Atonement Theories

Clare73 said:

That's human court. . .is it against the law in God's Court?

Click to expand...

Human courts in the USA do not contradict what we have in the Bible. They are really trying to be just and fair, they just cannot address every situation nor do they judge by looking at the heart of the criminal. Try to force penal substitution into something fair and just, does not work and is not the way God acts.

The sinner who does not accept the Loving discipline will be punished, while those who accept God’s forgiveness and Loving discipline go on to heaven.

Clare73 said:

Which is someone else paying your debt for transgressing the law, just as Jesus did on the cross according to God's Court.

Click to expand...

Paying a fine is not the same as take the place for the death sentence on the criminal, which is not allowed in any court as far as I know, because it is unjust.

Clare73 said:

Your knowledge of the background of accounting is lacking.

Forgiveness means "cancellation of the debt," which can be by payment or otherwise.

Click to expand...

Would you please reference n accounting dictionary or textbook.

Clare73 said:

The mortality of the body is temporary, they do not remain dead forever, we are set free of it at the resurrection, just as we are set free of sin (made sinless) at the resurrection.

Click to expand...

It really does not matter what the legal punishment is for any crime if it is forgiven, since forgive debts have no payment.

Clare73 said:

Which is where we launch into a "less-than-satisfactory," human, extra-Biblical notion of forgiveness, nowhere found in Scripture, the stench of which rises to the heavenly Court to be spit out and trampled on as the insufferable demeaning notion that it is.
(Why don't you tell us what you think, Clare?)

Click to expand...

What does it mean to have your sins 100% forgiven?

Clare73 said:

Where do we find this miserable gospel-denying notion presented, supported or asserted in Scripture, the only authority for God's truth?

Click to expand...

I start with Lev. 5 and go through all the verse in context on atonement.

bling said:

Human courts in the USA do not contradict what we have in the Bible.

Click to expand...

Who made that rule?

bling said:

They are really trying to be just and fair, they just cannot address every situation nor do they judge by looking at the heart of the criminal. Try to force penal substitution into something fair and just, does not work and is not the way God acts.
The sinner who does not accept the Loving discipline will be punished, while those who accept God’s forgiveness and Loving discipline go on to heaven.
Paying a fine is not the same as take the place for the death sentence on the criminal, which is not allowed in any court as far as I know, because it is unjust.

Click to expand...

Would you please reference n accounting dictionary or textbook.

Click to expand...

Google it.

bling said:

It really does not matter what the legal punishment is for any crime if it is forgiven, since forgive debts have no payment.

Click to expand...

Contradiction of terms. . .forgiven debts have no payment only because they are paid, either by the debtor, a third party, or the debtee.
All debt is paid, by someone. . .in the case of salvation, the debt is paid by the debtee (God).

bling said:

What does it mean to have your sins 100% forgiven?

Click to expand...

In God's Court, it means you are no longer liable to his law of eternal punishment (Mt 25:46), for your sin haa been punished.

bling said:

I start with Lev. 5 and go through all the verse in context on atonement.

Click to expand...

Lev 5 being on the guilt offering, which was mandatory for
unintentional specific sins where restitution was possible and, therefore, required:

for sins against holy things (priests):
--ignorantly (unaware) used what should have been offered for tithes, first fruits, first-born animals (Lev 22:14),
--additional 20%, only when certain of unintentional sin,
--when uncertain, must be treated as sin (sacrifice, restitution), as in Ro 14:23 - When unceratin if something is sin or not, we are to treat it as sin,
accompanied by restitution, plus 20% (when certain of sin),
for cleansing or defilement,
always a ram (fat-tailed sheep).

Lev 6 (continuing Lev 5):

for sins against common things (neighbor):
--to sin against our neighbor in property matters is to sin against the Lord
--protecting our neighbor's property is faithfulness to the Lord (Ex 22:7-15, Dt 22:1-3, Mt 5:23-24)--no "finders keepers, losers weepers."
additional 20% effected reconciliation (appeasement) in addition to forgiveness,

which was a pattern/type of Christ who made restitution (expiation) plus appeasement (propitiation, 1Jn 2:2, 1 Jn 4:10, Ro 3:25) for our sin by his atoning sacrifice.

In the NT, the OT Levitical laws no longer apply.

bling said:

God can forgive the debt or do you believe God lacks something and does not have the ability to forgive our debt, without Christ doing something?

Click to expand...

It's not about what God can do, it's about what he does do, as revealed in his word written.

Akita Suggagaki said:

?

Click to expand...

Giving up resentment is not the only meaning of forgiveness.

Clare73 said:

Who made that rule?

Click to expand...

For the most part people, trying to follow God’s principles.

Can you generate a list of “civil laws” which are contrary to God’s rules and principles?

Clare73 said:

Google it.

Click to expand...

What you are saying is not out there, but payment of a debt and forgiveness of a debt are in accounting not meaning the same thing.

Generally, if you borrow money from a commercial lender and the lender later cancels or forgives the debt, you may have to include the cancelled amount in income for tax purposes. The lender is usually required to report the amount of the canceled debt to you and the IRS on a Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt.

The word “cancel” and not forgive when the debt is uncollectable debt like you have when company goes bankrupt.

The principal payment is recorded as a reduction of the liability Notes Payable or Loans Payable. (Both the receipt of the loan principal amount and the repayment of the loan principal will be reported on the statement of cash flows.)

There is no such animal as a debt forgiven and also having the debt paid for.

There is a huge difference in how these are handle, recorded and taxed.

Clare73 said:

Contradiction of terms. . .forgiven debts have no payment only because they are paid, either by the debtor, a third party, or the debtee.
All debt is paid, by someone. . .in the case of salvation, the debt is paid by the debtee (God).

Click to expand...

Not if the debt is forgiven. When you offend the Creator of the universe there is nothing that could pay back such an offence, but God’s Love allows God to forgive your offence without any payment (His Love is that great). The debt we create with God is not a money transaction nor carry some prison term, it is unimaginably huge.

Clare73 said:

In God's Court, it means you are no longer liable to his law of eternal punishment (Mt 25:46), for your sin haa been punished.

Click to expand...

Are you saying Jesus became guilty of my sins, because if he is not guilty then he is not being punished, he was wrongfully tortured, humiliated and murdered. How can you punish an innocent child?

A guilty child forgiven by their parents can be lovingly disciplined to help them and others correct their behavior, feel like they are truly children and become closer to their parents.

Clare73 said:

Lev 5 being on the guilt offering, which was mandatory for
unintentional specific sins where restitution was possible and, therefore, required:

for sins against holy things (priests):
--ignorantly (unaware) used what should have been offered for tithes, first fruits, first-born animals (Lev 22:14),
--additional 20%, only when certain of unintentional sin,
--when uncertain, must be treated as sin (sacrifice, restitution), as in Ro 14:23 - When unceratin if something is sin or not, we are to treat it as sin,
accompanied by restitution, plus 20% (when certain of sin),
for cleansing or defilement,
always a ram (fat-tailed sheep).

Lev 6 (continuing Lev 5):

for sins against common things (neighbor):
--to sin against our neighbor in property matters is to sin against the Lord
--protecting our neighbor's property is faithfulness to the Lord (Ex 22:7-15, Dt 22:1-3, Mt 5:23-24)--no "finders keepers, losers weepers."
additional 20% effected reconciliation (appeasement) in addition to forgiveness,

which was a pattern/type of Christ who made restitution (expiation) plus appeasement (propitiation, 1Jn 2:2, 1 Jn 4:10, Ro 3:25) for our sin by his atoning sacrifice.

In the NT, the OT Levitical laws no longer apply.

Click to expand...

I just start with Lev. 5 and we can continue from there going over sins related to greed and lust, which also could be atoned for. The thing about Lev. 5 is these are sins you knew were sins and only unintentionally did them, like kicking a dead rat out of your path which you initially thought was a dead baby rabbit.

Clare73 said:

It's not about what God can do, it's about what he does do, as revealed in his word written.

Click to expand...

God tells us our sins are forgiven. Where does God say: "Jesus paid your debt of sin"?

bling said:

For the most part people, trying to follow God’s principles.

Can you generate a list of “civil laws” which are contrary to God’s rules and principles?

Click to expand...

Legality of abortion at will, legality of homosexuality, legality of marriages of the same sex. . .a good starter.

bling said:

The word “cancel” and not forgive when the debt is uncollectable debt like you have when company goes bankrupt.

Click to expand...

Cancellation of the debt is forgiveness of the debt. . .Google it.

bling said:

Are you saying Jesus became guilty of my sins,

Click to expand...

He bore our guilt. . .as the OT sacrifices bore the guilt of the sinner.

bling said:

God tells us our sins are forgiven. Where does God say: "Jesus paid your debt of sin"?

Click to expand...

Can you tell me where God says: "I am triune"?

He came "to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mt 20:28)

A ransom is a payment to buy back (redeem) an object, in this case to redeem sinners from God's condemnation to eternal punishment (Mt 25:46).

How important are the atonement theories? I recall reading CS Lewis saying in Mere Christianity - "Theories about Christ's death are not Christianity, they are explanations of how it works." and "A man can accept what Christ has done without knowing how it works: indeed he would not know how it works until he has accepted it."

Akita Suggagaki said:

There will always be mystery to it but with our God given minds I think we can also use reason even in matters of faith.

Click to expand...

I think what Lewis was saying is that in becoming a christian its not a atonement theory one is asked to accept. He makes a distinction between theories of how it works, and the atonement itself which can be accepted without knowing how it works.

dms1972 said:

How important are the atonement theories? I recall reading CS Lewis saying in Mere Christianity - "Theories about Christ's death are not Christianity, they are explanations of how it works." and "A man can accept what Christ has done without knowing how it works: indeed he would not know how it works until he has accepted it."

Click to expand...

There can be a kind of danger in taking only one of the theories totally exclusively, as it can fail to get a wider view of the whole picture. Which is why I think, in many ways, the different theories provide different explanations, but are not in themselves the full story.

For example if you asked me if I accept Christus Victor or Satisfaction Theory, I'd say both. There's even room for the Moral Influence Theory as long as it isn't held to the exclusion of the others.

I think Recapitulation Theory is true, I think Ransom Theory is true, I think Christus Victory (which is a bit of the previous together) Theory is true, I think Satisfaction Theory is true, and Penal Substitution also has some truth.

Because these are all addressing different things, pulling from different ways the Bible itself talks about the atonement; and so these theories are not mutually exclusive.

Is it true that Christ made satisfaction by being righteous in our stead? Yes. Is it true that Christ has undone what Adam did? Yes. And both truths are expressed in Scripture, even in the same places, that by the one man's disobedience sin came to many and death through sin, and by the one Man's obedience has come resurrection from the dead and justification to all.

Is is true that Christ bore our punishment on our behalf? Absolutely. Is is true that Christ's death was also, paradoxically, a victory over sin, death, hell, and the devil? Also absolutely yes. Is Christ's way of life, His suffering and willing embrace of the shame of the cross an example that we are follow ourselves? Also very much yes.

These are all true statements, biblical statements.

-CryptoLutheran

Clare73 said:

Can you tell me where God says: "I am triune"?

He came "to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mt 20:28)

A ransom is a payment to buy back (redeem) an object, in this case to redeem sinners from God's condemnation to eternal punishment (Mt 25:46).

Click to expand...

One can also make the argument that the ransom freed us from the devil's tyranny,

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil," (Hebrews 2:14)

That's the essence of Ransom Theory, which was arguably the most common position among early Christians.

In Ransom Theory since human beings are subject and held in bondage by the devil through the power of death, the ransom means God paid the ransom to free us from the devil by giving His Son to be subject to the devil's power (death). Of course, what this means is that God basically sent in a Trojan Horse, because then Christ destroyed the power of death and hell and made the devil himself a captive, aka The Harrowing of Hell. As the Scripture says, "He led captivity captive" (Ephesians 4:7-10).

But I would argue that we do not need to regard these two things as mutually exclusive.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

There can be a kind of danger in taking only one of the theories totally exclusively, as it can fail to get a wider view of the whole picture. Which is why I think, in many ways, the different theories provide different explanations, but are not in themselves the full story.
For example if you asked me if I accept Christus Victor or Satisfaction Theory, I'd say both. There's even room for the Moral Influence Theory as long as it isn't held to the exclusion of the others.

Click to expand...

I think Recapitulation Theory is true, I think Ransom Theory is true, I think Christus Victory (which is a bit of the previous together) Theory is true, I think Satisfaction Theory is true, and Penal Substitution also has some truth.
Because these are all addressing different things, pulling from different ways the Bible itself talks about the atonement; and so these theories are not mutually exclusive.
Is it true that Christ made satisfaction by being righteous in our stead? Yes.

Click to expand...

Or was it that Christ's righteousness with which he was born (as Adam was created in righteousness) had to be maintained in order to qualify as the perfect sacrifice (Lev 1:3) for atonement (propitiation). And Christ did not fail the trial of his righteousness as did Adam.

Righteousess (justification) is imputed to us by faith (Ro 4:1-11, Ge 15:6) apart from works (Ro:28), but it is a forensic righteousness, a declaration of "not guilty," a sentence of acquittal by the Court, it is not an actual righteousness as in sanctification (Ro 6:16-19).

So was it that Christ's righteousness made satisfaction for our sin,
or was it that Christ's righteousness qualified him to be the perfect sacrifice, which made satisfaction for our sin?

ViaCrucis said:

Is it true that Christ has undone what Adam did? Yes. And both truths are expressed in Scripture, even in the same places, that by the one man's disobedience sin came to many and death through sin, and by the one Man's obedience has come resurrection from the dead and justification to all.

Is is true that Christ bore our punishment on our behalf? Absolutely. Is is true that Christ's death was also, paradoxically, a victory over sin, death, hell, and the devil? Also absolutely yes. Is Christ's way of life, His suffering and willing embrace of the shame of the cross an example that we are follow ourselves? Also very much yes.

These are all true statements, biblical statements.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Atonement, ransom are simplified concepts for the Jews carry forward, as humans can only effectively carry forward understandable concepts. The big picture is that God would build an eternity we call Heaven for both angels and humans to live with God, who is sin-incompatible, forever. Law is thus set up followed by a Final Judgment to identify who (angels and humans) are qualified to enter such a Heaven. By Law whoever sinned (i.e., before the Final Judgment) will have to leave God's current dwelling realm. Eden is part of God's dwelling realm while the established models are all the same, whether it's in Eden or on Earth or in Heaven humans are subject to the influence from the much more capable and intelligent angelic beings.

As the first lineage of humans, Adam and Eve sinned under the influence of Satan. By Law they need to leave God's realm. Satan (all fallen angels) is left to the Abyss. Adam and Even are left to planet Earth to continue to have descendants who are supposed to bear a chance to pass the Judgment of Law to return Heaven. However the capable Satan would make sure that humans won't be able to do so, he's said to keep all humans under his captivity. That's why it is said that a ransom needs to be paid. It's paid to the Law as Satan keeps human under his captivity through the Law.

From a lawful perspective, Satan by his influence will cause all mankind to fail the Final Judgment, such that no human can enter God's Heaven to be built. And Satan successfully did so with valid and lawful witnessing from Adam till Noah. As a result, humans/Earth shall be destroyed as the purpose of their very existence is defeated, by a flood. (I won't say that God has a plan B as someone fond of semantics would like to attack me bypassing the point I am trying to make, they must be sent by Satan to do so) God on the other hand granted a series of covenants for human salvation, such that humans can legally dodge the Judgment of Law. It's partly because, unlike the angels, humans are born in a realm 'ruled' by Satan, that is, a realm under more influence from Satan than God while all angels are born inside God's dwelling realm.

Humans are thus judged by the series of covenants instead of the Judgment of Law. By Law, this doesn't come without a price (or else it won't be fair to the angels). Jesus paid that price by dying on the cross as a human. That's why the atonement concept. In order for humans not be judged by Law but by God who is even more fair than Law, Jesus made a self-sacrifice such that humans can be judged by the covenants instead of Law, unlike the angels.

To put it another way, without Jesus' self-sacrifice humans must be judged by Law just the same as the angels. Only with Jesus that covenants are made possible such that humans are judged by Jesus with the covenants as a standard, instead of Law.