Penal Substitution is NOT a “Theory”

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
...how did I know that you might say something to that effect (your handle)?
No, I find it way too rigid, and lacking a great deal of insight as to what the Scriptures are actually attempting to convey.
In other words, I can appreciate the proof-text that a Reformer will use to establish the basis for their doctrines, but I find that they lack the ability to harmonize those with the undeniable and prevalent counter-text.
I perceive Reformed doctrine to be derived from, not a radical, but a rather shallow, comprehension of Scripture.
It fails to grasp the paradox of its wisdom.
Name one
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Sorry, when I said name one I thought you would show how it is contrary to Scripture, etc, etc,....
No, on the contrary, my point was that I can entirely appreciate the Reformed stance on several doctrines. That is, I am fully aware of the Scriptures that support their position, both their explicit nature and their abundance. And on that basis alone, I would totally agree with them.
I just feel that there is also a substantial amount of texts that conflict with the Reformed conclusion, and therefore, I feel that they've failed to integrate, and harmonize these two perceived dichotomies, into a unified and balanced doctrine.
So, I don't regard the Reformed views necessarily as radical or absurd, but just not comprehensive and insightful enough.

No one asks a lame man to run a race and win, especially at the pain of death. And yet there were about 20 capital crimes in the Mosaic Law, God wiped-out countless peoples and races due to their wicked behaviour, and the over-arching principle throughout the entirety of Scripture, is 'be Holy, as I am Holy'. No one requests or demands this from a being incapable of being Holy, let alone righteous or able to choose good.
 
Last edited:

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, on the contrary, my point was that I can entirely appreciate the Reformed stance on several doctrines. That is, I am fully aware of the Scriptures that support their position, both their explicit nature and their abundance. And on that basis alone, I would totally agree with them.
I just feel that there is also a substantial amount of texts that conflict with the Reformed conclusion, and therefore, I feel that they've failed to integrate, and harmonize these two perceived dichotomies, into a unified and balanced doctrine.
So, I don't regard the Reformed views necessarily as radical or absurd, but just not comprehensive and insightful enough.

No one asks a lame man to run a race and win, especially at the pain of death. And yet there were about 20 capital crimes in the Mosaic Law, God wiped-out countless peoples and races due to their wicked behaviour, and the over-arching principle throughout the entirety of Scripture, is 'be Holy, as I am Holy'. No one requests or demands this from a being incapable of being Holy, let alone righteous or able to choose good.
Yeah, I still don't see your point.
 

Steve Owen

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
385
267
63
72
Exmouth UK
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
I just feel that there is also a substantial amount of texts that conflict with the Reformed conclusion, and therefore, I feel that they've failed to integrate, and harmonize these two perceived dichotomies, into a unified and balanced doctrine
I think that anyone who makes this sort of broad-brush statement should accompany with one or more examples.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I think that anyone who makes this sort of broad-brush statement should accompany with one or more examples.
It was in retort to the other's poster's broad-brush statement, who claimed that Reformed theology was synonymous with Biblical doctrine. It was sufficient at the time, just to challenge his assertion.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
My point is you have yet to show how any of that is contrary to Scripture. You just assert that it is.
Wasn't this a brief attempt?

No one asks a lame man to run a race and win, especially at the pain of death. And yet there were about 20 capital crimes in the Mosaic Law, God wiped-out countless peoples and races due to their wicked behaviour, and the over-arching principle throughout the entirety of Scripture, is 'be Holy, as I am Holy'. No one requests or demands this from a being incapable of being Holy, let alone righteous or able to choose good.
 

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wasn't this a brief attempt?

No one asks a lame man to run a race and win, especially at the pain of death. And yet there were about 20 capital crimes in the Mosaic Law, God wiped-out countless peoples and races due to their wicked behaviour, and the over-arching principle throughout the entirety of Scripture, is 'be Holy, as I am Holy'. No one requests or demands this from a being incapable of being Holy, let alone righteous or able to choose good.
That was an attempt at human philosphy, not biblical exegesis.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Did you take phrases out of context? Of course!
Well, call me naive, but I was expecting a much better attempt at exegesis than what you have offered. Even back to our previous discussion, I keep presenting a argument with a few points, and you keep retorting with a single line, nothing more. No proof or exposition, just a contentious remark.
 

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, call me naive, but I was expecting a much better attempt at exegesis than what you have offered. Even back to our previous discussion, I keep presenting a argument with a few points, and you keep retorting with a single line, nothing more. No proof or exposition, just a contentious remark.
Because your arguments are nonsense. You don't follow exegetical rules yet tout that you do.

And there was nothing given to me to exegete so there is that as well.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Because your arguments are nonsense. You don't follow exegetical rules yet tout that you do. And there was nothing given to me to exegete so there is that as well.
Well, that's fine, I absolutely give up...
...but, just for the record, out of our last 10+- posts, I practically wrote a chapter, you barely wrote a paragraph (there was a lot for you to address, and counter-argue).
You are beyond difficult, and in denial!
 

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, that's fine, I absolutely give up...
...but, just for the record, out of our last 10+- posts, I practically wrote a chapter, you barely wrote a paragraph (there was a lot for you to address, and counter-argue).
You are beyond difficult, and in denial!
No, you just haven't given anything of actual substance. Just conjecture. Not once have you showed an actual contradiction. Just asserted there is one.
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
No, you just haven't given anything of actual substance. Just conjecture. Not once have you showed an actual contradiction. Just asserted there is one.
ok, fine, I don't entirely agree, but maybe on another occasion we can have a more dedicated discussion on this, if the interest is still there...?