Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I'm not modifying at all.Who are you modifying above? Us as the fallen or Christ.
If us then your point would be Christ did not have to bear the cross for us.
If Christ then you miss the point. It was He who knew no sin who became sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21)
You can view the OP which expands on the one line summary of @PeaceByJesus. However, his one sentence summary is basic Biblical propitiation language as pointed out here.I'm not modifying at all.
I'm pointing out an inconsistency in the definition of penal substirution I quoted and the definition of forgiveness. I'm looking for how that is resolved.
I understand it's almost unavoidable but that language projects mutability onto God. I don't know if the substitution I believe is either. I think man upset the order of creation( all beings primary being us.) as God intended but didn't upset God or prevent Him from being able to forgive. The disordering of human nature and obstructing the perfection of man to be united to God is restored by Jesus. Jesus, also a human, made available to all humans that lost human perfection and the end intended for human life.You can view the OP which expands on the one line summary of @PeaceByJesus. However, his one sentence summary is basic Biblical propitiation language as pointed out here.
God made us in his image, yet we preferred not to accept the gift but rather take action that it might be our doing, and as it transpired it was our great undoing. In Jesus, that which we once had has been restored.I understand it's almost unavoidable but that language projects mutability onto God. I don't know if the substitution I believe is either. I think man upset the order of creation( all beings primary being us.) as God intended but didn't upset God or prevent Him from being able to forgive. The disordering of human nature and obstructing the perfection of man to be united to God is restored by Jesus. Jesus, being a human made available to all humans that human perfection and the end intended for human life.
I understand it's almost unavoidable but that language projects mutability onto God. I don't know if the substitution I believe is either. I think man upset the order of creation( all beings primary being us.) as God intended but didn't upset God or prevent Him from being able to forgive. The disordering of human nature and obstructing the perfection of man to be united to God is restored by Jesus. Jesus, being a human made available to all humans that human perfection and the end intended for human life.
Propitiation: the action of propitiating or appeasing a god, spirit, or person.
I think we have to be very careful with this language lest we sound as though we are making God like the gods of primitive tribes requiring sacrifice to make them happy or less angry. If that is all we have to offer, then maybe JB Phillips is correct Our God is too small
I just don't think any discussion of the atonement without mystery or ineffability is ever going to be ultimately satisfactory.
That having been said, I am quite comfortable with the idea that Jesus is the lamb of the new testament covenant.
Yes, look I am good with this as you know. The word is used 4 times in the NT (and not in the Gospels). Redemption is used 12 times. just saying. I think the NT use of the propitiation word is to lead us back to the image of the passover lamb.STRONGS NT 2434: ἱλασμός
ἱλασμός, ἱλασμοῦ, ὁ (ἱλάσκομαι);
1. an appeasing, propitiating, Vulg.propitiatio (Plutarch, de sera num. vind. c. 17; plural joined with καθαρμοι, Plutarch, Sol. 12; with the genitive of the object τῶν θεῶν, the Orphica Arg. 39; Plutarch, Fab. 18; θεῶν μῆνιν ἱλασμοῦ καί χαριστηριων δεομένην, vit. Camill. 7 at the end; ποιεῖσθαι ἱλασμόν, of a priest offering an expiatory sacrifice, 2 Macc. 3:33).
2. in Alex. usage the means of appeasing, a propitiation: Philo, alleg. leg. 3: § 61; προσοίσουσιν ἱλασμόν, for חַטָּאת, Ezekiel 44:27; περί τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν, of Christ, 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10 (κριός τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ, Numbers 5:8; (cf. ἡμέρα τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ, Leviticus 25:9); also for סְלִיחָה, forgiveness, Psalm 129:4 (Ps. 130:4); Daniel 9:9, Theod.). (Cf. Trench, § lxxvii.)
Yet it was the word/phrase Paul and John used.
While propitiation (or atoning sacrifice) is applicable to false pagan gods, there is no question that it is properly applicable to Christ as the Lamb of God. As Paul says those other gods are no gods, simply devils.Propitiation: the action of propitiating or appeasing a god, spirit, or person.
I think we have to be very careful with this language lest we sound as though we are making God like the gods of primitive tribes requiring sacrifice to make them happy or less angry.
Yes I see that as true. We were presented a good that we considered better for us than the good of God. In deciding that it was better 'for us' a false image of ourselves must be constructed in order for the evil presented to be a good. I think, if I understand, when Satan made God out to be nefarious in His commandment "to not eat" A false mental image of God formed and a corresponding false image of man.God made us in his image, yet we preferred not to accept the gift but rather take action that it might be our doing, and as it transpired it was our great undoing. In Jesus, that which we once had has been restored.
The cost of which is the shedding of blood because evil hates good. No good deed goes unpunished? Jesus made God's love visible and the consequence of sin is hatred of the good of God. To evil spirits and men good is evil and evil deserves punished. God knew He would have to sacrifice His life to restore order. The Prophets lived this truth out in their own lives.
The wrath of God is appeased=propitiation. I don't disagree with the term but what was it that appeased the Father is mistaken when terms are used that are used in exchange of money. Or conceptualizing God's anger as if He is like us and is suffering deprivation.The "means" used by the Father was propitiation.
It is forgiving without the ultimate need for a sin-bearer and atonement - which the shedding of righteous life-blood provides and effectual penitent faith appropriates - that doesn't square with God's forgiveness.Forgiving= is when the offended foregoes what's justly due from the offender- Somehow that definition of substitution doesn't square with forgiveness.
While theology on the atonement is necessary, i am glad conversion in the Bible only required convicted contrite souls to believe on the Son sent by the Father to be the savior of the world, (1 John 4:14) and who died for our sins and rose again in accordance with the prophetic Scripture, and rise again, so that whoever believes on Him shall receive forgiveness of sins, on His account. (Acts 10:43) And thus characteristically follow Him.The wrath of God is appeased=propitiation. I don't disagree with the term but what was it that appeased the Father is mistaken when terms are used that are used in exchange of money. Or conceptualizing God's anger as if He is like us and is suffering deprivation.
God's acts are love. Jesus, in obedience to His Father, obedient all the way to death on the cross, offered a sacrifice of love that was greater than the offense against His Father. It was obedience of such magnitude, in His Father's sight, it demonstrated love that could forgive every offense ever and infinitely more. That obedience mended the offense of rejection from mankind. Man who was a creature that God created everything for and made to be His son and friend, a son who was given everything his Father had made and more. In return His created son rejected the love of his Father and best friend He could ever desire. I think this is the nature of the debt and the atonement.
The devil was the original Communist Liberal Elite, who thought it was his right (not as one in need of mercy and grace) to sit in glory and power (Isaiah 14:14) and presumed to "climb up some other way" (John 10:1) than that which is ordained of God (by mercy avoiding what one deserves, and under grace receiving what one does not deserve, and also rewarding obedience, which God motivates and enables, whereby overcomers will sit with Christ in His throne, Revelation 3:21, which promotion the devil arrogantly presumed).Yes I see that as true. We were presented a good that we considered better for us than the good of God. In deciding that it was better 'for us' a false image of ourselves must be constructed in order for the evil presented to be a good. I think, if I understand, when Satan made God out to be nefarious in His commandment "to not eat" A false mental image of God formed and a corresponding false image of man.
Can you explain the thought in red further?I understand it's almost unavoidable but that language projects mutability onto God. I don't know if the substitution I believe is either. I think man upset the order of creation( all beings primary being us.) as God intended but didn't upset God or prevent Him from being able to forgive. The disordering of human nature and obstructing the perfection of man to be united to God is restored by Jesus. Jesus, also a human, made available to all humans that lost human perfection and the end intended for human life.
The cost of which is the shedding of blood because evil hates good. No good deed goes unpunished? Jesus made God's love visible and the consequence of sin is hatred of the good of God. To evil spirits and men good is evil and evil deserves punished. God knew He would have to sacrifice His life to restore order. The Prophets lived this truth out in their own lives.
And what form of substitution would each of us accept for forgiveness? Mankind doesn't really forgive in the real sense of the word.Forgiving= is when the offended foregoes what's justly due from the offender- Somehow that definition of substitution doesn't square with forgiveness.
The devil has already lost. He is only trying to take as many human beings as he can down to get back at God now. its a temporary thing.The devil was the original Communist Liberal, who thought it was his right (not as one in need of mercy and grace) to sit in glory and power and presumed to "climb up some other way" (John 10:1) than that which is ordained of God (mercy avoiding what one deserves, and grace giving what one does not, and under grace rewarding obedience which God motivates and enables, whereby overcomers will sit with Christ in His throne, Revelation 3:21, which promotion the devil arrogantly presumed).
And being abased for his self-exaltation in the original "Occupy Movement," he proceeded to work to seduce Eve with the original victim-entitlement psychology and "share the wealth" demand, presenting God as maliciously selfishly keeping Eve away from Divine power that which was rightfully hers. Thus her rebellion to obtain what was withheld seemed be just, while the devil, who presented himself as her savior, obtained power by her "vote," becoming the "god of this world."
And ever since then he was sought to enlarge his kingdom and rob God of glory via an alternative world, with perverse corruptions of what is of God, even marriage and Christ and the gospel, which he accomplishes thru his proxy servants. Who likewise typically seduce souls with the victim-entitlement mentality, though he typically has actual injustices to work with, but which are used to obtain power for his proxies, whether it be Stalin or lesser devils, who end up being the only ones who have what they worked souls be envious of.
Now back to my garden (not Eden).
When Adam sinned his body no longer shared in the immortality of his soul. He lost the Grace that ordered his body and soul to life everlasting. His body became a body of death. The lower powers of the soul that operate organic matter could no longer cooperate with the intellect or upper faculties and powers. The will and reason conscience, all these are informed by the sensitive powers or lower powers of the soul that are forced to adopt a law natural to death. The human body after sin is obedient to the law of the beasts. The law of survival. The disharmony in the soul externalizes to disharmony between Adam and Eve, Man and the powers of nature. The harmonious bond with God is with man and binds his body and soul, his personal relationships and mankind with nature.Can you explain the thought in red further?
Creation was finished and mankind was living in Eden at the time that sin came about
All of us as one man is Adam. Jesus substitutes for Adam. Is that what you mean?And what form of substitution would each of us accept for forgiveness? Mankind doesn't really forgive in the real sense of the word.
That isn’t in the Bible.When Adam sinned his body no longer shared in the immortality of his soul. He lost the Grace that ordered his body and soul to life everlasting. His body became a body of death. The lower powers of the soul that operate organic matter could no longer cooperate with the intellect or upper faculties and powers. The will and reason conscience, all these are informed by the sensitive powers or lower powers of the soul that are forced to adopt a law natural to death. The human body after sin is obedient to the law of the beasts. The law of survival. The disharmony in the soul externalizes to disharmony between Adam and Eve, Man and the powers of nature. The harmonious bond with God is with man and binds his body and soul, his personal relationships and mankind with nature.
So then, with my mind I am a slave to the law of God, but with my flesh I am a slave to the law of sin.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?