What child is released? What are you even talking about?
God’s child. The evil criminal sinner is holding back a child of God within them, by not accepting the ransom payment.
You coming up with a kidnapping scenario only beautifully fits according to your construction. It's not what the Bible says.
The Bible is describing a kidnapping scenario.
What?? How is it unjust and unfair? Only in the favor of those to whom God chose to show mercy is it unfair.
It is totally unjust and unfair to punish the innocent to allow the guilty to go free.
How is that a problem?
From Acts 2: 23 This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24 But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.
God INTENDED this. Deliberately planned it.
Yes, God “intended” to allow wicked people to torture, humiliate and murder Christ, but it was not to “punish” Christ, He is totally innocent.
Personal opinion/ personal anthropomorphism
How does PS not make God out to be blood thirsty?
Sin is not part of the atonement process (the solution).
But as to what you meant, why should man have a part to play? Only if one is determined to be self-determining!
Would you have a problem with God creating —boom, over and done with— a creature (certain humans) who is the Body and Bride of Christ, and the Dwelling Place of God? What part does man have to play in such a scenario?
Yes, set only some up for success and not providing for others to be successful is totally not Loving on God’s part.
If man does not have a part to play than it is universal or as you might say limited for no special reason.
What is not participative? You seem to be conflating salvation with sanctification. We most certainly do partake in his suffering and crucify the flesh.
But why should we be participative in our salvation? It is a gift, to include the very means (faith) by which we are saved.
Where is our participation found in PS?
Our “participation” is found in our acceptance of the huge ransom payment.
That is a logical failure. We had a sin debt, it was forgiven. And Christ is how the debt was paid.
If the debt was paid 100% there is nothing to be forgiven.
Huh? Can you expand on this a bit? I don't get what you mean. How not?
Can you be a good parent and not negatively discipline you children if you have the opportunity?
Think about this:
There is a, one of a kind, Ming vase on your parent’s mantel that has been handed down by your great, great, grandmother. You, as a young person, get angry with your parents and smash the vase. You are later sorry about it and repent and your loving parent can easily forgive you. Since this was not your first rebellious action your father, in an act of Love, collects every little piece of the vase and you willingly work together with your father hours each night for a month painstakingly gluing the vase back together. The vase is returned to the mantel to be kept as a show piece, but according to Antique Road Show, it is worthless. Working with your father helped you develop a much stronger relationship, comfort in being around him and appreciation for his Love.
Was your father fair/just and would others see this as being fair discipline? Did this “punishment” help resolve the issue?
Was restitution made or was reconciliation made and would you feel comfortable/ justified standing by your father in the future?
Suppose after smashing the vase, repenting and forgiveness, your older brother says he will work with your father putting the vase together, so you can keep up with your social life. Would this scenario allow you to stand comfortable and justified by your father?
Suppose Jesus the magician waved his hands over the smashed vase and restored it perfectly to the previous condition, so there is really very little for you to be forgiven of or for you to do. Would this scenario allow you to stand comfortable and justified by your father?
What are the benefits of being lovingly disciplined?
Suppose it is not you that breaks the Ming vase but your neighbor breaks into your house because he does not like your family being so nice and smashes the Ming vase, but he is caught on a security camera. Your father goes to your neighbor with the box of pieces and offers to do the same thing with him as he offered to do with you, but the neighbor refuses. Your father explains: everything is caught on camera and he will be fined and go to jail, but the neighbor, although sorry about being caught, still refuses. The neighbor loses all he has and spends 10 years in jail. So was the neighbor fairly disciplined or fairly punished?
How does the neighbor’s punishment equal your discipline and how is it not equal?
Was the neighbor forgiven and if not why not?
No. It does not, though the universalist would like to hear you say so.
Then why does Acts 2:38 say, 'Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.' ?
Where is PS talked about by Peter in Acts 2?
This doesn't sound quite cogent to me. Can you rewrite it, or explain what you mean? I don't want to guess.
Lev. 5 describes atonement for minor (unintentional sins) but it does not say the offering was a substitute for the sinner, but was a penalty (“punishment” and that can mean a “disciplining”).
I am more like those in the mob yelling “crucify Him”. Are you like Christ on the cross?
Very good. Now you are starting to get the idea. Would you say that we do after all, then, pay our own sin debt (or whatever verbal construction you prefer there)?
Christ died in our place, so now we are crucified with him, therefore we live in him.
NO!!! God forgives our sin debt; nothing can pay that debt. We are being disciplined for our sins by empathetically being crucified with Christ.
Where are you referring to, and in what context?
Crucified “for” you or crucified “for” sin.
Sure it does. Ransom means payment for release of a prisoner. Apart from Christ, we are prisoners, even slaves, to sin.
If there is no kidnapper it is not the ransom being discussed in the NT, so who is the kidnapper with PS?
You are using the term, 'problem', there, anthropomorphically, but as to your point, why should the fact of it be problematic for PS?
God has no “problems”, all the problems are man’s problems, God can forgive without the need for Christ going to the cross.
"God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement" How does that not fit? Or maybe I should say —does every passage of scripture describing what happened at Calvary have to mention PS, for it to be good doctrine? Can you show me one that counters it?
Ro. 3:25 states: “…He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished” that would also mean after the cross sinners are punished (disciplined), while before the cross forgiven sinners were not disciplined.
Death and Hell is not discipline.
Right, death is not bad in and of itself (it is the way good people go to heaven and the way bad people quit doing bad stuff. Hell is for those who refuse to humbly accept God’s discipline for their sins, so it is punishment.
Agreed. So what is the problem?
The problem is, most people defending PS say: “God does not Love everyone”.
