teaches? If it is, I have not read it yet. Maybe I shouldn't be a label on what I believe just yet. I definitely don't believe that and never have. I haven't read anywhere where the Early Christians believed this either.
Amen, I agree. I don't see how this contradicts anything that I have said in my previous post.
Amen, as sinners we are condemned like him. And Christ's ransom freed us from that bondage to sin and Satan so that we can live victoriously on Earth and live with Christ for all eternity. If Satan rules over us on Earth, we will go to the same place as him. If the chains are broken we can live Holy and live forever with Christ. I wouldn't say it is his goal for others to go to Hell, but that is the end result of what his goal is. I DO think that he wants people to go to hell with him though. Even though Satan will be in torment in hell, I think it will bring him some satisfaction that he has drug most of God's creation (created in the image of God) to eternal torment with him.
Amen, I agree...
I think that lost sinners are in bondage to sin and to Satan. We are under the condemnation of God, but it is because we have given in to sin and Satan's rule that we are under God's condemnation. Just like the name Satan means accuser, Satan is like the prosecuting attorney in the court of God's Law. He knows that the soul who sins shall die. He knows that the Law demands death. He knows that dominion over the Earth was given to man and then man gave it to him. I see O.T. Israel in bondage to Egypt and Pharaoh as symbolic to sinners in bondage to sin and Satan. With that in mind, this is what Micah 6:4 says, "Indeed, I abrought you up from the land of Egypt and ransomed you from the house of slavery, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron and Miriam." Moses is also the likeness of Jesus as deliverer...an O.T. form of Jesus. What it comes down to is that Satan has dominion over unredeemed, unsaved humans. That is why Jesus bound the strong man and plundered his house...
|
|
|
Post by joem on Jun 22, 2007 13:31:01 GMT -5
Quote:I used to view God and Satan as a sort of yin and yang type of existence, with God having dominion over Heaven and Satan having dominion over hell.
Is this what the "Ransom" view teaches? If it is, I have not read it yet. Maybe I shouldn't be a label on what I believe just yet. I definitely don't believe that and never have. I haven't read anywhere where the Early Christians believed this either.
I had a professor that held to the Ransom view, and that is what he taught. I agree that the Early Christians didn't hold to this either, yet the way they sometimes described the competing kingdoms of God and Satan was reminiscent of the cartoon version of hell with the devil in control in the fiery pit, complete with pitchfork and all. Catholic mysticism probably fuels this picture of Satan governing hell more so than the church prior to the 5th century.
Quote:Over time I began to see that Satan's only dominion is a limited and temporal one here on earth and that hell and the lake of fire are within the dominion of God, Satan being subject to its torments and having no authority to govern there whatsoever.
Amen, I agree. I don't see how this contradicts anything that I have said in my previous post.
I guess my real question was in reference to the statement "The ransom wasn't paid to God because God wasn't the one who held us in bondage, it was Satan." I don't think Satan was owed anything, nor do I believe that any ransom was due or paid to him as he has no power to grant salvation or release a soul from the bondage of iniquity. Sin holds Satan in captivity as it does lost sinners, and just as God does not need to pay me a ransom for your soul, neither does He need to pay Satan a ransom for your soul, as we are under the same condemnation seperated only by the offer of reconciliation that was not afforded to fallen angels. Does that make sense? I think the Ransom view, as I understand it, accurately portrays some aspects of earthly sanctification that accompanies salvation while neglecting the eternal implications of salvation. You have peaked my curiosity though and I will be reading more about it in the days to come.
Grace and Peace, Joe
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 22, 2007 13:46:57 GMT -5
Your professor is probably right. I guess I shouldn't have labeled it yet or maybe added a label to it like the Early Christian Ransom view of the atonement.
I understand what you are saying. I am still figuring this all out. I think what I am trying to say is that Satan has Earthly rule over lost sinners. When Christ defeated sin and Satan at the cross, it gives the lost sinner the ability to overcome sin and Satan...which they were in bondage to. I don't think God is owed anything either. I don't think He requires any sort of "payment." I think He simply forgives, pardons and has mercy on people based on Repentance, Faith in what Christ did at the Cross and Persevering to the end. So, we were Satan's possession, so to speak and what Christ did "ransomed" us or freed us. I do think it is Satan who did what he did to Christ. I would say that everything that happened to Christ during the Passion (whipping, mocking, insulting, beating) and the cross itself was the work of Satan. I don't think God did that to His Son, nor did He need to. I think He allowed Satan to do it though.
I understand what you are saying brother. I just know that when Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden, they gave dominion of the Earth over to Satan and that when we sin, we give into satan just like they did.
I'd be interested to know what you find as I am still reading and learning myself...
|
|
|
Post by joem on Jun 22, 2007 14:02:22 GMT -5
I think what I am trying to say is that Satan has Earthly rule over lost sinners. When Christ defeated sin and Satan at the cross, it gives the lost sinner the ability to overcome sin and Satan...which they were in bondage to.
I think I understand, and agree that Satan's kingdom is here on earth and was formed when man forfeited his right to rule the earth by sinning. There is a dual role often portrayed in the salvation that God provides; salvation in this temporal world and then eternally in the world to come. The salvation of the sinner begins with his release from the grip of sin and his association with Satan's kingdom and continues until final redemption eternally in Heaven. The beginning is not the end and you must start the race and keep running in order to finish it. This is another reason why I view salvation as a process rather than an event.
Grace and Peace, Joe
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 22, 2007 15:13:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Jun 22, 2007 20:25:56 GMT -5
Good verse Josh.
|
|
|
Post by alan4jc on Jun 22, 2007 20:35:30 GMT -5
Isiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. 11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
Has anyone concidered that it PLEASED God to crucify Christ for us? What does that say of Gods love for wretched, filthy, God hating sinners? What does it speak to us of how we should act towards those same sinners?
Romans12:20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jun 22, 2007 22:58:48 GMT -5
I believed, for lack of knowledge, in the retributive satisfaction view.
But it never made sense to me. I would be with Christians who would watch movies like the Passion with me, and then say things like, "That was my cross. That was my crown of thorns. I deserved to be crucified."
And I would think to myself, "No it wasn't! And no you didnt! You deserved to burn in hell forever!"
So the peices never really lined up, but I was only exposed to one atonement theory and didn't know what else to think.
Then I would encounter sinners who said, "If Jesus was punished for all my sins, past - present - and future, then I don't have to repent because there is no way I will be punished!"
And Universalists would say, "Christ was already punished for the sins of the whole world. Christ satisfied retributive justice for everyone, Christ took the wrath everyone deserved, so God no longer has retributive justice for anyone, God no longer has wrath for anyone, it's all been paid in full, the finished work of Christ is done."
But such things I knew were completely false! God's wrath could not have been completely satisifed on the cross, because God still had wrath for the majority of mankind!! But I didn't know how else to answer it.
So when I first studied the view of satisfaction to public justice, instead of retributive justice, it was a little bit hard for me to grasp because I had the retributive justice view hammered into my head for so long. But once God kept speaking to me, and showing me things in the scripture (like how forgiveness is pardoning unpaid debt, and how he actually forgives our sins) everything started to make sense.
I realized that it pleased God to have Christ crucified, because it enabled God to conditionally forgive all who repent and believe, because public justice has been satisfied, our sins had been propitiated for, and a substituted can take the place of our punishment which God sets aside.
I think had a consistent atonement theology that lined up with a universal atonement but not an automatic universal salvation, and also a conditional security whereby one for whom Christ died could still ultimately recieve God's wrath and end up in hell.
Anyways, this is a great topic to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jun 22, 2007 23:33:59 GMT -5
Kerrigan,
Thanks for your long explaination!
I am curious though, in respect to systematic theology, how can "captivity to the devil" be reconciled to free will?
The Early Church believed in the ransom view, but also in free will?
I myself believe that slavery and captivity to the devil is a voluntary and willfull slavery.
What do you think?
Also, if Christ died for all, and His death was a randsom to the devil, then are all men presently free from the devil and need only to repent and believe to recieve the pardon of their unpaid debts?
When are men freed from the captivity of the devil?
--------------------------------------- Kerrigan,
I am glad that we agree on the nature of forgiveness and pardon, that God pardons unpaid debt and forgives unpunished sin! That forgiveness is the setting aside of punishment, and that the atonement was necessary to make this type of forgiveness possible.
I would only say that the randsom was not paid to God personally, for person-person forgiveness does not require atonement (God expects me to forgive all without an atonement from them given to me) The relation of person to person does not necessitate an atonement.
But I would say that the atonement was necessary for God's governement, that as Grotius Hugo said (who refuted Soccianism), that the randsom was paid to God's governement, because God's relation of Governor or Sovereign to his subjects did require a substitution, atonement, or randsom to take the place of punishment if he was going to set it aside. His justice, or His government would suffer if an atonemtn was not made that satisfied the same purpose punishment would.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 23, 2007 9:53:35 GMT -5
Now, don't everyone gang up on me now. I am still working this all out. I think that I have thought this through pretty well, but that doesn't mean I am to the point where I can convince others or teach others about it. If you disagree with my view, maybe try answering some of my questions and interpreting the Scriptures I listed in light of your view. I really would like to hear from some of you on how your view would respond to those questions and Scriptures. Here they are again:
Regarding Hebrews 9:14, Josh, I actually quoted that in my post as support for the view of the atonement that I hold to. I don't consider that to mean that Jesus offered Himself up to God as a sort of pagan blood sacrifice. I see that verse as speaking of Christ offering His perfect obedience to God...similiar to us offering ourselves to God as living sacrifices in Romans 12:1-2. If we look at it from that point of view, we know that God doesn't want us to go kill ourselves as some sort of blood sacrifice or literal offering. Plus, I never said that Jesus was a blood sacrifice offered up to Satan. I said that Christ took our place to free us from the grip of Satan and sin.
Miles, why don't you join the discussion instead of giving "amen's" and "good verses"? I would like to hear your view and how you defend it in light of Scripture.
That verse doesn't say that God did the bruising or that God did the crucifying. God was pleased with Christ though...as he was totally obedient to Him and was giving lost sinners a chance to have their sins washed away and be reconciled unto God.
I would agree that it is willful slavery. In regards to bondage to Satan, that doesn't mean that we couldn't decide to not commit certain sins or that we couldn't freely choose to be free from Satan as our master. You are a slave to whomever you obey.
Here's what Hebrews 2:9-15 says: "But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone. For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings. For both He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, “I will proclaim Your name to My brethren, In the midst of the congregation I will sing Your praise.” And again, "I will put My trust in Him.” And again, "Behold, I and the children whom God has given Me.” Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives."
Here's a quote from an ECF: "When our Lord arose from the place of dead, and trampled death under foot, and bound the strong one, and set man free, then the whole creation saw clearly that for man's sake the Judge was condemned."
So, all can be saved, but they must repent, believe and persevere to the end...
I couldn't see Scripture any other way now that I have studied this for myself. How could I have been so blind for so many years!?
Amen, I agree...
I don't know brother. I will have to study this part some more. Can you give me some Scriptures to look at regarding this?
I would challenge everyone to really challenge your view of the atonement. See if it really holds up in Scripture. If it really is Biblical and true, there should be no problem with challenging it right?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 23, 2007 9:56:09 GMT -5
Yes, I have. BUT, only because I have found it to be Biblical. Don't confuse my studying of his material and mentioning his name as if I just automatically assume it is all right. I test it all with Scripture as a Berean. Just want to clear that up...just in case anyone was thinking that...
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 23, 2007 11:44:00 GMT -5
Now, don't everyone gang up on me now. I am still working this all out. I didn't mean to look as if I was ganging up on you. I thought you were posting scriptures that others have used to support the view. But I guess if you hold that view that puts you in that camp. I may try although I haven't worked out fully my view. It's not set in stone yet. Here is part of a conversation I had with someone who holds to the view. If my memory is correct it went something like this: "So you believe that God the Father offered His Son as payment to Satan?" "Yes." "Then God took back His Son after three days? In other words, God deceived the Deceiver by giving His Son to Him and taking Him back the third day? We know it was a deception because 'had they known [it], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.'" "Hmm.... Yes." Maybe he didn't quite have a grasp on the view, but from what I understand he has held to the ransom view for quite some time. I'll stop there for now. I may answer your objections depending on what you believe about the above dialog. I have a hard time believe God paid the Devil and took his payment back.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 23, 2007 11:56:03 GMT -5
Yeah, I've seen or heard that dialogue before I think. I am pretty sure that's not what the ransom view is and that is also not what the early Christian's held to. Christ's life was the ransom. It wasn't that God owed Satan anything. It was the fact that WE sold ourselves into slavery to sin and satan as our master because of our sin. We couldn't free ourselves from it, so Christ laying down His life in our place freed us from our bondage to sin and Satan. Now, if we will repent and believe, we can walk in holiness and live for God.
On the other hand, if you hold that Christ paid God the ransom, where does the Scripture say that Christ paid God anything? What was owed to God? What do we owe God except our obedience and love because of His great love for us first? What explicit Scriptural basis do we have to say that Christ paid God anything by His sacrifice on the cross? Does God need to be paid in order to forgive us? Does His justice need to be "satisfied" in order to forgive us or pardon us? If so, how does that comply with the parable of the "Unmerciful Servant"? I am still figuring this all out too, but this is the only one that makes sense to me in light of Scripture and other views weren't formed until Anselm in the 11th century....
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 23, 2007 12:07:20 GMT -5
Those are all good questions and I probably don't have adequate answers to but somehow we have to account that his blood had something to do with forgiveness of sins.
Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Rom 3:25 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;
Hbr 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Eph 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Col 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins:
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 23, 2007 14:19:30 GMT -5
Right...Christ's blood shed on the cross washes away our sins. It cleanses us and empowers us to live Holy.
Matthew 26:28 says that His blood makes a covenant with those who follow Him. It is the new covenant, just like the old covenant with Abraham was started with the shedding of blood...Genesis 15:1-21.
Acts 20:28 says that Christ purchased us with His blood. Who did He purchase us from? If from God, then we were already His...
Propitiation is the greek word hislasterion and it means the means of expiation... Expiation means the initiative taken by God to effect removal of impediments to a relationship with God’s self. What has impeding our relationship with God? Is it God's justice or is it sin? I say it is sin and the blood of Christ washes away our past sins...
In regards to Hebrews 9:22...the NASB translates purged as cleansed and remission as forgiveness...which fits perfectly with the ransom view.
Redemption is the greek word apolloutrosis which means to release from a captive condition or to deliver.
All those verses you quoted fit perfectly with the ransom view...
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 23, 2007 15:30:23 GMT -5
Is someone being paid in this view or a principle being satisfied? Maybe I'm not fully grasping your slant on this view. I'm not sure your view lines up with what is traditionally taught as the ransom view. The below is from wikipedia
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 23, 2007 15:52:24 GMT -5
Like I said on the first page, I probably shouldn't have put a label on my view just yet. The Bible does talk about Christ Himself being the ransom. All I know is that the Bible doesn't say that any ransom is paid to God and the Bible doesn't talk about God needing a payment...at least as far as I know. Satan and sin is the one we are in bondage to. I am still studying this and hope to have more on it later. I read that from wikipedia a few days ago. I don't think they are accurately portraying what the early Christians believed about the atonement. Hopefully I can post more tonight or tomorrow. I still don't think that ANY of the rest of the views on the atonement can answer the questions I have proposed with Biblical support nor correctly interpret the verses I listed...
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 23, 2007 16:02:55 GMT -5
I don't have a view ironed out either, so many we can come to a conclusion together. I'll try to take a stab at a few of your objections when I can. Don't let me forget. A few of them I see your dilemma and have pondered it myself.
I believe we were in bondage to this world, sin, ect. but I do not believe God owed Satan to buy us back. I'm just saying that as a general statement, not necessarily applying it towards you. The Bible teaches that God owns all souls.
Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 24, 2007 10:19:00 GMT -5
Just Josh and me I guess...no one else going to take a stab at my questions and the Scriptures I listed? Miles? I don't think that Jesse or Joe have been on in a day or so...
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 24, 2007 10:35:42 GMT -5
I don't have a view ironed out either, so many we can come to a conclusion together. I'll try to take a stab at a few of your objections when I can. Don't let me forget. A few of them I see your dilemma and have pondered it myself. Sounds good to me brother... Right, God doesn't owe Satan anything...I agree with that. What do you think about this that I posted earlier though: The Bible also teaches that there are the children of the devil and the children of God. Ultimately, EVERY soul belongs to God in the end. The devil belongs to God....BUT I don't think that changes the fact that lost sinners are in bondage to sin, the world and Satan...who is the prince of this world and the author of sin.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 24, 2007 10:50:16 GMT -5
Concerning whether God needed a sacrifice in order to forgive or whether he takes pleasure in the shedding of blood sacrifices like pagan "gods" (they are all the devil) do...here is some Scripture from Hebrews 10:1-18:
1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. 5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:
“ Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me. 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. 7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come— In the volume of the book it is written of Me— To do Your will, O God.’”
8 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them ” (which are offered according to the law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. 10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. 15 But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, 16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,” 17 then He adds, “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” 18 Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.Really, I would like to post just about the whole book of Hebrews. I really think that it would clear EVERYTHING up for us! Let me give a little commentary on this passage... The O.T. sacrifices were never sufficient in cleansing people from their sins. They were only a shadow of Christ...who was to come. All those sacrifices did was remind people of their sins year in and year out because the innocent shed blood of animals cannot take away or wash away the sins of guilty human beings. God does not desire sacrifices of animals or shed blood. He takes no pleasure in those things (as if He is a pagan God or "vampire" ). He takes pleasure in obedience...the doing of His will. That is why he sent a human being, Jesus Christ, to do His will. He was a human, so therefore he could take away the guilt of human by living a totally sinless and obedient life Himself. Christ was our sacrifice for sins. And through His sacrifice, He perfects all those who are being sanctified. He perfects those who are being sanctified by remembering their lawless deeds no longer...or by forgiving them. For where their is remission or forgiveness of sins, a sacrifice is no longer needed. I LOVE THE BOOK OF HEBREWS!!
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 24, 2007 12:22:17 GMT -5
Here are some other verses to dwell on:
1 Corinthians 6:20 says, “For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.”
John 12:31-32 (Jesus speaking) says, “Now judgment is upon this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”
John 16:7-11 (Jesus speaking) says, “But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment; concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me; and concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father and you no longer see Me; and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.”
Ephesians 2:1-2 says, “And you were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.”
John 8:34-36 says, “Jesus answered them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever, the son does remain forever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.’”
John 8:44 (Jesus speaking) says, “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”
1 John 3:8, 10 says, “…the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil…By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.”
Matthew 13:36-39 says, “The He left the crowds and went into the house. And His disciples cam to Him and said, ‘Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.’ And He said, ‘The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one; and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels.’”
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 24, 2007 15:35:22 GMT -5
I feel like I am talking to myself here...but here goes anyway... I know that most who hold to the idea that God demands justice and that God was the one who had His son crucified, etc., get a lot of what they believe from Isaiah 53. Particularly verse 4 which says, "smitten of God, and afflicted," verse 6 which says, "The Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall upon Him" and verse 10 which says, "But the Lord was pleased to crush Him..." These are all quotes from the NASB. BUT, the apostles and Jesus all quoted from the Septuagint...which was the Greek O.T. of there day. It was written around 300 B.C. and they obviously thought it to be God's Word. In fact, when you see O.T. quotes in the N.T. by the writers, it is always from the Septuagint. That's why when you look in your Bible and go from the N.T. to the O.T. to look up the O.T. quotes of the N.T. writers, they don't usually match up. I am NOT interested in getting into some argument over what is more God's Word then the next, BUT, it is interesting that the Septuagint, when translated into English is MUCH different then the Isaiah 53:4, 6, 10 in your and my Bible. Take a look for yourself and compare. Here is the English Septuagint version of Isaiah 53: www.apostlesbible.com/books/i23isaiah/fifties/i23c53.pdfVery Interesting INDEED!
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 24, 2007 17:36:50 GMT -5
Here goes! These verses just tell us that Christ gave himself as a payment. It doesn't say to whom or what. I would say this could be applied to an atonement theory, but the strict context is dealing with casting out devils. It would seem that Jesus taught that for a man to be delivered from possession that the devil would have to be bound before the man could be released. In other words, a devil isn't going to bind himself to take his own property only someone who is in opposition would. I agree with your previous interpretation of this that you brought out in the thread Evan asked about. You said this isn't dealing with atonement. Maybe I agree with you. Even if it is dealing with the atonement it doesn't say to who or what it is given to. Jesus defeated death by the resurrection. Again, this verse doesn't tell to who or what the atonement was offered. I believe this is dealing with his resurrection power. I don't have much to comment on this other than "Amen, yes he did." The old man was crucified with Christ. This verse doesn't tell to who or what the atonement was offered to. I would see Romans 6 as a good reference to this also. Christ gave himself so that men's sins could be forgiven. This parable doesn't actually tell how God forgives us. As you can tell from the last line the moral of this parable is that God will do to you what was done to the servant that didn't forgive, if you do not forgive others. You could possibly insert this into an atonement theory but that is not the reason Jesus gave this parable. Amen. He forgave us without us having to do anything to earn it. Forgive others the same way. God gave his son for our sins which would in turn deliver us from this age. I would say this is dealing with the miracle of regeneration. I was delivered from this age when God changed me. Yes, we were bought with his blood, but from who or what? Christ came to destroy the works of the devil.... We were dead in sins and he brought us near. Also, Gentiles were considered the circumcision but in Christ we have circumcision of the heart and can be a child of Abraham. Jesus offered himself to God, not the devil, and not to a principle. I enjoy the emphasis on Jesus delivering us from sin and the power of it, but we cannot forget who Jesus offered himself to. My emphasis over the last few years have been on that as opposed to mere forgiveness (but of course that is important to!). This offering was not a process but happened at a one time instance. The only logical conclusion is that he was offered on the Cross. When else would it be sufficient to say Christ offered himself? Amen. We are separated to God through the blood of Christ. See above. Those verses aren't dealing with the atonement but that a Christian must forgive others. You didn't pay God anything, God took care of it all Himself. You don't need a payment, take care of it yourself and forgive them. Not the Devil! They are both important. Without the death we wouldn't have a new covenant, without the resurrection we wouldn't be partakers of resurrection life. He was raised for our justification! (Romans 4:25) The Bible teaches that without Jesus having shed his blood you would have not been forgiven. Maybe it would seem better if the devil demanded a blood sacrifice and God was requited to pay him? Something like the Devil having power over God and making him submit? But yet we see God demanding blood on the Passover. Your "pagan" illustration and your "pushing" illustration both sound like the satisfaction view to me. God is angry with the wicked every day! Evil men hate God! Maybe one needs appeased and the other to repent. Rev if you don't believe that Jesus offered himself to Satan, then to who or what did he offer himself? Yes... Do you have any proof that anyone held to that view before Origen? My main dispute is that Jesus offered himself to God. I'm not even talking about if he was under wrath or not but that the offering was God-ward. Both. All sinners need to delivered from that wrath to come. Jesus made it possible that man could be forgiven and to deliver us from the power of sin. Both! You can't separate them. The answer is obvious, but doesn't show to who or what the offering was to. The sinner. Brother, I think you have found a great emphasis in the atonement. That being he delivered us from sin, hell, self, Satan, and the world. It's a great emphasis but doesn't prove at all that Jesus was offered to Satan or a principle. The book of 1 John tell us. Again, this doesn't prove to who the atonement was offered to. You've been talking to yourself to much in this thread. You have a lot to respond to but maybe this will work for now.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Jun 24, 2007 19:13:11 GMT -5
I appreciate you taking the time to answer the Scriptures and questions Josh. I don't agree with all of what you said, BUT I am still working this all out...as you can tell with all of the "talking to myself" that I am doing. Just so you know, I am not saying that Christ offered Himself to Satan. He offered the obedience of His life to God, but ransomed us from Satan. I think that Hebrews 2:14-15 makes it clear that we were in bondage to sin, Satan and death. I don't see how any verse could be applied from Scripture that we were ransomed from God. God didn't require some payment for sin and I haven't been able to find any verses that say He does. Can you find any verses that say that God requires a payment or ransom for us to be saved from His wrath? What I see in Scripture is that He is willing and able to forgive lost sinners who will repent, believe and be washed in the blood of Jesus...becoming Born Again and living for God the rest of their lives... Where does the Scripture say that God requires a payment made for our sins? If we are to forgive as God forgave us...even if the payment required was paid by His Son...then we should require justice or a payment as well...even if it is from our son. The Blood and sacrifice of Jesus cleanses us from our sins and washes us clean. It frees us from the bondage of sin and Satan through the resurrection power of Jesus Christ so that we can walk a life that is pleasing to God. The people who live such a way until the end are the ones who have the Grace of God according to Titus 2:11-14.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 24, 2007 22:48:34 GMT -5
I'm not too schooled on this topic but I'll add a quick thought.
Just because they quoted it and considered it scripture doesn't mean it's superior to a Hebrew text. I quote the KJV just like they would the Septuagint. Why don't I just quote it in Greek? I don't fully understand it nor would most on this board. I also am writing in English. Why didn't they quote in Hebrew? Many didn't have full grasp of Hebrew (not Jesus... possibly his audience) and the main point: they were writing in Greek.
|
|