What I believe about the Atonement

[reformed1689]

There are not dozens saying he is wrong.

Almost every lexicon I own disagrees with him and MANY commentaries disagree with him.

I am saying that the claim I must explain why I reject "punishment" when some have interpreted the word to mean punishment 6% of its usage in Scripture is not a good claim.

I believe the reason that you must give an explanation is because context dictates that it be punishment which is why translators use the word choice they do.

 

[reformed1689]

And I have explained that due to context it does not mean punishment.

Piercing, brusing, crushing, that's not learning and instruction.

 

[John Caldwell]

But we have explained it is due to the context of where it is found that gives you the definition of punishment.

And I do not believe your explanation is correct (just as you do not believe mine is correct).

 

[John Caldwell]

Piercing, brusing, crushing, that's not learning and instruction.

Look again at my explanation (and Scripture)

Hebrews 5:8-10
Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

Piercing, brusing and crushing is suffering, David.

 

[John Caldwell]

Almost every lexicon I own disagrees with him and MANY commentaries disagree with him.


I believe the reason that you must give an explanation is because context dictates that it be punishment which is why translators use the word choice they do.

Odd. None I own disagrees with him. It is interesting that some translate the word as "punish" but not all (I think the NASB more accurate). That said, I think we both know that this appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.

I have told you what I believe and why. You are more than welcome to dismiss my statements. That is not my responsibility.

I know what you believe. I believe your explanation is deficient. That is why I no longer hold the view.

I was trying to explain to you what I believe so that, while disagreeing, we could better understand one another. If you are interested then I will try to answer questions you may have about what I believe.

You do not have to constantly defend your view at every turn. Just sit back and try to understand what and why others view the passages differently.

 

[historyb]

Charity, "largely three-way conversation" and if you add "largely three-way, different denominations (Catholic,Baptist, etc) conversation", this would make even better since of why sometimes these debates on atonement, and other debates on the Christianity Boards, can cause much confusion to those like myself. I'm not a pastor lol. I get no edification either!

In my opinion, it would give more credibility to the poster and the responders if they stated, if not known in their profile, their denominational background! Then maybe their argument could be better understood. As for me I can tell you I'm not a Catholic. However, I was brought up in a Church Of Christ Church, but have since broke ways with the Church Of Christ because of the one doctrine they teach...baptism saves you. I totally disagree with that doctrine and it is not primary doctrine, but secondary doctrine IMHO. I now consider myself non-denominational.

Charity, I like your perspective, no alarms are going off in my spirit as of yet lol.

The Lord Jesus Christ ONLY, is Worthy of all our Praise and Worship!

I am of the Charismatic Episcopal Church, a Traditional Church

 

[Steve Owen]

Look again at my explanation (and Scripture)

Hebrews 5:8-10
Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

Piercing, brusing and crushing is suffering, David.

I did give my understanding of these verses on another thread, but it really is no good saying that Christ learned obedience as we might, since He was already obedient. I think you need to explain exactly what you understand by the term.
As I have also written before, punishment (or chastisement if you prefer) can be either remedial or retributive. I pointed out Amos 4:6-12, where remedial punishment unheeded leads to a final retributive punishment.

However, to move on, there are two aspects of the work of a High Priest. The first, as illustrated in Hebrews 4:14 - 5:11 deals with our Lord's work as an intercessor. The second, found in Hebrews 9:1 - 10:18, covers His sacrificial role. He alone has offered the one, perfect, acceptable sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 9:12-15), '......and for this reason He is the mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant that those who are called may receive the promise of eternal life,' and this leads into the wonderful promise of the new covenant in Hebrews 10:15-18. It is because Christ has paid for those sins, that there is now no longer any need for a sacrifice for sins (v.18). All this in sweet accord with Romans 3:23-26. Moreover, 'Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law' (Romans 3:31). The law is established, honoured, fulfilled by Christ suffering in the place of sinners, so that God can be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

 

[Steve Owen]

The verse does not speak of Christ learning obedience through childhood. It speaks of learning through suffering (and being perfected the same way). The context is in Hebrews 10 and concerns Christ's qualifications and identity as High Priest to intercede for us. Scholars typically explain this as Christ's office (High Priest, Messiah) being perfected (Christ was never not perfect). Likewise the "learning obedience" falls into this context (Christ was never disobedient). It signifies Christ being like us in all ways but without sin.

I hope that helps understand my position.

First of all, my apologies; I only just noticed your post. I am dipping in and out of the forum rather rapidly due to other priorities, and must have overlooked it.
When you say "the verse," I assume you mean Hebrews 5:8-9, but what do you mean by "The context is Hebrews 10"?
The Lord Jesus was obedient all through His ministry, even before His passion (John 5:30; Philippians 2:8), so to suggest that Isaiah 53:5 should be translated, 'The teaching for our peace was upon Him' seems to make no sense, especially in the context of so many other 'punishment' words that I have previously listed. Moreover we read that it is, 'By His stripes ['lashes,' 'cutting blows'] we are healed.' The text does not say that we are healed by His 'learning obedience.'

 

[John Caldwell]

First of all, my apologies; I only just noticed your post. I am dipping in and out of the forum rather rapidly due to other priorities, and must have overlooked it.
When you say "the verse," I assume you mean Hebrews 5:8-9, but what do you mean by "The context is Hebrews 10"?
The Lord Jesus was obedient all through His ministry, even before His passion (John 5:30; Philippians 2:8), so to suggest that Isaiah 53:5 should be translated, 'The teaching for our peace was upon Him' seems to make no sense, especially in the context of so many other 'punishment' words that I have previously listed. Moreover we read that it is, 'By His stripes ['lashes,' 'cutting blows'] we are healed.' The text does not say that we are healed by His 'learning obedience.'

That's fine. I also have been dropping in and out.

It is by Christ's stripes we are healed. I agree. But I believe this to be in the context of redemption (we were purchased not with silver or gold but with the precious blood of Christ).

 

[John Caldwell]

I did give my understanding of these verses on another thread, but it really is no good saying that Christ learned obedience as we might, since He was already obedient. I think you need to explain exactly what you understand by the term.
As I have also written before, punishment (or chastisement if you prefer) can be either remedial or retributive. I pointed out Amos 4:6-12, where remedial punishment unheeded leads to a final retributive punishment.

However, to move on, there are two aspects of the work of a High Priest. The first, as illustrated in Hebrews 4:14 - 5:11 deals with our Lord's work as an intercessor. The second, found in Hebrews 9:1 - 10:18, covers His sacrificial role. He alone has offered the one, perfect, acceptable sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 9:12-15), '......and for this reason He is the mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant that those who are called may receive the promise of eternal life,' and this leads into the wonderful promise of the new covenant in Hebrews 10:15-18. It is because Christ has paid for those sins, that there is now no longer any need for a sacrifice for sins (v.18). All this in sweet accord with Romans 3:23-26. Moreover, 'Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law' (Romans 3:31). The law is established, honoured, fulfilled by Christ suffering in the place of sinners, so that God can be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

I believe the law is that certificate against us which is nailed to the Cross and our redemption is the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law.

 

[reformed1689]

I believe the law is that certificate against us which is nailed to the Cross and our redemption is the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law.

What do you mean when you say "certificate against us"?

 

[John Caldwell]

What do you mean when you say "certificate against us"?

I mean the decrees that were against us.

 

[reformed1689]

I mean the decrees that were against us.

Can you be more specific?

 

[John Caldwell]

Can you be more specific?

David,

My brother thinks I'm stupid because I pay $35 a pair for my boxer briefs. The reason he thinks I am stupid is that he has never worn $35 boxer briefs because he thinks it is stupid.

I cannot think of a way I can be more specific than I have been. This "certificate" to which I am referring is the certificate of decrees that were against us. Christ nailed this to the cross and redemption has come not as a manifestation of the law but as a manifestation of God's righteousness apart from the law. Instead of punishing man's sins salvation necessitates that man be born again.

 

[reformed1689]

David,

My brother thinks I'm stupid because I pay $35 a pair for my boxer briefs. The reason he thinks I am stupid is that he has never worn $35 boxer briefs because he thinks it is stupid.

I cannot think of a way I can be more specific than I have been. This "certificate" to which I am referring is the certificate of decrees that were against us. Christ nailed this to the cross and redemption has come not as a manifestation of the law but as a manifestation of God's righteousness apart from the law. Instead of punishing man's sins salvation necessitates that man be born again.

What were the decrees. What decrees were nailed to the cross? That's the specificity I am looking for you to supply.

 

[John Caldwell]

What were the decrees. What decrees were nailed to the cross? That's the specificity I am looking for you to supply.

I do not understand your confusion here, David.

We are told that Christ has made us alive together with Christ by 1. canceling out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which were hostile to us and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross; and disarming the rulers and authorities, having triumphed over them through Him. This is the law that has bore witness (as have the prophets) of the redemption that is of the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law.

Essentially this is point to the elementary principles of the world (verse 8) and the vain philosophies that are in fact empty deception.

 

[reformed1689]

I do not understand your confusion here, David.

We are told that Christ has made us alive together with Christ by 1. canceling out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which were hostile to us and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross; and disarming the rulers and authorities, having triumphed over them through Him. This is the law that has bore witness (as have the prophets) of the redemption that is of the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law.

Essentially this is point to the elementary principles of the world (verse 8) and the vain philosophies that are in fact empty deception.

Ok, I don't know why you don't just answer. What was the debt? What was the decree against us? Why can you not specify this?

 

[John Caldwell]

Ok, I don't know why you don't just answer. What was the debt? What was the decree against us? Why can you not specify this?

I did answer. What about my answer do you not understand? There was no "debt", it was a "certificate of debt" (the law shows us our sin). This highlights, IMHO, the sinfulness of man and the rightful judgment that would come. There are two options - either we are judged guilty or we are made righteous.

Do you think that God is literally a lawyer sitting in heaven keeping holy ledgers?

 

[Enoch111]

Do you think that God is literally a lawyer sitting in heaven keeping holy ledgers?

What about God is the Judge keeping books in Heaven?
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

You have gone so far off the rails that you do not even understand Bible truth any more.

 

[John Caldwell]

What about God is the Judge keeping books in Heaven?
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

You have gone so far off the rails that you do not even understand Bible truth any more.

I do not believe that God is literally a man in heaven keeping literal books.

Scripture teaches us that God is Spirit. The only "man" that is God is Christ.

That said, I do believe that Scripture communicates divine things in a way we can understand (without having to add our myths).

You need to repent and turn to Scripture, Enoch.

Your idea that God is a literal man in the sky holding literal books with his feet literally resting on the Earth is heresy. I think it may stem from a lack of biblical literacy. You simply do not understand spiritual things.