Arminianism is untenable

[bling]

Arminians insist that Jesus took the punishment for all sins. Yet, they admit that there are people in hell because of their sins. This makes God disingenuous because He punishes people for sins that His Son already paid for.

smh

The whole idea of Penal Substitution is untenable. It might be “better” than all the other “popular” theories of atonement, but that does not make it logical or plausible.

What kind of being would torture humiliate and murder an innocent person (or even themselves) in order to allow the truly blatantly guilty to go away scot-free? What kind of example does that set?

Who would make up some silly “rule” that would require total injustice?

 

[Hammster]

The whole idea of Penal Substitution is untenable. It might be “better” than all the other “popular” theories of atonement, but that does not make it logical or plausible.

What kind of being would torture humiliate and murder an innocent person (or even themselves) in order to allow the truly blatantly guilty to go away scot-free? What kind of example does that set?

Who would make up some silly “rule” that would require total injustice?

Since you aren't Arminian, you don't need to participate.

Thanks.

 

[pdudgeon]

Here's a few popular ones.

So Moses made a bronze snake and mounted it on a pole. Whenever someone was bitten, and he looked at the bronze snake, he recovered. ([bless and do not curse]Numbers‬ [bless and do not curse]21‬:[bless and do not curse]9‬ HCSB)

And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived. ([bless and do not curse]Numbers‬ [bless and do not curse]21‬:[bless and do not curse]9‬ NASB)

And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived. ([bless and do not curse]Numbers‬ [bless and do not curse]21‬:[bless and do not curse]9‬ KJV)

So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, they lived. ([bless and do not curse]Numbers‬ [bless and do not curse]21‬:[bless and do not curse]9‬ NIV)

in all the verses quoted above, two things are clear;
1. The serpent of brass upon the pole represents Jesus and His attonement for our sins.

no one is disputing that in this thread.

What is in dispute are two things.
1. whether the looking itself was pre-ordained, compulsary, or a voluntary act.
2. whether all looked or only some looked.

nowhere in any of those translations does it say that ALL looked. What it does say is that all who looked were healed.

that's two different things.

 

[janxharris]

Romans 5:17-18
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.​

Scripture clearly speaks of God's 'abundant provision of Grace'. Such a gift must, of course, be received. That the provision was for all men is explicit in v.18.

 

[janxharris]

The whole idea of Penal Substitution is untenable. It might be “better” than all the other “popular” theories of atonement, but that does not make it logical or plausible.

What kind of being would torture humiliate and murder an innocent person (or even themselves) in order to allow the truly blatantly guilty to go away scot-free? What kind of example does that set?

Who would make up some silly “rule” that would require total injustice?

Not logical, but still better?

 

[Hammster]

in all the verses quoted above, two things are clear;
1. The serpent of brass upon the pole represents Jesus and His attonement for our sins.

no one is disputing that in this thread.

What is in dispute are two things.
1. whether the looking itself was pre-ordained, compulsary, or a voluntary act.
2. whether all looked or only some looked.

nowhere in any of those translations does it say that ALL looked. What it does say is that all who looked were healed.

that's two different things.

Actually, it says that all who were bitten looked and were healed.

 

[Hammster]

Romans 5:17-18
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.​

Scripture clearly speaks of God's 'abundant provision of Grace'. Such a gift must, of course, be received. That the provision was for all men is explicit in v.18.

That's nice. A non sequitur and eisegesis. But nice.

 

[janxharris]

That's nice. A non sequitur and eisegesis. But nice.

It's not a non sequitur - Jesus death, his righteous act, provided for all.

 

[Hammster]

It's not a non sequitur - Jesus death, his righteous act, provided for all.

Did He take the punishment for all?

 

[janxharris]

Did He take the punishment for all?

Yes.

Isaiah 53:4-6
Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

 

[Hammster]

Yes.

Isaiah 53:4-6
Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Then in Arminianism, God is unjust for punishing people in Hell for sins which His Son already bore the punishment.

 

[EmSw]

Did He take the punishment for all?

Hmmm, this is the second time you brought this up.

So, I will ask, what is the punishment He took?

 

[Hammster]

Hmmm, this is the second time you brought this up.

So, I will ask, what is the punishment He took?

Please, no derailing. Thanks.

 

[EmSw]

Please, no derailing. Thanks.

Sorry, but this is called participation. If anyone derailed, it was you.

Now please, what was the punishment He took?

 

[Hammster]

Sorry, but this is called participation. If anyone derailed, it was you.

Now please, what was the punishment He took?

Read the OP. If you are Arminian, respond. If not, respond to the Arminians.

 

[EmSw]

Arminians insist that Jesus took the punishment for all sins. Yet, they admit that there are people in hell because of their sins. This makes God disingenuous because He punishes people for sins that His Son already paid for.

smh

What was/is the punishment of which you speak?

Or perhaps you don't know what punishment the Arminians mean, thus, you would be guessing or perhaps, you are making this up.

 

[Hammster]

What was/is the punishment of which you speak?

Or perhaps you don't know what punishment the Arminians mean, thus, you would be guessing or perhaps, you are making this up.

I guess they can fill me in.

 

[EmSw]

I guess they can fill me in.

So you admit, you started an OP and have no idea what you are saying.

 

[Hammster]

So you admit, you started an OP and have no idea what you are saying.

Nope. Not at all.

Please, no more derailing. Last time I'll ask.

 

[EmSw]

Nope. Not at all.

Please, no more derailing. Last time I'll ask.

Please, no more meaningless accusations; please answer the question
I asked which deals with your OP.