Article: what is wrong the substitutionary theory of atonement.

[Adventtruth]

RC New Protestant wrote:

Most people when looking at those three categories would see a close relationship between Law and Justice, while Love would be looked at as being on the opposite end of the spectrum. This is not at all surprising as in the western culture we live in, Justice is viewed in a penal setting, that is, to most people Justice is most related to punishment. Justice in a more Eastern or ancient tradition is more related to a restoration of harmony than to one of punishment. In the Greek language of the New Testament the same word is used for our English words of Justice and righteous, therefore in simple language righteousness is right doing and justice is also right doing.

Misleading at best. There are several greek words for righteousness. One example is
δικαίωσις

dik-ah'-yo-sis , which means righteousness , which is not righteous doing but a declaration by God of rightousness. Justification.


More to come...




AT

 

[sentipente]

Let me watch this one unfold.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

righteousdivkaioß[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from (1349)[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Dikaios[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]2:182,168[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]dik'-ah-yos [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Adjective [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT]

1. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
   [*] righteous, observing divine laws
   
   1. in a wide sense, upright, righteous, virtuous, keeping the commands of God
      1. of those who seem to themselves to be righteous, who pride themselves to be righteous, who pride themselves in their virtues, whether real or imagined
      2. innocent, faultless, guiltless
      3. used of him whose way of thinking, feeling, and acting is wholly conformed to the will of God, and who therefore needs no rectification in the heart or life 1a
   2. only Christ truly
      1. approved of or acceptable of God
   3. in a narrower sense, rendering to each his due and that in a judicial sense, passing just judgment on others, whether expressed in words or shown by the manner of dealing with them
   [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] King James Word Usage - Total: 81[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]righteous 41, just 33, right 5, meet 2
http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1342&version=kjv


Righteousness:

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Strong's Number: 1345[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Browse Lexicon[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Word Origin[/FONT] dikaivwma[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from (1344)[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Dikaioma[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]2:219,168[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]dik-ah'-yo-mah [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Noun Neuter [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT]

1. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
   [*] that which has been deemed right so as to have force of law
   
   1. what has been established, and ordained by law, an ordinance
   2. a judicial decision, sentence
      1. of God 1b
   3. either the favourable judgment by which he acquits man and declares them acceptable to Him 1b
   4. unfavourable: sentence of condemnation
   
   [*] a righteous act or deed[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] King James Word Usage - Total: 10[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]righteousness 4, ordinance 3, judgment 2, justification 1[/FONT]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1345&version=kjv

Just:
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Strong's Number: 1342[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Browse Lexicon[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Word Origin[/FONT] divkaioß[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from (1349)[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Dikaios[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]2:182,168[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]dik'-ah-yos [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Adjective [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT]

1. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
   [*] righteous, observing divine laws
   
   1. in a wide sense, upright, righteous, virtuous, keeping the commands of God
      1. of those who seem to themselves to be righteous, who pride themselves to be righteous, who pride themselves in their virtues, whether real or imagined
      2. innocent, faultless, guiltless
      3. used of him whose way of thinking, feeling, and acting is wholly conformed to the will of God, and who therefore needs no rectification in the heart or life 1a
   2. only Christ truly
      1. approved of or acceptable of God
   3. in a narrower sense, rendering to each his due and that in a judicial sense, passing just judgment on others, whether expressed in words or shown by the manner of dealing with them
   [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] King James Word Usage - Total: 81[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]righteous 41, just 33, right 5, meet 2[/FONT]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1342&version=kjv

Justification:
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Strong's Number: 1345[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Browse Lexicon[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Word Origin[/FONT] dikaivwma[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from (1344)[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Dikaioma[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]2:219,168[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]dik-ah'-yo-mah [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Noun Neuter [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT]

1. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
   [*] that which has been deemed right so as to have force of law
   
   1. what has been established, and ordained by law, an ordinance
   2. a judicial decision, sentence
      1. of God 1b
   3. either the favourable judgment by which he acquits man and declares them acceptable to Him 1b
   4. unfavourable: sentence of condemnation
   
   [*] a righteous act or deed[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] King James Word Usage - Total: 10[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]righteousness 4, ordinance 3, judgment 2, justification 1[/FONT]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1345&version=kjv

Justification 2
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Strong's Number: 1347[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Browse Lexicon[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Word Origin[/FONT] dikaivwsiß[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from (1344)[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Dikaiosis[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]2:223,168[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]dik-ah'-yo-sis [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Noun Feminine [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT]

1. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
   [*] the act of God declaring men free from guilt and acceptable to him
   [*] abjuring to be righteous, justification[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] King James Word Usage - Total: 2[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]justification 2[/FONT]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1347&version=kjv

Just 2
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Strong's Number: 1738[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Browse Lexicon[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Word Origin[/FONT] e[ndikoß[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from (1722) and (1349)[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Endikos[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]None[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]en'-dee-kos [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Adjective [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT]

1. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
   [*] according to right, righteous, just[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] King James Word Usage - Total: 2[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]just 2[/FONT]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1738&version=kjv

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
[/FONT]

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Part 2

From the biblical perspective these two words are linked. In Greek, both terms belong to the same word-group, the dik- family. English is forced at times to use two different word-groups, the ‘just-’ and ‘right-’families. For instance, the noun dikaiosyne and the adjective dikaios are usually translated ‘righteousness’ and ‘righteous’ respectively. When it comes to translating the verb dikaioo there is no modern English equivalent within the ‘right-’ family. No such verb as ‘to rightify’ exists although there is an old English verb ‘to rightwise’. Instead, it has been the common practice from the sixteenth century to express the verbal idea by employing the ‘just’ word-group, and so we have the word ‘justify’. Sometimes ‘justice’ is used by translators as a synonym for ‘righteousness’ and ‘just’ as a synonym for ‘righteous’. Why not be consistent then, and take advantage of all the words of the ‘just-’ family to translate the dik- word-group? One reason is that such terms as ‘justice’ and ‘just’ suggest a narrower range of meaning associated with fairness in implementing the law. It is better, therefore, to speak of a ‘righteous’ person and of the ‘righteousness’ of God on the one hand, and of God ‘justifying’ the ungodly on the other. Incidentally, Hebrew also uses one main word-group, the s-d-q family. These three root letters are familiar to us in the name ‘Melkizedek’ (‘zedek’ in its transliterated form is sedeq). The Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), generally uses the dik- word-group to translate words belonging to the Hebrew s-d-q word-group.

http://www.the-highway.com/justification4_Eveson.html

The Greek words used to convey the concept of Justification and Righteousness are not worth listing here (though, if you want to see where they occur and the context in which they’re used, then they’re Strongs Greek numbers 1342, 1344, 1345 and 1347 variously translated by some form of the two words previously used) as they’re quite straightforward in their interpretation. But we should note immediately that, in the Bible, the words ‘righteousness’ and ‘justification’ are synonymous - that is to say, they can be used interchangeably in the contexts in which we find them without altering their meaning significantly.

http://home.clara.net/arlev/justific.htm

Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Righteousness:

When we translate the Greek words based on the stem dikai- into English we make use of two sets of words based on the stems, just and right. So we have just, justice, justify and right, righteous, righteousness, rightwise (old English). The use of two sets of English words for the one set of Greek words sometimes causes difficulties for students of the Bible. This is especially so when the verb "to justify, " describing God's word and action, is used with the noun "righteousness, " pointing to the result of that action.
http://beta.biblestudytools.com/mybst/default.aspx?type=library&contentid=87937&category=REF

There are always people who pretend that their limited understanding is truth. Those people should be avoided.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
[/FONT]

 

[StormyOne]

RC New Protestant wrote:



Misleading at best. There are several greek words for righteousness. One example is
δικαίωσις

dik-ah'-yo-sis , which means righteousness , which is not righteous doing but a declaration by God of rightousness. Justification.


More to come...




AT

deal with the concept i.e. the substitutionary theory of atonement.... wait even before that will you agree that there have been several theories to suggest how atonement occurred? I think starting there would be beneficial because if you don't agree that there have been several theories then no need to continue the discussion....

 

[sentipente]

Let's cut to the chase. I would like anyone who believes in the substitionary theory of atonement to show evidence that humans were ever required to purchase or provide their own atonement. Thanks.

 

[Adventtruth]

therefore in simple language righteousness is right doing and justice is also right doing.

My point in bring this to the readers attention is the word is not all ways associated with right doing as you suggested in the context of that article. While the greek shares the same root in the family of words, a more narrower meaning can be attained by the affixed and the context.


More to come.


AT

 

[sentipente]

My point in bring this to the readers attention is the word is not all ways associated with right doing as you suggested in the context of that article. While the greek shares the same root in the family of words, a more narrower meaning can be attained by the affixed and the context.


More to come.


AT

You could not do that in the original thread?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

My point in bring this to the readers attention is the word is not all ways associated with right doing as you suggested in the context of that article. While the greek shares the same root in the family of words, a more narrower meaning can be attained by the affixed and the context.


More to come.


AT

As I said before there are people who through they limited knowledge choose to only choose their narrow meanings. That the English word for justice and righteous have to do with right doing, acting justly etc is beyond dispute. Only here in the original post we see that dispute done, not by citing any evidence but merely by making graitutius assertions.

 

[Adventtruth]

As I said before there are people who through they limited knowledge choose to only choose their narrow meanings. That the English word for justice and righteous have to do with right doing, acting justly etc is beyond dispute. Only here in the original post we see that dispute done, not by citing any evidence but merely by making graitutius assertions.

The idea of Gods righteounsess has to be linked to God through His covenant with mankind.

The idea of forgivness has to be based on Gods promise to forgive through His covnenat with Abraham.

The covenant has to be ratified through blood.


The blood has to be Christ.


Interesting article, and their are countless who do agreee with your idea of forgivness based only on Gods willingness to forgive. But to me this idea neglects a tone of scripture dealing with the atonement. How does one get around the scripture? By finding ways to dis-credit certain portions of Gods word. And what about Gods rightousness (justice) towards sin? His Charcter demands that this issue be addressed, not just forgotten.


More to come .


AT

 

[sentipente]

Interesting article, and their are countless who do agreee with your idea of forgivness based only on Gods willingness to forgive. But to me this idea neglects a tone of scripture dealing with the atonement. How does one get around the scripture? By finding ways to dis-credit certain portions of Gods word. And what about Gods rightousness (justice) towards sin? His Charcter demands that this issue be addressed, not just forgotten.


More to come .


AT

Why do you think it is OK for you to discredit those parts of the Bible that do not support your perspective?

 

[StormyOne]

The idea of Gods righteounsess has to be linked to God through His covenant with mankind.

The idea of forgivness has to be based on Gods promise to forgive through His covnenat with Abraham.

The covenant has to be ratified through blood.


The blood has to be Christ.


Interesting article, and their are countless who do agreee with your idea of forgivness based only on Gods willingness to forgive. But to me this idea neglects a tone of scripture dealing with the atonement. How does one get around the scripture? By finding ways to dis-credit certain portions of Gods word. And what about Gods rightousness (justice) towards sin? His Charcter demands that this issue be addressed, not just forgotten.


More to come .


AT

who said it had to be Christ's blood? Which leads me back to the simple question that you felt you didn't need to answer, what was it about Christ's blood that facilitated atonement? Did it have some magical qualities? Why wasn't Christ's brief ministry enough to accomplish salvation?

 

[Adventtruth]

who said it had to be Christ's blood?

Hi Stormy.

The passover lambs blood had to be ministered just as God instucted Moses to do so with the covenant He established with Moses and the COI in bringing them out of Egypt.

(Exo 12:13) The blood shall be a sign for you, on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you, when I strike the land of Egypt.

In the same why Christ was the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world

(Joh 1:29) The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

what was it about Christ's blood that facilitated atonement? Did it have some magical qualities? Why wasn't Christ's brief ministry enough to accomplish salvation?

If you don't hold to a substitution its a moot point to you. But how do you get around these scriptures?

1) All men are sinners and quilty before God.

(Rom 3:9) What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin,
(Rom 3:10) as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;

Thus God wrath is poured out against all ungodliness of men.

(Rom 1:18) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.

2) The salution is the forgiveness of God through His covenant of grace . God establishes the terms of the covenants which rest on His promise. Christ Jesus who offered Himself as the final sacrifice for sin is the mediator of the New Covenant. In this, Clay, we see that Christ Ministry, the effects of it, is an everlasting ministry and not a brief one. It was through Christ blood that God made the old covenant obsolete, and inaugurated a better covenant which is a better version of His one eternal covenant. It has better promises, based on a better sacrifice, offered by a better high priest, in a much better sanctuary. No there is nothing magical about His blood unless you concider the truth that Christ blood was sin free.


AT.

 

[StormyOne]

Hi Stormy.

The passover lambs blood had to be ministered just as God instucted Moses to do so with the covenant He established with Moses and the COI in bringing them out of Egypt.

(Exo 12:13) The blood shall be a sign for you, on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you, when I strike the land of Egypt.

In the same why Christ was the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world

(Joh 1:29) The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!



If you don't hold to a substitution its a moot point to you. But how do you get around these scriptures?

1) All men are sinners and quilty before God.

(Rom 3:9) What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin,
(Rom 3:10) as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;

Thus God wrath is poured out against all ungodliness of men.

(Rom 1:18) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.

2) The salution is the forgiveness of God through His covenant of grace . God establishes the terms of the covenants which rest on His promise. Christ Jesus who offered Himself as the final sacrifice for sin is the mediator of the New Covenant. In this, Clay, we see that Christ Ministry, the effects of it, is an everlasting ministry and not a brief one. It was through Christ blood that God made the old covenant obsolete, and inaugurated a better covenant which is a better version of His one eternal covenant. It has better promises, based on a better sacrifice, offered by a better high priest, in a much better sanctuary. No there is nothing magical about His blood unless you concider the truth that Christ blood was sin free.


AT.

thanks for clarifying.... I don't agree....

 

[sentipente]

AT, how did you get from God's wrath revealed to God's wrath poured out. It seems you are using the Bible to get to your point rather than discovering the message of the Bible.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

The problem is, and we see this all the time, is that people begin with the assumption that substitution is what the Atonement is about. However when you read the churches history of the Atonement we know that this is not the case. It is not what the Early Church believed and was not even really accepted till the 1400's. But now because of tradition it is the assumed starting position. Just as people assume the sacrificial system was pointing forward to Christ. The fact is you can't symbolically point forward to something no one knows about. It only works in retrospect. We see the similarities to Christ and sacrifices in retrospect because we have the record of Christ and the way the New Testament writers saw a connection. But that is not and could not be the way the Old Testament people thought about the sacrificial system. You can't see the shadow and say that the shadow represents a Boeing 747 if you have never even seen an airplane.

Those assumptions then through tradition become assumptions which are applied to the middle ages atonement theory. The fact is that blood and sacrifices were the methods used to worship in most all the ancient religions, most likely for sociological reasons. But simply because God used the methods that people were used to does not mean that God is dependent upon those things. Clearly we don't think that as we no longer do such sacrifices. The New Testament was pretty clear that the blood of sheep and goats does nothing and that atonement is based upon reconciliation which is not accomplished by anything other then faith based upon a relationship with God. That is what Jesus taught also, read His parables about forgiveness, it is nothing about being punished in order to be forgiven, it is about being willing to forgive, those who freely forgive are freely forgiven.

 

[Adventtruth]

The problem is, and we see this all the time, is that people begin with the assumption that substitution is what the Atonement is about. However when you read the churches history of the Atonement we know that this is not the case. It is not what the Early Church believed and was not even really accepted till the 1400's

I have always understood many arguments about what the early church did and did not know as being a moot point. The early church was in its infancy. It was, as is today, still evolving

But now because of tradition it is the assumed starting position. Just as people assume the sacrificial system was pointing forward to Christ. The fact is you can't symbolically point forward to something no one knows about. It only works in retrospect. We see the similarities to Christ and sacrifices in retrospect because we have the record of Christ and the way the New Testament writers saw a connection. But that is not and could not be the way the Old Testament people thought about the sacrificial system. You can't see the shadow and say that the shadow represents a Boeing 747 if you have never even seen an airplane.

Those assumptions then through tradition become assumptions which are applied to the middle ages atonement theory.

I disagree here. It was recorded that John the baptist knew just who the lamb represented and the people where infact waiting for the true lamb of God.

(Joh 1:29) The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!


Isa 53 is also a testimony to the one who would die for the sin of mankind

(Isa 53:7) He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.

The fact is that blood and sacrifices were the methods used to worship in most all the ancient religions, most likely for sociological reasons. But simply because God used the methods that people were used to does not mean that God is dependent upon those things.

I agree He not dependant on such things, but God in His covenant with Israel still used a form of the Near Eastern Suzerainty treaty.

The New Testament was pretty clear that the blood of sheep and goats does nothing

Agreed. It was only the stipulations of the covenant God had with Israel. But it to pointed forward to the true Lamb of God.

and that atonement is based upon reconciliation

I disagree here...the Atonement...to cover, Kapar, is based upon Gods grace to forgive.

which is not accomplished by anything other then faith based upon a relationship with God.That is what Jesus taught also, read His parables about forgiveness, it is nothing about being punished in order to be forgiven, it is about being willing to forgive, those who freely forgive are freely forgiven.

[/quote]

I also agree some what. The atonement is accomplished by making amends and blotting out offenses and giving satisfaction for wrong doing. (this your article rejected) None of us have the power to do this. All of humanity stands powerless to make such payment.The bible tell us that God hates sin

(Jer 44:4) Yet I persistently sent to you all my servants the prophets, saying, 'Oh, do not do this abomination that I hate!'


It also tell us He punishes sin.

(Psa 5:4 ) For you are not a God who delights in wickedness; evil may not dwell with you.
(Psa 5:5) The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers.
(Psa 5:6) You destroy those who speak lies; the LORD abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.



None of us can establish his own righteousness. Humanity is hopeless with out God. It is in the grace and mercy of God that He provides the atonement that we can go free. It is through the covenant promise that God has atoned for man that he may have life.

Coming out of Eygpt God gave them atonement. This atonement was only simbolic in nature and the people where to trust God by faith.

(Lev 17:11) For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.


It was this simbolic ritual that John the baptist would speak of in reality centries later when he said "the lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world." (John 1:29)

Now we can argue back and forth about if the COI knew what the blood simbolized but thats really a moot point. The bible tells us, and as you correctly pointed out, animal blood really did nothing.

(Heb 10:4) For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.


Eph 1:7 tells us that it was the blood of Christ that redeemed us and is the bases of our forgivness with God and that it is all according to His Grace. The grace of God is the foundation to which it all flows.


(Eph 1:7) In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,


AT

 

[sentipente]

AT, when you desire the early church is evolving then at other times it is not because "it is written." You seem to have a theology of convenience. Your authority appears to be whatever dogma you have already accepted. There is no rational basis for your approach.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I disagree here...the Atonement...to cover, Kapar, is based upon Gods grace to forgive.

Some people read but are so intent upon disagreeing they don't understand. Atonement means At One Ment, that is reconciliation. Of course It is not God who went away from man but man away from God. Therefore the reconciliation is about God reaching out to rebellious man. Of course that involves love and forgiveness because one cannot be reconciled back to someone that you hate and or that you think is out to kill you.

Forgiveness no matter how freely given does not do anything if the person forgiven rejects the forgiveness. They simply remain hostile. Forgiveness is the method of reconciling and reconciling is the result of a love that does not let go but seeks after the hurting and rebellious man.

Unfortunately Christianity in the last couple hundred years has sought to make man feel that God has to punish, that love and forgiveness can't exist without punishment. Thus they read the Bible texts in a much different way that the Jew or Christian who wrote those things.

 

[StormyOne]

Some people read but are so intent upon disagreeing they don't understand. Atonement means At One Ment, that is reconciliation. Of course It is not God who went away from man but man away from God. Therefore the reconciliation is about God reaching out to rebellious man. Of course that involves love and forgiveness because one cannot be reconciled back to someone that you hate and or that you think is out to kill you.

Forgiveness no matter how freely given does not do anything if the person forgiven rejects the forgiveness. They simply remain hostile. Forgiveness is the method of reconciling and reconciling is the result of a love that does not let go but seeks after the hurting and rebellious man.

Unfortunately Christianity in the last couple hundred years has sought to make man feel that God has to punish, that love and forgiveness can't exist without punishment. Thus they read the Bible texts in a much different way that the Jew or Christian who wrote those things.

it is apparent that it takes about 200 yrs in the area of theology for a theory about something to become fact..... once set in stone it is practically impossible for some people to see it any other way......