Penal Substitution.....?

[Philip]

The cleansing is a sanctification process which works out in our spirit, soul, lives, and history.

Agreed.

That process is covered and paid -- as well as our lives and history before receiving Christ and really, everything and anything else that gets between us and God.

What do you mean by 'that process is covered'?

The idea that you're perfect during the cleansing process is false.

I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise.

 

[cygnusx1]

Two questions:
1. If we have been cleansed of sins, if they have been washed away, why do they still need to be hidden?

There is an ongoing application of cleansing by the blood of Christ .
The fact is that we sin even after being washed clean .
All sin needs to be hidden ie, covered , God can no sooner look upon your sin 2000 years ago than this year.

2. What do you mean 'for God's benefit'? Is God in some way lacking that He requires something?

yes , God lacks the desire to be indifferent to sin!

Even if I agreed with your interpretation of this verse, it does not prove your point. If we have been cleansed of sins, what more is needed? If our sins have been truly washed away, then there is not iniquity for God to look at.

So when you sin you don't need forgiving ........ you were forgiven and you no longer need cleansing and forgiving ? Of course we do!

Couple more questions:
3. How is God reconciled to man? You say that it is through Christ, but how does it occur?

Through the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ.

4. What is your Scriptural basis for claiming that God must be reconciled to man?

Because due to sin we were driven out from the presence of God , by God Himself ......... God cannot be casual about sin , or just turn everything into some abstract cosmic firework show ........ unless man's real need is dealt with , guilt , man remains polluted ., under a curse and undone.

I see here that man is reconciled to God. Where do the Scriptures say that God must be reconciled to man?

Let me ask you a question , does a reconciliation of mankind take place before we are reconciled to God ?

 

[Ben johnson]

What is your Scriptural basis for claiming that God must be reconciled to man?

Because due to sin we were driven out from the presence of God , by God Himself ......... God cannot be casual about sin , or just turn everything into some abstract cosmic firework show ........ unless man's real need is dealt with , guilt , man remains polluted ., under a curse and undone.

"Reconciliation", conveys movement. When we are reconciled to God, it is through the Cross (Eph2:16). We are moved towards God.

Does GOD move? No.

I don't understand the idea of "God being reconciled to man". Our reconciliation to God, is because we FELL. Reconciliation therefore is RESTORATION of the communion that once was. But it is us who need to move...

 

[cygnusx1]

"Reconciliation", conveys movement. When we are reconciled to God, it is through the Cross (Eph2:16). We are moved towards God.

Does GOD move? No.

I don't understand the idea of "God being reconciled to man". Our reconciliation to God, is because we FELL. Reconciliation therefore is RESTORATION of the communion that once was. But it is us who need to move...

Hi ben , I need a break .... if you get the time this article may further your thoughts .

http://members.aol.com/rsigrace/right.html

 

[theFijian]

"Reconciliation", conveys movement. When we are reconciled to God, it is through the Cross (Eph2:16). We are moved towards God.

Does GOD move? No.

I don't understand the idea of "God being reconciled to man". Our reconciliation to God, is because we FELL. Reconciliation therefore is RESTORATION of the communion that once was. But it is us who need to move...

Are we saved because have the ability to reach up to heaven or because God reached down to us?

 

[Van]

Are we saved because we receive the gospel? Yes. Does receiving the gospel save us? No
Did God reconcile all things to Himself through Christ's death on the cross? Yes
Did that save any individual? No
So God reconciled mankind to Himself when He accepted Christ's sacrifice as the propitiation of the whole world. But we receive the reconcilation by grace through faith. Our faith is our access to the grace in which we stand.
God chooses those who believe in Him, who trust and rely upon Him and who love Him.
For God so loved the world that He gave His one of a kind Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

 

[heymikey80]

What do you mean by 'that process is covered'?

That your status through that process is as one who is justified.

I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise.

"anyone has suggested"? Suggestions take a number of forms. You did say, "If we are cleansed from our sins ...", the suggestion would thus be that we have been cleansed from our sins. And the suggestion would be that if we have been cleansed from our sins that we return to a state of sinlessness -- ie perfection, as in the Garden.

 

[James1979]

Van,

We are saved because what Christ has done. As far as receiving the gospel and through it we are a new creature in Christ which is a spiritual action done by the Holy Ghost. This action is totally passive on God. In example, its like God coming to us and placing the gift on our laps rather than God sitting on a chair and waiting for you to come and take it from him.

Our faith is not an access to the grace, before anyone is saved, they have no faith no trust, no dependency on God. Once God saves an indiviual, his/her new life inherit spiritual blessing and good works. Faith is a work and also one of the fruit of the spirit (galations 5:22). We enter into grace by Christ' faith and his suffering that he did on behalf of those who will become saved.

God chose us when we were in unbelief, had no trust in God and had no love for him just like every other person who is under the wrath of God by nature.

 

[Ben johnson]

Thanx, Cygnus.

Are we saved because have the ability to reach up to heaven or because God reached down to us?

Because God reached down to us, who (by faith) receive His reconciliation of US to HIM by Jesus on the Cross.

 

[Ben johnson]

Our faith is not an access to the grace, before anyone is saved, they have no faith no trust, no dependency on God. Once God saves an indiviual, his/her new life inherit spiritual blessing and good works. Faith is a work...

"Saving-faith", is not a work. It is receiving HIS work.

and also one of the fruit of the spirit (galations 5:22).

There are different kinds of faith. There is a "measure of faith given to all BELIEVERS" in Rm12:3; there is "spiritual-GIFT-faith" (given to ONE believer and not to ANOTHER) in 1Cor12:9. The "fruit-faith" in Gal5, does not conflict "faith that receives Him".

We enter into grace by Christ' faith and his suffering that he did on behalf of those who will become saved.

God chose us when we were in unbelief, had no trust in God and had no love for him just like every other person who is under the wrath of God by nature.

James, I don't understand how you change "by grace have you been saved through faith" (Eph2:8), into "by grace have you been saved, and THEN He gives you faith".

No one is saved DURING unbelief; if one has unbelief, he is "cut off because OF unbelief". And conversely, if that person doesn't continue IN unbelief, he is grafted in AGAIN. Rm11:20-23 is very clear, isn't it?

 

[depthdeception]

As God doesn't do things to make Him feel good, your point that ethics is something outside God fails to carry. God doesn't have to enjoy what His internal justice demands. So that doesn't make His internal sense of justice a standard external to Him.

What is the world does God's feelings about something have to do with whether or not justice is external and binding upon God? This is one of the more absurd things you have said.

Well, that's just mistaken. Have you ever noticed that no one can be convicted of a crime without opportunity of circumstances and motive??? This argument fails the basic test of fact. And if you meant mitigating circumstances of environment, those circumstances are accounted in determining the punishment for a violation. The fact of violation -- it's still a fact, isn't it?

The entire point of my post, which you are evidently either incapable or unwilling to grasp, is that just because their is "penalty" does not mean that the system in which the "penalty" is carried out is "penal." Stop being obtuse.

Western justice does not operate as this explanation asserts it does. So you may safely ignore this as a view of western justice.

My, you are being dense! I never said this was an explanation of the Western system of justice! In fact, I offerred this example to show the way in which "penalty" occurs in an entirely different conception of justice. Apparently, you are not reading my posts, but merely responding to them based upon the argument you wish to forward.
Western justice operates on declared methods of determining violation, guilt, crime. It doesn't ignore motive or circumstances. It forces those determinations to be predeterminations, so people can't be found criminal ex-post-facto ("after the fact" guilt).

Um, aren't we talking about the presence of a penalty? It certainly does forward and establish my argument.

No, we were talking about whether or not the presence of a "penalty" requires the assumption of Western-style "penal" justice system. As I have shown above, it clearly does not.

No amount of language can represent reality en toto. So no amount of theology -- yours or mine -- can. But language was never meant to do so. The question remains whether the language used conforms with that reality. Penal substitution requires two things, a penalty, and a substitution.

It requires much more than that, not the least of which is a particular conception of the way in which "penalty" functions in relationship to God.

You can either deny the position represented by the language or accept it. Add all you want, but the validity of the statement is not affected.

This is where you are dead wrong. There is no "position presented by the language," for language, by itself, presents no meaning. Therefore, the only "position" is that which the user of the words places upon it.

 

[Van]

We are saved because what Christ has done. As far as receiving the gospel and through it we are a new creature in Christ which is a spiritual action done by the Holy Ghost. This action is totally passive on God. In example, its like God coming to us and placing the gift on our laps rather than God sitting on a chair and waiting for you to come and take it from him.

Our faith is not an access to the grace, before anyone is saved, they have no faith no trust, no dependency on God. Once God saves an indiviual, his/her new life inherit spiritual blessing and good works. Faith is a work and also one of the fruit of the spirit (galations 5:22). We enter into grace by Christ' faith and his suffering that he did on behalf of those who will become saved.

God chose us when we were in unbelief, had no trust in God and had no love for him just like every other person who is under the wrath of God by nature.

Hi James 1979, obviously our understanding of the gospel of Christ differs considerably.

Are we saved because of what Christ has done? Yes.

Is our receiving the gospel an act of the Holy Spirit? Well, yes and no. The gospel, the information, was produced by the Holy Spirit, so without God revealing Himself with the gospel of Christ we could not receive the gospel. There would be no gospel to receive. However, the gospel exists, and we receive it. John 1:10-13 says after we receive the gospel, then we are born again from above.

Is our faith our access to the grace in which we stand? Yes, Romans 5:2. Romans 4:5 says God reckons Abraham's faith as righteousness. Therefore the faith in view is Abraham's faith. If it is was God's faith given to Abraham it would not need to be reckoned as righteousness, it would already be righteous.

The faith in view in Galatians 5:22 is a gift of the indwelt Holy Spirit, and we are indwelt after we are saved, so this does not refer to our faith before we are saved.

Does God choose us while we are in unbelief? No. James 2:5 says God chooses us to keep His promise to those who love Him. Therefore He chooses believers just as indicated by John 3:16.

 

[James1979]

Van,

I'm glad that you provided these verses. Let's take a look at John 1:10-13

Jhn 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Jhn 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:

Jhn 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

In verse 12 it says as many as received him, God gave them power to become sons of God and to believe on his name. This verse is really talking about when Christ had came to Jersualem and majority of the people reject Christ as their messiah and only a few people received Christ (before he Christ went up to heaven). But on the other hand, this is still happening today. A great many people will not received Christ and become sons of God and believe on his name. While a few remnant out of the whole will receive Christ, become sons of God and believe on his name. Let's take a look at other verses why they will receive Christ and become sons of God and as well believe on his name.

Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Philippians 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake ;

John 3:27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

Psalms 65:4 Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.

These verses above show that Christ was on their behalf to believe on him and God had given them eternal life as this action is totally passive because in John 3:27 it says a man cannot receive anything (spiritual blessings, good works, eternal life, grace) unless God gives it to him. Even Psalms 65 clearly shows that God is the one who causes us to come to him and become sons of God so that we will eternally dwell in his prescence forever more.

In verse 13 we are born of God and not because we want to be born again. The will of man has gone astray and none seek God as this is recorded in Romans 3:10-12.Our rebellion ways is telling God that we are number one and he isn't.

Let's look at context of Romans 5:1 then to verse 2

Romans 5:1 Therefore beign justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Romans 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

The faith that justify anyone is Christ' faith.

Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law;, for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

So in Romans 5:1, we are justified by Christ' faith and by whom(Christ) we have access by faith(Christ' faith) into this grace wherein we stand. We can only be acceptable, without spot without blemish before God all because of Christ perfect faithfulness to the law of God and perfect good works.

Phl 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Faith is a work.

1Th 1:3 Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father;

2Th 1:11 Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of [this] calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of [his] goodness, and the work of faith with power:

So Abraham or anyone for that matter who become saved could not be justified for a good work that they have begun to walk into.

Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

You're right about Galatians 5:22. We have no faith before we are saved. Only after we have been converted, regenerate, a new creature in Christ will we have faith in God.

Yes God does chooses us while we were in unbelief. We are not born believers at the conception of birth are we? We are born as sinful people who needs to be born again from above to become believers. That's the transaction that needs to be made in an unbeliever's life.

Romans 11:30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:

Romans 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

The book of Romans talks a lot about National Israel but at the sametime, those who do become saved received mercy from God even while they were in unbelief.

 

[Van]

Hi James 1979, John verse 12 is saying that after folks believed on his name, then He gave them the right to be born again. The sequence is clear, first you believe, then God will spiritually place you in Christ where you will be born again, born from above.

Acts 13:48 says as many as took the direction of Paul, as many as were appointed by Paul, these believed. Compare with verse 46 where they did not take the direction. Clearly individual receptivity is in view.

All that Philippians 1:29 is saying is that we were allowed to come to Christ, and not only that, but we also were allowed to suffer for His sake.

God places us in Christ and it does not depend on our will to be saved, but on God who has mercy on whom He has mercy.

John 3:27 is saying John the Baptists place was given him by God, and he was not the Christ. The principle is that we cannot receive the gospel unless we are presented with the gospel.

Psalm 65:4 indicates we are blessed when God chooses us and allows us to draw near. This occurs when God places us spiritually in Christ after we receive the gospel, provided to us by the power of God.

All Romans 3 says we do not seek God when we are sinning, and because we must keep the whole law, we do not seek God by trying to keep the Law of Moses, for by the Law no flesh will be justified. The idea is we are sinners, we have turned into corruption. And has nothing to do with our ability to pursue the righteousness of God. See Romans 9:30-33.

Romans 5:2 does not say it is Christ's faith, it says it is our faith. Look back at Romans 4:5 where Abraham's faith is in view, then look at Romans 4:24 where it is our faith in Christ that is reckoned as righteousness.

We have a problem with Galatians 2:16 because the NASB translates the verse differently that the text you provided. The NIV, NASB, ESV, and the NKJV present the verse as saying it is our faith in Christ, whereas the text you provided indicates it is Christ's faith. The insertion of "of" or "in" is a translator decision, so we should look for other verses to determine which view is correct. Romans 4:24 makes it clear it is our faith in or on Christ which is reckoned as righteousness.

Yes I am right about Galatians 5:22, and I did not say we have no faith before we are saved.

Yes our presalvation work of faith does not save us, it is God who reckons our faith as righteousness, who saves us. If our faith was some sort of good works, it would not need to be credited as righteousness. It it was some sort of supernature gift from God, it would not need to be credited as righteousness.

God does not choose us while in unbelief, God chooses us when we are rich in faith, when we love God, James 2:5.

 

[heymikey80]

This is where you are dead wrong. There is no "position presented by the language," for language, by itself, presents no meaning. Therefore, the only "position" is that which the user of the words places upon it.

You and I are either talking about things sufficiently similar, or we're talking about the positions we're placing on the words. If that's the only position, then language doesn't communicate.

If we're talking about the positions we're placing on the words, then we can have no argument. We're not communicating. So no argument is necessary over what we're not communicating.

If we're talking about overlaps, differences and arguing their validit, then there is indeed a position commonly presented by the language which forms the basis for such a discussion.

 

[heymikey80]

What is the world does God's feelings about something have to do with whether or not justice is external and binding upon God? This is one of the more absurd things you have said.

Your argument which triggered this response asserted emotions and desires within God to cause this. I would completely agree with you, this is absurd.

But it's what you've said (#143):

... for God to further require the death of God is a very sadistic picture of God.

Sadism is enjoyment from cruelty. Enjoyment is a feeling. Ethics, on the contrary, isn't derived from feeling. Therefore your statement that this is the result of PSA -- is more absurd than my denial.

 

[heymikey80]

The entire point of my post, which you are evidently either incapable or unwilling to grasp, is that just because their is "penalty" does not mean that the system in which the "penalty" is carried out is "penal." Stop being obtuse.

Quit attacking me personally and I might return a little less rancor.

My assertion stands. Western views of penalty don't look like what you're critiquing; so they're immune to the criticism.

For a critique to be successful it must start with a factual observation of the system it is to critique. As yours doesn't I don't see much reason to go further.

My, you are being dense! I never said this was an explanation of the Western system of justice!

Oh, so you didn't say (at post # 160):

In Western systems of "justice," justice is said to be blind and is supposed to render penalty for actions regardless of the circumstances, motivations, etc. However, in a non-penally oriented system of justice, these issues are taken into consideration and the telos of restoration and rehabilitation are always in the background of the dissemination of "penalty."

Who hijacked your account, then?

In case you don't see the exact problem here: western systems don't have the attributes you say they do -- so they do qualify as non-penally-oriented systems of justice, and obtain those attributes you are attributing to non-western systems. They attribute circumstances, motivations, etc.

The problem is, your example is duplicated in the U.S. under a number of compensation schemes.

In fact, I offerred this example to show the way in which "penalty" occurs in an entirely different conception of justice. Apparently, you are not reading my posts, but merely responding to them based upon the argument you wish to forward.

In fact you're not noticing how or why I'm choosing the points I'm choosing. But no matter.

No, we were talking about whether or not the presence of a "penalty" requires the assumption of Western-style "penal" justice system. As I have shown above, it clearly does not.

Well you haven't really distinguished the attributes of a western-style penal system, as I pointed out in my prior post. So clearly your point hasn't been made. You've tilted at some windmill, but it's not the dragon you said you wanted to slay.

It requires much more than that, not the least of which is a particular conception of the way in which "penalty" functions in relationship to God.

Maybe one particular version of PSA does. The remainder aren't impacted by your critique, because the remainder don't have that particular conception, but another.

Penal Substitutionary Atonement does not demand one particular penal system. To be penal, a penalty must exist. To be substitutionary, a substitution must exist. To be an atonement, an atonement must exist.

I'm not lumping all non-PSA views into one blob and attacking them all with the arguments against one of their members. I don't see why you should be allowed to do that to all PSA views. It's not logical.

If you want to talk about one particular version of PSA, fine.

Qualify.

 

[Philip]

"anyone has suggested"? Suggestions take a number of forms. You did say, "If we are cleansed from our sins ...", the suggestion would thus be that we have been cleansed from our sins. And the suggestion would be that if we have been cleansed from our sins that we return to a state of sinlessness -- ie perfection, as in the Garden.

You make two errors in your assumptions about my statement. First, when I stated 'If we are cleansed from our sins...', in no way did I mean that we would not sin again. Second, I do not agree with your association of perfection with the Garden.

 

[James1979]

Van,

We both have different beliefs as you have a freewill gospel that is widely taught throughout the world. I use to believe in a free-will gospel believing that all a person has to do to become saved is believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as if I can do that. I found out that I was trapped in a gospel that the Israelities were doign in the days of Moses, Joshua. They thought that whatever commandment God told them to do they would be right with God. Today's gospel is a duplicate of the old times, trying to obey a commandment from God to become saved.

For an example, "you must repent, if you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, confess with your mouth that he is lord and so on"

 

[Van]

Hi James 1979, whoever believes in Him shall not perish. John 3:16
What must I do to be saved? Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. Acts 16:30-31

Trusting in the work of Christ is not trusting in the works of the Law, not works of merit earning salvation. But a work - singular. See if scripture says salvation is not of a work, or not of works. Lets take Roman 4:4-5. Works is plural as a noun. In verse 5, the one who does not work refers to working for a wage of righteousness, or in other words, doing multiple works is in view.
How about Ephesians 2:9, which says salvation is not of works.

Works does not provide salvation, but works proves salvation. Show me your faith without works and I will show you my faith by my works. So another issue has to do with whether a person, once saved is alway saved, or must do works to sustain their salvation. The answer is no, once we are in Christ, we cannot lose our salvation.
But if our faith does not result in striving to do the good works of God, that is evidence we were never saved. Jesus said depart from me, you who practice lawlessness, I never knew you. Note He does not say, I knew you once, but then you did not sustain your salvation, so I kicked you out.