The Greatest Heresy

[avra34v2]

Rejecting and denying the substitutionary atonement.

Nothing I've ever heard makes me more angry, upset, sad, or heartbroken than this.

It's the Gospel, the most basic of our faith. Through it we have salvation, there is no other way. I both grieve for, and am made angry by, all who claim Christ but deny the eternally costful method of salvation, bought with the blood of our precious Saviour whom we proclaim.

Romans 3:23-26
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

2 Corinthians 5:21
He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

1 Peter 2:24
And He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.

1 Peter 3:18
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit.

Isaiah 53 4-5
Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our gransgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed.

Isaiah 53:10-11
But the LORD was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief; if He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, and the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand. As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; by His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, as He will bear their iniquities.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LLOJ subscribes..........

Substitutionary atonement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Substitutionary atonement is a doctrine in Christian theology which states that Jesus of Nazareth died – intentionally and willingly – on the cross as a propitiation, or substitute, for sinners. This doctrine presents Jesus' death as a supreme act of love for mankind, in order to bring people into a relationship with God. It stresses the vicarious nature of the crucifixion as being "instead of us".

This vicarious and substitutionary nature of the atonement is expressed in Scripture verses such as "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness," (1 Pet. 2:24) and "For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God," (1 Peter 3:18).

 

[Stryder06]

Rejecting and denying the substitutionary atonement.

Nothing I've ever heard makes me more angry, upset, sad, or heartbroken than this.

It's the Gospel, the most basic of our faith. Through it we have salvation, there is no other way. I both grieve for, and am made angry by, all who claim Christ but deny the eternally costful method of salvation, bought with the blood of our precious Saviour whom we proclaim.

Really? Here I was thinking it was man trying to change the law of God and take the place of God on earth...go figure.

 

[angelmom01]

Propitiation = substitute?

Maybe I am missing the point or the intent here, but I don't see how Christ died as a "substitute" for sinners.

Propitiation (hil-as-mos') means "atonement". Christ "atoned" for our sins (which means "to make amends") but that doesn't mean that He died "instead" of us (as a "substitute").

Christ died "for" us in the sense that He has atoned for our sins and made amends between man and God, so that through Him we might have life from the dead.

But He did not die "for" us in the sense that He died "in our place" so that we do not die.

We are saved through death, not from death.

 

[Hammster]

Propitiation = substitute?



Maybe I am missing the point or the intent here, but I don't see how Christ died as a "substitute" for sinners.



Propitiation (hil-as-mos') means "atonement". Christ "atoned" for our sins (which means "to make amends") but that doesn't mean that He died "instead" of us (as a "substitute").



Christ died "for" us in the sense that He has atoned for our sins and made amends between man and God, so that through Him we might have life from the dead.



But He did not die "for" us in the sense that He died "in our place" so that we do not die.



We are saved through death, not from death.

In what way did He make amends?

 

[angelmom01]

In what way did He make amends?

I'm not sure what you are asking. He is the Mediator between God and man and by His death (and resurrection) reconciled men to God. He was "made sin" for us. He died (as it is appointed unto men) so that through His death and resurrection we might have life. By being planted into the likeness of His death we can also know the power of His resurrection.

In what way did He die "as a substitute" if we still die? He did not die so that we do not have to, but that we might be redeemed FROM death. Am I misunderstanding your question?

 

[Hammster]

I'm not sure what you are asking. He is the Mediator between God and man and by His death (and resurrection) reconciled men to God. He was "made sin" for us. He died (as it is appointed unto men) so that through His death and resurrection we might have life. By being planted into the likeness of His death we can also know the power of His resurrection.

In what way did He die "as a substitute" if we still die? He did not die so that we do not have to, but that we might be redeemed FROM death. Am I misunderstanding your question?

If there was separation between God and man due to sin, in what way did Jesus dying resolve that?

 

[tulc]

Decaff, definitely decaffeinated coffee.
tulc(just sayn')

 

[obsolete]

Rejecting and denying the substitutionary atonement.

Nothing I've ever heard makes me more angry, upset, sad, or heartbroken than this.

It's the Gospel, the most basic of our faith. Through it we have salvation, there is no other way. I both grieve for, and am made angry by, all who claim Christ but deny the eternally costful method of salvation, bought with the blood of our precious Saviour whom we proclaim.

The greatest heresay was setting Barrabis free.

 

[angelmom01]

If there was separation between God and man due to sin, in what way did Jesus dying resolve that?

By providing for the resurrection of the dead (death being the penalty for sin).

Now can you please tell me how "propitiation" = "substitute"?

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Proptiation for the elect in Christ.

Thankyou for listening.










Ooo a Calvinist slant eh?

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

The greatest heresay was setting Barrabis free.

So what are you saying here? What heresy does it involve?
Also, if Jesus was set free...umm, we'd be screwed....sorry but that's a fact.

 

[ebia]

Rejecting and denying the substitutionary atonement.

Not that subsitutionary atonement is necessarly wrong (it depends on exactly what one means by that phrase), but if you really see denying it as the greatest heresy (or even heresy at all) you've completely missed the point. We are saved by faith in Christ, not by faith in a model about how Christ's saving power works.

It's the Gospel,

No it's not; it's a model to explain part of how the Gospel works.

Through it we have salvation, there is no other way.

We have salvation through Christ's life, death and resurrection, not through one particular model of understanding how the death bit of that works.

I both grieve for, and am made angry by, all who claim Christ but deny the eternally costful method of salvation, bought with the blood of our precious Saviour whom we proclaim.

Someone who denies Subsitutionary Atonement is not denying Christ's death, nor the pain of that death, nor the effectiveness of that death. They are simply denying one particular way of understanding how all of that works.

 

[Hammster]

By providing for the resurrection of the dead (death being the penalty for sin).

Are you a universalist?

Now can you please tell me how "propitiation" = "substitute"?

It doesn't. However, by doing what we could not do (satisfy God's wrath) Jesus is our atonement by taking the wrath of God upon Himself. Therefore, He is our penal (bearing the penalty due us) substitutionary (in our place) atonement (making us one with God).

 

[angelmom01]

Are you a universalist?

Why? Do only Universalist believe that the penalty for sin is death?

It doesn't.

I didn't think so. So why all the questions just to agree with me that "propitiation" does not equal "substitution"?

However, by doing what we could not do (satisfy God's wrath) Jesus is our atonement by taking the wrath of God upon Himself.

Yes, he did what we cannot do but since when does the wrath of God abide only on Jesus and not on men?

Therefore, He is our penal (bearing the penalty due us) substitutionary (in our place) atonement (making us one with God).

The penalty for sin is death; since when have men not borne the penalty for sin? How did he bear the penalty due us when we still bear the penalty?

Christ did not die "instead of us". The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

He prepared a way OUT OF DEATH for us.

So, I am sorry, I am still not getting the "substitute" part of this equation. :o Neither can I find a single reference in scriptures for Christ being "a substitute" for sinners. Do you have one?

 

[Hammster]

5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Not that subsitutionary atonement is necessarly wrong (it depends on exactly what one means by that phrase), but if you really see denying it as the greatest heresy (or even heresy at all) you've completely missed the point. We are saved by faith in Christ, not by faith in a model about how Christ's saving power works.


No it's not; it's a model to explain part of how the Gospel works.


We have salvation through Christ's life, death and resurrection, not through one particular model of understanding how the death bit of that works.


Someone who denies Subsitutionary Atonement is not denying Christ's death, nor the pain of that death, nor the effectiveness of that death. They are simply denying one particular way of understanding how all of that works.

They are however denying the very simple and profound nature, and purpose of His death IMHO.

I see where the OP is coming from, but I don't get angry about it.

 

[obsolete]

So what are you saying here? What heresy does it involve?
Also, if Jesus was set free...umm, we'd be screwed....sorry but that's a fact.

The greatest compromise would be a better way to say that setting Barrabass free instead of Jesus was compromising intergrity. Just because it helped doesn't make it right. That just reinforces the need.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

The greatest compromise would be a better way to say that setting Barrabass free instead of Jesus was compromising intergrity. Just because it helped doesn't make it right. That just reinforces the need.

So can I assume you are posting right now from a "devil's advocate" type position?

It was right IMHO, because it was GOD's will.

 

[angelmom01]

5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Where do you find "substitute" in that verse?