penal substitution verses Christus Victor

[bling]

So you believe in God's predestination & God's exhaustive foreknowledge?

Maybe not the way you believe "predestination"?

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

I'm not fighting for any particular atonement theory since there are at least 7 and each one holds some truth.

However, Romans 1:15-20 is not support for Jesus being used to calm God's wrath.

It states that God's wrath has been REVEALED against all ungodliness and all unrighteousness of men...BECAUSE God has made Himself manifest to man from the beginning of time and so man has no excuse.

It does NOT say that Jesus appeased this wrath.

It says that if you read through to chapter 3...He is the propitiation who turns away the wrath of God from the elect.

 

[GodsGrace101]

It says that if you read through to chapter 3...He is the propitiation who turns away the wrath of God from the elect.

You must mean Romans 5:9

I just don't find this to be the all encompassing theory.
The Early Church believed in The Moral Influence Theory
and the Cristus Victor Theory. The others came along at
different times, and they all make sense to me.

Like I've been saying...it doesn't really matter which one anyone believes in.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

No....I meant what I said. Romans1 to chapter 3:23-26, if you understand it.

The"early church" was already departing from truth so they were not a good barometer. The scripture is the rule of faith and practice.

 

[GodsGrace101]

No....I meant what I said. Romans1 to chapter 3:23-26, if you understand it.

The"early church" was already departing from truth so they were not a good barometer. The scripture is the rule of faith and practice.

I think you mean this for me.

Could you post some scripture?

As to the early church....the church has always been fighting heresies.
But if it was already departing from the truth...
imagine what we're teaching today,,,,2,000 years later.
I trust the Early Fathers the best since they were taught by the Apostles...
and they are the ones that put the bible together.
Those of pre 325 AD.

 

[Butch5]

Why are you persistently elusive to answer as to whom the ransom was paid to? If God doesn't require the ransom, to whom was it paid?



The statement "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow" which was a consequence of their action doesn't need the wrathful heart of God to pronounce the deadly curses? Does the statement made "in the realm of time" come from God's heart like from a senseless robotic machine?

What does God's wrath in John 3:36 and many other verses mean? Are they also not involving the angry heart of God?

You're responding to posts from years ago. Instead of jumping from post to post, why don't you make your case and we can address it.

I've already pointed out the Penal Substitution doesn't work. The Bible speaks of forgiveness over and over again.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 Jn. 1:9 KJV)

Penal Substitution doesn't allow for forgiveness. The debt is paid, not forgiven.

 

[Butch5]

No....I meant what I said. Romans1 to chapter 3:23-26, if you understand it.

The"early church" was already departing from truth so they were not a good barometer. The scripture is the rule of faith and practice.

We have to keep in mind that when we say Scripture, we really mean our interpretation of Scripture. The early church was in a much better place to understand what was taught by Jesus and the apostles. Some of them were taught by the apostles.

 

[Butch5]

Butch5,

Thanks for the follow up question asking for clarification;



It is in the text...let's look;
Paul explains why he is looking to present the gospel of which he is NOT ASHAMED;
15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

Why is he preaching the Gospel, notice the next verse starts with;
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

You didn't highlight who the wrath of God is being revealed against. It's all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in unrighteousness. They know the truth but are rejecting it.

However, I don't see anything in this passage that says these men can somehow appease the wrath of God that is against them.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Butch5,

However, I don't see anything in this passage that says these men can somehow appease the wrath of God that is against them.

Men cannot do this. That is why Jesus came to save those given to Him by the Father. He is the one who turns away the wrath.

 

[Butch5]

Butch5,


Men cannot do this. That is why Jesus came to save those given to Him by the Father. He is the one who turns away the wrath.

That's not the point. Where does Scripture say that God requires his wrath be appeased. Unless one can establish this from Scripture the Penal model is based on speculation. The Scriptures don't say that God requires His wrath be appeased. This idea is simply assumed and then certain passages are claimed to support the idea. It's simply reading an idea into the text.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Butch5,


Men cannot do this. That is why Jesus came to save those given to Him by the Father. He is the one who turns away the wrath.

This is also for @Butch5

The Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement came about at the reformation when all of Catholicism was being rejected.

This theory was not known before this time.
The idea that Jesus takes our place is a rather dangerous idea.
Why?
How many times have we heard that we need to NOTHING to be saved but accept Jesus because HE has covered for us and done it all for us.

Nothing could be further from the truth and many are living in a state of false security.

If you notice,,,Jesus did not speak too much about "being saved". Not that I don't believe we need to be since it is HE that stated John 3:3, 5

But what Jesus DID speak to and teach is that we need to be born of the spirit,,,,yes,,,but that WE need to live a holy life because God is holy.
1 Peter 1:16

He said WE need to be perfect like our Father in heaven is perfect.
Matthew 5:48

He said that WE need to not be lawless since it is THOSE that will not be saved.
Matthew 7:23

We do not love a wrathful God that needs sacrifice...
God said that He does not want sacrifice, but wants our heart.
1 Samuel 15:22 and many other verses.

God has been mad at mankind.
Jesus is the perfect and final sacrifice.
But is this the ONLY reason He came to us??

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

That's not the point. Where does Scripture say that God requires his wrath be appeased. Unless one can establish this from Scripture the Penal model is based on speculation. The Scriptures don't say that God requires His wrath be appeased. This idea is simply assumed and then certain passages are claimed to support the idea. It's simply reading an idea into the text.

Maybe you are correct. God sends multitudes of sinners into eternal torment because He loves them and has a wonderful plan for their life.
Paul was mistaken in Roman's 1.
God is amused by our idolatry, murder,and sexual perversion.
Yes, I see what you are saying now.
He was just kidding with the flood, a n d Sodom and Gommorah .

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

This is also for @Butch5

The Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement came about at the reformation when all of Catholicism was being rejected.

This theory was not known before this time.
The idea that Jesus takes our place is a rather dangerous idea.
Why?
How many times have we heard that we need to NOTHING to be saved but accept Jesus because HE has covered for us and done it all for us.

Nothing could be further from the truth and many are living in a state of false security.

If you notice,,,Jesus did not speak too much about "being saved". Not that I don't believe we need to be since it is HE that stated John 3:3, 5

But what Jesus DID speak to and teach is that we need to be born of the spirit,,,,yes,,,but that WE need to live a holy life because God is holy.
1 Peter 1:16

He said WE need to be perfect like our Father in heaven is perfect.
Matthew 5:48

He said that WE need to not be lawless since it is THOSE that will not be saved.
Matthew 7:23

We do not love a wrathful God that needs sacrifice...
God said that He does not want sacrifice, but wants our heart.
1 Samuel 15:22 and many other verses.

God has been mad at mankind.
Jesus is the perfect and final sacrifice.
But is this the ONLY reason He came to us??

Penal substitutionary atonement is the biblical teaching without which there is.no gospel

 

[Butch5]

Maybe you are correct. God sends multitudes of sinners into eternal torment because He loves them and has a wonderful plan for their life.
Paul was mistaken in Roman's 1.
God is amused by our idolatry, murder,and sexual perversion.
Yes, I see what you are saying now.
He was just kidding with the flood, a n d Sodom and Gommorah .

Sarcasm doesn't make the case. Let me ask you a question. If Jesus died to appease God's wrath, what role is there for forgiveness?

Here's another problem with the Penal model.
God has it within is His power to simply forgive man's sin. However, the Penal model won't let God simply forgive. Instead it demands justice. It demands that God kill His own Son to appease His wrath. Imagine a human Father that had two sons. One son disobeys and for that disobedience the father kills the other son. People would call that man a monster. Yet somehow they want to impose this idea on God.

 

[Butch5]

Penal substitutionary atonement is the biblical teaching without which there is.no gospel

It's not. If you look at history you'll find that it wasn't taught until the Reformation. It's a tweaked version of Anselm's Satifaction Model which came about around 1100 AD.

 

[Jack Terrence]

Penal substitutionary atonement is the biblical teaching without which there is.no gospel

Butch5 is correct. The "penal substitution" doctrine did not appear until the 16th century Reformation. it is blatantly false. God cannot punish an innocent man.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Maybe you are correct. God sends multitudes of sinners into eternal torment because He loves them and has a wonderful plan for their life.
Paul was mistaken in Roman's 1.
God is amused by our idolatry, murder,and sexual perversion.
Yes, I see what you are saying now.
He was just kidding with the flood, a n d Sodom and Gommorah .

The above is not for me but is rather a silly reply to a serious discussion.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Penal substitutionary atonement is the biblical teaching without which there is.no gospel

Well then, there was no gospel until Luther, Calvin, Knox, etc.

Here is the gospel message:
1 Corinthians 15:1-4
1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,
2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.
3For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures....

and...

12Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; 14and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; 17and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.

Christ came so that we may have faith in Him...so He could defeat death and sin.

He took upon Himself all the sins of the world so that no more sacrifices would ever be necessary.

He came to re-establish man's communion with God which had been lost in the Garden when God was disobeyed.