You are a precious sister in Christ. You love our Lord, and that is guiding you away from traditional strongholds. I am so encouraged by your ability to see the truth apart from man's preconceived ideas and doctrines. Some time if you ever have time please look at my series refuting PSA on RU-Noble CZcams called Atonement Theories Only. After Warren did his 17 part series I studied PSA daily for nearly 3 years. I had to walk away from it. The incredible thing is as a church planter in Eastern Europe for 12 years I literally put it in every gospel presentation I ever gave! As I said before, you are a special voice of reasoning and discernment the Lord has blessed His people with. May He continue to open the eyes of your heart more and more in your understanding of just how loving He is. I mentioned my video series on PSA simply because I came to many of the same conclusions you did and dropping PSA allowed me to see the Love of the Father for the first time in over 30 years of walking with Him.
Thank you Alana. The atonement is something I recently have been led to study deeply for the first time, too. My first thought was, if Jesus took our punishment for sin, why do all of us still suffer punishment for our sins? We still experience all the curses God gave Adam. So I agree with you, the punishment we avoid is the second death, which is God's wrath. Here's a few of my other thoughts inspired by Scripture. I remember from my youth, the Roman Catholics (wrong on just about everything), used the right word you believe also - expiation, not propiation. An expiation doesn't require the person paying the debt to be the guilty party, they can be innocent in the matter. In an expiation, the debt isn't just canceled, it isn't even recorded in the first place - as if it was never owed. That's how thoroughly Jesus’ death has set a Believer free from any condemnation of sin (past, present and future). Jesus’ death also bought back the deed to the earth. God gave Adam, male and female, dominion over the whole earth, but their sin of obeying the evil one, instead of God, resulted in earth's dominion being handed over to Satan. The deed to earth is the scroll with the seven seals no man could open in Rev 5:7 - except the slain Lamb. When the final seal is opened, the earth will be released from its corruption and God will return it to its former glory for His resurrected, immortal children in Christ to enjoy forever. (There's more to it - it was a fulfillment of a Hebrew law, that stated when a Jew owed a debt and his land deed was being held by the one owed, the closest relative with the means to pay the debt must be offered a chance to buy it first, before the land could be sold to a stranger to pay off the debt. Jesus' flesh ancestry goes back to Adam. He's the closest relative to him who was able to pay his sin debt). I believe Christ's flesh was the same as ours, mortal. When in the days of His flesh He wasn't being God, but heing human (He WAS with God, and He WAS God, John 1, but humbled Himself to live only in the flesh for 33 years). And it's appointed to every man to die once. He had to die for His body to be resurrected immortal. This is how Jesus is the eternal Father (Isaiah 53) of the redeemed human race; the first Adam is the father of the fallen human race. While you're studying, I encourage you to keep an eye out to find a passage in Scripture that requires one to believe in a Trinity to receive eternal life. May God Bless you in your walk; you do bless me.
Thank you for making this video Alana! It comes at a good time for me as I very much relate to what you were saying in the beginning about your coming out of Calvinism. As I have come away from and now reject the tenets of the Calvinistic system, I have begun to rethink and question so many other things, the atonement is one of them. I too am being careful with my language and I am analyzing every song we sing in church (I am still in a Calvinist leaning church with a very reformed pastor who is a big PSA defender). It’s funny you mentioned How Deep the Father’s Love for Us..:we just sang that recently and because I think I don’t agree with PSA now, I didn’t want to sing that line about the Father turning his face away. I really love how you walked through each Scripture and reviewed what each says. It was so helpful! I also wanted to say that it upsets me when PSA is made out to be the Gospel. I read an article one time from a well known para church org disparaging The Bible Project because their sacrifice and atonement video as well as their Romans videos do not talk about the wrath of God being satisfied and our sins being paid for. Because they see that as central to the Gospel, they cast suspicion on Tim Mackie and the Bible Project. But TBP’s video on sacrifice and atonement focuses on all the things you talked about and uses the Biblical language. So for them and many others, if a Biblical scholar doesn’t hold to PSA, they are borderline heretical. Ugh. I also appreciate your nuance and flexibility in saying that there are multiple theories and the Scripture speaks to many aspects of them. God bless. ❤
Why am I not surprised that you would cover PST? ❤ I love it. We are kindred spirits, sister. I too see Biblical Christianity in opposition to Calvinistic Theology and my dad and I have recently been hashing out Christus Victor and Penal Substitution. I find that William Lane Craig holds the best arguement in favor of PST and yet I also have to reject the wrath element of it and absolutely see solid Biblical evidence for Christus Victor and the fact that Jesus is the fulfillment of all righteousness, that through Him was the death of death and that He ultimately defeated evil on the cross. Through Him, we can live a victorious Christian life. I too will have a series on Calvinism on my channel soon, Lord willing, and am considering discussing PST as well. I so appreciate your desire for truth and desire to understand Scripture coherently for what it says as a whole. ❤
Lol... I am laughing because I do the same thing with old hymns and songs.... One of the first ones that got me thinking when leaving Calvinism was Silent Night. How many times have I sang that song and not really paid attention to the part that says "no crying He made" . Why would someone think Jesus didn't cry? Oh, that is right, a crying baby is a selfish sinful baby in Calvinism....... Oh boy..... It makes so much more sense that God does exactly what He expects and teaches us to do. Simply forgive. He forgives, restores, heals..... "By His stripes we are healed"
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.” Leviticus 17:11. Like you said, it’s true because God says it’s so!
The context of Lev. 17:11 is saying that the reason blood should not be eaten as food is because blood is used as a covering on the altar, a covering for their lives. This does not say anything about blood being a payment for sin, nor that God needs blood to forgive. It is not giving instructions about sin sacrifices. The reason to not eat blood is that blood represents life, not as an exchange of life-for-life, rather it symbolizes the life of the offeror. Furthermore, the verse does not state that blood is the only thing acceptable for atonement. In the case of sin offerings, flour was also acceptable (Leviticus 5:11-12). It is a mistake to use Leviticus 17:11 out of context to promote a doctrine that is not really there.
Hi Alana, I think it was interesting you brought up Mike Winger and his video on PSA. I too reacted to his view that it's dangerous to deny PSA and that might mean you are not even saved. I don't believe doctrines save you, but faith in Christ does. My opinion is you only need to believe the very basics, Christ died for our sins and was resurrected for our salvation. However it might be helpful to hold to some more detailed doctrines of the atonement. I believe Christ on the cross took on himself what sin deserves, the consequence of sin, death. He paid the price for sin so to speak, conquered sin for us. Make of it what you like. Christ love! ✝️
Thanks again, Alana ❤ I have recently come to find that theologists too quickly state with absolute certainty ideas that cannot be known with that kind of conviction since they are not spelled out specifically in the Word. Particularly, how Adam sinning affected all future humanity.
Good news… your so right!!! I don’t think the thief on the cross didn’t understand the inner workings of the spirit world, he just believed Jesus was the way and believed
Alana.. wow... this was a fantastic study... thank you for doing it. "Possibility Space" is a very good place to keep things we aren't 100% sure about and we can meditate on and consider them as we grow and change. I agree with your conclusions. I think there are serious problems with PSA and you pin-pointed a major one around minute 59:00 with the "wrath" issue... saying God pour out all His wrath on Jesus sounds like "Universalism" but I digress.
The Bible uses words like "propitiation," "ransom," and "atonement" to describe the death of Christ. These terms all have their roots in the Old Testament sacrificial system, especially the Day of Atonement. Isa. 53:4-6 specifically says that "Surely our griefs He Himself bore, / And our sorrows He carried; . . . But He was pierced throughfor our transgressions, / He was crushed for our iniquities; / The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, / And by His scourging we are healed. / All of us like sheep have gone astray, / Each of us has turned to his own way; / But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all / To fall on Him." (You should especially hear Handel's musical rendition of this last verse in Messiah). Paul begins his comprehensive explanation of the gospel in Romans by stating "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (1:18) and then proceeds to lay out the scope of human depravity in the next two chapters. This lays the backdrop for his statement in 3:25,26 that Christ was "displayed publicly as a propitiation in HIs blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over 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." God is just; He must punish sin. Christ took our penalty for us. The Epistle to the Hebrews goes into an extensive discussion of the priestly work of Christ, stating in 9:22 "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness," and Christ was "offered once to bear the sins of many" (v. 28). The author goes on in 10:1-18 to describe how Christ was the perfect offering for sin. It's a little hard to see how one can escape the conclusion of Penal Satisfaction view of the Atonement.
Alana, I highly recommend Dallas Willard's talks on CZcams. He has one titled The Cross of Christ and tje Atonement, and another called Spiritual Formation as a Natural part of Salvation. I ALSO LOVE HIS series on CZcams Knowing Christ Today. And his The divine conspiracy talks. His books are wpnderful, but listening to him on youtube has been balm to my soul the past 7 years.
I would offer that we see PSA most clearly illustrated in Isaiah 53: "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. . . Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand." (Isa. 53:5,10). The wording here seems clear that our sins are placed upon Jesus and the Father's wrath is upon him on account of these sins. When we consider also that Jesus is the "lamb of God" and we consider that in the Old Testament sacrificial system the sins of the people were transferred to the offered animal, and the animal was then sacrificed on account of those sins, it seems difficult to arrive at any conclusion other than that Jesus took our sins upon him and died on account of those sins, in our place.
I think if you go back to read the OT passages for yourself, you will see that you are confusing two separate rituals. Sins were laid on the scapegoat but it was not killed. It was chased away. The yearly sacrifice of atonement involved the priest's and the people's sins being cleansed by being sprinkled with the blood of an innocent animal. In neither case were animals "punished".
@@mrgrossism I am simply referring to the sacrificial system in its totality. The animals took on the guilt of the people and were killed in the place of the sinner. (Or in the case of the scapegoat, sent off to die.)
@@sorenpx Can I ask where you are getting your information? Is it coming directly from the Bible? What I see in Leviticus is that when it came to sacrifices, "taking on the guilt of the people" and "killed in the place of the sinner" are two separate things. Most of the offerings for cleansing and atonement involved a sinner laying his hands on the animal, signifying this animal was taking his place in death. The scapegoat, though, was different. The high priest (originally Aaron) would "lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites - all their sins - and put them on the goat's head." (Leviticus 16:21) This is the only time you will see this kind of language used about laying the sins of the people on an animal. THIS goat was taken out into the desert and released, taking those sins far away from the Israelites. It was not killed.
@@mrgrossism If I remember correctly, from Leon Morris's "The Atonement," the scapegoat was not expected to live. And I believe he also said that the scapegoat was sometimes forced off the side of a cliff to its death. In any case, if the animals were not being sacrificed in the place of the sinner--which carries with it the notion of the animals taking on the guilt of the sinner--why were they sacrificed?
@@sorenpx The animals except for the scapegoat WERE being sacrificed in the place of the sinner, but to say that that necessarily "carries with it the notion of the animals taking on the guilt of the sinner" is a presupposition planted by the proponents of PSA. It's not there in the text, is what I am saying. One could imagine other ways the sacrifice could function - for instance, if I must kill this innocent lamb with my own hands, then I am being reminded of the gravity of my sins and the reality of the death which sin brings. Also, Leviticus has a lot to say about the blood and how the animals' blood is spread and where because "the life is in the blood". It is God's provision, pouring out its blood so that I do not have to pour out mine - why does there have to be an element of it carrying my sins?
Alana I really appreciate you as a sister, I can tell you I was never taught Calvinism, Penal substitution was shown to through scripture. I came from Roman Catholism, God showed me the truth through his word not some man made teaching ,that Jesus paid our sin debt. Blessings!
I have loved your channel and been watching for a long time ❤ I came across the word Redeem in Exodus 13:13 the other day. I thought it was odd because i never remembered reading it in the OT before. So i looked up the definition of redeem. It is very interesting... The whole system of the law was payment for sin. Isaiah 53 says it so beautifully. The whole chapter... It pleased the Lord to bruise Him... Gods punishment because of sin was upon us and had to be redeemed but Gods mercy and kindness and love has always been present, always. Because we were His creation and His children. He always gave us a way out. I dont think that means He is an angry God that only wants vengeance. (Look at Cains mark and the story of Abraham standing with the Lord and talked him down to 10 in reference to Sodom and Gemorrah. He has always been a very personal God. But sin had to be dealt with. The wrath in Revelations is upon unbelievers who are still denying Christ. We are not under His punishment because we have Christ. They are because they will still deny. Rev 16. He was still giving them a way out but they were choosing to blaspheme and not repent.
Isaiah 53 has multiple translation biases to favor PSA. Also, a literal ransom and redemption payment results in absurdities if carefully thought through. For example, consider “redeemed us from the curse” (Gal. 3:13), “redeem those under the law” (Gal. 4:5), “redeem us from all lawlessness” (Titus 2:14), and “redeemed from the empty way of life” (1 Peter 1:18). None of these statements involve a transfer of a payment from one party to another. They are all figuratively picturing a release. Jesus did not make a literal transaction with anyone. Jesus redeemed us (set us free) from the addiction and bondage of sin so we would be the servants of God and display God’s righteousness. For this reason, God is just and righteous in passing over our former sins (Romans 3:25). Psalm 74:2 is a good example of both “purchase” and “redeem” being used as metaphors: “Remember Your congregation, which You have purchased of old, which You have redeemed to be the tribe of Your inheritance; and this Mount Zion, where You have dwelt.” The point here is that Israel belongs to God because God is the one who directly intervened to do what was needed to liberate Israel from bondage. In Psalm 74:2, the psalmist is praying and requesting God to remember that Israel belongs to Him because it was He who set them free from their bondage. A similar verse is Exodus 15:13, part of the song of Moses immediately after the Red Sea crossing: “You have led in your steadfast love the people whom you have redeemed; you have guided them by your strength to your holy abode." Again, the word “redeemed” is being used to show freedom, liberty, or release, not a payment. Moses himself is said to be the redeemer in Acts 7:35 “This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’-this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush.” Moses was their liberator as God’s agent. The use of “redeem” as a metaphor should be obvious, as it is frequently understood with the meaning “to liberate, to free”, and not to pay. The blood of Christ is mighty precious because it is the basis of our covenant with Christ and our loyalty to him. In contrast, if blood is reduced to a mere substance for bartering with God, then it cheapens both the blood and the holiness of God. The atonement is primarily relational, not legal.
Honesty is so important. When we read the Bible and find something not spelled out - and, folks, even the Trinity is not spelled out the way we are taught it is so important to understand it - it’s okay to speak in Biblical terms and just leave it at that, not rejecting people for having a different understanding. We can continue talking patiently with one another - because maybe there is something important we can bring to each other. If so, it will be a service, not an imprisonment. There are things clearly spelled out in the Bible which get very little attention.
Alana been on a similar journey myself,I realised a few years ago after being a Christian for 30 years that I knew nothing about the atonement except psa,I began to read about scapegoat,Christ's Victor ,ransom being paid to death to deliver us from a cruel master.Sometimes when you've been a Calvanist you have some much fear of not reading scripture with Calvanist specs on.So much mystery .Oh the depths of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God.Whos ways are unsearchable AND PAST FINDING Out!!! ROMANS.Thanks for your humility.
One of the ways I've heard and been leaning towards in regards to understanding our atonement is that it was *our conscience* that needed to be appeased with death/blood. This theory would help to make sense of these Scriptures: Hebrews 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Hebrews 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. As for those who hold to PSA, I have heard them use Tetelestai as "proof". They say that Jesus saying "It is finished" (Tetelestai) is a Greek word denoting "Paid in Full". When I decided to actually research this I found that Jesus was actually using the same word just a couple verses earlier to say that He "accomplished" all the the law/prophets had written for Him to fulfill. John 19:28-30 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now *accomplished*, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is *finished*: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. There is no verse that says God is so Holy that He *can’t* look at sin. How can this be true and it still be true that He is omniscient? It was the wrath of *man* that Jesus experienced in His beating & death. You were wondering why you wrote 1 Peter 2:24. It might have been because it talks about Jesus trusting God the Father to “judge righteously”. If the Father poured out His wrath on Jesus that would be unjust as Jesus had no sin. Thanks for posting. It did feel like we were doing Bible study together. Keep 'em coming!
Did God need a whipping boy to vent his frustration out on, punishing someone else for another’s crime Or Did God so “ LOVE “ the world that he sent his only begotten son Because God loves us and wants us reconciled to himself God wants us to follow Him and not the god of this world Could it be that simple, the cross was a mercy seat of love for fallen humans A previous unattainable position that is now a “ FREE GIFT “
20 min in… wonderful discussion. You may be interested in the book “The “Gospel” of Divine Abuse” by Eitan Bar. He’s a Jewish scholar and makes some for he same observations you’ve pointed out.
Interesting things to ponder. I'm not a Calvinist, but in this particular question of "Did The Father turn His face on Christ on the cross?" it does make one ask, was Jesus quoting Psalm 22, or was Psalm 22 quoting Jesus? The Jews at the time didn't understand what He was saying or doing, because it was recorded that they thought He was calling out to Elijah when He said "Eli Eli". In any event, if The Father did indeed turn His face, then we can still be assured that He will not turn His face on us. For Christ bore the punishment for our sins, not us. So, if part of the punishment for sins is The Father turning His face from the sin-bearer, Christ bore that for us, so we would never have to. I like what you said about there is a freedom of interpretation here. There certainly is, and many of our Calvinist brothers and sisters are very uncomfortable with that for sure.
When Jesus cried from the cross, he was yelling to those witnessing this historical event, Psalm 22, Psalm 22 Psalm 22 is being fulfilled before your very eyes, It confirms that “ IAM” I confirm and fulfil this prophecy It was a much needed reminder to all who witnessed Jesus and his ministry that all was going to Gods plan and God indeed is in control of a seemingly tragic set of events.
One of my hesitations with Ransom Theory is that it seems to place God and Satan on the same level since the ransom is being paid to Satan. Maybe I don't understand the whole process correctly. How I have always understood the Cross is this; God is perfect in justice and he is also perfect in his love. The only way for sin to be reconcilled is for God's Son (the perfect lamb) to pay the price/wage.
That’s why I don’t want a title. I agree about Satan not being the one God pays a ransom to:) What wage does sin need paid? Where do you see that in scripture?
*He made a pit* and digged it, and is fallen into the ditch which he [satan / the scapegoat] made. His mischief *shall return upon his own head* and his violent dealing shall come down upon his own pate. {Psalm 7:15-16}
@@lilyanaalvarez3539 “The wages of sin is death" must be read in context. Romans 6:22-23 "But NOW that you have been SET FREE FROM SIN and have become slaves of God, the FRUIT you get LEADS to sanctification and ITS END, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." When read together, the consequence ("the fruit") of being "set free from sin" is eternal life, and the wages, the consequence of sin, is death. These two results are being contrasted. The phrase "the wages of sin is death" is not a transactional statement of how to pay for sin. Wages are a metaphor for consequences, not a method of payment. Nevertheless, this one phrase is a keystone of the Penal Substitutionary Atonement doctrine, as if it is intended to state that the event of Jesus' death was the means of how the sins of humanity were paid. This proof-texting of a phrase to use as a basis for defending the PSA theory is a sad display of sloppy scholarship (just an observation - I used to use it wrong too).
I recently looked into this as well... and watched Idol Killer's series on PSA (which was decent, though I didn't agree 100%). I came to a similar conclusion that PSA (and it's 17 points from Augustine, Anselment, and a council) are pretty bogus, but psa (the concept of penal substitutionary atonement, not the official church doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement) actually has some merit. Every alternative to PSA (including psa) has Jesus dying for our sin. Death is the PENALTY for sin. You have it exactly right when you say DEATH (not sin or the Devil) is who the ransom is being paid. Death is the enemy. Death is the "bandit" or "intruder" who has taken man hostage. The ransom is not paid to Satan, but to death. In Rom 5, death is what spread to all men... not sin or guilt. Death reigns, not sin. In Heb 2:15 we see Death (not sin or guilt) is the cause of the sin nature (our slavery to sin). Death is the penalty God imposed for sin - the P in PSA. God DECLARED death upon the world when He said "for dust you are and to dust you will return." That declaration imposed death upon a creation created without death. That death was the enemy... that death was the invader... the intrusion. You should read Leviticus 16 to understand "atonement." Lev 16:20-22 NASB20 - 20 "When he finishes atoning for the Holy Place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall offer the live goat. 21 "Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the wrongdoings of the sons of Israel and all their unlawful acts regarding all their sins; and he shall place them on the head of the goat and send [it] away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who [stands] ready. 22 "Then the goat shall carry on itself all their wrongdoings to an isolated territory; he shall release the goat in the wilderness. Notice this is a corporate transference of the sin of all the people to the goat. The goat is then sent into the wilderness and bears away the sin of the people to the wilderness... the goat is SEPARATED from the congregation of God. That is a foreshadow of Christ. Phl 2:5-11 NASB95 - 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, [and] being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Regarding Death -- it will be ABOLISHED. Death was a UNIVERSAL judgment for Adam's single transgression. Rom 5:16-18 NASB95 - 16 The gift is not like [that which came] through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment [arose] from one [transgression] resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift [arose] from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. 18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. Notice a UNIVERSAL, CORPORATE judgment in Adam. For a single transgression, Adam, Eve, their children, the animals, the plants, the ground of the whole earth were all judged with death. Therefore, there will also be a universal, corporate resurrection from that death when that death is abolished... because Adam's JUDGMENT is abolished. 1Co 15:22, 26 NASB95 - 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. ... 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 2Ti 1:10 NASB95 - 10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, So Adam's death judgment isn't "forgiven" or "atoned for" but rather, it is ABOLISHED or canceled... vacated. In its place, we will instead have INDIVIDUAL judgments. Notice Rom 5:16 above -- the free gift arose from MANY TRANSGRESSIONS, not the single transgression. That means Christ's atonement will be applied INDIVDUALLY, not CORPORATELY. Therefore, atonement is not for Adam's universal, corporate judgment, but for each of our individual judgments. There is an individual judgment in the Great White Throne judgment. Rev 20:11-15 NASB95 - 11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one [of them] according to their deeds. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. Unlike Adam's judgment which was corporate and universal, the GWTJ is individual - each one according to their deeds. Therefore, Romans 5:16 is contrasting Adam's death judgment with the GWTJ. According to 2Ti 1:10 above, (Adam's) death is abolished by Christ's APPEARING. When there are none who are righteous, not even one, a universal corporate judgment is JUST. But as soon as a single righteous person appears, that makes the universal, corporate judgment UNJUST and it has to be repealed, vacated, or ABOLISHED and in its place we will have individual judgments. Acts 24:15 having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. John 5:28 “Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. Revelation 21:8 “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” Daniel 12:1 Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued. 2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. When Adam's universal, corporate judgment is ABOLISHED, it results in a universal, corporate resurrection of everyone (and perhaps even every animal) who died under that judgment. However, this is not Universalism because the timing of that resurrection is PRIOR to the GWTJ, therefore, while there will be universal resurrection of the righteous and the wicked, there will not be universal salvation. As such, you need a mechanism for a universal resurrection that is separate from the mechanism for salvation. Christ's RIGHTEOUSNESS appearing on the earth is the mechanism for the resurrection, and Christ's ATONEMENT (which is the application of Christ's righteousness to all who believe) is the mechanism for salvation. Once you solve the problem of Adam's judgment, you then have the problem of each individual's own judgment.
thank you for doing this. I have been exploring this as well and definitely believe there are multiple atonement theories going on in the Bible. Christus victor, moral exemplar, ransom… but I think PSA is at odds with Scripture in addition to the double jeapardy issue. Proverbs 6:16-19, 17:15,26
Here is a partial list of Penal Substitutionary Atonement problems: 5. Basic logic tells us that a complete payment cancels forgiveness. You cannot forgive a debt that has already been paid, and you do not need to pay a debt that has been forgiven. Forgiveness is granted because a debt has NOT been paid, not after the payment has been made! 6. Forgiveness that can be bought or sold is not true forgiveness. If you think that you or a third party can purchase genuine forgiveness, you do not understand forgiveness! 7. We humans are able to forgive others when they sin against us. To claim that God cannot do a good thing that we can do is to make us more moral than God. 8. PSA’s "infinite justice” claim has God incapable of truly forgiving us without first getting a proxy payment by murder and blood. How can that be genuine forgiveness? 9. If someone says, “I forgive you,” you assume it is done right then, not secretly projecting it into a nebulous future when a payment will eventually be made by someone else. Secretly projecting the act of forgiving into the distant future would be considered deceptive. God is not a deceiver for forgiving people before Christ died. 10. God said many times that He would forgive, and He forgave (past tense), long before Jesus was born. Many texts could be listed. The following are just a few of these: “If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin.” 2 Chronicles 7:14 “I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin.” Psalm 32:5 “You forgave the iniquity of your people; you covered all their sin.” Psalm 85:2 “LORD our God, you answered them; you were to Israel a forgiving God, though you punished their misdeeds.” Psalm 99:8 NIV “Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity and passing over transgression for the remnant of his inheritance? He does not retain his anger forever, because he delights in steadfast love.” Micah 7:18 “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” Isaiah 55:7 11. Jesus did not seem to think that he was going to make a payment to God for the sins of humanity. Even while on the cross He did not speak as if he was making a payment when he said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Lk 23:34). Jesus did not say, “Father, wait until I am finished paying for their sins, then you can forgive them.” 12. Every example of forgiveness we have from Jesus shows forgiveness in the normal human sense, not in some unheard-of future forgiveness, transfer, imputation, payment, or third-party justice. “And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors...for if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses...” Matthew 6:12, 14-15 “And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.” Mark 11:25 (See also Matthew 9:2-8, 18:21-35, Luke 5:20, 6:37, 7:47-48, 11:4, 15:11-32.) 13. A literal payment requires a literal transfer and a literal recipient of that payment. How can a death (an action, not a substance) be a literal payment? Who collected this payment? 14. If God has been paid in full for our sins, then why does He still demand that we stop sinning and live right, and even have wrath and threaten judgment for disobedience? If Jesus paid it all, God got what He wanted. 15. Would not a payment for sin be a type of indulgence payment, a bribe to ignore sin and to issue a pardon? A blood sacrifice as a payment to a god is a pagan idea, which is why God ordered the Old Testament people many times to stop their sacrifices - they began treating sacrifices as if they were indulgences, and that stinks to God. Ps. 40:6, 51:16, Jer. 6:20, Is. 1:11-18, 1 Samuel 15:22, Hosea 6:6, Micah 6:6-8, Amos 5:22. (The God of the Bible is relational, and sacrifices were supposed to be a token of this relationship, not a payment to get Him to change.) For more on this topic, see the book “Atonement and Reconciliation”
“having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” “He was pierced through for our transgressions”
24:40 I really liked THIS point, IMO, it is the foundation for the believer and where we can confidently stake our claim to salvation... our belief in Christ's death for our sin and concurring death in his resurrection which promises new life to whosoever will believe in him. There are many subjects in scripture which people have 'split the sheets' over. Every denomination represents at least one. But those which bring into question another believers salvation have lost sight of who and why Jesus saves. We tend to argue over whose dirt is "dirtier", and its usually the other guy's😎 .. To God it's all just dirt, when he looks at a believer he just sees Jesus. In Calvinism, God's promises can only apply to the mysterious 'elect', (as they define them). Promises of God certainly cannot apply to the eternally damned reprobate.🤷🏻♂ THIS is a problem for those embracing TULP. It's categorically impossible to know for certain 'who' is elect. No one is guaranteed the "Gift of Perseverance". They don't think about it often, but the doctrine denies anyone the ability to believe any of the promises of God apply to them...personally,,, for sure. It offers no assurance to any believer they are truly loved by God and not just experiencing an episode of 'Evanescent Grace'. Satan loves that about Calvinism.
Hi Alana- around minute 18 you mentioned death as eternal separation from God. Maybe a follow up video/study could be an examination of that idea. Does the Bible make this the essential picture of death or is that a figurative and secondary image that has taken on a primary significance in some interpretations?
For the wages of sin is death; (not hell;) but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. {Romans 6:23} Turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha *into ashes* condemned them with an overthrow, making them *an ensample* unto those that after should live ungodly; {2 Peter 2:6} Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are *set forth for an example* suffering the vengeance of *eternal fire* {Jude 1:7} (Sodom is not still burning, so it is not the fire / punishment that is eternal, but rather the consequences thereof.) And ye [the saints] shall tread down the wicked; for *they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet* in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts. {Malachi 4:3} Thou [satan] hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and *I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth* in the sight of all them that behold thee. All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more. {Ezekiel 28:18-19} Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such *the second death* hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. {Revelation 20:6} And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. *This is the second death* And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. {Revelation 20:14-15} O death, where is thy sting? O grave, [hell] where is thy victory? {1 Corinthians 15:55} What do you imagine against the LORD? He will make an utter end: affliction shall not rise up the second time. {Nahum 1:9} Immortality is conditional. Shall *mortal man* be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker? {Job 14:7} Let not sin therefore reign in *your mortal body* that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. {Romans 6:12} For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest *in our mortal flesh* {2 Corinthians 4:11} But *if* the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken *your mortal bodies* by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. {Romans 8:11} For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and *this mortal* must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and *this mortal* shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. {1 Corinthians 15:53-54}
How deep the father’s love for us is…. ya if ya elected/ chosen… B/4 you were ever born…aka ..” B/4 the foundation of the world…” fact is…” SOVEREIGNTY…. Is not….DETERMINISM….” & the Sovereignty… of God is not threatened by giving us free will…. helloooooo…..❤
I like the "Christ the Victor" view. I know I still don't get it all the way, but something that helped me a little was to attempt to define 'God's Wrath'. What does it mean that God has wrath? I know it would not look like human wrath, and I discovered that it is essentially to allow a sinful heart to experience what it wants. It allows a soul to experience godlessness, pain, and lack of life. I believe that this actually plays a huge part in conversion, and is necessary, just like the prodigal son. It was the pig slop that brought him to his senses. Anyways here are some thought provoking passages about God's wrath. Psalm 106 35 they mingled with the Gentiles ,And learned their works; 36 They served their idols, Which became a snare to them. 37 They even sacrificed their sons And their daughters to DEMONS, 39 Thus they were defiled by their own works...40 Therefore the wrath of the Lord was kindled against His people, ...41 And He GAVE THEM into THE HAND of the GENTILES, And those who hated them ruled over them. 42 Their enemies also oppressed them, And they were brought into subjection under their hand. To give them over... Now listen to what Jesus says: Luke 9 44 “Let these words sink down into your ears, for the Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the HANDS OF MEN.” Mark 10:33 “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death and DELIVER HIM TO THE GENTILES; Also another word picture for his wrath was a cup of wine... Psalm 75 (GOD says of HIMSELF) 2 God says “When I choose the proper time, I will judge uprightly"...6 For exaltation comes neither from the east Nor from the west nor from the south. 7 But God is the Judge: He puts down one, And exalts another. 8 For in the hand of the Lord there is a CUP, And the wine is red; It is fully mixed, and He pours it out; Surely its dregs shall all the wicked of the earth Drain and drink down. That is everybody..all who have reached the age of accountability become children of wrath by trusting in idols.. it makes our hearts dull and hard, and leads to death. The drunkenness causes our stumblings, but ultimately it is for the salvation of our souls. To allow us to see the difference between good and evil. Life and death. A rod and a prod to turn us away from our idols. God gives these 'life rebukes', and We won't sober up until we recognize the dire state, and look to God for help. Now listen to what Jesus says: Luke 22 39 ..He knelt down and prayed, 42 saying, “Father, if it is Your will, take this CUP (enemies to have their way with Him / God's wrath, right?) away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.” Just found these correlations interesting and so mysterious. Hard to put into words. Loved the video!
I love your videos, and I am in no way, stating that I have any of this fleshed out in my own mind lol however, it does say in Colossians that he nailed our debt of sin to the cross. I’m writing this comment only 12 minutes into your video so I’m not sure if you address this verse later and I will continue to watch to see if you do but I wanted to bring that up while I was thinking of it. God bless you!
Hey alana, I'm exactly half way through your video and wanted to offer some thoughts. I noticed that as I was transitioning to an eastern orthodox christian I too came across for the first time MANY atonement theories. Have you ever heard of The Recapitulation theory by St. Irenaeus? It's my favorite. You mentioned christus Victor and that's my second favorite. Also, the Greek Septuagint has become my favorite and standard old testament text because ots older than the 9th century AD masoretic Hebrew old testament that the kjv users use. But Jesus and the disciples quoted from and used the Septuagint as the kjv of their own day. In Isaiah 53 is speaks NOTHING of the Father bruising or punishing the son. It speaks the opposite, "purging him from his stroke". The origins of the penal substitution theory came from Anselms "honor" teachings of mideval times. I have one more thing to share. Hold on
@@SheepDog1974 an old old note I wrote: The bible is clear in romans 3:25 that Christs atonement gave forbearance to sinners, including the elect, so that he may pass over sins through the atonement. The english word atonement has no direct bible roots. The Hebrew word "kipur" was made to "katallage" which in english transliterates to "reconciliation" which means "restore to favor". Jesus recociled the world to himself through his sacrifice which caused forebearance to take place which is God having mercy on all(rom 11) through forebearance. Forebearance is a temporary life time for all to receive reconciliation, despite romans saying that we were reconciled to God while we were enemies(rom 5:10) the next verse speaks of the necessity of this reconciliation/atonement to "be received".. (2Co 5:18-21) makes it clear that God reconciled the world to himself yet in the same chapter , a few verses later paul once again calls for all to be reconciled to God, which is now the second time paul states this, all during this time of forbearance(romans 3:25) of favor and mercy obtained and brought on by Christs propitiation, which means to MAKE FAVORABLE. Paul mentions this a third time in colossians 1:19-22 how Christ reconciled in himself all things, and how we that are saved are reconciled in his body of flesh by his death. Paul repeats this kind of reconciliation in ephesians 2:16 saying "and he might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. Despite the first reconciliation on the cross for atonement, we are still children of wrath by nature(ephesians 5) and only the reconciliation of salvation will end both wrath and hostility. Atonement was done for the world to reconcile us to God through propitiation which deals with the consequences of our sins over the due wrath of God against those who Reject jesus and the gift of salvation , to which wrath is to come lest they turn and be saved. Propitiation is defined in the new testament as hilasterion, the exact term that specifically points to the old testament sacrificial system, in particular, “The Mercy Seat” In place of the judgement seat. The sacrifice of the animal was the due consequence of sin being taken on by the animal. Propituation for the jews and christians did not point to wrath and appeasement done on the animal more than the term they used for propitiation. Instead, The sprinking of the blood upon the judgement seat made it a seat of mercy, and this is the image that prolituation points to.. Not the animal, but the hilasterion, or, mercy seat.. Christ describes his own atonement using a numbers 21 where the serpent was lifted up for all of israel, yet only those who went to be bitten were healed. This example paralells the day of atonement done once every single year in Leviticus 16:29-30 & 23:26-31. The priest atoned for the sins of all israel, yet only those who humbled themselves and did no work benefited from the atonement done for them. 5 days later, the feast of tabernacles was done by sacrificing 70 bulls for the 70 nations of the gentile world. 70 means universal in hebrew. Christ's example also paralells the reconciliation of the ninevites, whose sins had reached heaven. And God provided a promise of mercy if they repented. The king ordered a fast of repentence. Not even the animals ate. Prayer was also done. This mirrors the day of atonement practice for the jews yet without a sacrifice. God had mercy on all Nineveh and so all were spared. This shows Gods desire for all to cone to repentance and his desire that all should be saved as stated in the epistles of timothy. Jesus said he that God loves the world so much that he gave his son for it(john 3) Paul said by adams transgression the world was condemned, but from one act of righteousness by jesus justification of life went to all men. Justification of life is described by paul as the free gift, which was not like the condemnation. That free gift is salvation. Salvation is justification of life, that goes to all men to be received or rejected. Justification of life another phrase for salvation, used only once in the bible. Justification by faith is how one receives salvation. Seen many times throughout the bible. Salvation is a gift to all. Only those who receive the gift will be bleesdd. Which is why the grace of God has appeared which offers salvation to everyone(titus 2:11) And when the kindness of God our savior and his love appeared for all mankind, he saved those who believed(titus 3:4-5) because he loves those who believe just as he loves all mankind who he desires to all be saved(1 timothy 2:4) Jesus said his flesh is bread that he gives for the life of the world(john 6:51) John said Gods love was made manifest to us and that he loves us demonstrated in his propitiation for our sins(1 john 4:9-11) and not for ours only but for the whole world 1 john 2:2 Paul says in ephesians that with love he loved us while we were dead in trespasses(ephesians 2:4-5) Even when we were helpless(romans 5:8) John says they saw with their own eyes that the father sent jesus to be the savior of the world(1 john 4:14) The samaritans said after hearing for themselves that jesus is the christ and the savior of the world(john 4:42) And the samaritans have no reason to gain in pushing any notion of an elect. Jesus died once for all(romans 6:10) Jesus died for all(2 corinthians 5:15) Jesus died for sins once for all(1 peter 3:18) The bible is explicitly clear in a most trinitarian sense that Jesus died for everyone in the whole world. Matthew 20:28 says jesus gave himself as a ransom for many. 1 timothy 2:6 says he gave himself as a ransom for all. The word in hebrew rabbim is used to describe something that is unquantifiable. This is the word used for "many" in matthew 20. Hebrew had no range of language, so people spoke in ways that consequently would qualify other nouns found in more expressable languages such as greek and english. This is why paul used the exact teaching from Jesus and said "ransom for all" because the greek had the word to express the meaning for a greek speaker. But when paul wrote to the hebrews, he wrote the word "many" in hebrews 9:28, despite him writing in greek. He was speaking their language. Many means all. Romans 5 and ephesians 2 says he died for the ungodly, he died for us while we were his enemies, and that he died for sinners. 1 peter 3:18 says he died for the unjust. And 2 peter 2:1 says he died for(bought) those who denied him. This includes peter, who denied him. This also includes judas. Luke 22:14 - 20 states that jesus spoke to the 12 apostles and said "this is my body which is broken for you, and this is the new covenant in my blood which is shed for you". This included judas who was one of the 12, despite jesus choosing him as one of his disciples.(john 6:70) Those for whom christ died can be lead astray to destruction by our irresponsible actions(1 corinthians 8:11) and this is repeated in romans 14:15, saying it destroys the work of God in verse 20... This goes directly in line with the parable of the soils by Jesus, where some dont remain saved. Jesus died for his church(acts 20:28) His sheep(john 10) His people(matthew 1:21) God remained holy in maintaining his Character and demonstrating his righteousness(romans 3:25) on earth, as Jesus, not his wrath on Jesus. He was the perfect propitiate in order to expiate(hilasmos) or, cleanse us from the cause of our alienation, that being sin. This was done for the whole world in 1 john 2:2. The blood of bulls and goats gave temporary salvation. Jesus obtained eternal salvation.(Hebrews 9) That’s what he provdes… eternal life… The bible says his atonement gave the entire world forbearance of time to be reconciled to God, which is the way he had mercy on all, during forbearance to draw near because Jesus expiated the problem that separated us from God, that being sin. Man was separated from God as a result of the fall and, left to his own devices, was incapable of returning to God. Christ became human to heal mankind by perfectly uniting the human nature to the Divine Nature in His person. Through the Incarnation, Christ took on human nature, becoming the Second Adam, and entered into every stage of humanity, from infancy to adulthood, uniting it to God. He then suffered death to enter Hell and bresk its power. On the third day, He resurrected and completed His task by destroying death. By entering each of these stages and remaining perfectly obedient to the Father, Christ recapitulated every aspect of human nature. He said “Yes” where Adam said “No” and healed all of what Adam’s actions had damaged. This enables all of those who are willing to say yes to God to be perfectly united to God through Christ’s person. By destroying death, Christ placed the victory of eternal life above the consequence of the fall. Now, all can be resurrected. Those who choose to live their life in Christ can be perfectly united to the Holy Trinity, receiving the full love of God that makes us more like him. But those who reject what was done for them will receive the wrath of God that abides on them(john 3:36). When their life of forbearance Is up and they have taken their last breath they will suffer under the weight of their own sins because all are still by nature children of wrath(ephesians 5). In the parable of jesus, a man who was forgiven his debt did not forgive those in debted to him, and was taken away into condemnation to pay every last cent of what he owed. Despite the forgiveness he received of his debt to his king. The atonement is one thing. The gift of Salvation is another. There may be many disagreements about salvation, but there are only a handful about the atonement.
@SheepDog1974 another old old note: I respect subsitutionary atonement. But compared to the older and longer standings of RECONCILIATION, PROPITIATION, EXPIATION and RECAPITULATION, it's shown where the much later big changes occured, and with whom... It all started with Anselm. Some bits of Augustine for other areas but mainly this way of thinking about the atonement began with Anselm, who is known as the father of the satisfaction understanding of the atonement. His goal was to be able to explain to the heathens living among him in a logical fashion why Christ had to die for our sins, without using the Bible or the Fathers. Anyone can see he was using the way of Feudalism around him to explain his theology. But Jesus and the apostles never lived in such a system. Thats the first problem. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t trying to stay within the fathers and the bible, but because of his methodology he does drift away substantially on some points. It is known as the satisfaction theory because it indicates a need to satisfy a lack that keeps us from salvation. A lack of satisfaction came from dishonoring God with our sin. But for God to be dissatisfied would show some lack or need within God himself. Another problem that changed the character and understanding of God. Essentially, he took the concept of debt that we owe to God and made that into the whole of the atonement. We do see the debt understanding even in the Bible, as the servant who owed his master a lifetime plus of wages. But unlike anselm, when jesus used a parable of a man owing a debt to someone, he was forgiven and was freed from having to pay the debt back. (Matthew 18:21-35) Athanasius speaks of our debt we owe as well, but not as Anselm ended up using it. Because of sin, we owed God a debt due to our violation of His honor. This honor has to be repaid somehow due to his view of the nature of God. another rabbit hole. Man can’t pay it, only God can pay it, so God becomes man to not only pay what His due is to the Father through perfect obedience, but goes beyond that to give what He didn’t have to give, His life. Since He didn’t need this “merit”,(he was a Roman Catholic afterall) we can obtain that merit for paying our debt to God off. The sacraments then become a means of distributing these merits, as well as other good works. This is basically the Roman Catholic understanding. The two major problems with this understanding are these: 1. God’s forgiveness is not dependant upon repaying a debt, and 2. The debt we owe is not to the Father. All we have to do to know that the first is not true is look in the Scriptures. All through the Old Testament, before Christ’s sacrifice, God is considered merciful, slow to anger, forgiving all who come to Him. He is ready to cast our sins as far as the east is from the west. A requirement for forgiveness offered in 2 Chron. 7:14 is “if my people who are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray, and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways….” Nothing is mentioned about atoning for a past debt before forgiveness of sins can happen. Rather, God simply says: “…then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land. In the New Testament we have the parable mentioned earlier, where the servant who owes his master more money than he could ever hope to repay is forgiven his entire debt without expectation of repaying it. In the parable of the Prodigal Son, likewise the father takes the son back, not asking that he restore the wealth he lost in sinful living. Concerning the second, we see as we have already noted that death is what is being defeated, Satan is the one who we are in bondage to, not God. By placing God as the one who is unwilling to forgive us our debt, it is He who we are in bondage to death with, not Satan. This is attested to by the Fathers: But since it was necessary also that the debt owing from all should be paid again: for, as I have already said , it was owing that all should die - St. Athanasius, “Incarnation of the Word,” Chp. 20 …he means that the devil held possession of it, the bond which God made for Adam, saying, “In the day thou eatest of the tree, thou shalt die.” (Genesis 2:17.) This bond then the devil held in his possession. And Christ did not give it to us, but Himself tore it in two, the action of one who remits joyfully. - St. John Chrysostom, 6th homily on Colossians) There is a third key change in Anselm’s view that makes a major shift from the view of the Early Church, indicated in the previous quote, and that is WHAT is being atoned for. In the first understanding of The Faith it was the broken relationship with God, the Lack of His life giving energies, lack of a union with God as it was in The Beginning in The Garden. In Anselm’s later view, it is the debt of broken honor with God that is the problem to solve and fix. The whole goal of Christ’s death and resurrection has moved from redeeming us from death and Satan by defeating Him, to paying back God for the honor due Him that we cannot pay ourselves. This was arrived at by deductive logic on Anselm’s part by making what should have just remained analogical into a whole reality. Salvation in the eyes of Protestants, therefore, is not freedom from the bondage of sin and death, but rather it is deliverance from the hands of God Himself! As much as Protestants may protest otherwise with their rhetoric, they do not believe that we are saved from sin - they believe that we are saved from God. An essentially legal view of sin leads inevitably to a legal view of salvation. If salvation is primarily about the Father punishing the Incarnate Son in our stead, then as a judicial necessity, our failure to believe in Jesus compels God to punish us. Such theologies see the Cross as saving us from the punitive, legally determined wrath of God-God the Son saving us from God the Father. Viewing God as vindictive can cause us great damage, particularly if we believe that the physical and spiritual harm we inflict on ourselves through sin is a sample of God's wrath and punishment as unsaved sinners(when in actuality it is our own suffering from our pains of sin). Confusing our guilt with God’s anger can cause us to fear and flee from Him, which only weakens us further. The Orthodox view is that Christ died and was raised again to conquer death, which is the wages of sin, and that sin is a spiritual illness rather than a debt to be paid. This language is essentially the same as that of expiation, for expiation is the destruction of sin and the death that it causes. To destroying death itself as it directly correlates to the utter smashing of examples like Pharaoh and his horde in the Red Sea. Jesus’ sacrifice, rather than being a punishment of sin, ought to be understood like a “cosmic sponge” whereby He absorbs all the sin of the world and takes it away from us. Otherwise, there is really no forgiveness in the Anselmian/Protestant paradigm of salvation. Instead, all there is Jesus buying an indulgence for us as Anselm would view it, from the Father (satisfying the Father’s wrath). Contrast this to the Parable of the Prodigal Son... Big difference.. There is no punitive nature there at all - yet there is a sacrifice. And that sacrifice is the joy of the relationship being made right again between a father and his child. Rom 6:3-13 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? .... read all the verses later if you like.. It is also my understanding that the word "atonement" in Greek means something like "reconciliation." We are saved together but damned alone - Orthodox Proverb ☦️
@@AlanaL3 If a friend pays a debt on your behalf, one you could never afford, that friend is in a position to then turn to you and say - your debt has been forgiven ... for you were not the one to pay it. ❤
@@AlanaL3 yes, although the greek word really seems to be debt. But I still think you are right, later in Matthew is the story of the indebted servant which concludes, Matthew 18:32 Then summoning him, his lord said to him, ‘You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. In the story the king forgave the debt, but did not extract the money then from his own son. The king just forgave it and suffered the loss of money himself. I've heard it argued that because the king suffered the loss of money, that's similar to Jesus bearing the wrath, but it's not. If God has suffered some loss by our sin and we owe Him a debt for that, then the perfect simile to the story is that God judt forgives it, thereby suffering the loss forever and doesn't extract it from himself or his son or anyone else.
@@AlanaL3 I have not found a respected translation that says trespasses there. Maybe you can show me one but the multiple I looked at all say debt. Trespasses seems to come from The Book of Common Prayer.
The Cup of God’s wrath was depicted in the Old Testament and Jesus used this same depiction many times when He talked about partaking in God’s cup. In Matthew 20:22 and Mark 10:38 Jesus hints at it when He speaks to the Son’s of Zebedee. During Passover there were 4 cups of wine with the 2nd cup being a cup of wrath/judgement. It was well understood during the time of Jesus of the symbolic nature of the cup of wrath. Hence Jesus prayer in the garden of Gethsemane. His talk with the Pharisees in Matthew 3 about “filling up” their guilt- which was another symbolism connecting to the filling up of a cup; and this dialogue was about a coming judgment.
If Mark 20:38 is referencing a cup "of wrath", why does he tell the disciples in 10:39 "The cup that I drink you will drink"? Is He saying they will also somehow drink of God's wrath? It seems to me that "the cup" is whatever God has in store for someone. Yes, the cup can be filled with wrath, but it can also be the "cup of salvation" (Psalm 116). In Psalm 23, did David's cup runneth over with God's wrath?
@@mrgrossism the context of the cup comment in Mark 10 and Matthew 20 is based on the previous statement of Jesus foreshadowing His suffering. There are some verses that speak of cups in a symbolic way about abundance and blessing but most references about “cups” and “pouring” in the Bible is associated with wrath. Wrath of God as a cup/ wine Job 21:20 NASB1995 ”Let his own eyes see his decay, And let him drink of the wrath of the Almighty.“ Psalms 60:3 NASB1995 ”You have made Your people experience hardship; You have given us wine to drink that makes us stagger.“ Psalms 75:8 NASB1995 ”For a cup is in the hand of the Lord, and the wine foams; It is well mixed, and He pours out of this; Surely all the wicked of the earth must drain and drink down its dregs.“ Isaiah 51:17 NASB1995 ”Rouse yourself! Rouse yourself! Arise, O Jerusalem, You who have drunk from the Lord’s hand the cup of His anger; The chalice of reeling you have drained to the dregs.“ Isaiah 51:22 NASB1995 ”Thus says your Lord, the Lord, even your God Who contends for His people, “Behold, I have taken out of your hand the cup of reeling, The chalice of My anger; You will never drink it again.“ Isaiah 63:6 NASB1995 ”I trod down the peoples in My anger And made them drunk in My wrath, And I poured out their lifeblood on the earth.”“ Jeremiah 25:15 NASB1995 ”For thus the Lord, the God of Israel, says to me, “Take this cup of the wine of wrath from My hand and cause all the nations to whom I send you to drink it.“ Obadiah 1:16 NASB1995 ”Because just as you drank on My holy mountain, All the nations will drink continually. They will drink and swallow And become as if they had never existed.“ Revelation 14:10 NASB1995 ”he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.“ Revelation 16:19 NASB1995 ”The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath.“ God’s Wrath depicted as being poured 2 Chronicles 12:7 NASB1995 ”When the Lord saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the Lord came to Shemaiah, saying, “They have humbled themselves so I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some measure of deliverance, and My wrath shall not be poured out on Jerusalem by means of Shishak.“ 2 Chronicles 34:21 NASB1995 ”“Go, inquire of the Lord for me and for those who are left in Israel and in Judah, concerning the words of the book which has been found; for great is the wrath of the Lord which is poured out on us because our fathers have not observed the word of the Lord, to do according to all that is written in this book.”“ 2 Chronicles 34:25 NASB1995 ”Because they have forsaken Me and have burned incense to other gods, that they might provoke Me to anger with all the works of their hands; therefore My wrath will be poured out on this place and it shall not be quenched.” ’“ Jeremiah 7:20 NASB1995 ”Therefore thus says the Lord God, “Behold, My anger and My wrath will be poured out on this place, on man and on beast and on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground; and it will burn and not be quenched.”“ Jeremiah 10:25 NASB1995 ”Pour out Your wrath on the nations that do not know You And on the families that do not call Your name; For they have devoured Jacob; They have devoured him and consumed him And have laid waste his habitation.“ Jeremiah 42:18 NASB1995 ”For thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, “As My anger and wrath have been poured out on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so My wrath will be poured out on you when you enter Egypt. And you will become a curse, an object of horror, an imprecation and a reproach; and you will see this place no more.”“ Jeremiah 44:6, 19 NASB1995 ”Therefore My wrath and My anger were poured out and burned in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem, so they have become a ruin and a desolation as it is this day.“ Lamentations 2:4 NASB1995 ”He has bent His bow like an enemy; He has set His right hand like an adversary And slain all that were pleasant to the eye; In the tent of the daughter of Zion He has poured out His wrath like fire.“ Lamentations 4:11 NASB1995 ”The Lord has accomplished His wrath, He has poured out His fierce anger; And He has kindled a fire in Zion Which has consumed its foundations.“ Ezekiel 7:8 NASB1995 ”Now I will shortly pour out My wrath on you and spend My anger against you; judge you according to your ways and bring on you all your abominations.“ Ezekiel 9:8 NASB1995 ”As they were striking the people and I alone was left, I fell on my face and cried out saying, “Alas, Lord God! Are You destroying the whole remnant of Israel by pouring out Your wrath on Jerusalem?”“ Ezekiel 14:19 NASB1995 ”Or if I should send a plague against that country and pour out My wrath in blood on it to cut off man and beast from it,“ Ezekiel 20:8 NASB1995 ”But they rebelled against Me and were not willing to listen to Me; they did not cast away the detestable things of their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I resolved to pour out My wrath on them, to accomplish My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.“ Ezekiel 20:13 NASB1995 ”But the house of Israel rebelled against Me in the wilderness. They did not walk in My statutes and they rejected My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live; and My sabbaths they greatly profaned. Then I resolved to pour out My wrath on them in the wilderness, to annihilate them.“ Ezekiel 20:21 NASB1995 ”But the children rebelled against Me; they did not walk in My statutes, nor were they careful to observe My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live; they profaned My sabbaths. So I resolved to pour out My wrath on them, to accomplish My anger against them in the wilderness.“ Ezekiel 20:33 NASB1995 ”“As I live,” declares the Lord God, “surely with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm and with wrath poured out, I shall be king over you.“ Ezekiel 20:34 NASB1995 ”I will bring you out from the peoples and gather you from the lands where you are scattered, with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm and with wrath poured out;“ Ezekiel 22:22 NASB1995 ”As silver is melted in the furnace, so you will be melted in the midst of it; and you will know that I, the Lord, have poured out My wrath on you.’ ” Ezekiel 30:15 NASB1995 ”I will pour out My wrath on Sin, The stronghold of Egypt; I will also cut off the hordes of Thebes.“ Ezekiel 36:18 NASB1995 ”Therefore I poured out My wrath on them for the blood which they had shed on the land, because they had defiled it with their idols.“ Hosea 5:10 NASB1995 ”The princes of Judah have become like those who move a boundary; On them I will pour out My wrath like water.“ Nahum 1:6 NASB1995 ”Who can stand before His indignation? Who can endure the burning of His anger? His wrath is poured out like fire And the rocks are broken up by Him.“ Revelation 16:1 NASB1995 ”Then I heard a loud voice from the temple, saying to the seven angels, “Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls of the wrath of God.”“
@@haiasinosdnah0813 Psalm 116:12 How can I repay the LORD for all His goodness to me? 13 I will lift the cup of salvation and call on the name of the LORD. Psalm 16:5 The LORD is my chosen portion and my cup; You have made my lot secure. 6 The lines of my boundary have fallen in pleasant places; surely my inheritance is delightful. Strong's describes the Greek word for "cup" in this way: "By a figure common to Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, and not unknown to Latin writers, one's lot or experience, whether joyous or adverse, divine appointments, whether favorable or unfavorable, are likened to a cup which God presents one to drink." Jesus never says what is in the "cup" which the Father has given Him. Nowhere does He specify that it is wrath. He DOES say in Mark 10:39 that His disciples will drink from the SAME cup.
@@mrgrossism I believe that I conceded the point in my earlier comment that symbolism of cups within the OT could also represent bountiful abundance and I will also concede your point that the cup that is described in the Psalms you referenced symbolizes salvation and security. Even in the Passover meal, 1 of the 4 cups is the cup of salvation/redemption while another cup of the 4 is for wrath/judgement. Yet, I have provided numerous examples of how the cup being poured out is a connotation for wrath. Nevertheless the context that precedes the cup analogy in Mark 10 and Matthew 20 is Jesus revealing His suffering. Lastly, Jesus specifically prayed for the cup to pass from Him in the Garden of Gethsemane, I don’t think He was associating that analogy of the cup as a cup of security nor salvation. It is easier to infer that He was praying about wrath being passed from Him.
@@haiasinosdnah0813 I guess I am not understanding why the cup could not be filled with "suffering". Why does it necessarily have to be filled with "wrath"?
Yes! Ransomed from death! So mich of what uou are saying has been similar to my processs... I don't.feel alone in thinking through these things I thought we had to believe...
I have a Calvinist friend who actually says that if a person does not have a correct understanding of all these things that they might not be saved. A person will have a beautiful deep faith in Jesus and be laying down their life for him daily and my friend will say well do they understand this and this and if not, they can’t be saved. It’s only academic with him. Do you know that I will show him a video of a little girl who is beaten and murdered in India because she will not deny Jesus, and his response will be if she didn’t have a correct understanding in regard to who Jesus is, and why he died, and the nature of the atonement that she might not have been saved.
That is so terrible. I do not agree with that thought process at all. All of us are wrong at some part of our theology. Whoever cannot admit that still has a lot to learn. Thank you, Jesus that the gospel is simple and that you save a willing and humble heart that loves you!
I appreciate what you say about satan not having that much power. I agree wholeheartedly & I think it's a critical point in this conversation. It's also tethered to why I land agreeing with a PSA view in light of Isaiah 53 referencing punishment. Who has power over Christ unto punishment? But God himself. Not Satan. And not death. And we see punishment tied to God's wrath in revelation, but spared for those in Christ -who has already taken upon himself "the punishment that brought us peace."
@@All-shall-say-Jesus-is-Lord Do you read Greek!? Sadly, I do not, and I'm critical of the handling of the text if I can't read it myself - considering it's been abandoned long ago and possibly not stewarded well in light of that. What do you think?
@@Shark_fishing You don't need to know greek! Look up "septuagint english online" and it will give you at least 3 good results. Look up "Septuagint interlinear" and it will give you the greek and english so you can cross reference the greek with Strong's concordance.
In every instance where the NT references Is. 53, it does so in a non-substitutionary manner. Mat. 8:17 quotes Is. 53:4, but in a way that denies substitution: “That evening they brought to him many who were oppressed by demons, and he cast out the spirits with a word and healed all who were sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah: “He took our illnesses and bore our diseases.”” The meaning is not that Jesus healed by making himself sick and literally bearing by transferring the diseases to himself, but rather that he was compassionately burdened by human suffering and he did something about it. Matthew also considers this prophecy fulfilled before Jesus went to the cross, not as a consequence of the cross! It was not fulfilled by the death of Jesus, but by his life. In 1 Cor. 15:3 we read, “…Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures.” This is likely Is. 53:5. In the phrase “died for our sins” it is the Greek word “hyper,” indicating causation, not replacement or substitution, indicating that Isaiah 53:5 was not about substitution, but a prophecy regarding the cause as to why Jesus died - because of our sin, not in place of our sin, and certainly not as a payment for our sin. Is. 53:4 A careful reader of the second phrase of verse 4 will see that "we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God" is saying that the people "esteemed" or reasoned that God was punishing the victim. A proper contextual reading of this verse together with verse 5 shows that it was not God punishing, rather, the victim was enduring the pain and suffering due to the wrongs of others toward him. The suffering was not caused by God or for God, not an act of divine justice, but of human injustice! To make matters worse, the verse is often misread as if it says, "we saw him stricken BY God." This is a serious misuse of the text! Is. 53:5 expands on verse 4. The first word is "but," intended as a contrast. Verse 4 is saying, "we thought this…" and verse 5 corrects the error with, "but the truth is this…" Sadly, so many teachers read this “but” as if it says "and." Their mind processes it as, "…stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 "AND" he was pierced for our transgressions…" These teachers WANT the passage to be about God punishing Jesus as a payment for sin, so their minds are reading what they expect the passage to say instead of what it actually says! Both the Hebrew and the LXX (Septuagint) state that, “he was pierced BECAUSE OF [Greek “dia”] our transgressions, he was crushed BECAUSE OF [Greek “dia”] our iniquities.” Is. 53:6 shows the cause of this injustice is due to the people straying. The LORD “has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” The words translated “has laid on” is a most unusual choice of words chosen to project the PSA view. In Hebrew “has laid on” is “hip̄·gî·a”, which actually means “to fall, to meet, or to encounter.” The Greek word is "paradidōmi", meaning, "to hand over, to give or deliver over." The meaning is simply that God had the culmination of the error of the people fall on, or meet at, or delivered to, the point where they were willing to murder this innocent servant, exactly as stated in Acts 2:23. The same Hebrew word, H6293 is used in verse 12, but most translations have this word as “intercession.” Apparently, the only place where translators conveniently use “has laid on” for H6293 is this one case in Isaiah 53:6, which should raise serious suspicions. Is. 53:10 is never mentioned in the New Testament, which is quite incredible if it is about Jesus making an offering! In fact, the word "offering" is not in either the Masoretic or LXX texts, as it is assumed and supplied by the translators! Furthermore, there are multiple translation options that leave the author’s intent very vague, especially when the Hebrew Masoretic text is compared to the Greek LXX text.
@atonementandreconciliation3749 “Having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us & condemned us, he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.” Colossians 2:14 What was nailed to the cross? The body of Jesus. “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God” 2 Cor 5:21 Both verses use substitutionary language. Apart from Isaiah 53:4, you have verse 10 clearly indicated this was the will of God. This is affirmed by Jesus when He rebukes Peter for taking his defense when they seize him for the crucifixion. Matthew 26:53-54 he says “did you not know I could call on my Father and He would put more than 12 legions of angels at my disposal?” Jesus could stop it all at any time: the Godhead willing unto the cross, in spite of suffering, compelled by love. 1 Peter 1:19 and Hebrews 13:12 liken Jesus to the qualifying characteristics of sin offerings in the Old Testament. Revelation 5:6 depicts Christ as the slain Lamb, the ultimate offering fulfillment to which the Old Testament sacrificial system was a signpost. It’s all there my friend.
Hey Alana Great word!...but your gonna put many great evangelist like Ray Comfort out of business with this one. lol! I think the book of Romans the apostle Paul's great theological masterpiece is the best book to go to instead of skipping all around the bible. The apostle Paul takes the first two chapters and brings everyone guilty before a Holy and righteous God. I know the wrath of God is not to popular in America to talk about because most of America does not know God. That is why some adapt different atonement theories to get around having to talk about the wrath of God and the fear of God because its not to comfortable to sinners ears and how BEFORE Christ we are enemies of God and children of wrath. But we have to ask the question What are we being saved from? You answer that question everything else flows out from there. 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:36
The missing piece is to focus on the innocence of the sacrifice. The life of the flesh is in the blood Lev 17:11 and Jesus blood (life) was perfect and when the Father looks upon the perfect innocent blood of Christ shed for sinners his Wrath passes over (Passover) those under the blood and falls on those that reject it. That's the message of Hebrews. His blood cleanses, purifies, protects and presents us to the Father. So it's not that His blood suffers the Wrath of the Father, but rather the Father is pleased by HIs innocence and sacrifice and so has mercy on those under it. Like the Passover.
I've been coming to a similar position, but I have a burning question. If this is how the passover lamb works and how Jesus' sacrifice works, then why death? If the blood is all that's needed, wouldn't the lamb and Jesus just be cut and their blood poured out partially without killing them? Why does the innocent life have to die as well?
The blood of Christ was about a covenant, not a payment. A payment would be bribing God to issue a pardon, like someone paying a President or a governor to issue a pardon for a convicted criminal. That is a very bad idea that is a problem with PSA. Matthew 26:28 “For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Given the context and the Greek, this Matthew 26:28 verse could have, and probably should have, been translated as, “For this is my blood of the covenant which is shed concerning many unto the release of [their] sins.” In other words, the blood covenant is something that people can enter into, and by doing so they agree to release their sins, which is to stop sinning!
@@All-shall-say-Jesus-is-Lord be said the penalty of sin is death. The life of the flesh is in the blood the Passover lamb was fully consumed. He has to fulfill the typology. And the law had to be upheld. He did fulfill the law. He is our innocent substitute that fulfills the law.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 I don't think theres any way around the fact that the Bible speaks repeatedly about death via the curse of the Law. Jesus took the curse (death) for us to fulfill the Law. He is our substitute. But the curse of the Law aka death isn't the same as God's fiery Wrath and total abandonment. He was delivered into the hands of sinners and was "abandoned" in that sense to his enemies. But not by God. Psalm 22 makes that clear.
@@Eloign Yes, the law brings death, but Jesus was falsely accused. That does not make him a substitute, it makes him a victim. The law is not a living thing that needs to be appeased. Jesus did not die to placate God, he died to bring us TO God. We were/are the problem, not God. God forgave people throughout the OT. He did not need Jesus to solve some forgiveness problem. “I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin.” Psalm 32:5 “You forgave the iniquity of your people; you covered all their sin.” Psalm 85:2 “LORD our God, you answered them; you were to Israel a forgiving God, though you punished their misdeeds.” Psalm 99:8 NIV “Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity and passing over transgression for the remnant of his inheritance? He does not retain his anger forever, because he delights in steadfast love.” Micah 7:18
The words "by faith" are misleading. The Greeks says, "ek pistis," where the "ek" means "out of" or "out from." “Ek” is the opposite of the word “eis” which means into. In other words, righteousness, and hence justification (setting right that which was wrong), comes out from, or out of faith, as a product of faith. This means that genuine faith produces righteousness because it is a functional faith. This faith is not a neutral intellectual belief, it is operational, active, and productive, causing a change from unrighteous living to righteous living. By this a person is justified - set right from a previous state of living wrong. It is amazing to hear some Bible teachers say things like, “Theology affects the way we live” and “You mostly live according to the theology you believe”, and yet these same teachers speak of “salvation by faith” as if faith as something that happens external to you and has no required byproduct of righteous living. "By faith" is often understood as nearly a passive idea, where we are made to have faith and God does something called "justification," a legal arrangement or accounting act on His end. That is not what is intended by "ek pistis." Teachers of Reformed Theology and Penal Substitutionary Atonement have a problem with active, functional faith because they typically see this as works. To avoid this, the weaker translation is used, changing “out from faith” to “by faith.”
This is a reply to a comment that must have been deleted, but it adds to my "by faith" point. "Ek pistis" or "ek pisteo" is in Romans 1:17, 3:30, 4:16, 5:1, 9:30,32, 10:6, Gal. 2:16,3:7,11, Heb. 10:38, James 2:24 These all show that faith is presumed to be active - affecting the mind, will, emotions, and actions of the believer. There are passages that do say “by faith,” which is “dia pisteo,” but “dia” means "through,” so faith in these cases is the active mechanism, not a passive idea. Peter states it well in Acts 15:9, “…having cleansed their hearts by faith.” In this case the “by faith” is “te pistei”, which is simply “the faith,” making the phrase say that faith is the active thing that cleansed their hearts. Faith is not some external property like a salve or clothing that has no internal effect on the person. The single exception is found in the example of James 2:17-20 where demons have inactive faith, a dead faith that produces nothing.
"Others again are said in the manner of association and relation , as, My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me Matthew 27:46 ? and He has made Him to be sin for us, Who knew no sin 2 Corinthians 5:21 , and being made a curse for us Galatians 3:13; also, Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him 1 Corinthians 15:28 For neither as God nor as man was He ever forsaken by the Father, nor did He become sin or a curse, nor did He require to be made subject to the Father. For as God He is equal to the Father and not opposed to Him nor subjected to Him; and as God, He was never at any time disobedient to His Begetter to make it necessary for Him to make Him subject. Appropriating, then, our person and ranking Himself with us, He used these words." ~ Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith Saint John of Damascus
Hey Alana, I think propitiation is an acceptable term because it "turns away" God's wrath. Jesus' sacrifice turned God's wrath away from us. In 1 Chronicles 21, King David offers a sacrifice that turns away God's wrath. Does this mean the Father poured out His wrath on Christ on the cross? Not necessarily. We know that Jesus bore our sins in His own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). Also, the Father made Jesus "to be sin for us, who knew no sin" (2 Cor 5:21). Thus, Jesus took our sins upon himself: "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." (Isaiah 53:4) Jesus Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice to the Father by taking the sins of the world upon Himself. Jesus was stricken by God because Christ carried the weight of humanity's sin and all the suffering that goes with it. In doing this, Jesus secured redemption for all who believe. In short, Jesus felt separated from the Father because of the sin that Jesus bore on the cross. A person doesn't have to believe that God poured out His wrath on Christ. But Jesus definitely took our place and turned God's wrath away from us.
Isaiah 53:10 The Lord also is pleased to purge him from his stroke. If ye can give an offering for sin, your soul shall see a long-lived seed: The Septuagint has a totally different meaning in that verse. You should check out the Septuagint.
Propitiation in that verse, if I'm not wrong, itls the exact greek word that the greek septuagint uses for the old testament Mercy Seat. Could be wrong.
Alana, would you agree that PSA theory creates a breeding ground for Calvinist doctrine? Because if one says that Christ died to “pay” for the sins of the whole world, then that would imply Universalism and then the “double jeopardy” argument, which then creates a foothold to say Christ died only for the elect. But to say that He has paid a ransom, or cancelled debt to conquer death, that seems to be an entirely different field for thought.
My big question on PSA is this. If Jesus paid the penalty for my sin, how does that equal forgiveness. Whether I pay it or my representative pays it, it is still paid. Not forgiven. And if it is forgiven, then how is God just in demanding payment anyways, even if my representative pays for me.
If a judge requires a penalty of me, but in an unusual show of mercy, fulfills the penalty on my behalf - that judge is well positioned to say to me: what *you* owe has been forgiven. Justice is fulfilled, but not by me. I’m the recipient of mercy. In fairness, the question is a good one. The same could be said of a ransom model- in which the one in need of ransom is generally faultless. A victim. But Romans 6:23 & many other passages clearly identify our sin as our fault source, we are not victims- but rather our need is sourced by our own doing. It’s actually interesting that the ransom model is preferred in this place..… Because following the ransom model through- holding it to the same standard of analogous relationship- it only makes sense if Jesus is talking about those ultimately found faultless in the end- those specifically glorified in His righteousness.
"If Jesus paid the penalty for my sin, how does that equal forgiveness." "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." Romans 5:9 We have been saved from God's wrath by Jesus' atonement = Jesus took God's wrath away and now God can forgive us.
So Christ was *once offered to BEAR the sins of many* and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. {Hebrews 9:28} Strong's Definitions: ἀναφέρω anaphérō, an-af-er'-o; from G303 and G5342; to take up (literally or figuratively):-bear, bring (carry, lead) up, offer (up).
Another passage that comes to mind is John 3:36, "he who does not obey the son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him". What happened to the wrath of God for those who do obey, if scripture said it was there before? We see God's wrath tethered to his judgement, the end of which is punishment. But according to Isaiah 53 Christ bore "the punishment that brought us peace." Alana, I'm curious, in all the places where God says he passes over and shows mercy (in the Old Testament and such)... Do you not believe these were tethered in a forward-looking fashion to the cross of Jesus? (ie: the passover lamb a signpost to the Lamb of God)
@@AlanaL3 I ask because around 23:50 you made a comment that I understood to mean God forgives, passes over, pardons .... simply. like He says He does. Without reconciling His judgement. But if it is the cross that reconciles us, It wasn't simple. It required the bloodshed of Jesus. I think this is what Mike Winger means when he says it is the centrality of the gospel. I agree with your comment that there is a spiritual order, but I believe scripture teaches that God is its authority. The ultimate judge. There is no "order" or "standard" above Him, to which He is accountable. He is the perfect standard. In terms of keeping with scripture, I don't know of any passage that would lead us otherwise - Where God is not the ultimate authority. I would also submit that a lot of people circulating "models" of atonement... If you listen closely enough... You begin to hear postulations of a small regard for sin. A desire that seeks to say something like, my sin didn't warrant that suffering. This is also a false gospel, not the one of Christ. On idol killer, Paul Vendredi recently makes a comment about this and says, "you have this small idea of falling in the garden"... and He is likening it to the violence of the cross depicted in the Passion, essentially suggesting a smaller tragedy would have been more commensurate to the fall. To be clear, I believe the cross was far more tragic than Mel Gibson or any of us could imagine. In my estimation, This is deeply dangerous ideology to represent such ideas as the truth of the gospel.
I understood her to also say God can just forgive simply, which would then make me say…why the cross at all then? When someone “forgives” a debt, there is still a price someone is losing, there is still a cost to the one forgiving. It’s why I’d love for her to discuss how God can be both JUST And the Justifier and how his justice is seen on the cross. This “just forgiving sin simply” was very confusing since I have never seen this in scripture, quite the opposite. Maybe this is her simply asking a question she has not figured out the answer to yet and not making a definite statement.
Colossians 2:14 isn't talking about the debt. Idk what translation it is, but what it says is that he took the handwriting of ordinances that was against & contrary to us out of the way having nailed it to the cross. What handwriting "OF ORDINANCES" is there? That is THE LAW. Sin is the transgression of the law. God took the very thing that makes sin, sin, out of the way. Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth
God’s pledge to send the Seed, the propitiation for our sin, was to Adam and Eve. This gift would wipe away Eve’s belief that God was withholding something good from her; this gift would restore both Adam and Eve’s faith in God’s love. To say this ransom was offered to the snake suggests the snake had some position of power, when God paints him as a crushed “authority.” He is crushed by our heals as we walk forward in faith. Faith was restored to us in full when Christ withheld nothing on the cross.
Exodus 12:3 - 12:13 The Passover Lamb Genesis 22:7 “And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” King James Version (KJV) 1 John 2:2 “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” King James Version (KJV 1 Peter 1:19 “But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:” King James Version (KJV) John 1:29 “The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” King James Version (KJV) Jesus is our Passover Lamb... †††
Alana! I absolutely love how you process things and your willingness to examine the faith with so much intentionality and a pureness. Thank you for making this video. I wanted to ask if you have ever heard of David Bercot? Your journey, in many ways, reminds me of his as he was coming out of JW. He apparently went through all of the ante-nicene fathers writings in a year as he tried to examine his own faith and what he believed. My husband & I have benefited so much from his sermons. I haven't listened to his Atonement sermon, but my husband says it was really good. I'll link it below in case you're interested! czcams.com/video/RvZH3vqQ6I8/video.html czcams.com/video/OJceuCdgKI0/video.html
Of course, it is. In Jesus, there is the added principle of the kinsmen redeemer. It's why Jesus has to come from above in the fashion of sin and for sin to condemn sin in the flesh. So that we through transference can become the righteousness which is of God if we LIVE according to the faith (the eternal law).
Atonement and sacrifices are to be understood as relational/covenantal, not legal/contractual: “Gather to Me My saints, who made a covenant with Me by sacrifice.” Psalm 50:5 “Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.” 1 Samuel 15:22 “To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice” Proverbs 21:3. “In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted… Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required.” Psalm 40:6 “For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6 Flour was also acceptable for sin sacrifices! “But if he cannot afford two turtledoves or two pigeons, then he shall bring as his offering for the sin that he has committed a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He shall put no oil on it and shall put no frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering. And he shall bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take a handful of it as its memorial portion and burn this on the altar, on the LORD’s food offerings; it is a sin offering." Leviticus 5:11-12 A sacrifice is only legitimate after dealing with your internal problems: “You will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise…THEN will you delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings; THEN bulls will be offered on your altar.” Psalm 51:16,17,19 Also, Isaiah 1:11-18 Jesus taught that God wants your heart and relationships to be right BEFORE an offering is given. An offering is not a substitute for repenting and repairing the offense that had been done to another, and it is a gift to God, not a payment. “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. FIRST be reconciled to your brother, and THEN come and offer your gift.” Matthew 5:23-24 The idea that a sinner is restored by a blood transaction with an angry God is a serious misunderstanding of what people in Bible times understood.
“For by one sacrifice He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy” Hebrews 10:14 … But wait for it. Your translation surely records it differently?
@@Shark_fishing Good question. Hebrews 10:14 “For [because] by one offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” The greater context of verses 11-18 is about how Christ’s offering has changed us to take sins away from our lives and to write God’s law on our hearts. The offering in verse 14 is not a payment to God to get God to declare us righteous or to get God to forgive us. Rather, the verse points to the result of this offering, which is to perfect “those who are being sanctified.” The effect of the offering is a change in us, not a change in God. The word typically translated “forgiveness” in verse 18 is “aphesis”, which literally means "release." It is about us releasing our sinful ways of living which makes additional offerings unnecessary, not because they are all paid for, but because the bondage to sin has stopped and has been replaced by God’s law written on our hearts.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 oh man. I thought I understood you previously to say there’s no mention of “offering” in the New Testament in relation to Christs work…Do we have one in Hebrews!? So are you saying you believe Christs work is not what perfects or justifies us, but rather our changed lives and the right living that follows? I want to understand bc that how I’m reading your last post.
@@Shark_fishing Oh. Ok. I think I mentioned in another comment under this video that Is. 53:10 does not have the word "offering", that it was added by the translators. Maybe you read that and then remembered wrong. "The works of Christ" is a theological phrase that I have not found mentioned in the Bible. The phrase confuses the topic of works. Yes, the death and resurrection and blood covenant of Christ justify us - set us right. The word "justify" means to set something right, like moving something that is wrong to being right (either literally, mentally, or behaviourally). A declaration of being right is done after it has been rightened, not before, as that would be lying. But PSA typically jumps to a declaration, completely skipping the rightening. If a non-functional faith causes God to merely grant us an external legal righteousness, a mere status called "justified," with no corresponding change of heart, then we would still have a need for an external law to control and regulate our actions. Faith only voids the law if the faith is active and functional. Law is not needed if we are being faithful. Consider 1 Timothy 1:8-11, “Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching that agrees with the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.” Also Romans 3:31, “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.”
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 Maybe I forgot? Haha … more specifically You said Isaiah 53:10 is not referenced anywhere in the NT, which is most unusual if it was really referring to an “offering”…. And yet now we have offering in Heb speaking to what Jesus did on the cross. I use the words”work of Christ” most purposely because it sets a picture of *what Christ has done or does* vs *what we do* allowing for conversation sake to understand where another’s faith or dependence resides, especially when you think they may disagree with your language otherwise. I don’t know of anyone who believes in PSA (understanding well) but also believes you can have a non-functional faith. I would also submit that the law provides measure for our sanctification. 2 Corinthians 13:5 gives us something on this. What should we, the faithful, examine our hearts against? If not the law of God. Jesus says very pointedly in Matt 5:17 that He fulfills the law, not us, not our faith. I think your words flirt with what Paul warned the Galatians against, calling it a false gospel. But I could just be misunderstanding you.
Eve sinned because she thought God was a magician(just a phony holding out on her on how he got his power). She thought God was just a phony, who was subject to the affects of nature, instead of supernatural ( above the laws of nature we understand). In a nutshell, she thought God had forgotten to invite her to the “party” and so he was WITHHOLDING something good from her. She was smart enough to understand you don’t forget about what or who you love , not even for a minute. So, what did God do to restore her faith and so save her from her sin and restore a right relationship with her? He gave his all through the life he lived, died and rose again. He was constantly giving and knowing us in our pain through all of that! Was it Satan or Eve God needed to pay a ransom to in exchange for her being saved by his grace through faith? His pledge was to Eve and Adam not Satan. God responded to this lack of faith Eve had by making a promise about sending a “Seed, “but before he made the promise he planted faith in this now mortals heart by meeting her practical need with clothes to shield her from the now harmful elements, and he didn’t just clothe her with “something.” We have reason to believe it would have been a lambs skin, which is the most supple and luxurious leather of all, and he did this for people who ruined the world with their sin and doubt. He planted this “Seed” promise in her heart, through sacrificing on her behalf what she would have perceived as the most precious of his creation to cover her nakedness( her lack). Remember she had not had a baby yet, so a lamb would have been prized as God’s most precious creation in her eyes. She would have held that lamb at some point just loving it like her own toddler. This sacrifice was enough to restore her faith that God was not withholding something from her. Still, Eve looked forward to this Promise of “Seed” in faith the way we look back on it in faith. Through having sorrow and conception, she would CONCEIVE how greatly the father loved her. God planted a seed( Jesus), and he will take root in the hearts of some while being aborted by others. He gave his all on the cross,; he gave faith to us all through demonstrating his unfailing, never ending love, and then after enduring all that trauma, he rose from the dead to love us still more. The natural thing for him to have done would be to lie in the tomb until noon crying over trauma he had just been through and wrap his arms tightly around self, but still he was thinking of Mary, Thomas and everyone who were crying and afraid. He was thinking of you, and even if you don’t recognize his presence as they didn’t, just know he is with you and he is taking care of what concerns you. The wise person takes note of that and doesn’t tear down what he is building for you. Hear his words . I believe faith is sometimes learned or given as a gift through difficult times. Praise God for those struggles on the job or at home, because it is revealing the life ( and fruit) of Christ through your response of faith.. Eve was actually reaching for “enlightenment “ when she reached for the forbidden fruit. Then after she sinned, God told her that he would greatly multiply not just her sorrow but her “ conception,” a synonym for “enlightenment “ or “sight.” Now Calvary might has well been the darkest corner of the earth. It actually looked like a skull, and it was a place where cult members didn’t just kill a person; they mastered how to torcher a person so that they were on the brink of death without actually dying until they decided the torcher was over( that is why they whipped him 39 times, because 40 times was known to kill and that is why they cut in the cold, because it kept their victim from bleeding to death….). The soldiers on this skull shaped hill were cult members , who called Caesar “god” and they were trained to be like vipers, just hardened killers who had no compassion. This was he darkest corner of the earth, and Jesus willingly went there. Why? Because he had made a promise to Eve. The Centurion was Eve’s great, great, great…..grandson. It wasn’t a light thing for him to acknowledge Jesus to be “The Son of God” around these cult members trained to kill. These words were traitorous for him to say. These weren’t casual words. These were words of faith. God had restored faith even in the darkest corner of the earth. I believe sometimes faith comes the hard way, and God was willing to bring enlightenment of who he is even in this worst place with the worst people, because when they see him for who he is, it changes people; this sight given through seeing Christ on the cross, redeems the prizes God lost under that forbidden tree so long before it resulted in such an awful fly seen on that hill. But was it really so awful compared to beautiful it was to see God’s passion is this great not just for Adam and Eve but for their children? If you ever doubt the love of God, remember the cross. Remember the resurrection. One would think the cross would be enough, but his love is even greater than that and he is still preparing a place for you that where he is there you MIGHT be also. What business man would give his absolute all so that he might have a return? A creator who loves you more than you can fathom.
Thanks for making this video. I was taught PSA for years and believed it thinking it was biblical. Now I cringe when I hear RC Sproul preaching his famous "God cursed Christ on the Cross" sermon. Very scary tradition that many people continue to hold to. PSA and "Double Imputation" were all doctrines that I took for granted because men like Sproul and MacArthur taught them. 😢
"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us-for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” Galatians 3:13
Where the Bible talks about debt as sin or owing God something: Matthew 18:21-35. The parable of the unforgiving servant. The Master forgave the huge debt of a servant but then that servant did not forgive a small debt of his fellow servant. Jesus compares this to the Kingdom of Heaven and forgiving sins. Also every translation I checked (maybe 10 to 12 major translations) has "debts" in the Lord's prayer in Matthew 6, not trespasses. I could not find a single one that translated it trespasses in the Lord's prayer, although Jesus' commentary about it after the prayer includes the word trespasses. It seems this word was substituted for debts in The Book of Common Prayer a version but not an actual translation which became popular. Also in the gospel of Luke with a shorter version of the prayer, it has "sins". But Matthew uses the word debts as a metaphor for sins or trespasses according to Jesus' commentary after it. I think the forgiving debts metaphor is a good one. It shows how the forgiven debtor pays nothing even though they had a large debt to pay, but yet the one who forgave the debt pays it all. He absorbs the cost. Like if you burned down a large building but the owner forgave you. That owner would be the one to absorb that cost, paying the price to rebuild himself. I think that is what Jesus did on the cross. He absorbed the debt himself. And it hurt big time. But he forgave anyway. Overall good thoughts. I appreciate your testimony and I love how you study the Bible. However, don't shun all topical study. We have great resources like Bible concordances (even before Google!) to assist. God bless!
@@AlanaL3 yes... And he calls it a debt we owe to the King. Also the Lord's prayer calls sin "debt" and it's not even in a parable. You can try to say it's just a metaphor and I agree, it is, but that is how Jesus explains what is going on spiritually and it literally in the Bible.
Jist so it is clear, pSA is not an exclusively Calvinist doctrine, and the language of it is found in the Church Fathers other than Augustine and Anselm
What if we were never meant to pick apart and analyze scripture like this? What if we’re just supposed to understand it simply. We have sinned against God and our sin separates us from him. But God so loved the world that he gave his only son and whoever would believe in him would not perish, but have eternal life. Why do we need to know anything else? I believe that all of the discussion about these things and the arguments are only a distraction from resting in Christ.
You only read the New Testament? God’s wrath on the suffering servant is depicted in Isaiah 53. I think to understand the full witness of the Gospel you must also include Old Testament accounts on the atonement.
I believe scripture speaks clearly on the atonement. (Isaiah 53:4-12, Mat 26, Rom 5:6-8, Heb 9:12-14) just a few. I dont believe you can say "spiritual mystery" about the atonement but not give the same olive branch to calvinists in regards to freewill/determinism. This is based on your previous "in and out videos" (48:12) you mention the "gospel coming back void" everytime a calvinist preaches to an unbeliever. I would ask, does it return void when a non calvinist preaches and the person doesnt respond? Or responds positively but later loses their salvation? If a person freely decides to turn away, did the gospel not produce salvation? I am not sure how you can speak so matter of fact against calvinism in that you KNOW it is wrong. How do you know? How do you know you are correct if arminians/calvinists etc...use the same bible and scriptures. I have no idea what you are trying to convey at the (12:13) mark. It seems like you are under the impreasion that unbelievers only receive death and do not go to hell when they die. I coukd be wrong, its very difficult to understand that part. Especially bc right after you explain how Jesus defeated death. (19:00) why cant this topic be concrete? Why can others be concrete but not this one? (20:00-21:15) tough to follow other than a bad joke about people being in danger of "not being flexible etc..." (23:00-24:00) "God pardons, forgives, passes over like he says he does and i believe thats what happened on the cross, forgiveness of sins" I would ask, did God pardon Jesus? (Rom 8:32) yes he is forgiving sins but sin requires blood(Heb 9:22) You mention how it doesnt change anything bc you dont know and its just stuff. You still love Jesus....etc Mormons say they love Jesus and he is their savior....etc. are they speaking about the same Jesus as you and I? My take away was that you started with 3 questions around a year ago and still dont have an answer for any of them, or at least an answer you like.
Your on the right track sis. PSA is not biblical. Literal human sacrifice is a very pagan practice. Jesus is making atonement for us now as high priest if we confess our sin. I suggest u start at the beginning of time as this is when God began ie Genesis. Otherwise u will have a different God, think about it - what book would u start near the back?. Unless someone had told u there are two books and two people's (false!). The first thing u should do is rip out that man made page that divides people's and God. Have a look at when the new testament (covenant) begins - Jer31, ie at the resurrection when we will sin no more. Think about it! One God one faith 👍
Amazingly the New Living Translation gets this one right. It is understood that Jesus didn't actually (metaphysically) become sin (since sin is a choice). Instead He was a 'sin offering.' New Living Translation For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “…so that IN him we might become the righteousness of God,” not "from him." "In" is about association, solidarity, not a transfer. It is by being “in” Christ that we can have God’s righteousness, which is about following Christ as our leader, living and behaving as he did. Righteousness is what we do because we are associated with Christ. It is not delegated or assigned to us. “Become the righteousness of God” in Greek is, “be becoming the righteousness of God.” This is about transitioning from a condition of unrighteousness, toward righteousness. Becoming righteous is not a status or a position or a transfer, or a declaration. It is similar to, "that we might die to sin and live to righteousness" in 1 Peter 2:24. The greater context is about Christ reconciling us to God, which is relational, not legal. If an external righteousness is transferred to us in total disregard of our actually ceasing to offend, no genuine reconciliation has occurred. The plea of Paul is that WE be reconciled TO God. The first step in any process of reconciliation is to stop offending. Until the offenses cease, there can be no genuine reconciliation. So, to read this passage with the idea that we are not required to stop offending and that reconciliation occurs due to an imparting of righteousness from a third party destroys the very intent of the passage, which is that we be reconciled TO God.
It is true nobody really knows why the Almighty demands the death of those who sin, but be it as it is, Jesus in union with the Spirit of the Father, and by the act of evil men against him, the Almighty used that act to rescue humanity from the power of sin and death which comes from the Law given to Moses. Sin gets its power from the Law, death from sin, and our sinful nature is what causes us to sin although we as gentiles have never been under the Law of God. The Almighty can only give His Spirit to a righteous person, just as He gave it to Jesus, but because of his death, those who view Jesus’s death as the only way for the Almighty to forgive our sins, will be granted the righteousness of Jesus just as Abraham believed God and he was considered righteous. When we are considered righteous, Jesus promised to send the Spirit of the Father to that person, making that person a son of the Almighty and giving that person the capacity to become truly righteous by the fruit the Spirit produces which is Love.
Matthew 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of his people.
we can't tell whether the Father actually turned His face away from the Lord Jesus Christ. But we do know that the Father forsook His Son, because the Lord Jesus Christ explicitly said, My God My God, why has Thou forsaken Me?.
@@AlanaL3 Ok, so you're basically saying that David and Jesus felt forsaken but that wasn't the reality of things. In other words, David and Jesus were simply mistaken in thinking that God forsook them when in reality He didn't. Am I understanding you correctly?
“Jesus died "for" our sin, but the English word "for" can have a range of meanings, such as an exchange or a cause of action. There is a specific Greek word that indicates an exchange or a replacement, and it is the word "anti." An example of this is when Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for [anti] an eye and a tooth for [anti] a tooth.'" Both of the words translated as "for" in this verse are the Greek word "anti." It's literally, "an eye in place of an eye," or "an eye instead of an eye," or "an eye against an eye." However, the word "anti" is NEVER used even once in ANY statement regarding the fact that "Christ died for us." The word "for" in ALL of the statements of "Christ died for us" or "Christ died for our sin," are the Greek words "dia" (meaning through), "hyper" (meaning over), and "peri" (meaning around). Not once in the Greek text is there a direct substitutionary statement used about Jesus literally taking our place as an exchange or a payment. Nevertheless, translators seem to have preferred to use the much more ambiguous word "for" as that enables the teacher and reader to assume things about the text that were never intended.”
God DOES give us enough to understand why Jesus had to die, and God DOES say its important, in fact, accursed is every false Gospel. The wrath of God must punish all sin-the Law brings wrath, we flee the wrath to come, we are saved from wrath through him, he treads the wine press of the wrath of Almighty God, he overturns mountains in his wrath. Everywhere in Scripture wrath is connected to sin, it's punishment, it's wages. Not mere physical death which is easy and over in a moment. There IS no lack of debt talk. The parable of the servant owed ten thousand talents. OWED. That is the unpayable debt of sin. Now clearly, you see that even in that time this amount of money could never be paid. And due to the debt, the servant was turned over to the torturers until ALL should be paid back. And you studied through the NT?!! Clearly with bias. Colossians said he nailed the certificate of debt to the cross. Payment language is constantly used in Scripture. He purchased souls for God. Christ suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. He who knew no sin became sin for us. Without the shedding of blood there IS no forgiveness of sin. It is not pricking Jesus' finger. It's his suffering. I DO fear for you. This IS the centrality of the Gospel. "Why are there so many theories." Because the DEVIL does not SIT on his hands! Saying that standing for the truth is dangerous is INSANE. Compromise and not caring about the truth is a HALLMARK of demonic deception. How can one say caring about the truth is dangerous? That is literally insane?! Jesus took the punishment we deserved. If you make the Gospel something else, you stand against Scripture, you stand against the Gospel, you stand against the Holy Spirit, you stand against logic, and you stand against your own conscience. By lowering the consequence of sin, not requiring it be fully paid, you cheapen both God's holiness and how evil sin is. There is no saving the world while trampling on the holiness of God. Jesus DID become a curse. You "don't see it as saying" what the words actually and literally say. Shouldn't that concern you at least a small bit? It absolutely should. The fear of God is the BEGINNING of knowledge. The Law promised wrath for sin. The Law brings wrath, Romans 3. Yes, the atonement is SO strong and SO powerful that it will literally forgive those who try to saw off the branches they are sitting on, by denying the holiness of God and the evilness of sin. But you will be misleading many and preaching lies and incurring disciplinary judgment on yourself and loving a lie of the devil. Is that how you want to go to heaven? I would take this VERY seriously, and deception IS working in your life, and those you have associated yourself with, and trusted too much.
The everlasting gospel was preached in the garden. See Genesis 3 The sacrifices of Able (and Cains apostasy) was enacting the sacrifice that Jesus Christ make on the cross.
Col. 2:14 is usually not translated accurately - several translations try to make this verse be about Jesus canceling a sin debt, but the phrase “record of debt” is not in the Greek! The Berean Literal Bible matches the Greek text: “having blotted out the handwriting in the decrees against us, which was adverse to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” Paul’s point is about the cancellation of “the handwriting in the decrees,” a reference to the Mosaic law, and that they should not accept criticism “in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.” This verse, when translated properly and read carefully within its full context, is not about canceling a debt of sin, but about canceling the ordinances of the Mosaic law, to the benefit of both Jews and Gentiles.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 I was actually thinking if it was that. Not necessarily having to do with our sin, but having to do with the law, which is why it reminds me of the Ephesians 2 passage, as well as the Galatians three passage, I shared. They seem to all be communicating the same thing. The law has been “canceled out, moved to the side, nail to the cross.” Jesus fulfilled the law, and now we are free from it. Very interesting.
@@AlanaL3 Romans 3:31 “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.” Active, functional faith will uphold lawful living because its source, God, is the source of all that is defined as righteous. God’s law is a restraint to govern the lawless. Those who have active faith live to please God and don’t have to be concerned about obeying the written law because they will be fulfilling God’s law anyway, thereby making the codified (Mosaic) law irrelevant for that individual. Godly people uphold the law by default. However, if a non-functional faith causes God to merely grant us an external legal righteousness, a mere status called "justified," with no corresponding change of heart, then we would still need an external law to control and regulate our actions. Faith only voids the law if the faith is active and functional. Law is not needed IF we are being faithful. 1 Timothy 1:8-11, “Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching that agrees with the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”
Dit you understand the penal atonement doctrine? We have broken God's law. God's justice demands that we bear the penalty for that transgression. Jesus took the punishment so that God is now just when he forgives us. Read Isaiah 53. The punishment that brings us peace was upon Him. Why don't you listen to the Bible, Paul said that a woman should not give spiritual teaching and that is exactly what you are doing.
Former Non-Calvinist here: In John 3:16 the Greek word for “whosoever” is (πᾶς/ transliteration: pas) which can be translated as: all, every, everything, everyone. In other words the english translation could read “that all the believing ones”. Unfortunately this rigid translation does not read well in the English. Thus, the translation would read better as “all who believes” or “everyone who believes” or “whoever believes”. Notice that this language does not necessitate an offer but sheds light on the promise of eternal life to the believing ones. The text does not infer who will indeed believe or who has the capability to believe.
Sure, but the context is that God loved the world. That's everybody. So, yeah the actual salvation from damnation comes to the one who believes. Jesus died so that the one who believes will be saved, but the act of God the Father in giving His own Son to achieve this salvation, was for the World, not only those who end up believing. The unbelievers may not get the effect of the giving of Jesus, but it was intended for them as well from the get-go. Only the believers gets the salvation in Jesus, but the intended extent was for the world. What some calvinists do is, because only the believer actually gets saved, they extrapolate from this and say that only the individual who believes was the intended focus of God giving us Jesus, and NOT those who didn't end up believing. Put it like this, God the Father gave his son with the intent to save the one who ends up believing and getting saved, equally and as much as he intended it for the one who doesn't end up believing. The unbelievers and believers were both equally in mind when God gave his son to save. That's something I don't think certain Calvinists can affirm, no matter how they wiggle and squeeze to decietfully come off with a yes.
Its a difficult topic and you're right, there are so many different ways Christians have understood the Work of Christ.
But what is it?
@@aadschram5877 I have several series on my channel addressing the different views
You are a precious sister in Christ. You love our Lord, and that is guiding you away from traditional strongholds. I am so encouraged by your ability to see the truth apart from man's preconceived ideas and doctrines. Some time if you ever have time please look at my series refuting PSA on RU-Noble CZcams called Atonement Theories Only. After Warren did his 17 part series I studied PSA daily for nearly 3 years. I had to walk away from it. The incredible thing is as a church planter in Eastern Europe for 12 years I literally put it in every gospel presentation I ever gave! As I said before, you are a special voice of reasoning and discernment the Lord has blessed His people with. May He continue to open the eyes of your heart more and more in your understanding of just how loving He is. I mentioned my video series on PSA simply because I came to many of the same conclusions you did and dropping PSA allowed me to see the Love of the Father for the first time in over 30 years of walking with Him.
Thanks for sharing your life window, you're fully human and in faith in Christ
Thank you Alana. The atonement is something I recently have been led to study deeply for the first time, too. My first thought was, if Jesus took our punishment for sin, why do all of us still suffer punishment for our sins? We still experience all the curses God gave Adam. So I agree with you, the punishment we avoid is the second death, which is God's wrath. Here's a few of my other thoughts inspired by Scripture.
I remember from my youth, the Roman Catholics (wrong on just about everything), used the right word you believe also - expiation, not propiation. An expiation doesn't require the person paying the debt to be the guilty party, they can be innocent in the matter. In an expiation, the debt isn't just canceled, it isn't even recorded in the first place - as if it was never owed. That's how thoroughly Jesus’ death has set a Believer free from any condemnation of sin (past, present and future).
Jesus’ death also bought back the deed to the earth. God gave Adam, male and female, dominion over the whole earth, but their sin of obeying the evil one, instead of God, resulted in earth's dominion being handed over to Satan. The deed to earth is the scroll with the seven seals no man could open in Rev 5:7 - except the slain Lamb. When the final seal is opened, the earth will be released from its corruption and God will return it to its former glory for His resurrected, immortal children in Christ to enjoy forever.
(There's more to it - it was a fulfillment of a Hebrew law, that stated when a Jew owed a debt and his land deed was being held by the one owed, the closest relative with the means to pay the debt must be offered a chance to buy it first, before the land could be sold to a stranger to pay off the debt. Jesus' flesh ancestry goes back to Adam. He's the closest relative to him who was able to pay his sin debt).
I believe Christ's flesh was the same as ours, mortal. When in the days of His flesh He wasn't being God, but heing human (He WAS with God, and He WAS God, John 1, but humbled Himself to live only in the flesh for 33 years). And it's appointed to every man to die once. He had to die for His body to be resurrected immortal. This is how Jesus is the eternal Father (Isaiah 53) of the redeemed human race; the first Adam is the father of the fallen human race.
While you're studying, I encourage you to keep an eye out to find a passage in Scripture that requires one to believe in a Trinity to receive eternal life.
May God Bless you in your walk; you do bless me.
Thank you for making this video Alana! It comes at a good time for me as I very much relate to what you were saying in the beginning about your coming out of Calvinism. As I have come away from and now reject the tenets of the Calvinistic system, I have begun to rethink and question so many other things, the atonement is one of them. I too am being careful with my language and I am analyzing every song we sing in church (I am still in a Calvinist leaning church with a very reformed pastor who is a big PSA defender). It’s funny you mentioned How Deep the Father’s Love for Us..:we just sang that recently and because I think I don’t agree with PSA now, I didn’t want to sing that line about the Father turning his face away.
I really love how you walked through each Scripture and reviewed what each says. It was so helpful!
I also wanted to say that it upsets me when PSA is made out to be the Gospel. I read an article one time from a well known para church org disparaging The Bible Project because their sacrifice and atonement video as well as their Romans videos do not talk about the wrath of God being satisfied and our sins being paid for. Because they see that as central to the Gospel, they cast suspicion on Tim Mackie and the Bible Project. But TBP’s video on sacrifice and atonement focuses on all the things you talked about and uses the Biblical language. So for them and many others, if a Biblical scholar doesn’t hold to PSA, they are borderline heretical. Ugh.
I also appreciate your nuance and flexibility in saying that there are multiple theories and the Scripture speaks to many aspects of them.
God bless. ❤
Good video and. Thanks for info keep doing that nice work big like 👍👍👍👍👍👍
Great video Alana! I agree with much of what you said, hopefully adherents of PSA will consider it.
Why am I not surprised that you would cover PST? ❤ I love it. We are kindred spirits, sister. I too see Biblical Christianity in opposition to Calvinistic Theology and my dad and I have recently been hashing out Christus Victor and Penal Substitution. I find that William Lane Craig holds the best arguement in favor of PST and yet I also have to reject the wrath element of it and absolutely see solid Biblical evidence for Christus Victor and the fact that Jesus is the fulfillment of all righteousness, that through Him was the death of death and that He ultimately defeated evil on the cross. Through Him, we can live a victorious Christian life. I too will have a series on Calvinism on my channel soon, Lord willing, and am considering discussing PST as well. I so appreciate your desire for truth and desire to understand Scripture coherently for what it says as a whole. ❤
Have you actually done a word study on wrath?
Lol... I am laughing because I do the same thing with old hymns and songs.... One of the first ones that got me thinking when leaving Calvinism was Silent Night. How many times have I sang that song and not really paid attention to the part that says "no crying He made" . Why would someone think Jesus didn't cry? Oh, that is right, a crying baby is a selfish sinful baby in Calvinism....... Oh boy..... It makes so much more sense that God does exactly what He expects and teaches us to do. Simply forgive. He forgives, restores, heals..... "By His stripes we are healed"
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.” Leviticus 17:11. Like you said, it’s true because God says it’s so!
The context of Lev. 17:11 is saying that the reason blood should not be eaten as food is because blood is used as a covering on the altar, a covering for their lives. This does not say anything about blood being a payment for sin, nor that God needs blood to forgive. It is not giving instructions about sin sacrifices. The reason to not eat blood is that blood represents life, not as an exchange of life-for-life, rather it symbolizes the life of the offeror. Furthermore, the verse does not state that blood is the only thing acceptable for atonement. In the case of sin offerings, flour was also acceptable (Leviticus 5:11-12). It is a mistake to use Leviticus 17:11 out of context to promote a doctrine that is not really there.
Hi Alana,
I think it was interesting you brought up Mike Winger and his video on PSA. I too reacted to his view that it's dangerous to deny PSA and that might mean you are not even saved. I don't believe doctrines save you, but faith in Christ does. My opinion is you only need to believe the very basics, Christ died for our sins and was resurrected for our salvation. However it might be helpful to hold to some more detailed doctrines of the atonement. I believe Christ on the cross took on himself what sin deserves, the consequence of sin, death. He paid the price for sin so to speak, conquered sin for us. Make of it what you like. Christ love! ✝️
Thanks again, Alana ❤
I have recently come to find that theologists too quickly state with absolute certainty ideas that cannot be known with that kind of conviction since they are not spelled out specifically in the Word.
Particularly, how Adam sinning affected all future humanity.
All atonement theories are irrelevant. The importance of the atonement through Christ's death on the cross resides in its necessity for our salvation.
Good news… your so right!!! I don’t think the thief on the cross didn’t understand the inner workings of the spirit world, he just believed Jesus was the way and believed
Alana.. wow... this was a fantastic study... thank you for doing it. "Possibility Space" is a very good place to keep things we aren't 100% sure about and we can meditate on and consider them as we grow and change. I agree with your conclusions. I think there are serious problems with PSA and you pin-pointed a major one around minute 59:00 with the "wrath" issue... saying God pour out all His wrath on Jesus sounds like "Universalism" but I digress.
Amen brother!
The Bible uses words like "propitiation," "ransom," and "atonement" to describe the death of Christ. These terms all have their roots in the Old Testament sacrificial system, especially the Day of Atonement.
Isa. 53:4-6 specifically says that "Surely our griefs He Himself bore, / And our sorrows He carried; . . . But He was pierced throughfor our transgressions, / He was crushed for our iniquities; / The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, / And by His scourging we are healed. / All of us like sheep have gone astray, / Each of us has turned to his own way; / But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all / To fall on Him." (You should especially hear Handel's musical rendition of this last verse in Messiah).
Paul begins his comprehensive explanation of the gospel in Romans by stating "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (1:18) and then proceeds to lay out the scope of human depravity in the next two chapters. This lays the backdrop for his statement in 3:25,26 that Christ was "displayed publicly as a propitiation in HIs blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over 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." God is just; He must punish sin. Christ took our penalty for us.
The Epistle to the Hebrews goes into an extensive discussion of the priestly work of Christ, stating in 9:22 "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness," and Christ was "offered once to bear the sins of many" (v. 28). The author goes on in 10:1-18 to describe how Christ was the perfect offering for sin.
It's a little hard to see how one can escape the conclusion of Penal Satisfaction view of the Atonement.
Yes! He is quoting the psalms, singing his way backto Joy as Jim Wilder says
Alana, I highly recommend Dallas Willard's talks on CZcams. He has one titled The Cross of Christ and tje Atonement, and another called Spiritual Formation as a Natural part of Salvation. I ALSO LOVE HIS series on CZcams Knowing Christ Today. And his The divine conspiracy talks. His books are wpnderful, but listening to him on youtube has been balm to my soul the past 7 years.
I appreciate Dallas Willard so much. Balm to the soul is right!
Funny because I have been looking at the atonement to better understand. JC Lamont has a Christus Victor series I think you should do a review on
Yeah what you said about reading so much into scripture. Man, people go crazy with that and it's like, why?!
- Rachel
I would offer that we see PSA most clearly illustrated in Isaiah 53:
"But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. . . Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand." (Isa. 53:5,10).
The wording here seems clear that our sins are placed upon Jesus and the Father's wrath is upon him on account of these sins.
When we consider also that Jesus is the "lamb of God" and we consider that in the Old Testament sacrificial system the sins of the people were transferred to the offered animal, and the animal was then sacrificed on account of those sins, it seems difficult to arrive at any conclusion other than that Jesus took our sins upon him and died on account of those sins, in our place.
I think if you go back to read the OT passages for yourself, you will see that you are confusing two separate rituals. Sins were laid on the scapegoat but it was not killed. It was chased away. The yearly sacrifice of atonement involved the priest's and the people's sins being cleansed by being sprinkled with the blood of an innocent animal. In neither case were animals "punished".
@@mrgrossism I am simply referring to the sacrificial system in its totality. The animals took on the guilt of the people and were killed in the place of the sinner. (Or in the case of the scapegoat, sent off to die.)
@@sorenpx Can I ask where you are getting your information? Is it coming directly from the Bible?
What I see in Leviticus is that when it came to sacrifices, "taking on the guilt of the people" and "killed in the place of the sinner" are two separate things. Most of the offerings for cleansing and atonement involved a sinner laying his hands on the animal, signifying this animal was taking his place in death. The scapegoat, though, was different. The high priest (originally Aaron) would "lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites - all their sins - and put them on the goat's head." (Leviticus 16:21) This is the only time you will see this kind of language used about laying the sins of the people on an animal. THIS goat was taken out into the desert and released, taking those sins far away from the Israelites. It was not killed.
@@mrgrossism If I remember correctly, from Leon Morris's "The Atonement," the scapegoat was not expected to live. And I believe he also said that the scapegoat was sometimes forced off the side of a cliff to its death.
In any case, if the animals were not being sacrificed in the place of the sinner--which carries with it the notion of the animals taking on the guilt of the sinner--why were they sacrificed?
@@sorenpx The animals except for the scapegoat WERE being sacrificed in the place of the sinner, but to say that that necessarily "carries with it the notion of the animals taking on the guilt of the sinner" is a presupposition planted by the proponents of PSA. It's not there in the text, is what I am saying. One could imagine other ways the sacrifice could function - for instance, if I must kill this innocent lamb with my own hands, then I am being reminded of the gravity of my sins and the reality of the death which sin brings. Also, Leviticus has a lot to say about the blood and how the animals' blood is spread and where because "the life is in the blood". It is God's provision, pouring out its blood so that I do not have to pour out mine - why does there have to be an element of it carrying my sins?
Alana I really appreciate you as a sister, I can tell you I was never taught Calvinism, Penal substitution was shown to through scripture. I came from Roman Catholism, God showed me the truth through his word not some man made teaching ,that Jesus paid our sin debt. Blessings!
Curious,
Scripture say you’ve earned a wage
You say you have a debt ?
🤔
@@markshaneh Thanks for the responce, I didn't respond to debate but encourage.
I have loved your channel and been watching for a long time ❤ I came across the word Redeem in Exodus 13:13 the other day. I thought it was odd because i never remembered reading it in the OT before. So i looked up the definition of redeem. It is very interesting... The whole system of the law was payment for sin. Isaiah 53 says it so beautifully. The whole chapter... It pleased the Lord to bruise Him... Gods punishment because of sin was upon us and had to be redeemed but Gods mercy and kindness and love has always been present, always. Because we were His creation and His children. He always gave us a way out. I dont think that means He is an angry God that only wants vengeance. (Look at Cains mark and the story of Abraham standing with the Lord and talked him down to 10 in reference to Sodom and Gemorrah. He has always been a very personal God. But sin had to be dealt with. The wrath in Revelations is upon unbelievers who are still denying Christ. We are not under His punishment because we have Christ. They are because they will still deny. Rev 16. He was still giving them a way out but they were choosing to blaspheme and not repent.
Isaiah 53 has multiple translation biases to favor PSA. Also, a literal ransom and redemption payment results in absurdities if carefully thought through. For example, consider “redeemed us from the curse” (Gal. 3:13), “redeem those under the law” (Gal. 4:5), “redeem us from all lawlessness” (Titus 2:14), and “redeemed from the empty way of life” (1 Peter 1:18). None of these statements involve a transfer of a payment from one party to another. They are all figuratively picturing a release. Jesus did not make a literal transaction with anyone. Jesus redeemed us (set us free) from the addiction and bondage of sin so we would be the servants of God and display God’s righteousness. For this reason, God is just and righteous in passing over our former sins (Romans 3:25).
Psalm 74:2 is a good example of both “purchase” and “redeem” being used as metaphors: “Remember Your congregation, which You have purchased of old, which You have redeemed to be the tribe of Your inheritance; and this Mount Zion, where You have dwelt.” The point here is that Israel belongs to God because God is the one who directly intervened to do what was needed to liberate Israel from bondage. In Psalm 74:2, the psalmist is praying and requesting God to remember that Israel belongs to Him because it was He who set them free from their bondage.
A similar verse is Exodus 15:13, part of the song of Moses immediately after the Red Sea crossing: “You have led in your steadfast love the people whom you have redeemed; you have guided them by your strength to your holy abode." Again, the word “redeemed” is being used to show freedom, liberty, or release, not a payment.
Moses himself is said to be the redeemer in Acts 7:35 “This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’-this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush.” Moses was their liberator as God’s agent. The use of “redeem” as a metaphor should be obvious, as it is frequently understood with the meaning “to liberate, to free”, and not to pay.
The blood of Christ is mighty precious because it is the basis of our covenant with Christ and our loyalty to him. In contrast, if blood is reduced to a mere substance for bartering with God, then it cheapens both the blood and the holiness of God. The atonement is primarily relational, not legal.
Honesty is so important. When we read the Bible and find something not spelled out - and, folks, even the Trinity is not spelled out the way we are taught it is so important to understand it - it’s okay to speak in Biblical terms and just leave it at that, not rejecting people for having a different understanding. We can continue talking patiently with one another - because maybe there is something important we can bring to each other. If so, it will be a service, not an imprisonment.
There are things clearly spelled out in the Bible which get very little attention.
Well said.
Alana been on a similar journey myself,I realised a few years ago after being a Christian for 30 years
that I knew nothing about the atonement except psa,I began to read about scapegoat,Christ's Victor ,ransom being paid to death to deliver us from a cruel master.Sometimes when you've been a Calvanist you have some much fear of not reading scripture with Calvanist specs on.So much mystery .Oh the depths of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God.Whos ways are unsearchable AND PAST FINDING Out!!! ROMANS.Thanks for your humility.
One of the ways I've heard and been leaning towards in regards to understanding our atonement is that it was *our conscience* that needed to be appeased with death/blood. This theory would help to make sense of these Scriptures:
Hebrews 9:14
How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Hebrews 10:2
For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
As for those who hold to PSA, I have heard them use Tetelestai as "proof". They say that Jesus saying "It is finished" (Tetelestai) is a Greek word denoting "Paid in Full". When I decided to actually research this I found that Jesus was actually using the same word just a couple verses earlier to say that He "accomplished" all the the law/prophets had written for Him to fulfill.
John 19:28-30
After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now *accomplished*, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.
Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is *finished*: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
There is no verse that says God is so Holy that He *can’t* look at sin. How can this be true and it still be true that He is omniscient?
It was the wrath of *man* that Jesus experienced in His beating & death.
You were wondering why you wrote 1 Peter 2:24. It might have been because it talks about Jesus trusting God the Father to “judge righteously”. If the Father poured out His wrath on Jesus that would be unjust as Jesus had no sin.
Thanks for posting. It did feel like we were doing Bible study together. Keep 'em coming!
Did God need a whipping boy to vent his frustration out on, punishing someone else for another’s crime
Or
Did God so “ LOVE “ the world that he sent his only begotten son
Because God loves us and wants us reconciled to himself
God wants us to follow Him and not the god of this world
Could it be that simple, the cross was a mercy seat of love for fallen humans
A previous unattainable position that is now a “ FREE GIFT “
3:46 this song! I've wondered this
20 min in… wonderful discussion. You may be interested in the book “The “Gospel” of Divine Abuse” by Eitan Bar. He’s a Jewish scholar and makes some for he same observations you’ve pointed out.
Interesting things to ponder. I'm not a Calvinist, but in this particular question of "Did The Father turn His face on Christ on the cross?" it does make one ask, was Jesus quoting Psalm 22, or was Psalm 22 quoting Jesus? The Jews at the time didn't understand what He was saying or doing, because it was recorded that they thought He was calling out to Elijah when He said "Eli Eli". In any event, if The Father did indeed turn His face, then we can still be assured that He will not turn His face on us. For Christ bore the punishment for our sins, not us. So, if part of the punishment for sins is The Father turning His face from the sin-bearer, Christ bore that for us, so we would never have to. I like what you said about there is a freedom of interpretation here. There certainly is, and many of our Calvinist brothers and sisters are very uncomfortable with that for sure.
When Jesus cried from the cross, he was yelling to those witnessing this historical event,
Psalm 22, Psalm 22
Psalm 22 is being fulfilled before your very eyes,
It confirms that “ IAM”
I confirm and fulfil this prophecy
It was a much needed reminder to all who witnessed Jesus and his ministry that all was going to Gods plan and God indeed is in control of a seemingly tragic set of events.
One of my hesitations with Ransom Theory is that it seems to place God and Satan on the same level since the ransom is being paid to Satan. Maybe I don't understand the whole process correctly. How I have always understood the Cross is this; God is perfect in justice and he is also perfect in his love. The only way for sin to be reconcilled is for God's Son (the perfect lamb) to pay the price/wage.
That’s why I don’t want a title. I agree about Satan not being the one God pays a ransom to:)
What wage does sin need paid? Where do you see that in scripture?
*He made a pit* and digged it, and is fallen into the ditch which he [satan / the scapegoat] made.
His mischief *shall return upon his own head* and his violent dealing shall come down upon his own pate.
{Psalm 7:15-16}
@@AlanaL3hey sweet sister I haven’t watched the whole video yet but I always understood Roman’s 6:23 as saying our sin earned us death .
@@lilyanaalvarez3539 “The wages of sin is death" must be read in context. Romans 6:22-23 "But NOW that you have been SET FREE FROM SIN and have become slaves of God, the FRUIT you get LEADS to sanctification and ITS END, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."
When read together, the consequence ("the fruit") of being "set free from sin" is eternal life, and the wages, the consequence of sin, is death. These two results are being contrasted. The phrase "the wages of sin is death" is not a transactional statement of how to pay for sin. Wages are a metaphor for consequences, not a method of payment. Nevertheless, this one phrase is a keystone of the Penal Substitutionary Atonement doctrine, as if it is intended to state that the event of Jesus' death was the means of how the sins of humanity were paid. This proof-texting of a phrase to use as a basis for defending the PSA theory is a sad display of sloppy scholarship (just an observation - I used to use it wrong too).
I recently looked into this as well... and watched Idol Killer's series on PSA (which was decent, though I didn't agree 100%). I came to a similar conclusion that PSA (and it's 17 points from Augustine, Anselment, and a council) are pretty bogus, but psa (the concept of penal substitutionary atonement, not the official church doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement) actually has some merit. Every alternative to PSA (including psa) has Jesus dying for our sin. Death is the PENALTY for sin. You have it exactly right when you say DEATH (not sin or the Devil) is who the ransom is being paid. Death is the enemy. Death is the "bandit" or "intruder" who has taken man hostage. The ransom is not paid to Satan, but to death. In Rom 5, death is what spread to all men... not sin or guilt. Death reigns, not sin. In Heb 2:15 we see Death (not sin or guilt) is the cause of the sin nature (our slavery to sin). Death is the penalty God imposed for sin - the P in PSA. God DECLARED death upon the world when He said "for dust you are and to dust you will return." That declaration imposed death upon a creation created without death. That death was the enemy... that death was the invader... the intrusion.
You should read Leviticus 16 to understand "atonement."
Lev 16:20-22 NASB20 - 20 "When he finishes atoning for the Holy Place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall offer the live goat. 21 "Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the wrongdoings of the sons of Israel and all their unlawful acts regarding all their sins; and he shall place them on the head of the goat and send [it] away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who [stands] ready. 22 "Then the goat shall carry on itself all their wrongdoings to an isolated territory; he shall release the goat in the wilderness.
Notice this is a corporate transference of the sin of all the people to the goat. The goat is then sent into the wilderness and bears away the sin of the people to the wilderness... the goat is SEPARATED from the congregation of God. That is a foreshadow of Christ.
Phl 2:5-11 NASB95 - 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, [and] being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Regarding Death -- it will be ABOLISHED. Death was a UNIVERSAL judgment for Adam's single transgression.
Rom 5:16-18 NASB95 - 16 The gift is not like [that which came] through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment [arose] from one [transgression] resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift [arose] from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. 18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
Notice a UNIVERSAL, CORPORATE judgment in Adam. For a single transgression, Adam, Eve, their children, the animals, the plants, the ground of the whole earth were all judged with death. Therefore, there will also be a universal, corporate resurrection from that death when that death is abolished... because Adam's JUDGMENT is abolished.
1Co 15:22, 26 NASB95 - 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. ... 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.
2Ti 1:10 NASB95 - 10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,
So Adam's death judgment isn't "forgiven" or "atoned for" but rather, it is ABOLISHED or canceled... vacated. In its place, we will instead have INDIVIDUAL judgments. Notice Rom 5:16 above -- the free gift arose from MANY TRANSGRESSIONS, not the single transgression. That means Christ's atonement will be applied INDIVDUALLY, not CORPORATELY. Therefore, atonement is not for Adam's universal, corporate judgment, but for each of our individual judgments. There is an individual judgment in the Great White Throne judgment.
Rev 20:11-15 NASB95 - 11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one [of them] according to their deeds. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
Unlike Adam's judgment which was corporate and universal, the GWTJ is individual - each one according to their deeds. Therefore, Romans 5:16 is contrasting Adam's death judgment with the GWTJ. According to 2Ti 1:10 above, (Adam's) death is abolished by Christ's APPEARING. When there are none who are righteous, not even one, a universal corporate judgment is JUST. But as soon as a single righteous person appears, that makes the universal, corporate judgment UNJUST and it has to be repealed, vacated, or ABOLISHED and in its place we will have individual judgments.
Acts 24:15
having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.
John 5:28
“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.
Revelation 21:8
“But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
Daniel 12:1
Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.
2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.
When Adam's universal, corporate judgment is ABOLISHED, it results in a universal, corporate resurrection of everyone (and perhaps even every animal) who died under that judgment. However, this is not Universalism because the timing of that resurrection is PRIOR to the GWTJ, therefore, while there will be universal resurrection of the righteous and the wicked, there will not be universal salvation. As such, you need a mechanism for a universal resurrection that is separate from the mechanism for salvation. Christ's RIGHTEOUSNESS appearing on the earth is the mechanism for the resurrection, and Christ's ATONEMENT (which is the application of Christ's righteousness to all who believe) is the mechanism for salvation. Once you solve the problem of Adam's judgment, you then have the problem of each individual's own judgment.
If you keep reading the Psalm, you see that God did not turn away from Psalmist after all 😊
thank you for doing this. I have been exploring this as well and definitely believe there are multiple atonement theories going on in the Bible. Christus victor, moral exemplar, ransom… but I think PSA is at odds with Scripture in addition to the double jeapardy issue. Proverbs 6:16-19, 17:15,26
Here is a partial list of Penal Substitutionary Atonement problems:
5. Basic logic tells us that a complete payment cancels forgiveness. You cannot forgive a debt that has already been paid, and you do not need to pay a debt that has been forgiven. Forgiveness is granted because a debt has NOT been paid, not after the payment has been made!
6. Forgiveness that can be bought or sold is not true forgiveness. If you think that you or a third party can purchase genuine forgiveness, you do not understand forgiveness!
7. We humans are able to forgive others when they sin against us. To claim that God cannot do a good thing that we can do is to make us more moral than God.
8. PSA’s "infinite justice” claim has God incapable of truly forgiving us without first getting a proxy payment by murder and blood. How can that be genuine forgiveness?
9. If someone says, “I forgive you,” you assume it is done right then, not secretly projecting it into a nebulous future when a payment will eventually be made by someone else. Secretly projecting the act of forgiving into the distant future would be considered deceptive. God is not a deceiver for forgiving people before Christ died.
10. God said many times that He would forgive, and He forgave (past tense), long before Jesus was born. Many texts could be listed. The following are just a few of these: “If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin.” 2 Chronicles 7:14 “I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin.” Psalm 32:5 “You forgave the iniquity of your people; you covered all their sin.” Psalm 85:2 “LORD our God, you answered them; you were to Israel a forgiving God, though you punished their misdeeds.” Psalm 99:8 NIV “Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity and passing over transgression for the remnant of his inheritance? He does not retain his anger forever, because he delights in steadfast love.” Micah 7:18 “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” Isaiah 55:7
11. Jesus did not seem to think that he was going to make a payment to God for the sins of humanity. Even while on the cross He did not speak as if he was making a payment when he said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Lk 23:34). Jesus did not say, “Father, wait until I am finished paying for their sins, then you can forgive them.”
12. Every example of forgiveness we have from Jesus shows forgiveness in the normal human sense, not in some unheard-of future forgiveness, transfer, imputation, payment, or third-party justice. “And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors...for if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses...” Matthew 6:12, 14-15 “And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.” Mark 11:25 (See also Matthew 9:2-8, 18:21-35, Luke 5:20, 6:37, 7:47-48, 11:4, 15:11-32.)
13. A literal payment requires a literal transfer and a literal recipient of that payment. How can a death (an action, not a substance) be a literal payment? Who collected this payment?
14. If God has been paid in full for our sins, then why does He still demand that we stop sinning and live right, and even have wrath and threaten judgment for disobedience? If Jesus paid it all, God got what He wanted.
15. Would not a payment for sin be a type of indulgence payment, a bribe to ignore sin and to issue a pardon? A blood sacrifice as a payment to a god is a pagan idea, which is why God ordered the Old Testament people many times to stop their sacrifices - they began treating sacrifices as if they were indulgences, and that stinks to God. Ps. 40:6, 51:16, Jer. 6:20, Is. 1:11-18, 1 Samuel 15:22, Hosea 6:6, Micah 6:6-8, Amos 5:22. (The God of the Bible is relational, and sacrifices were supposed to be a token of this relationship, not a payment to get Him to change.)
For more on this topic, see the book “Atonement and Reconciliation”
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 🎯🎯🎯 i agree and each of these points is absolute gold. thank you for posting this. ❤️
“having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.”
“He was pierced through for our transgressions”
What was actually nailed to the cross? Jesus’ body. Col 2:14 uses substitutionary language.
@@Shark_fishing absolutely amen
Yes, Calvinism use Bible verse incorrectly, to support their wrong doctrine.
Thank you making this video.🌷😊🙏
24:40 I really liked THIS point, IMO, it is the foundation for the believer and where we can confidently stake our claim to salvation... our belief in Christ's death for our sin and concurring death in his resurrection which promises new life to whosoever will believe in him. There are many subjects in scripture which people have 'split the sheets' over. Every denomination represents at least one. But those which bring into question another believers salvation have lost sight of who and why Jesus saves. We tend to argue over whose dirt is "dirtier", and its usually the other guy's😎 .. To God it's all just dirt, when he looks at a believer he just sees Jesus.
In Calvinism, God's promises can only apply to the mysterious 'elect', (as they define them). Promises of God certainly cannot apply to the eternally damned reprobate.🤷🏻♂ THIS is a problem for those embracing TULP. It's categorically impossible to know for certain 'who' is elect. No one is guaranteed the "Gift of Perseverance". They don't think about it often, but the doctrine denies anyone the ability to believe any of the promises of God apply to them...personally,,, for sure.
It offers no assurance to any believer they are truly loved by God and not just experiencing an episode of 'Evanescent Grace'.
Satan loves that about Calvinism.
Hi Alana- around minute 18 you mentioned death as eternal separation from God. Maybe a follow up video/study could be an examination of that idea. Does the Bible make this the essential picture of death or is that a figurative and secondary image that has taken on a primary significance in some interpretations?
I agree, it’s just repeating another idea I’ve heard, but not laid out in scripture clearly:)
For the wages of sin is death; (not hell;) but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
{Romans 6:23}
Turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha *into ashes* condemned them with an overthrow, making them *an ensample* unto those that after should live ungodly;
{2 Peter 2:6}
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are *set forth for an example* suffering the vengeance of *eternal fire*
{Jude 1:7}
(Sodom is not still burning, so it is not the fire / punishment that is eternal, but rather the consequences thereof.)
And ye [the saints] shall tread down the wicked; for *they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet* in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.
{Malachi 4:3}
Thou [satan] hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and *I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth* in the sight of all them that behold thee.
All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.
{Ezekiel 28:18-19}
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such *the second death* hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
{Revelation 20:6}
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. *This is the second death*
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
{Revelation 20:14-15}
O death, where is thy sting? O grave, [hell] where is thy victory?
{1 Corinthians 15:55}
What do you imagine against the LORD? He will make an utter end: affliction shall not rise up the second time.
{Nahum 1:9}
Immortality is conditional.
Shall *mortal man* be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?
{Job 14:7}
Let not sin therefore reign in *your mortal body* that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
{Romans 6:12}
For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest *in our mortal flesh*
{2 Corinthians 4:11}
But *if* the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken *your mortal bodies* by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
{Romans 8:11}
For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and *this mortal* must put on immortality.
So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and *this mortal* shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
{1 Corinthians 15:53-54}
How deep the father’s love for us is…. ya if ya elected/ chosen… B/4 you were ever born…aka ..” B/4 the foundation of the world…” fact is…” SOVEREIGNTY…. Is not….DETERMINISM….” & the Sovereignty… of God is not threatened by giving us free will…. helloooooo…..❤
I like the "Christ the Victor" view. I know I still don't get it all the way, but something that helped me a little was to attempt to define 'God's Wrath'. What does it mean that God has wrath? I know it would not look like human wrath, and I discovered that it is essentially to allow a sinful heart to experience what it wants. It allows a soul to experience godlessness, pain, and lack of life. I believe that this actually plays a huge part in conversion, and is necessary, just like the prodigal son. It was the pig slop that brought him to his senses. Anyways here are some thought provoking passages about God's wrath.
Psalm 106
35 they mingled with the Gentiles ,And learned their works; 36 They served their idols, Which became a snare to them. 37 They even sacrificed their sons And their daughters to DEMONS, 39 Thus they were defiled by their own works...40 Therefore the wrath of the Lord was kindled against His people, ...41 And He GAVE THEM into THE HAND of the GENTILES, And those who hated them ruled over them. 42 Their enemies also oppressed them, And they were brought into subjection under their hand.
To give them over... Now listen to what Jesus says:
Luke 9
44 “Let these words sink down into your ears, for the Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the HANDS OF MEN.”
Mark 10:33
“Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death and DELIVER HIM TO THE GENTILES;
Also another word picture for his wrath was a cup of wine...
Psalm 75 (GOD says of HIMSELF)
2 God says “When I choose the proper time, I will judge uprightly"...6 For exaltation comes neither from the east Nor from the west nor from the south. 7 But God is the Judge: He puts down one, And exalts another. 8 For in the hand of the Lord there is a CUP, And the wine is red; It is fully mixed, and He pours it out; Surely its dregs shall all the wicked of the earth Drain and drink down.
That is everybody..all who have reached the age of accountability become children of wrath by trusting in idols.. it makes our hearts dull and hard, and leads to death. The drunkenness causes our stumblings, but ultimately it is for the salvation of our souls. To allow us to see the difference between good and evil. Life and death. A rod and a prod to turn us away from our idols. God gives these 'life rebukes', and We won't sober up until we recognize the dire state, and look to God for help.
Now listen to what Jesus says:
Luke 22
39 ..He knelt down and prayed, 42 saying, “Father, if it is Your will, take this CUP (enemies to have their way with Him / God's wrath, right?) away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.”
Just found these correlations interesting and so mysterious. Hard to put into words. Loved the video!
I love your videos, and I am in no way, stating that I have any of this fleshed out in my own mind lol however, it does say in Colossians that he nailed our debt of sin to the cross. I’m writing this comment only 12 minutes into your video so I’m not sure if you address this verse later and I will continue to watch to see if you do but I wanted to bring that up while I was thinking of it. God bless you!
I do;)
@@AlanaL3 Yep, I caught it towards the end!
Hey alana, I'm exactly half way through your video and wanted to offer some thoughts. I noticed that as I was transitioning to an eastern orthodox christian I too came across for the first time MANY atonement theories. Have you ever heard of The Recapitulation theory by St. Irenaeus? It's my favorite. You mentioned christus Victor and that's my second favorite. Also, the Greek Septuagint has become my favorite and standard old testament text because ots older than the 9th century AD masoretic Hebrew old testament that the kjv users use. But Jesus and the disciples quoted from and used the Septuagint as the kjv of their own day. In Isaiah 53 is speaks NOTHING of the Father bruising or punishing the son. It speaks the opposite, "purging him from his stroke". The origins of the penal substitution theory came from Anselms "honor" teachings of mideval times. I have one more thing to share. Hold on
I'm looking for your second thought...
@@SheepDog1974 an old old note I wrote:
The bible is clear in romans 3:25 that Christs atonement gave forbearance to sinners, including the elect, so that he may pass over sins through the atonement. The english word atonement has no direct bible roots. The Hebrew word "kipur" was made to "katallage" which in english transliterates to "reconciliation" which means "restore to favor". Jesus recociled the world to himself through his sacrifice which caused forebearance to take place which is God having mercy on all(rom 11) through
forebearance. Forebearance is a temporary life time for all to receive reconciliation, despite romans saying that we were reconciled to God while we were enemies(rom 5:10) the next verse speaks of the necessity of this reconciliation/atonement to "be received".. (2Co 5:18-21) makes it clear
that God reconciled the world to himself yet in the same chapter , a few verses later paul once again calls for all to be reconciled to God, which is now the second time paul states this, all during this time of forbearance(romans 3:25) of favor and mercy obtained and brought on by Christs propitiation, which means to MAKE FAVORABLE. Paul mentions this a third time in colossians 1:19-22 how Christ reconciled in himself all things, and how we that are saved are reconciled in his body of flesh by his death.
Paul repeats this kind of reconciliation in ephesians 2:16 saying "and he might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. Despite the first reconciliation on the cross for atonement, we are still children of wrath by nature(ephesians 5) and only the reconciliation of salvation will end both wrath and hostility. Atonement was done for the world to reconcile us to God through propitiation which deals with the consequences of our sins over the due wrath of God against those who Reject jesus and the gift of salvation , to which wrath is to come lest they turn and be saved.
Propitiation is defined in the new testament as hilasterion, the exact term that specifically points to the old testament sacrificial system, in particular, “The Mercy Seat” In place of the judgement seat. The sacrifice of the animal was the due consequence of sin being taken on by the animal. Propituation for the jews and christians did not point to wrath and appeasement done on the animal more than the term they used for propitiation. Instead, The sprinking of the blood upon the judgement seat made it a seat of mercy, and this is the image that prolituation points to.. Not the animal, but the hilasterion, or, mercy seat..
Christ describes his own atonement using a numbers 21 where the serpent was lifted up for all of israel, yet only those who went to be bitten were healed. This example paralells the day of atonement done once every single year in Leviticus 16:29-30 & 23:26-31. The priest atoned for the sins of all israel, yet only those who humbled themselves and did no work benefited from the atonement done for them.
5 days later, the feast of tabernacles was done by sacrificing 70 bulls for the 70 nations of the gentile world. 70 means universal in hebrew.
Christ's example also paralells the reconciliation of the ninevites, whose sins had reached heaven. And God provided a promise of mercy if they repented. The king ordered a fast of repentence. Not even the animals ate. Prayer was also done. This mirrors the day of atonement practice for the jews yet without a sacrifice. God had mercy on all Nineveh and so all were spared. This shows Gods desire for all to cone to repentance and his desire that all should be saved as stated in the epistles of timothy.
Jesus said he that God loves the world so much that he gave his son for it(john 3)
Paul said by adams transgression the world was condemned, but from one act of righteousness by jesus justification of life went to all men. Justification of life is described by paul as the free gift, which was not like the condemnation. That free gift is salvation. Salvation is justification of life, that goes to all men to be received or rejected. Justification of life another phrase for salvation, used only once in the bible. Justification by faith is how one receives salvation. Seen many times throughout the bible. Salvation is a gift to all. Only those who receive the gift will be bleesdd. Which is why the grace of God has appeared which offers salvation to everyone(titus 2:11)
And when the kindness of God our savior and his love appeared for all mankind, he saved those who believed(titus 3:4-5) because he loves those who believe just as he loves all mankind who he desires to all be saved(1 timothy 2:4)
Jesus said his flesh is bread that he gives for the life of the world(john 6:51)
John said Gods love was made manifest to us and that he loves us demonstrated in his propitiation for our sins(1 john 4:9-11) and not for ours only but for the whole world 1 john 2:2
Paul says in ephesians that with love he loved us while we were dead in trespasses(ephesians 2:4-5)
Even when we were helpless(romans 5:8)
John says they saw with their own eyes that the father sent jesus to be the savior of the world(1 john 4:14)
The samaritans said after hearing for themselves that jesus is the christ and the savior of the world(john 4:42)
And the samaritans have no reason to gain in pushing any notion of an elect.
Jesus died once for all(romans 6:10)
Jesus died for all(2 corinthians 5:15)
Jesus died for sins once for all(1 peter 3:18)
The bible is explicitly clear in a most trinitarian sense that Jesus died for everyone in the whole world.
Matthew 20:28 says jesus gave himself as a ransom for many.
1 timothy 2:6 says he gave himself as a ransom for all. The word in hebrew rabbim is used to describe something that is unquantifiable. This is the word used for "many" in matthew 20. Hebrew had no range of language, so people spoke in ways that consequently would qualify other nouns found in more expressable languages such as greek and english.
This is why paul used the exact teaching from Jesus and said "ransom for all" because the greek had the word to express the meaning for a greek speaker. But when paul wrote to the hebrews, he wrote the word "many" in hebrews 9:28, despite him writing in greek. He was speaking their language. Many means all.
Romans 5 and ephesians 2 says he died for the ungodly, he died for us while we were his enemies, and that he died for sinners. 1 peter 3:18 says he died for the unjust. And 2 peter 2:1 says he died for(bought) those who denied him. This includes peter, who denied him. This also includes judas.
Luke 22:14 - 20 states that jesus spoke to the 12 apostles and said "this is my body which is broken for you, and this
is the new covenant in my blood which is shed for you". This included judas who was one of the 12, despite jesus choosing him as one of his disciples.(john 6:70)
Those for whom christ died can be lead astray to destruction by our irresponsible actions(1 corinthians 8:11) and this is repeated in romans 14:15, saying it destroys the work of God in verse 20... This goes directly in line with the parable of the soils by Jesus, where some dont remain saved.
Jesus died for his church(acts 20:28)
His sheep(john 10)
His people(matthew 1:21)
God remained holy in maintaining his Character and demonstrating his righteousness(romans 3:25) on earth, as Jesus, not his wrath on Jesus. He was the perfect propitiate in order to expiate(hilasmos) or, cleanse us from the cause of our alienation, that being sin.
This was done for the whole world in 1 john 2:2. The blood of bulls and goats gave temporary salvation. Jesus obtained eternal salvation.(Hebrews 9) That’s what he provdes… eternal life… The bible says his atonement gave the entire world forbearance of time to be reconciled to God, which is the way he had mercy on all, during forbearance to draw near because Jesus expiated the problem that separated us from God, that being sin.
Man was separated from God as a result of the fall and, left to his own devices, was incapable of returning to God. Christ became human to heal mankind by perfectly uniting the human nature to the Divine Nature in His person. Through the Incarnation, Christ took on human nature, becoming the Second Adam, and entered into every stage of humanity, from infancy to adulthood, uniting it to God. He then suffered death to enter Hell and bresk its power. On the third day, He resurrected and completed His task by destroying death.
By entering each of these stages and remaining perfectly obedient to the Father, Christ recapitulated every aspect of human nature. He said “Yes” where Adam said “No” and healed all of what Adam’s actions had damaged. This enables all of those who are willing to say yes to God to be perfectly united to God through Christ’s person. By destroying death, Christ placed the victory of eternal life above the consequence of the fall. Now, all can be resurrected. Those who choose to live their life in Christ can be perfectly united to the Holy Trinity, receiving the full love of God that makes us more like him.
But those who reject what was done for them will receive the wrath of God that abides on them(john 3:36). When their life of forbearance Is up and they have taken their last breath they will suffer under the weight of their own sins because all are still by nature children of wrath(ephesians 5). In the parable of jesus, a man who was forgiven his debt did not forgive those in debted to him, and was taken away into condemnation to pay every last cent of what he owed. Despite the forgiveness he received of his debt to his king.
The atonement is one thing. The gift of Salvation is another. There may be many disagreements about salvation, but there are only a handful about the atonement.
@SheepDog1974 another old old note:
I respect subsitutionary atonement. But compared to the older and longer standings of RECONCILIATION, PROPITIATION, EXPIATION and RECAPITULATION, it's shown where the much later big changes occured, and with whom...
It all started with Anselm. Some bits of Augustine for other areas but mainly this way of thinking about the atonement began with Anselm, who is known as the father of the satisfaction understanding of the atonement. His goal was to be able to explain to the heathens living among him in a logical fashion why Christ had to die for our sins, without using the Bible or the Fathers. Anyone can see he was using the way of Feudalism around him to explain his theology. But Jesus and the apostles never lived in such a system. Thats the first problem. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t trying to stay within the fathers and the bible, but because of his methodology he does drift away substantially on some points. It is known as the satisfaction theory because it indicates a need to satisfy a lack that keeps us from salvation.
A lack of satisfaction came from dishonoring God with our sin. But for God to be dissatisfied would show some lack or need within God himself. Another problem that changed the character and understanding of God.
Essentially, he took the concept of debt that we owe to God and made that into the whole of the atonement. We do see the debt understanding even in the Bible, as the servant who owed his master a lifetime plus of wages.
But unlike anselm, when jesus used a parable of a man owing a debt to someone, he was forgiven and was freed from having to pay the debt back.
(Matthew 18:21-35)
Athanasius speaks of our debt we owe as well, but not as Anselm ended up using it. Because of sin, we owed God a debt due to our violation of His honor. This honor has to be repaid somehow due to his view of the nature of God. another rabbit hole. Man can’t pay it, only God can pay it, so God becomes man to not only pay what His due is to the Father through perfect obedience, but goes beyond that to give what He didn’t have to give, His life. Since He didn’t need this “merit”,(he was a Roman Catholic afterall) we can obtain that merit for paying our debt to God off. The sacraments then become a means of distributing these merits, as well as other good works. This is basically the Roman Catholic understanding.
The two major problems with this understanding are these:
1. God’s forgiveness is not dependant upon repaying a debt, and
2. The debt we owe is not to the Father. All we have to do to know that the first is not true is look in the Scriptures. All through the Old Testament, before Christ’s sacrifice, God is considered merciful, slow to anger, forgiving all who come to Him. He is ready to cast our sins as far as the east is from the west. A requirement for forgiveness offered in 2 Chron. 7:14 is “if my people who are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray, and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways….” Nothing is mentioned about atoning for a past debt before forgiveness of sins can happen. Rather, God simply says: “…then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.
In the New Testament we have the parable mentioned earlier, where the servant who owes his master more money than he could ever hope to repay is forgiven his entire debt without expectation of repaying it. In the parable of the Prodigal Son, likewise the father takes the son back, not asking that he restore the wealth he lost in sinful living.
Concerning the second, we see as we have already noted that death is what is being defeated, Satan is the one who we are in bondage to, not God. By placing God as the one who is unwilling to forgive us our debt, it is He who we are in bondage to death with, not Satan. This is attested to by the Fathers:
But since it was necessary also that the debt owing from all should be paid again: for, as I have already said , it was owing that all should die - St. Athanasius, “Incarnation of the Word,” Chp. 20
…he means that the devil held possession of it, the bond which God made for Adam, saying, “In the day thou eatest of the tree, thou shalt die.” (Genesis 2:17.) This bond then the devil held in his possession. And Christ did not give it to us, but Himself tore it in two, the action of one who remits joyfully. - St. John Chrysostom, 6th homily on Colossians)
There is a third key change in Anselm’s view that makes a major shift from the view of the Early Church, indicated in the previous quote, and that is WHAT is being atoned for. In the first understanding of The Faith it was the broken relationship with God, the Lack of His life giving energies, lack of a union with God as it was in The Beginning in The Garden. In Anselm’s later view, it is the debt of broken honor with God that is the problem to solve and fix. The whole goal of Christ’s death and resurrection has moved from redeeming us from death and Satan by defeating Him, to paying back God for the honor due Him that we cannot pay ourselves. This was arrived at by deductive logic on Anselm’s part by making what should have just remained analogical into a whole reality.
Salvation in the eyes of Protestants, therefore, is not freedom from the bondage of sin and death, but rather it is deliverance from the hands of God Himself! As much as Protestants may protest otherwise with their rhetoric, they do not believe that we are saved from sin - they believe that we are saved from God. An essentially legal view of sin leads inevitably to a legal view of salvation. If salvation is primarily about the Father punishing the Incarnate Son in our stead, then as a judicial necessity, our failure to believe in Jesus compels God to punish us. Such theologies see the Cross as saving us from the punitive, legally determined wrath of God-God the Son saving us from God the Father. Viewing God as vindictive can cause us great damage, particularly if we believe that the physical and spiritual harm we inflict on ourselves through sin is a sample of God's wrath and punishment as unsaved sinners(when in actuality it is our own suffering from our pains of sin). Confusing our guilt with God’s anger can cause us to fear and flee from Him, which only weakens us further.
The Orthodox view is that Christ died and was raised again to conquer death, which is the wages of sin, and that sin is a spiritual illness rather than a debt to be paid. This language is essentially the same as that of expiation, for expiation is the destruction of sin and the death that it causes.
To destroying death itself as it directly correlates to the utter smashing of examples like Pharaoh and his horde in the Red Sea. Jesus’ sacrifice, rather than being a punishment of sin, ought to be understood like a “cosmic sponge” whereby He absorbs all the sin of the world and takes it away from us. Otherwise, there is really no forgiveness in the Anselmian/Protestant paradigm of salvation. Instead, all there is Jesus buying an indulgence for us as Anselm would view it, from the Father (satisfying the Father’s wrath). Contrast this to the Parable of the Prodigal Son... Big difference.. There is no punitive nature there at all - yet there is a sacrifice. And that sacrifice is the joy of the relationship being made right again between a father and his child.
Rom 6:3-13
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? .... read all the verses later if you like..
It is also my understanding that the word "atonement" in Greek means something like "reconciliation."
We are saved together but damned alone - Orthodox Proverb ☦️
Matthew 6:12 (NASB95): And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
So there is SOME debt language, right? I will say it's rare.
Two thoughts:) many translations say trespasses instead of debts, and more importantly it says forgive, not pay off. :)
@@AlanaL3 If a friend pays a debt on your behalf, one you could never afford, that friend is in a position to then turn to you and say - your debt has been forgiven ... for you were not the one to pay it. ❤
@@AlanaL3 yes, although the greek word really seems to be debt. But I still think you are right, later in Matthew is the story of the indebted servant which concludes, Matthew 18:32 Then summoning him, his lord said to him, ‘You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.
In the story the king forgave the debt, but did not extract the money then from his own son. The king just forgave it and suffered the loss of money himself. I've heard it argued that because the king suffered the loss of money, that's similar to Jesus bearing the wrath, but it's not. If God has suffered some loss by our sin and we owe Him a debt for that, then the perfect simile to the story is that God judt forgives it, thereby suffering the loss forever and doesn't extract it from himself or his son or anyone else.
@@AlanaL3 I have not found a respected translation that says trespasses there. Maybe you can show me one but the multiple I looked at all say debt. Trespasses seems to come from The Book of Common Prayer.
@@salvadaXgracia either way the debt is forgiven not paid off is my point:)
The Cup of God’s wrath was depicted in the Old Testament and Jesus used this same depiction many times when He talked about partaking in God’s cup. In Matthew 20:22 and Mark 10:38 Jesus hints at it when He speaks to the Son’s of Zebedee. During Passover there were 4 cups of wine with the 2nd cup being a cup of wrath/judgement. It was well understood during the time of Jesus of the symbolic nature of the cup of wrath. Hence Jesus prayer in the garden of Gethsemane. His talk with the Pharisees in Matthew 3 about “filling up” their guilt- which was another symbolism connecting to the filling up of a cup; and this dialogue was about a coming judgment.
If Mark 20:38 is referencing a cup "of wrath", why does he tell the disciples in 10:39 "The cup that I drink you will drink"? Is He saying they will also somehow drink of God's wrath?
It seems to me that "the cup" is whatever God has in store for someone. Yes, the cup can be filled with wrath, but it can also be the "cup of salvation" (Psalm 116). In Psalm 23, did David's cup runneth over with God's wrath?
@@mrgrossism the context of the cup comment in Mark 10 and Matthew 20 is based on the previous statement of Jesus foreshadowing His suffering. There are some verses that speak of cups in a symbolic way about abundance and blessing but most references about “cups” and “pouring” in the Bible is associated with wrath.
Wrath of God as a cup/ wine
Job 21:20 NASB1995
”Let his own eyes see his decay, And let him drink of the wrath of the Almighty.“
Psalms 60:3 NASB1995
”You have made Your people experience hardship; You have given us wine to drink that makes us stagger.“
Psalms 75:8 NASB1995
”For a cup is in the hand of the Lord, and the wine foams; It is well mixed, and He pours out of this; Surely all the wicked of the earth must drain and drink down its dregs.“
Isaiah 51:17 NASB1995
”Rouse yourself! Rouse yourself! Arise, O Jerusalem, You who have drunk from the Lord’s hand the cup of His anger; The chalice of reeling you have drained to the dregs.“
Isaiah 51:22 NASB1995
”Thus says your Lord, the Lord, even your God Who contends for His people, “Behold, I have taken out of your hand the cup of reeling, The chalice of My anger; You will never drink it again.“
Isaiah 63:6 NASB1995
”I trod down the peoples in My anger And made them drunk in My wrath, And I poured out their lifeblood on the earth.”“
Jeremiah 25:15 NASB1995
”For thus the Lord, the God of Israel, says to me, “Take this cup of the wine of wrath from My hand and cause all the nations to whom I send you to drink it.“
Obadiah 1:16 NASB1995
”Because just as you drank on My holy mountain, All the nations will drink continually. They will drink and swallow And become as if they had never existed.“
Revelation 14:10 NASB1995
”he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.“
Revelation 16:19 NASB1995
”The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath.“
God’s Wrath depicted as being poured
2 Chronicles 12:7 NASB1995
”When the Lord saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the Lord came to Shemaiah, saying, “They have humbled themselves so I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some measure of deliverance, and My wrath shall not be poured out on Jerusalem by means of Shishak.“
2 Chronicles 34:21 NASB1995
”“Go, inquire of the Lord for me and for those who are left in Israel and in Judah, concerning the words of the book which has been found; for great is the wrath of the Lord which is poured out on us because our fathers have not observed the word of the Lord, to do according to all that is written in this book.”“
2 Chronicles 34:25 NASB1995
”Because they have forsaken Me and have burned incense to other gods, that they might provoke Me to anger with all the works of their hands; therefore My wrath will be poured out on this place and it shall not be quenched.” ’“
Jeremiah 7:20 NASB1995
”Therefore thus says the Lord God, “Behold, My anger and My wrath will be poured out on this place, on man and on beast and on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground; and it will burn and not be quenched.”“
Jeremiah 10:25 NASB1995
”Pour out Your wrath on the nations that do not know You And on the families that do not call Your name; For they have devoured Jacob; They have devoured him and consumed him And have laid waste his habitation.“
Jeremiah 42:18 NASB1995
”For thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, “As My anger and wrath have been poured out on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so My wrath will be poured out on you when you enter Egypt. And you will become a curse, an object of horror, an imprecation and a reproach; and you will see this place no more.”“
Jeremiah 44:6, 19 NASB1995
”Therefore My wrath and My anger were poured out and burned in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem, so they have become a ruin and a desolation as it is this day.“
Lamentations 2:4 NASB1995
”He has bent His bow like an enemy; He has set His right hand like an adversary And slain all that were pleasant to the eye; In the tent of the daughter of Zion He has poured out His wrath like fire.“
Lamentations 4:11 NASB1995
”The Lord has accomplished His wrath, He has poured out His fierce anger; And He has kindled a fire in Zion Which has consumed its foundations.“
Ezekiel 7:8 NASB1995
”Now I will shortly pour out My wrath on you and spend My anger against you; judge you according to your ways and bring on you all your abominations.“
Ezekiel 9:8 NASB1995
”As they were striking the people and I alone was left, I fell on my face and cried out saying, “Alas, Lord God! Are You destroying the whole remnant of Israel by pouring out Your wrath on Jerusalem?”“
Ezekiel 14:19 NASB1995
”Or if I should send a plague against that country and pour out My wrath in blood on it to cut off man and beast from it,“
Ezekiel 20:8 NASB1995
”But they rebelled against Me and were not willing to listen to Me; they did not cast away the detestable things of their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I resolved to pour out My wrath on them, to accomplish My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.“
Ezekiel 20:13 NASB1995
”But the house of Israel rebelled against Me in the wilderness. They did not walk in My statutes and they rejected My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live; and My sabbaths they greatly profaned. Then I resolved to pour out My wrath on them in the wilderness, to annihilate them.“
Ezekiel 20:21 NASB1995
”But the children rebelled against Me; they did not walk in My statutes, nor were they careful to observe My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live; they profaned My sabbaths. So I resolved to pour out My wrath on them, to accomplish My anger against them in the wilderness.“
Ezekiel 20:33 NASB1995
”“As I live,” declares the Lord God, “surely with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm and with wrath poured out, I shall be king over you.“
Ezekiel 20:34 NASB1995
”I will bring you out from the peoples and gather you from the lands where you are scattered, with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm and with wrath poured out;“
Ezekiel 22:22 NASB1995
”As silver is melted in the furnace, so you will be melted in the midst of it; and you will know that I, the Lord, have poured out My wrath on you.’ ”
Ezekiel 30:15 NASB1995
”I will pour out My wrath on Sin, The stronghold of Egypt; I will also cut off the hordes of Thebes.“
Ezekiel 36:18 NASB1995
”Therefore I poured out My wrath on them for the blood which they had shed on the land, because they had defiled it with their idols.“
Hosea 5:10 NASB1995
”The princes of Judah have become like those who move a boundary; On them I will pour out My wrath like water.“
Nahum 1:6 NASB1995
”Who can stand before His indignation? Who can endure the burning of His anger? His wrath is poured out like fire And the rocks are broken up by Him.“
Revelation 16:1 NASB1995
”Then I heard a loud voice from the temple, saying to the seven angels, “Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls of the wrath of God.”“
@@haiasinosdnah0813 Psalm 116:12 How can I repay the LORD for all His goodness to me? 13 I will lift the cup of salvation and call on the name of the LORD.
Psalm 16:5 The LORD is my chosen portion and my cup; You have made my lot secure.
6 The lines of my boundary have fallen in pleasant places; surely my inheritance is delightful.
Strong's describes the Greek word for "cup" in this way: "By a figure common to Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, and not unknown to Latin writers, one's lot or experience, whether joyous or adverse, divine appointments, whether favorable or unfavorable, are likened to a cup which God presents one to drink."
Jesus never says what is in the "cup" which the Father has given Him. Nowhere does He specify that it is wrath. He DOES say in Mark 10:39 that His disciples will drink from the SAME cup.
@@mrgrossism I believe that I conceded the point in my earlier comment that symbolism of cups within the OT could also represent bountiful abundance and I will also concede your point that the cup that is described in the Psalms you referenced symbolizes salvation and security. Even in the Passover meal, 1 of the 4 cups is the cup of salvation/redemption while another cup of the 4 is for wrath/judgement. Yet, I have provided numerous examples of how the cup being poured out is a connotation for wrath. Nevertheless the context that precedes the cup analogy in Mark 10 and Matthew 20 is Jesus revealing His suffering. Lastly, Jesus specifically prayed for the cup to pass from Him in the Garden of Gethsemane, I don’t think He was associating that analogy of the cup as a cup of security nor salvation. It is easier to infer that He was praying about wrath being passed from Him.
@@haiasinosdnah0813 I guess I am not understanding why the cup could not be filled with "suffering". Why does it necessarily have to be filled with "wrath"?
Yes! Ransomed from death! So mich of what uou are saying has been similar to my processs... I don't.feel alone in thinking through these things I thought we had to believe...
Ransom, I can’t imagine God having to bow down to satan and pay a ransom, to a created Elohim
that questions the power dynamic between God and satan 🤔
I have a Calvinist friend who actually says that if a person does not have a correct understanding of all these things that they might not be saved. A person will have a beautiful deep faith in Jesus and be laying down their life for him daily and my friend will say well do they understand this and this and if not, they can’t be saved. It’s only academic with him.
Do you know that I will show him a video of a little girl who is beaten and murdered in India because she will not deny Jesus, and his response will be if she didn’t have a correct understanding in regard to who Jesus is, and why he died, and the nature of the atonement that she might not have been saved.
That is so terrible. I do not agree with that thought process at all. All of us are wrong at some part of our theology. Whoever cannot admit that still has a lot to learn. Thank you, Jesus that the gospel is simple and that you save a willing and humble heart that loves you!
I appreciate what you say about satan not having that much power. I agree wholeheartedly & I think it's a critical point in this conversation. It's also tethered to why I land agreeing with a PSA view in light of Isaiah 53 referencing punishment. Who has power over Christ unto punishment? But God himself. Not Satan. And not death. And we see punishment tied to God's wrath in revelation, but spared for those in Christ -who has already taken upon himself "the punishment that brought us peace."
You should check out Isaiah 53 in the Septuagint. Very interesting.
@@All-shall-say-Jesus-is-Lord Do you read Greek!? Sadly, I do not, and I'm critical of the handling of the text if I can't read it myself - considering it's been abandoned long ago and possibly not stewarded well in light of that. What do you think?
@@Shark_fishing You don't need to know greek!
Look up "septuagint english online" and it will give you at least 3 good results.
Look up "Septuagint interlinear" and it will give you the greek and english so you can cross reference the greek with Strong's concordance.
In every instance where the NT references Is. 53, it does so in a non-substitutionary manner. Mat. 8:17 quotes Is. 53:4, but in a way that denies substitution: “That evening they brought to him many who were oppressed by demons, and he cast out the spirits with a word and healed all who were sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah: “He took our illnesses and bore our diseases.”” The meaning is not that Jesus healed by making himself sick and literally bearing by transferring the diseases to himself, but rather that he was compassionately burdened by human suffering and he did something about it. Matthew also considers this prophecy fulfilled before Jesus went to the cross, not as a consequence of the cross! It was not fulfilled by the death of Jesus, but by his life.
In 1 Cor. 15:3 we read, “…Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures.” This is likely Is. 53:5. In the phrase “died for our sins” it is the Greek word “hyper,” indicating causation, not replacement or substitution, indicating that Isaiah 53:5 was not about substitution, but a prophecy regarding the cause as to why Jesus died - because of our sin, not in place of our sin, and certainly not as a payment for our sin.
Is. 53:4 A careful reader of the second phrase of verse 4 will see that "we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God" is saying that the people "esteemed" or reasoned that God was punishing the victim. A proper contextual reading of this verse together with verse 5 shows that it was not God punishing, rather, the victim was enduring the pain and suffering due to the wrongs of others toward him. The suffering was not caused by God or for God, not an act of divine justice, but of human injustice! To make matters worse, the verse is often misread as if it says, "we saw him stricken BY God." This is a serious misuse of the text!
Is. 53:5 expands on verse 4. The first word is "but," intended as a contrast. Verse 4 is saying, "we thought this…" and verse 5 corrects the error with, "but the truth is this…" Sadly, so many teachers read this “but” as if it says "and." Their mind processes it as, "…stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 "AND" he was pierced for our transgressions…" These teachers WANT the passage to be about God punishing Jesus as a payment for sin, so their minds are reading what they expect the passage to say instead of what it actually says! Both the Hebrew and the LXX (Septuagint) state that, “he was pierced BECAUSE OF [Greek “dia”] our transgressions, he was crushed BECAUSE OF [Greek “dia”] our iniquities.”
Is. 53:6 shows the cause of this injustice is due to the people straying. The LORD “has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” The words translated “has laid on” is a most unusual choice of words chosen to project the PSA view. In Hebrew “has laid on” is “hip̄·gî·a”, which actually means “to fall, to meet, or to encounter.” The Greek word is "paradidōmi", meaning, "to hand over, to give or deliver over." The meaning is simply that God had the culmination of the error of the people fall on, or meet at, or delivered to, the point where they were willing to murder this innocent servant, exactly as stated in Acts 2:23. The same Hebrew word, H6293 is used in verse 12, but most translations have this word as “intercession.” Apparently, the only place where translators conveniently use “has laid on” for H6293 is this one case in Isaiah 53:6, which should raise serious suspicions.
Is. 53:10 is never mentioned in the New Testament, which is quite incredible if it is about Jesus making an offering! In fact, the word "offering" is not in either the Masoretic or LXX texts, as it is assumed and supplied by the translators! Furthermore, there are multiple translation options that leave the author’s intent very vague, especially when the Hebrew Masoretic text is compared to the Greek LXX text.
@atonementandreconciliation3749 “Having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us & condemned us, he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.” Colossians 2:14
What was nailed to the cross? The body of Jesus.
“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God” 2 Cor 5:21
Both verses use substitutionary language.
Apart from Isaiah 53:4, you have verse 10 clearly indicated this was the will of God. This is affirmed by Jesus when He rebukes Peter for taking his defense when they seize him for the crucifixion. Matthew 26:53-54 he says “did you not know I could call on my Father and He would put more than 12 legions of angels at my disposal?” Jesus could stop it all at any time: the Godhead willing unto the cross, in spite of suffering, compelled by love.
1 Peter 1:19 and Hebrews 13:12 liken Jesus to the qualifying characteristics of sin offerings in the Old Testament.
Revelation 5:6 depicts Christ as the slain Lamb, the ultimate offering fulfillment to which the Old Testament sacrificial system was a signpost.
It’s all there my friend.
Hey Alana Great word!...but your gonna put many great evangelist like Ray Comfort out of business with this one. lol! I think the book of Romans the apostle Paul's great theological masterpiece is the best book to go to instead of skipping all around the bible. The apostle Paul takes the first two chapters and brings everyone guilty before a Holy and righteous God. I know the wrath of God is not to popular in America to talk about because most of America does not know God. That is why some adapt different atonement theories to get around having to talk about the wrath of God and the fear of God because its not to comfortable to sinners ears and how BEFORE Christ we are enemies of God and children of wrath. But we have to ask the question What are we being saved from? You answer that question everything else flows out from there.
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:36
The missing piece is to focus on the innocence of the sacrifice. The life of the flesh is in the blood Lev 17:11 and Jesus blood (life) was perfect and when the Father looks upon the perfect innocent blood of Christ shed for sinners his Wrath passes over (Passover) those under the blood and falls on those that reject it. That's the message of Hebrews. His blood cleanses, purifies, protects and presents us to the Father. So it's not that His blood suffers the Wrath of the Father, but rather the Father is pleased by HIs innocence and sacrifice and so has mercy on those under it. Like the Passover.
I've been coming to a similar position, but I have a burning question. If this is how the passover lamb works and how Jesus' sacrifice works, then why death? If the blood is all that's needed, wouldn't the lamb and Jesus just be cut and their blood poured out partially without killing them? Why does the innocent life have to die as well?
The blood of Christ was about a covenant, not a payment. A payment would be bribing God to issue a pardon, like someone paying a President or a governor to issue a pardon for a convicted criminal. That is a very bad idea that is a problem with PSA.
Matthew 26:28 “For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Given the context and the Greek, this Matthew 26:28 verse could have, and probably should have, been translated as, “For this is my blood of the covenant which is shed concerning many unto the release of [their] sins.” In other words, the blood covenant is something that people can enter into, and by doing so they agree to release their sins, which is to stop sinning!
@@All-shall-say-Jesus-is-Lord be said the penalty of sin is death. The life of the flesh is in the blood the Passover lamb was fully consumed. He has to fulfill the typology. And the law had to be upheld. He did fulfill the law. He is our innocent substitute that fulfills the law.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 I don't think theres any way around the fact that the Bible speaks repeatedly about death via the curse of the Law. Jesus took the curse (death) for us to fulfill the Law. He is our substitute. But the curse of the Law aka death isn't the same as God's fiery Wrath and total abandonment. He was delivered into the hands of sinners and was "abandoned" in that sense to his enemies. But not by God. Psalm 22 makes that clear.
@@Eloign Yes, the law brings death, but Jesus was falsely accused. That does not make him a substitute, it makes him a victim. The law is not a living thing that needs to be appeased. Jesus did not die to placate God, he died to bring us TO God. We were/are the problem, not God. God forgave people throughout the OT. He did not need Jesus to solve some forgiveness problem.
“I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin.” Psalm 32:5 “You forgave the iniquity of your people; you covered all their sin.” Psalm 85:2 “LORD our God, you answered them; you were to Israel a forgiving God, though you punished their misdeeds.” Psalm 99:8 NIV “Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity and passing over transgression for the remnant of his inheritance? He does not retain his anger forever, because he delights in steadfast love.” Micah 7:18
The words "by faith" are misleading. The Greeks says, "ek pistis," where the "ek" means "out of" or "out from." “Ek” is the opposite of the word “eis” which means into. In other words, righteousness, and hence justification (setting right that which was wrong), comes out from, or out of faith, as a product of faith. This means that genuine faith produces righteousness because it is a functional faith. This faith is not a neutral intellectual belief, it is operational, active, and productive, causing a change from unrighteous living to righteous living. By this a person is justified - set right from a previous state of living wrong.
It is amazing to hear some Bible teachers say things like, “Theology affects the way we live” and “You mostly live according to the theology you believe”, and yet these same teachers speak of “salvation by faith” as if faith as something that happens external to you and has no required byproduct of righteous living.
"By faith" is often understood as nearly a passive idea, where we are made to have faith and God does something called "justification," a legal arrangement or accounting act on His end. That is not what is intended by "ek pistis." Teachers of Reformed Theology and Penal Substitutionary Atonement have a problem with active, functional faith because they typically see this as works. To avoid this, the weaker translation is used, changing “out from faith” to “by faith.”
Wow
Well said!
This is a reply to a comment that must have been deleted, but it adds to my "by faith" point.
"Ek pistis" or "ek pisteo" is in Romans 1:17, 3:30, 4:16, 5:1, 9:30,32, 10:6, Gal. 2:16,3:7,11, Heb. 10:38, James 2:24
These all show that faith is presumed to be active - affecting the mind, will, emotions, and actions of the believer.
There are passages that do say “by faith,” which is “dia pisteo,” but “dia” means "through,” so faith in these cases is the active mechanism, not a passive idea.
Peter states it well in Acts 15:9, “…having cleansed their hearts by faith.” In this case the “by faith” is “te pistei”, which is simply “the faith,” making the phrase say that faith is the active thing that cleansed their hearts. Faith is not some external property like a salve or clothing that has no internal effect on the person. The single exception is found in the example of James 2:17-20 where demons have inactive faith, a dead faith that produces nothing.
💗💗💗🙏Noah Webster 1828
Forsaken: Deserted, left, abandoned
"Others again are said in the manner of association and relation , as, My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me Matthew 27:46 ? and He has made Him to be sin for us, Who knew no sin 2 Corinthians 5:21 , and being made a curse for us Galatians 3:13; also, Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him 1 Corinthians 15:28 For neither as God nor as man was He ever forsaken by the Father, nor did He become sin or a curse, nor did He require to be made subject to the Father. For as God He is equal to the Father and not opposed to Him nor subjected to Him; and as God, He was never at any time disobedient to His Begetter to make it necessary for Him to make Him subject. Appropriating, then, our person and ranking Himself with us, He used these words."
~ Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith Saint John of Damascus
Hey Alana, I think propitiation is an acceptable term because it "turns away" God's wrath. Jesus' sacrifice turned God's wrath away from us. In 1 Chronicles 21, King David offers a sacrifice that turns away God's wrath. Does this mean the Father poured out His wrath on Christ on the cross? Not necessarily. We know that Jesus bore our sins in His own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). Also, the Father made Jesus "to be sin for us, who knew no sin" (2 Cor 5:21). Thus, Jesus took our sins upon himself: "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." (Isaiah 53:4) Jesus Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice to the Father by taking the sins of the world upon Himself. Jesus was stricken by God because Christ carried the weight of humanity's sin and all the suffering that goes with it. In doing this, Jesus secured redemption for all who believe. In short, Jesus felt separated from the Father because of the sin that Jesus bore on the cross. A person doesn't have to believe that God poured out His wrath on Christ. But Jesus definitely took our place and turned God's wrath away from us.
Isaiah 53:10 The Lord also is pleased to purge him from his stroke. If ye can give an offering for sin, your soul shall see a long-lived seed:
The Septuagint has a totally different meaning in that verse. You should check out the Septuagint.
Propitiation in that verse, if I'm not wrong, itls the exact greek word that the greek septuagint uses for the old testament Mercy Seat. Could be wrong.
Alana, would you agree that PSA theory creates a breeding ground for Calvinist doctrine? Because if one says that Christ died to “pay” for the sins of the whole world, then that would imply Universalism and then the “double jeopardy” argument, which then creates a foothold to say Christ died only for the elect. But to say that He has paid a ransom, or cancelled debt to conquer death, that seems to be an entirely different field for thought.
I definitely think Calvinist need PSA to be the atonement theory that they hold to. It makes most sense with their doctrine.
My big question on PSA is this. If Jesus paid the penalty for my sin, how does that equal forgiveness. Whether I pay it or my representative pays it, it is still paid. Not forgiven. And if it is forgiven, then how is God just in demanding payment anyways, even if my representative pays for me.
If a judge requires a penalty of me, but in an unusual show of mercy, fulfills the penalty on my behalf - that judge is well positioned to say to me: what *you* owe has been forgiven. Justice is fulfilled, but not by me. I’m the recipient of mercy.
In fairness, the question is a good one. The same could be said of a ransom model- in which the one in need of ransom is generally faultless. A victim. But Romans 6:23 & many other passages clearly identify our sin as our fault source, we are not victims- but rather our need is sourced by our own doing.
It’s actually interesting that the ransom model is preferred in this place..… Because following the ransom model through- holding it to the same standard of analogous relationship- it only makes sense if Jesus is talking about those ultimately found faultless in the end- those specifically glorified in His righteousness.
"If Jesus paid the penalty for my sin, how does that equal forgiveness."
"Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." Romans 5:9
We have been saved from God's wrath by Jesus' atonement = Jesus took God's wrath away and now God can forgive us.
So Christ was *once offered to BEAR the sins of many* and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
{Hebrews 9:28}
Strong's Definitions: ἀναφέρω anaphérō, an-af-er'-o; from G303 and G5342; to take up (literally or figuratively):-bear, bring (carry, lead) up, offer (up).
Another passage that comes to mind is John 3:36, "he who does not obey the son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him". What happened to the wrath of God for those who do obey, if scripture said it was there before? We see God's wrath tethered to his judgement, the end of which is punishment. But according to Isaiah 53 Christ bore "the punishment that brought us peace."
Alana, I'm curious, in all the places where God says he passes over and shows mercy (in the Old Testament and such)... Do you not believe these were tethered in a forward-looking fashion to the cross of Jesus? (ie: the passover lamb a signpost to the Lamb of God)
Hey:) yes I do see it’s a foreshadow of Christ. That’s why I mentioned perfect sacrifice several times from Hebrews etc;)
@@AlanaL3 I ask because around 23:50 you made a comment that I understood to mean God forgives, passes over, pardons .... simply. like He says He does. Without reconciling His judgement. But if it is the cross that reconciles us, It wasn't simple. It required the bloodshed of Jesus. I think this is what Mike Winger means when he says it is the centrality of the gospel.
I agree with your comment that there is a spiritual order, but I believe scripture teaches that God is its authority. The ultimate judge. There is no "order" or "standard" above Him, to which He is accountable. He is the perfect standard. In terms of keeping with scripture, I don't know of any passage that would lead us otherwise - Where God is not the ultimate authority.
I would also submit that a lot of people circulating "models" of atonement... If you listen closely enough... You begin to hear postulations of a small regard for sin. A desire that seeks to say something like, my sin didn't warrant that suffering. This is also a false gospel, not the one of Christ. On idol killer, Paul Vendredi recently makes a comment about this and says, "you have this small idea of falling in the garden"... and He is likening it to the violence of the cross depicted in the Passion, essentially suggesting a smaller tragedy would have been more commensurate to the fall. To be clear, I believe the cross was far more tragic than Mel Gibson or any of us could imagine. In my estimation, This is deeply dangerous ideology to represent such ideas as the truth of the gospel.
I understood her to also say God can just forgive simply, which would then make me say…why the cross at all then? When someone “forgives” a debt, there is still a price someone is losing, there is still a cost to the one forgiving. It’s why I’d love for her to discuss how God can be both JUST And the Justifier and how his justice is seen on the cross. This “just forgiving sin simply” was very confusing since I have never seen this in scripture, quite the opposite. Maybe this is her simply asking a question she has not figured out the answer to yet and not making a definite statement.
Colossians 2:14 isn't talking about the debt. Idk what translation it is, but what it says is that he took the handwriting of ordinances that was against & contrary to us out of the way having nailed it to the cross.
What handwriting "OF ORDINANCES" is there?
That is THE LAW. Sin is the transgression of the law. God took the very thing that makes sin, sin, out of the way.
Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth
I completely agree:)
God’s pledge to send the Seed, the propitiation for our sin, was to Adam and Eve. This gift would wipe away Eve’s belief that God was withholding something good from her; this gift would restore both Adam and Eve’s faith in God’s love. To say this ransom was offered to the snake suggests the snake had some position of power, when God paints him as a crushed “authority.” He is crushed by our heals as we walk forward in faith. Faith was restored to us in full when Christ withheld nothing on the cross.
Exodus 12:3 - 12:13 The Passover Lamb
Genesis 22:7
“And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?”
King James Version (KJV)
1 John 2:2
“And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”
King James Version (KJV 1 Peter 1:19
“But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:”
King James Version (KJV)
John 1:29
“The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.”
King James Version (KJV)
Jesus is our Passover Lamb... †††
Alana! I absolutely love how you process things and your willingness to examine the faith with so much intentionality and a pureness. Thank you for making this video. I wanted to ask if you have ever heard of David Bercot? Your journey, in many ways, reminds me of his as he was coming out of JW. He apparently went through all of the ante-nicene fathers writings in a year as he tried to examine his own faith and what he believed. My husband & I have benefited so much from his sermons. I haven't listened to his Atonement sermon, but my husband says it was really good. I'll link it below in case you're interested!
czcams.com/video/RvZH3vqQ6I8/video.html
czcams.com/video/OJceuCdgKI0/video.html
Of course, it is. In Jesus, there is the added principle of the kinsmen redeemer. It's why Jesus has to come from above in the fashion of sin and for sin to condemn sin in the flesh. So that we through transference can become the righteousness which is of God if we LIVE according to the faith (the eternal law).
Atonement and sacrifices are to be understood as relational/covenantal, not legal/contractual: “Gather to Me My saints, who made a covenant with Me by sacrifice.” Psalm 50:5
“Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.” 1 Samuel 15:22
“To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice” Proverbs 21:3.
“In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted… Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required.” Psalm 40:6
“For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6
Flour was also acceptable for sin sacrifices! “But if he cannot afford two turtledoves or two pigeons, then he shall bring as his offering for the sin that he has committed a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He shall put no oil on it and shall put no frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering. And he shall bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take a handful of it as its memorial portion and burn this on the altar, on the LORD’s food offerings; it is a sin offering." Leviticus 5:11-12
A sacrifice is only legitimate after dealing with your internal problems: “You will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise…THEN will you delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings; THEN bulls will be offered on your altar.” Psalm 51:16,17,19 Also, Isaiah 1:11-18
Jesus taught that God wants your heart and relationships to be right BEFORE an offering is given. An offering is not a substitute for repenting and repairing the offense that had been done to another, and it is a gift to God, not a payment. “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. FIRST be reconciled to your brother, and THEN come and offer your gift.” Matthew 5:23-24
The idea that a sinner is restored by a blood transaction with an angry God is a serious misunderstanding of what people in Bible times understood.
“For by one sacrifice He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy” Hebrews 10:14 …
But wait for it. Your translation surely records it differently?
@@Shark_fishing Good question. Hebrews 10:14 “For [because] by one offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.”
The greater context of verses 11-18 is about how Christ’s offering has changed us to take sins away from our lives and to write God’s law on our hearts. The offering in verse 14 is not a payment to God to get God to declare us righteous or to get God to forgive us. Rather, the verse points to the result of this offering, which is to perfect “those who are being sanctified.” The effect of the offering is a change in us, not a change in God. The word typically translated “forgiveness” in verse 18 is “aphesis”, which literally means "release." It is about us releasing our sinful ways of living which makes additional offerings unnecessary, not because they are all paid for, but because the bondage to sin has stopped and has been replaced by God’s law written on our hearts.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 oh man. I thought I understood you previously to say there’s no mention of “offering” in the New Testament in relation to Christs work…Do we have one in Hebrews!?
So are you saying you believe Christs work is not what perfects or justifies us, but rather our changed lives and the right living that follows? I want to understand bc that how I’m reading your last post.
@@Shark_fishing Oh. Ok. I think I mentioned in another comment under this video that Is. 53:10 does not have the word "offering", that it was added by the translators. Maybe you read that and then remembered wrong. "The works of Christ" is a theological phrase that I have not found mentioned in the Bible. The phrase confuses the topic of works.
Yes, the death and resurrection and blood covenant of Christ justify us - set us right. The word "justify" means to set something right, like moving something that is wrong to being right (either literally, mentally, or behaviourally). A declaration of being right is done after it has been rightened, not before, as that would be lying. But PSA typically jumps to a declaration, completely skipping the rightening.
If a non-functional faith causes God to merely grant us an external legal righteousness, a mere status called "justified," with no corresponding change of heart, then we would still have a need for an external law to control and regulate our actions. Faith only voids the law if the faith is active and functional. Law is not needed if we are being faithful. Consider 1 Timothy 1:8-11, “Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching that agrees with the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.” Also Romans 3:31, “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.”
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 Maybe I forgot? Haha … more specifically You said Isaiah 53:10 is not referenced anywhere in the NT, which is most unusual if it was really referring to an “offering”…. And yet now we have offering in Heb speaking to what Jesus did on the cross.
I use the words”work of Christ” most purposely because it sets a picture of *what Christ has done or does* vs *what we do* allowing for conversation sake to understand where another’s faith or dependence resides, especially when you think they may disagree with your language otherwise.
I don’t know of anyone who believes in PSA (understanding well) but also believes you can have a non-functional faith. I would also submit that the law provides measure for our sanctification. 2 Corinthians 13:5 gives us something on this. What should we, the faithful, examine our hearts against? If not the law of God. Jesus says very pointedly in Matt 5:17 that He fulfills the law, not us, not our faith. I think your words flirt with what Paul warned the Galatians against, calling it a false gospel. But I could just be misunderstanding you.
Eve sinned because she thought God was a magician(just a phony holding out on her on how he got his power). She thought God was just a phony, who was subject to the affects of nature, instead of supernatural ( above the laws of nature we understand). In a nutshell, she thought God had forgotten to invite her to the “party” and so he was WITHHOLDING something good from her. She was smart enough to understand you don’t forget about what or who you love , not even for a minute. So, what did God do to restore her faith and so save her from her sin and restore a right relationship with her? He gave his all through the life he lived, died and rose again. He was constantly giving and knowing us in our pain through all of that! Was it Satan or Eve God needed to pay a ransom to in exchange for her being saved by his grace through faith? His pledge was to Eve and Adam not Satan. God responded to this lack of faith Eve had by making a promise about sending a “Seed, “but before he made the promise he planted faith in this now mortals heart by meeting her practical need with clothes to shield her from the now harmful elements, and he didn’t just clothe her with “something.” We have reason to believe it would have been a lambs skin, which is the most supple and luxurious leather of all, and he did this for people who ruined the world with their sin and doubt. He planted this “Seed” promise in her heart, through sacrificing on her behalf what she would have perceived as the most precious of his creation to cover her nakedness( her lack). Remember she had not had a baby yet, so a lamb would have been prized as God’s most precious creation in her eyes. She would have held that lamb at some point just loving it like her own toddler. This sacrifice was enough to restore her faith that God was not withholding something from her. Still, Eve looked forward to this Promise of “Seed” in faith the way we look back on it in faith. Through having sorrow and conception, she would CONCEIVE how greatly the father loved her. God planted a seed( Jesus), and he will take root in the hearts of some while being aborted by others. He gave his all on the cross,; he gave faith to us all through demonstrating his unfailing, never ending love, and then after enduring all that trauma, he rose from the dead to love us still more. The natural thing for him to have done would be to lie in the tomb until noon crying over trauma he had just been through and wrap his arms tightly around self, but still he was thinking of Mary, Thomas and everyone who were crying and afraid. He was thinking of you, and even if you don’t recognize his presence as they didn’t, just know he is with you and he is taking care of what concerns you. The wise person takes note of that and doesn’t tear down what he is building for you. Hear his words . I believe faith is sometimes learned or given as a gift through difficult times. Praise God for those struggles on the job or at home, because it is revealing the life ( and fruit) of Christ through your response of faith.. Eve was actually reaching for “enlightenment “ when she reached for the forbidden fruit. Then after she sinned, God told her that he would greatly multiply not just her sorrow but her “ conception,” a synonym for “enlightenment “ or “sight.” Now Calvary might has well been the darkest corner of the earth. It actually looked like a skull, and it was a place where cult members didn’t just kill a person; they mastered how to torcher a person so that they were on the brink of death without actually dying until they decided the torcher was over( that is why they whipped him 39 times, because 40 times was known to kill and that is why they cut in the cold, because it kept their victim from bleeding to death….). The soldiers on this skull shaped hill were cult members , who called Caesar “god” and they were trained to be like vipers, just hardened killers who had no compassion. This was he darkest corner of the earth, and Jesus willingly went there. Why? Because he had made a promise to Eve. The Centurion was Eve’s great, great, great…..grandson. It wasn’t a light thing for him to acknowledge Jesus to be “The Son of God” around these cult members trained to kill. These words were traitorous for him to say. These weren’t casual words. These were words of faith. God had restored faith even in the darkest corner of the earth. I believe sometimes faith comes the hard way, and God was willing to bring enlightenment of who he is even in this worst place with the worst people, because when they see him for who he is, it changes people; this sight given through seeing Christ on the cross, redeems the prizes God lost under that forbidden tree so long before it resulted in such an awful fly seen on that hill. But was it really so awful compared to beautiful it was to see God’s passion is this great not just for Adam and Eve but for their children? If you ever doubt the love of God, remember the cross. Remember the resurrection. One would think the cross would be enough, but his love is even greater than that and he is still preparing a place for you that where he is there you MIGHT be also. What business man would give his absolute all so that he might have a return? A creator who loves you more than you can fathom.
Thanks for making this video. I was taught PSA for years and believed it thinking it was biblical. Now I cringe when I hear RC Sproul preaching his famous "God cursed Christ on the Cross" sermon. Very scary tradition that many people continue to hold to. PSA and "Double Imputation" were all doctrines that I took for granted because men like Sproul and MacArthur taught them. 😢
"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us-for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” Galatians 3:13
Where the Bible talks about debt as sin or owing God something:
Matthew 18:21-35. The parable of the unforgiving servant. The Master forgave the huge debt of a servant but then that servant did not forgive a small debt of his fellow servant. Jesus compares this to the Kingdom of Heaven and forgiving sins.
Also every translation I checked (maybe 10 to 12 major translations) has "debts" in the Lord's prayer in Matthew 6, not trespasses. I could not find a single one that translated it trespasses in the Lord's prayer, although Jesus' commentary about it after the prayer includes the word trespasses. It seems this word was substituted for debts in The Book of Common Prayer a version but not an actual translation which became popular. Also in the gospel of Luke with a shorter version of the prayer, it has "sins". But Matthew uses the word debts as a metaphor for sins or trespasses according to Jesus' commentary after it.
I think the forgiving debts metaphor is a good one. It shows how the forgiven debtor pays nothing even though they had a large debt to pay, but yet the one who forgave the debt pays it all. He absorbs the cost. Like if you burned down a large building but the owner forgave you. That owner would be the one to absorb that cost, paying the price to rebuild himself. I think that is what Jesus did on the cross. He absorbed the debt himself. And it hurt big time. But he forgave anyway.
Overall good thoughts. I appreciate your testimony and I love how you study the Bible. However, don't shun all topical study. We have great resources like Bible concordances (even before Google!) to assist. God bless!
Yes, the parable is about forgiving sins:)
@@AlanaL3 yes... And he calls it a debt we owe to the King. Also the Lord's prayer calls sin "debt" and it's not even in a parable. You can try to say it's just a metaphor and I agree, it is, but that is how Jesus explains what is going on spiritually and it literally in the Bible.
Jist so it is clear, pSA is not an exclusively Calvinist doctrine, and the language of it is found in the Church Fathers other than Augustine and Anselm
I know it’s not…:) I just don’t get how it works not in Calvinism…the extra wrath for the nonbeliever at the end?
Ahhhh… yes. But I’m a confessional Lutheran, so we butt heads with Calvinists on things too at times
What if we were never meant to pick apart and analyze scripture like this?
What if we’re just supposed to understand it simply.
We have sinned against God and our sin separates us from him. But God so loved the world that he gave his only son and whoever would believe in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
Why do we need to know anything else? I believe that all of the discussion about these things and the arguments are only a distraction from resting in Christ.
It shapes our view of God:)
You only read the New Testament?
God’s wrath on the suffering servant is depicted in Isaiah 53. I think to understand the full witness of the Gospel you must also include Old Testament accounts on the atonement.
I do not only read the New Testament;)
I believe scripture speaks clearly on the atonement. (Isaiah 53:4-12, Mat 26, Rom 5:6-8, Heb 9:12-14) just a few.
I dont believe you can say "spiritual mystery" about the atonement but not give the same olive branch to calvinists in regards to freewill/determinism. This is based on your previous "in and out videos"
(48:12) you mention the "gospel coming back void" everytime a calvinist preaches to an unbeliever. I would ask, does it return void when a non calvinist preaches and the person doesnt respond? Or responds positively but later loses their salvation?
If a person freely decides to turn away, did the gospel not produce salvation?
I am not sure how you can speak so matter of fact against calvinism in that you KNOW it is wrong. How do you know? How do you know you are correct if arminians/calvinists etc...use the same bible and scriptures.
I have no idea what you are trying to convey at the (12:13) mark. It seems like you are under the impreasion that unbelievers only receive death and do not go to hell when they die. I coukd be wrong, its very difficult to understand that part. Especially bc right after you explain how Jesus defeated death.
(19:00) why cant this topic be concrete? Why can others be concrete but not this one?
(20:00-21:15) tough to follow other than a bad joke about people being in danger of "not being flexible etc..."
(23:00-24:00) "God pardons, forgives, passes over like he says he does and i believe thats what happened on the cross, forgiveness of sins"
I would ask, did God pardon Jesus? (Rom 8:32) yes he is forgiving sins but sin requires blood(Heb 9:22)
You mention how it doesnt change anything bc you dont know and its just stuff. You still love Jesus....etc Mormons say they love Jesus and he is their savior....etc. are they speaking about the same Jesus as you and I?
My take away was that you started with 3 questions around a year ago and still dont have an answer for any of them, or at least an answer you like.
Your on the right track sis. PSA is not biblical. Literal human sacrifice is a very pagan practice. Jesus is making atonement for us now as high priest if we confess our sin. I suggest u start at the beginning of time as this is when God began ie Genesis. Otherwise u will have a different God, think about it - what book would u start near the back?. Unless someone had told u there are two books and two people's (false!). The first thing u should do is rip out that man made page that divides people's and God. Have a look at when the new testament (covenant) begins - Jer31, ie at the resurrection when we will sin no more. Think about it! One God one faith 👍
For *he hath made him to be sin for us* who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
{2 Corinthians 5:21}
Read Psalm 22
Amazingly the New Living Translation gets this one right. It is understood that Jesus didn't actually (metaphysically) become sin (since sin is a choice). Instead He was a 'sin offering.'
New Living Translation
For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
@@spartianknight.
Offering is not in the Greek text.
τὸν γὰρ μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν ἵνα ἡμεῖς γινώμεθα δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ
{2 Corinthians 5:21}
Offering ~ προσφορά G4377
2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “…so that IN him we might become the righteousness of God,” not "from him." "In" is about association, solidarity, not a transfer. It is by being “in” Christ that we can have God’s righteousness, which is about following Christ as our leader, living and behaving as he did. Righteousness is what we do because we are associated with Christ. It is not delegated or assigned to us.
“Become the righteousness of God” in Greek is, “be becoming the righteousness of God.” This is about transitioning from a condition of unrighteousness, toward righteousness. Becoming righteous is not a status or a position or a transfer, or a declaration. It is similar to, "that we might die to sin and live to righteousness" in 1 Peter 2:24.
The greater context is about Christ reconciling us to God, which is relational, not legal. If an external righteousness is transferred to us in total disregard of our actually ceasing to offend, no genuine reconciliation has occurred. The plea of Paul is that WE be reconciled TO God. The first step in any process of reconciliation is to stop offending. Until the offenses cease, there can be no genuine reconciliation. So, to read this passage with the idea that we are not required to stop offending and that reconciliation occurs due to an imparting of righteousness from a third party destroys the very intent of the passage, which is that we be reconciled TO God.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749
No! That is a false pretext. Salivation is in Christ.
@@larrybedouin2921 Ok...what does "in Christ" mean?
It is true nobody really knows why the Almighty demands the death of those who sin, but be it as it is, Jesus in union with the Spirit of the Father, and by the act of evil men against him, the Almighty used that act to rescue humanity from the power of sin and death which comes from the Law given to Moses. Sin gets its power from the Law, death from sin, and our sinful nature is what causes us to sin although we as gentiles have never been under the Law of God. The Almighty can only give His Spirit to a righteous person, just as He gave it to Jesus, but because of his death, those who view Jesus’s death as the only way for the Almighty to forgive our sins, will be granted the righteousness of Jesus just as Abraham believed God and he was considered righteous. When we are considered righteous, Jesus promised to send the Spirit of the Father to that person, making that person a son of the Almighty and giving that person the capacity to become truly righteous by the fruit the Spirit produces which is Love.
Matthew 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of his people.
Saved and reconciling :)
@@AlanaL3 his people
Penal Substitutionary atonement is biblical!
I’m sold!
we can't tell whether the Father actually turned His face away from the Lord Jesus Christ. But we do know that the Father forsook His Son, because the Lord Jesus Christ explicitly said, My God My God, why has Thou forsaken Me?.
So did David in psalm 22. Do you think God forsook David?
@@AlanaL3 What any of us thinks doesn’t matter. What matters is what David and Jesus claimed unless you believe they didn't really mean it.
@@gk.4102 I don’t think God forsook David. I think David felt that way, but it was just a low emotional point in his life.
@@AlanaL3 Ok, so you're basically saying that David and Jesus felt forsaken but that wasn't the reality of things. In other words, David and Jesus were simply mistaken in thinking that God forsook them when in reality He didn't. Am I understanding you correctly?
He should be sued! That’s a crime!😢
“Jesus died "for" our sin, but the English word "for" can have a range of meanings, such as an exchange or a cause of action. There is a specific Greek word that indicates an exchange or a replacement, and it is the word "anti." An example of this is when Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for [anti] an eye and a tooth for [anti] a tooth.'" Both of the words translated as "for" in this verse are the Greek word "anti." It's literally, "an eye in place of an eye," or "an eye instead of an eye," or "an eye against an eye." However, the word "anti" is NEVER used even once in ANY statement regarding the fact that "Christ died for us." The word "for" in ALL of the statements of "Christ died for us" or "Christ died for our sin," are the Greek words "dia" (meaning through), "hyper" (meaning over), and "peri" (meaning around). Not once in the Greek text is there a direct substitutionary statement used about Jesus literally taking our place as an exchange or a payment. Nevertheless, translators seem to have preferred to use the much more ambiguous word "for" as that enables the teacher and reader to assume things about the text that were never intended.”
God DOES give us enough to understand why Jesus had to die, and God DOES say its important, in fact, accursed is every false Gospel.
The wrath of God must punish all sin-the Law brings wrath, we flee the wrath to come, we are saved from wrath through him, he treads the wine press of the wrath of Almighty God, he overturns mountains in his wrath. Everywhere in Scripture wrath is connected to sin, it's punishment, it's wages. Not mere physical death which is easy and over in a moment.
There IS no lack of debt talk. The parable of the servant owed ten thousand talents. OWED. That is the unpayable debt of sin. Now clearly, you see that even in that time this amount of money could never be paid. And due to the debt, the servant was turned over to the torturers until ALL should be paid back. And you studied through the NT?!! Clearly with bias.
Colossians said he nailed the certificate of debt to the cross. Payment language is constantly used in Scripture. He purchased souls for God. Christ suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. He who knew no sin became sin for us. Without the shedding of blood there IS no forgiveness of sin. It is not pricking Jesus' finger. It's his suffering.
I DO fear for you. This IS the centrality of the Gospel. "Why are there so many theories." Because the DEVIL does not SIT on his hands! Saying that standing for the truth is dangerous is INSANE. Compromise and not caring about the truth is a HALLMARK of demonic deception. How can one say caring about the truth is dangerous? That is literally insane?!
Jesus took the punishment we deserved. If you make the Gospel something else, you stand against Scripture, you stand against the Gospel, you stand against the Holy Spirit, you stand against logic, and you stand against your own conscience. By lowering the consequence of sin, not requiring it be fully paid, you cheapen both God's holiness and how evil sin is.
There is no saving the world while trampling on the holiness of God. Jesus DID become a curse. You "don't see it as saying" what the words actually and literally say. Shouldn't that concern you at least a small bit? It absolutely should. The fear of God is the BEGINNING of knowledge. The Law promised wrath for sin. The Law brings wrath, Romans 3.
Yes, the atonement is SO strong and SO powerful that it will literally forgive those who try to saw off the branches they are sitting on, by denying the holiness of God and the evilness of sin. But you will be misleading many and preaching lies and incurring disciplinary judgment on yourself and loving a lie of the devil. Is that how you want to go to heaven?
I would take this VERY seriously, and deception IS working in your life, and those you have associated yourself with, and trusted too much.
No scripture….
The everlasting gospel was preached in the garden.
See Genesis 3
The sacrifices of Able (and Cains apostasy) was enacting the sacrifice that Jesus Christ make on the cross.
Col. 2:14 is usually not translated accurately - several translations try to make this verse be about Jesus canceling a sin debt, but the phrase “record of debt” is not in the Greek! The Berean Literal Bible matches the Greek text: “having blotted out the handwriting in the decrees against us, which was adverse to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” Paul’s point is about the cancellation of “the handwriting in the decrees,” a reference to the Mosaic law, and that they should not accept criticism “in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.” This verse, when translated properly and read carefully within its full context, is not about canceling a debt of sin, but about canceling the ordinances of the Mosaic law, to the benefit of both Jews and Gentiles.
@@atonementandreconciliation3749 I was actually thinking if it was that. Not necessarily having to do with our sin, but having to do with the law, which is why it reminds me of the Ephesians 2 passage, as well as the Galatians three passage, I shared. They seem to all be communicating the same thing. The law has been “canceled out, moved to the side, nail to the cross.” Jesus fulfilled the law, and now we are free from it. Very interesting.
@@AlanaL3 Romans 3:31 “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.”
Active, functional faith will uphold lawful living because its source, God, is the source of all that is defined as righteous. God’s law is a restraint to govern the lawless. Those who have active faith live to please God and don’t have to be concerned about obeying the written law because they will be fulfilling God’s law anyway, thereby making the codified (Mosaic) law irrelevant for that individual. Godly people uphold the law by default.
However, if a non-functional faith causes God to merely grant us an external legal righteousness, a mere status called "justified," with no corresponding change of heart, then we would still need an external law to control and regulate our actions. Faith only voids the law if the faith is active and functional. Law is not needed IF we are being faithful.
1 Timothy 1:8-11, “Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching that agrees with the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”
Dit you understand the penal atonement doctrine? We have broken God's law. God's justice demands that we bear the penalty for that transgression. Jesus took the punishment so that God is now just when he forgives us. Read Isaiah 53. The punishment that brings us peace was upon Him.
Why don't you listen to the Bible, Paul said that a woman should not give spiritual teaching and that is exactly what you are doing.
I do understand it. I do not agree with it.
Is the spiritual gift of teaching only reserved for men?
Do you think I’m teaching here? How?
God certainly forsook Jesus, so much that he sent him to pay for our sins to hell for 3 days and 3 nights
Scripture:)
@@AlanaL3 maybe that’s another little study you can make yourself :)
@@wendymtzc I’ve also always heard that:)
Former Non-Calvinist here:
In John 3:16 the Greek word for “whosoever” is (πᾶς/ transliteration: pas) which can be translated as: all, every, everything, everyone. In other words the english translation could read “that all the believing ones”. Unfortunately this rigid translation does not read well in the English. Thus, the translation would read better as “all who believes” or “everyone who believes” or “whoever believes”. Notice that this language does not necessitate an offer but sheds light on the promise of eternal life to the believing ones. The text does not infer who will indeed believe or who has the capability to believe.
Sure, but the context is that God loved the world. That's everybody. So, yeah the actual salvation from damnation comes to the one who believes. Jesus died so that the one who believes will be saved, but the act of God the Father in giving His own Son to achieve this salvation, was for the World, not only those who end up believing. The unbelievers may not get the effect of the giving of Jesus, but it was intended for them as well from the get-go.
Only the believers gets the salvation in Jesus, but the intended extent was for the world. What some calvinists do is, because only the believer actually gets saved, they extrapolate from this and say that only the individual who believes was the intended focus of God giving us Jesus, and NOT those who didn't end up believing.
Put it like this, God the Father gave his son with the intent to save the one who ends up believing and getting saved, equally and as much as he intended it for the one who doesn't end up believing. The unbelievers and believers were both equally in mind when God gave his son to save. That's something I don't think certain Calvinists can affirm, no matter how they wiggle and squeeze to decietfully come off with a yes.